Levirate Marriage and the Family[ ]rate marriage with their brother’s widow or release her from the levirate
bond through halitza.
As we have seen, the word “brother” can be understood narrowly
or broadly. While the Mishnah usually employs the word “brothers” to
describe men who share at least one parent, it both recognizes in the
biblical text and employs for itself a broader usage. The decision, then,
to interpret the word “brothers” in Deuteronomy : narrowly, restrict-
ing the levirate obligation to men who share a parent with the deceased,
or broadly, extending responsibility for the widow to a larger segment
of the deceased’s male kin, involves not only the interpreter’s reading
of the Torah, but also his understanding of family and commitment to
levirate. The exegetical strategy of the tannaim with regard to Deuter-
onomy : reveals something about kinship in ancient Israel as well as
the history of both biblical interpretation and levirate marriage.
The Bible itself offers mixed evidence. The use of the word yavam in
Deuteronomy suggests that the obligation is restricted to a situation
in which the deceased has a brother. In Genesis , Juda h orders his sec-
ond son, Onan, to fulfill his duty to his deceased brother by impregnat-
ing Er’s widow, Tamar. Although Judah never gives Tamar to his third
son, Shelah, after both Er and Onan die, the narrative makes it clear
that doing so would have been appropriate. It is not clear how we should
understand Judah’s fathering of twins on Tamar. The conclusion of the
story could be read as an indication that another male relative could
fulfill the levirate obligation when there was no brother. On the other
hand, the narrative could portray an irregular situation and speak more
to Judah’s emergence as a leader in his family than to an explication of
levirate in ancient Israel.^15
The Book of Ruth suggests that the responsibility to ensure the preser-
vation of a childless man’s property and name may devolve on any man
in his patrilineage, although precedence may have been given to closer
relatives. Naomi’s words to her daughters-in-law in Ruth : suggest t hat
a widow could expect to marry her deceased husband’s brother. Naomi’s
comment, “I am too old to marry,” raises the possibility that even a half-
brother by the same mother could fulfill the levirate duty, although we
could argue that Naomi’s musings are meant to underscore the hope-
lessness of her situation rather than to suggest that such a course of ac-
tion, even if feasible, would be legally effective.