Levirate Marriage and the Family[ ]sizes that halitza neither privileges nor penalizes the brother who car-
ries out the ritual.
The discussions at Bavli Yevamot a and a indicate that while le-
virate marriage can be financially desirable for one brother, halitza can
en r ich a l l t he su r v iv i ng brot hers. In ot her words, i f t he deceased brot her
had a si zable estate, it is i n t he best i nterest of a ny g iven brot her to ma r r y
t he w idow, whi le t he ot her brot hers have a n interest in ma k ing sure t hat
he does not marry her. It may be that in assigning the responsibility for
levirate first and foremost to the oldest brother, the rabbis were trying
to prevent quarreling among the brothers. Furthermore, since “levirate
is tied to inheritance,” perhaps it seemed most logical to bestow the
yevama on the oldest brother, who, if he was the firstborn, was already
privileged vis-à-vis the family estate.
We can now understand why a younger brother might “act first,” sup-
planting his older brother by having intercourse with, and thereby mar-
rying, the yevama. We can also understand why brothers might be disin-
clined to strategize a group response to the death of a childless brother.
Levirate is no longer a disinterested act on the part of the levir; it is, at
least potentially, a financially attractive option. We can now understand
the Mishnah’s statement, “Four brothers married to four [unrelated]
women and [the brothers] died — If the oldest [surviving brother] wants
to perform levirate marriage with all of [the widows], he may do so.”^40
Why would a man take on four additional wives when he has the option
of halitza or sharing t he responsibilit y for lev irate w it h his brot hers? It is
conceivable that a man might choose to do levirate solely for his broth-
er’s estate, and here there is the possibility of absorbing the property of
four brothers.
These discussions indicate that in a levirate situation involving more
than one surviving brother, the brothers may find themselves compet-
ing for the economic opportunity provided by levirate marriage. In a
case in which levirate is not an attractive option, the brothers may try
to foist the responsibility for the widow on each other. It is also possible
that some brothers would advocate for halitza wh i le one brot her wa nted
to perform levirate. In addition to the conflict between a single surviv-
ing brother’s own interests and those of the deceased (insofar as levirate
as imagined by the rabbis serves the interests of the deceased), levirate
may ignite conflicts among the surviving brothers. These passages,