[ ]Brothersthen, suggest that the philosophy “every man for himself” may be more
of a factor in fraternal relations than is “one for all and all for one” and
that levirate, rather than demonstrating loyalty to brother and family,
may create or reveal deep divisions among brothers.
Motives for Levirate Marriage
The Bible pinpoints some of the motives of a man whose desire is to
avoid levirate marriage. Levirate threatens a man’s inheritance and the
preservation of his property; it also requires him to father children for
someone else. The only motives offered by the Bible for choosing a levi-
rate union are a sense of duty to the dead or the desire to avoid shame.
Rabbinic law removes the disadvantages to levirate marriage, assigning
the children of the union and the estate of the deceased to the levir. In
doing so, it also creates a possible incentive for levirate marriage: the
opportunity to inherit one’s brother’s property.
The rabbis’ anxiety over the levir’s motives in choosing levirate mar-
riage is detailed in the Bavli. After considering whether levirate per-
formed by a younger brother is preferable to halitza performed by the
oldest surviving brother, the Bavli considers the choice between levirate
and halitza:
a. They taught there [in Mishnah Bekhorot 1:7]: Levirate takes
precedence over halitza. [That was the case] at an earlier time,
when their intention was to fulfill a commandment. Now, when
it is not their intention to fulfill a commandment, they said:
Halitza takes precedence over levirate.
b. Rav said: We do not compel [halitza].
c. When [levirs] came before Rav, he would say, “If you wish,
release her; if you wish, marry her. The Torah leaves the choice
to you.” For Deuteronomy 25:7 reads, “If the man does not want
[to marry her]” — it’s what he wants — if he wants, he releases
her and if he wants, he marries her.
d. And even R. Judah was of the opinion that we do not compel
[halitza].
e. For when R. Judah prepared a document for halitza, [it read]:
So-and-So, the daughter of So-and-So brought So-and-So her
brother-in-law to court before us, and we recognized him as the