Levirate Marriage and the Family[ ][O]n one hand, a man must never have sex with his brother’s wife;
on the other hand, he must have sex with his brother’s wife if his
brother is dead.... Legally and biologically, the person you most
want to have sex with your wife, when you are dead, is your brother,
because he has your genes. But psychologically, the last person you
want to have sex with your wife, even when you are dead, is your
brother, because of sibling rivalry.^46The understanding of paternity found in The Laws of Manu allows for
the provision of an heir for a childless man through levirate. At the same
time, Manu expresses disapproval of the practice. Manu is concerned
that the surviving brother and a widow may have a sexual relationship
not out of their sense of duty to the deceased, but because of sexual at-
traction;^47 this concern is also voiced in rabbinic texts. Despite his dis-
dain for the nigoya, Manu explains the justification for the practice and
acknowledges that it will occur. Ideally, the relationship between the
widow and her brother-in-law should be limited to the begetting of one
son. This union is not intended to be a second, ongoing marriage for the
widow; nor does it impede the levir’s marrying and producing children
of his own.
Nigoya is seen as the obligation of a man to his deceased, childless
brother. It also enables the widow to fulfill her obligation to provide her
husband with a son. Nevertheless, the levir and the widow may be less
than eager to fulfill this obligation. Until her husband’s death, a sexual
relationship between a woman and her brother-in-law would have been
unthinkable. Such a relationship, even when mandated by custom, may
be problematic. A contemporary Indian novelist portrays such a rela-
tionship; t he brot her-in-law, who was raised by his sister-in-law, has dif-
ficulty consummating the union.^48 The brother’s reluctance stands in
opposition to the village council’s decision that it is his duty to take his
brother’s place with his wife. For Doniger, this novel captures the inher-
ent tension involved in the practice of nigoya, which is “simultaneously
legitimate[d] and forbid[den]” in India.^49
The availability of ancient texts, both legal and nonlegal, that discuss
lev i rate, as wel l as contempora r y fieldwork t hat considers t he pract ice of
levirate in India, allows us to see the evolution of attitudes toward levi-
rate in a culture. Quale believes that in the centuries before The Laws of