[ ]Brothersinsisting that “name” does not mean naming the child for
the deceased but assigning the deceased’s property to his
“replacement,” that is, the brother who marries the widow.}
d. Rava said: Even though throughout the Torah [we teach that]
no verse ever loses its contextual meaning, here the result of
applying the exegetical principle of gezera shava is that the
contextual meaning is entirely lost!
e. If there was no gezera shava, would I say that “name” actually
means [that the child bears the deceased’s] name? Whom is
the Torah addressing? If it is the levir, it should read, “shall be
accounted to your brother.” If it is the court, it should read, “shall
be accounted to his father’s brother.” Perhaps the Torah is saying
to the court: Say to the levir, “[The child born to you] shall be
accounted to his [that is, the levir’s] brother.” Rather, the result
of applying the exegetical principle of gezera shava is that the
contextual meaning is entirely lost.^38This exegesis, which the Bavli acknowledges utterly ignores the context
of the verse, names the levir as his brother’s heir. It severs the connection
between the child born of the levirate union and the deceased; the child
is not expected to bear the deceased’s name, nor is he the deceased’s
heir. The property of a childless man reverts to his brother if that brother
enters i nto a lev i rate u n ion; it w i l l event ua l ly be d iv ided a mong a l l of t he
lev ir’s sons, whether they are his sons by his brother’s w idow or by other
wives. It is difficult to argue that levirate marriage under these condi-
tions offers any preservation of the name of the deceased, whether we
understand “name” in the literal sense or as inheritance. This construct
of levirate leaves the deceased with no acknowledged descendants,
nor does it preserve his property separately from that of his brother.
It does, however, make levirate marriage an enticing economic pros-
pect for the levir, at least in cases where the deceased left a significant
estate.
If none of the brothers choose to marry the yevama, the disposition
of the property is quite different. When one of the brothers submits to
halitza, the property is divided among all of the surviving brothers; if
their father is alive, he inherits and they will receive a share of their
brot her’s estate as pa rt of t heir paterna l inherita nce.^39 The Bavli empha-