Yibbum
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yibbum (pronounced "yee-boom") or levirate marriage, in Judaism, is one of the most complex types of marital unions mandated by Torah law, and which is not presently practiced in its full application.
Contents |
From the Torah, Judaism teaches that a "Yabham in Hebrew, [is] a specific term denoting a childless man's brother, who has an obligation to marry his dead brother's wife" [1].
The most famous case of a Levirate type marriage in the Hebrew Bible is the unusual union of the Hebrew patriarch Judah and his daughter in law Tamar as recorded in the Book of Genesis chapter 38 [2].
The full commandment is spelled out in the Book of Deuteronomy 25:5-6 [3]:
"When brothers live together, and one of them dies childless, the dead man's wife shall not be allowed to marry an outsider. Her husband's brother must cohabit with her, making her his wife, and thus performing a brother-in-law's duty to her. The first-born son whom she bears will then perpetuate the name of the dead brother, so that his name will not be obliterated from Israel."
However, there is an escape clause if the one of the parties refuses to go through with the "marriage", that is known as Chalitza, the "removal" of a specially designed leather shoe by the woman from the man who either he or she refuses to marry, as a symbolic act of renunciation of their willingness to perform the Yibbum (levirate marriage), Deuteronomy 25:7-10 :
"If the man does not wish to take his brother's wife, the sister-in-law shall go up to the elders in court, and declare, 'My brother-in-law refuses to perpetuate his brother's name in Israel, and will not consent to perform his brotherly duty with me.' The elders of his city shall summon him and speak to him. If he remains firm, he must say, 'I do not want to take her.' His sister-in-law shall then approach him before the elders, take off his shoe and spit toward his face. She shall then declare, 'This is what shall be done to the man who will not build up a family for his brother.' The name of [that place] shall then be known in Israel as, 'the house [where] the shoe was removed'."
In Jewish law, Halakha, today, Yibbum is not permitted and therefore the ceremony of Chalitza must be performed in front of a ten man Beth Din (court of Jewish religious law).
A famous instance involving a symbolic case of both Chalitza and Yibbum is recounted in the Book of Ruth when after the death of her husband, Ruth is rejected by an anonymous Ploni Almoni, and is noticed, welcomed and eventually turns to her husband's remaining kinsman Boaz.
The rabbis in the time of the mishnah added formal marriage requirements such as a marriage contract, but over the centuries Yibbum waned in favor, until it was completely abolished by Ashkenazi Jews who favored strict monogamy, whereas it may have lingered on among Sephardi Jews who were more accepting of allowing more than one wife.
The Biblical significance of Yibbum is emphasized by various Judaic teachings that the Jewish messiah will be directly descended from both Judah and Tamar as well as through Ruth and Boaz. Their stories are considered to be one of the most powerful love stories in the Hebrew Bible.
An entire tractate in the Talmud, called Yevamot, is devoted to the subject of levirate marriages.
[edit] As taken from the 1901 Jewish Encyclopedia
- The following is taken from the public domain 1901 Jewish Encyclopedia:
Levirate marriage is marriage with a brother's widow. In some cases it is the duty of a man to marry his brother's widow even if she has had children by the deceased, but in most cases it occurs when there are no children, as among the Hindus ("Institutes of Manu," v. 59-63).
Among the Jews marriage with a brother's widow was forbidden (Lev. xviii. 16, xx. 21), except for the case where the brother died without children (Deut. xxv. 56) (and known as Yibbum in Hebrew) and when the two brothers had been contemporaries (rules out a younger brother born after the death of an older brother). The surviving brother had the choice of Ḥaliẓah. Such a choice was viewed with disfavor. The case of Ruth is not one of levirate marriage, being connected rather with the institution of the Go'el; but the relations of Tamar with her successive husbands are an instance (Gen. xxxviii.). If the levirate union resulted in male issue, the child would succeed to the estates of the deceased brother. It would appear that later the levirate marriage came to be regarded as obligatory only when the widow had no children of either sex. The Septuagint translates "ben" (son) in the passage of Deuteronomy by "child," and the Sadducees in the New Testament take it in this sense (Mark xii. 19; comp. Josephus, "Ant." iv. 8, § 23).
By Talmudic times the practice of levirate marriage was deemed objectionable (Bek. 13a), and was followed as a matter of duty only. To marry a brother's widow for her beauty was regarded by Abba Saul as equivalent to incest (Yeb. 39b). Bar Ḳappara recommends ḥaliẓah (Yeb. 109a). A difference of opinion appears among the later authorities, Alfasi, Maimonides, and the Spanish school generally upholding the custom, while R. Tam and the Northern school prefer ḥaliẓah (Shulḥan 'Aruk, Eben ha-'Ezer, 165). The marriage was not necessary if the brother left a child by another marriage, even if such a child were on the point of death (l.c. 157). A change of religion on the part of the surviving brother does not affect the obligation of the levirate, or its alternative, the ḥaliẓah (Isaac b. Sheshet, Responsa, i. 2), yet the whole question has been profoundly affected by the change from polygamy to monogamy due to the taḳḳanah of Gershom ben Judah (see Marriage).
The Samaritans followed a slightly different course, which may indicate an earlier custom among the Hebrews; the former practised the levirate only when the woman was betrothed and the marriage had not been consummated (Ḳid. 65b). The Karaites appear to have followed the same practice, and Benjamin Nahawendi, as well as Elijah Bashyaẓi, favored it (Adderet Eliyahu, "Nashim," p. 93a).
It has been suggested by Kalisch ("Leviticus," ii. 362-363) that the prohibition in Leviticus is of later date than the obligation under certain conditions in Deuteronomy, but it is equally possible that the Leviticus prohibition was a general one, and the permission in Deuteronomy only an exception when there was no male issue. J. F. Maclennan ("Studies in Ancient History," i. 109-114) suggested that the existence of levirate marriage was due to polyandry among the primitive Hebrews, and has been followed by Buhl ("Sociale Verhaltnisse," p. 34) and Barton ("Semitic Origins," pp. 66-67); but this is rather opposed to the Hebraic conditions, for it would be against the interests of the surviving brother to allow the estate to go out of his possession again. There is, besides, no evidence of polyandry among the Hebrews.
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- This article incorporates text from the 1901–1906 Jewish Encyclopedia, a publication now in the public domain.
- Levirate Marriage in the Jewish Encyclopedia.
