[joeleeraa]

One of these militant feminist ppl who lives near me was telling me all of her complaints on the torah. One of them was how comes when a man dies we make his wife do yibbum to keep a continuation of his name but when a woman dies we do'nt care? Anyone got an answer for me.

[shim]

joeleeraa, on Jan 12 2004, 01:12 AM, said:

One of these militant feminist ppl who lives near me was telling me all of her complaints on the torah. One of them was how comes when a man dies we make his wife do yibbum to keep a continuation of his name but when a woman dies we do'nt care? Anyone got an answer for me.

Because according to the Torah familial association is determined by the father. However, according to the Torah being Jewish is determined by the mother. So all in all that kind of balances a bit, doesn't it? Arguably the balance is in favor of women in this area, no?

Another point, which is probably relevant but not necessarily something she needs to hear is that the Torah was not given in a vacuum. The institution of levirate marriage [i.e. yibum] was commonplace in the time and place of Biblical Israel. It's purpose was as much to provide for a widow who would now be kept in the family and provided for, as opposed to just more or less being out on her tuchus as much as it was to provide a "name" for the dead brother. The Torah encodes a common and arguably necessary custom of the day.

In other words, it was a legal protection for the widow as much as anything else and was relevent to the reality of life in the ancient world. The reality included the fact that women couldn't fend for themselves and that a widow who possibly couldn't bear children (after all, she never bore one for the brother who died) was not a hot marriage prospect.

Today where these realities are less relevent we do chalitzah rather than yibum (although that is not the reason the Talmud states).

I'm sure that perspective is totally unsatisfying to a "militant feminist", but the bottom line is that Rome wasn't built in a day. What I mean by that is that the Torah was given at a specific time and place in history. Hashem had to balance timeless relevenence with the realities of the Middle East 3300 years ago. That is why the Torah is written "b'lishna b'dei adam", in common language. The Torah had to be intelligible to both a shepherd of 3000 years ago and us today, as well as to our presumably more sophisticated descendents in a thousand years from now. That is why the Torah deals in the facts and realities of 3000 years ago. Three thousand years ago a woman couldn't be a lawyer and earn a living. She depended upon a husband who would provide for her. That is why the Torah almost takes it for granted that a widow is needy, especially if she doesn't have sons. Hashem took that reality into account and legislated that a widow who had no tie to the family she married into (in the form of a child) would remain in that family, and therefore provided for, by having her brother-in-law marry her. This need didn't exist in reverse.

So while she can bemoan the fact that women didn't have equal opportunities 3000 years ago she cannot fault the Torah for providing for a widow without ties in the customary fashion when she would have been unable to fend for herself without this mitzvah.

[micha]

I'd say something similar to Shim's idea.

Yibbum is not only about the sheivet and family identity, it's also about their effects on the nachalah, the inherited portion of Israel. If someone r"l dies childless, to whom does the land go?

We have a similar question raised by benos Tzelafchad, where Tzelafchad had daughters for inheritors, and Moshe had not yet been taught by Hashem the law in such a case. Then, when it turns out that they, and therefore their children -- who are of another shevet get the land, the sheivet complains about the loss of land. And so the daughers are told to marry within their clan.

[shayna]

shim, on Jan 12 2004, 01:33 AM, said:

Today where these realities are less relevent we do chalitzah rather than yibum (although that is not the reason the Talmud states).

Do people actually do chalitzah today?

I remember before we had kids, a friend of mine and I used to joke that we had better get moving in the baby department, just in case c"v we would find ourselves in the situation to have to marry our BIL's - no way! Get out the shoe and spit shine! (no offense to my dear BIL's, but that's just gross and incestual)

[ShtarkOut]

shayna, on Jan 12 2004, 09:51 AM, said:

Do people actually do chalitzah today? 

I know someone who did Chlitzah. Literally every Dayan was there to see it, because it rarely happens.

[Opus]

I remember when one was done in YU. I was one of the people who was going to be allowed to watch until the beis din decided that there should be no unnecessary spectators so that the yavam did not get scared off.

[reelee23]

Wasn't there one in Breurs last year?