R1-17: The Central Role ‘Levirate Marriage’ Plays In The Book Of Ruth

“Naomi said, ‘Go back, my daughters. Why do you want to go with me? Do I still have sons in my womb who could become your husbands?  Go back, my daughters; go your way; for I’m too old to have a husband. Even if I were to say, ‘I still have hope’; even if I had a husband tonight and bore sons; would you wait for them until they grew up? Would you refuse to marry, just for them? No, my daughters. On your behalf I feel very bitter that the hand of Adonai has gone out against me.’”-Ruth 1:11-13

Alrighty folks, I have no choice but to go over the concept Levirate marriage with you today.

Why?

Because after Naomi blessed Ruth and Orpah and told them to return to their mother’s homes in Moab, they both insisted on following Naomi back to Judah.

In response, Naomi introduced an argument to convince them that was NOT a good idea.

And the basis of her argument was the sheer impossibility of “Levirate Marriage” ever happening.

So we’ve got no choice but to reacquaint ourselves with this ancient custom.

Let’s start by reading the following verses from the fifth book of the Torah:

“If brothers live together, and one of them dies childless, his widow is not to marry someone unrelated to him; her husband’s brother is to go to her and perform the duty of a brother-in-law by marrying her. The first child she bears will succeed to the name of his dead brother, so that his name will not be eliminated from Israel. ’–Deuteronomy 25:5-6

So there you have it.

The idea is that the remaining biological brother (or in some cases another close family member) of the man who died is obligated to marry his brother’s widow IF SHE DIDN’T HAVE ANY SONS…

The purpose of this obligatory marriage is to impregnate the widow so that she will have a son who will be considered the offspring of the brother who passed away.

This enabled the proverbial killing of multiple birds with one stone.

FIRST, the family line would remain intact and unbroken.

SECOND, the widow would have a son to care for her in old age.

THIRD, the widow would fulfill her societal duty of bringing new life into the world (this was considered the ultimate duty of a woman in the Biblical era).

FOURTH, the essence of the deceased man would continue to live on through the son born…otherwise that “essence” would terminate in the afterlife.

FIFTH, the land of the deceased man would be inherited by someone (the son born) to a person who was a member of his own clan…and thus the requirements of the Mosaic law would be fulfilled.

Also, keep in mind that Levirate Marriage was NOT unique to Hebrew culture…

But the way it eventually came to be practiced among the Hebrews was unique…

Here’s an instance of a form of Levirate Marriage happening way before the Torah of Moses was given to Israel:

Oh and one other final thing.

Even though the pronunciation sounds similar, there’s ZERO connection between the priestly tribe of Levi and Levirate Marriage.

This might surprise you but the term “Levirate” is actually a word of gentile origins.

It comes from the Latin word LEVIR which means “husband’s brother”.

So even though the custom of Levirate Marriage is in the Bible, you ain’t gonna find the word Levirate or LEVIR anywhere in the original Hebrew text of the Scriptures.

And that does it for today homies.