Welcome to the Judaism community on Codidact!
Will you help us build our community of learners? Drop into our study hall, ask questions, help others with answers to their questions, share a d'var torah if you're so inclined, invite your friends, and join us in building this community together. Not an ask-the-rabbi service, just people at all levels learning together.
Does a living brother fulfill his own pru ur'vu during a Yibum marriage?
If a man is required to father a boy and a girl (according to B"Hillel in Yevamos 61b), but is married to his late brother's wife (the brother died, childless) then do (all) the children who are born of the Levirate marriage belong to the dead brother's "line" and fulfill the dead brother's or do they (some or all?) conclude the living brother's obligation?
As wikipedia puts it, "The offspring of the levirate union would be seen as a perpetuation of the deceased brother's name." The children (according to the same wiki page) might even inherit from the dead brother so they are considered "his" in certain ways. Would the living brother need to divorce this wife and marry another so that he can have children outside the context of his brother's marriage?
1 answer
D'varim 25:6 says "the firstborn that she'll give birth to, he will stand on his dead brother's name". There are a few interpretations:
- Rashi says the eldest brother of the deceased should do yibum (i.e., marry the widow), provided she can give birth, and he then inherits his brother's share in their father's estate. This interpretation is based on the Bavli and is accepted in halacha (Yore Dea 161:4, 163:1).
- Ramban says this is an assurance [seemingly that the firstborn will in some sense stand in his father's stead]. Rabenu Bachya (ben Asher) seems to say something similar.
- S'forno indeed says that the firstborn of the new marriage [or maybe he means all its children] will "count for God as the deceased's fulfillment of the command to multiply". But I cannot find this — and certainly not that it doesn't count for the new husband — in Shulchan Aruch, Bes Sh'muel, Chelkas M'chokek, or Aruch Hashulchan 1, 156, or 162–164, or in Minchas Chinuch 1 or 598, so I strongly suspect it's not accepted in halacha, or at least that the children's not counting for the new husband is not accepted in halacha.
1 comment thread