Amud (a) focuses on the importance of birth order in yibum. The eldest, not the firstborn, is obligated in yibum. If for some reason he is unable to take the yevama in marriage, the obligation falls to the next eldest, and so on. However, if a younger brother should wish to participate in yibum, that marriage is valid. The rabbis speak about reasons for these halachot, including inheritance laws and related verses.
Amud (b) takes us on a tangent that apparently will last to the end of this Perek. First, they speak of converts. Are Canaanite slaves who are freed and Gentile women allowed to be married to Jewish men? If those men were suspected of illicit relations with those women before the conversion, they are not supposed to marry. But does conversion mean anything if a person is converting for love? Sharing their arguments and their proof texts, the rabbis teach us that they are concerns that after love fades, love for Judaism could fade as well, and idol worship could be introduced to Jewish homes. They also teach that outside of Israel, conversion is meaningful: there is no benefit to conversion in the diaspora. The rabbis remind us that conversion was not allowed when Solomon's successes or when David's strength defined Judaism. People should convert for "pure" reasons: the love of G-d and mitzvot.
On a related note, the rabbis want to understand when a woman should be divorced from her husband. They speak about suspicion: when a married woman is suspected of an illicit sexual relationship, she should be divorced. Their examples of such suspicion include witnesses - and arriving home to see a peddler leaving while one's wife is dressing from her undergarments into her clothing. Even if the woman in question is divorced from her husband, she should not be remarried to her adulterous partner.
The rabbis are more lenient regarding these questions than with many other questions. If a woman has children, should she really be forced to divorce? If people are suspicious about an illicit affair and the couple ends up marrying despite the decree that they should not marry, is it really necessary to end that marriage? Looking for loopholes and alternate interpretations, the rabbis leave much leeway for courts and individuals to create restorative alternatives to harsh sentences.
We ask these same questions today regarding conversion and justice following infidelity. Who is a Jew? Does it matter if someone converts for love? When should people divorce? When can their actions be frowned upon but ultimately forgiven - at least enough to allow them continued communal involvement? The fact that our rabbis were more flexible regarding some of these questions suggests to me that these circumstances occurred frequently; in nuanced circumstances. Where is this flexibility when it comes to other issues of identity and sexual behaviours?
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment