Now a days, when a man dies childless, his brother has to offer marriage to the widow, but the widow is expected to say no. I asked my rabbi if I have to marry my brother's wife if he dies with no children, the rabbi said it is a simple ceremony and the woman not only has the right to say no, but is expected to say no.
Today is so much better than the past, - is it not?
According to Tanakh she originally had no choice.
It is really strange to me though - that they would still practice the Halizah. I mean - have the widow SPIT at you? And you be shamed?
This was interesting - from Jewish Encyclopedia -
"Various reasons have been offered for the ceremony of loosening the shoe. From the incident related in the Book of Ruth (iv. 7, 8), which certainly refers to this ancient custom, it would seem that the loosening of the shoe was
a symbol for a transfer of rights, ..."
"Some of the later rabbis (Jehiel of Paris, for instance) say that the removal of the shoe symbolized the entrance into a state of mourning. From the time when the yabam actually
refused to marry his brother's widow and thus perpetuate his name in Israel, his brother was considered dead, and the yebamah, by drawing off his shoe, thus declared to him that from that time on he was a mourner ("Perush Seder Ḥaliẓah," 82; comp. Weill, "La Femme Juive," part iv., ch. v., Paris, 1874)."
I have also read the opinion that it represented shame, and loss of status, for the Brother-in-law and his family. The removal of the shoe representing that they hold no more honor then slaves.
There was also an interesting tidbit hidden at the bottom of one of Jewish Encyclopedia's reference pages that suggested - this practice was originally because of
primitive Hebrew polyandry (multiple husbands.) It notes that the verse in question states they are two male siblings living together, and one dies with no offspring, Suggesting polyandry. This could give a reason for a refusal to give a brother an heir. If he provides an heir, -
"their" estate inheritance gets split between his and his brother's offspring. And the "exposure" of the "foot," law that came into being, - covers several of the ideas given, public shame for letting his brother's name die in Israel, - and transference of rights, etc.
I also noticed that the foot - often represents the penis.
A hand was put to the penis for Oaths and Swearings, and Honor. Thus the widow unlatching and removing the covering of the "foot" in public, - probably originally represented the public display - to ridicule, - of the penis he refused to use. Thus great public shame, and showing his lack of honor - exposed.
*
