Comentário sobre Gênesis 38:8

והקם זרע AND RAISE SEED — The son will be called by the name of him who is dead.

AND MARRY HER AS BROTHER-IN-LAW, AND RAISE SEED TO THY BROTHER. The son will be called by the name of the deceased. This is Rashi’s language.
But this is not true, for in the same commandment of the Torah it likewise says, And it shall be, that the firstborn that she beareth shall succeed in the name of his brother that is dead, that his name be not blotted out of Israel,¹⁵⁰Deuteronomy 25:6. and yet the brother-in-law is not commanded to call his son by the name of his dead brother.¹⁵¹Yebamoth 24a. In the case of Boaz it says, Moreover Ruth the Moabitess, the wife of Machlon, have I acquired to be my wife, to raise up the name of the dead upon his inheritance, that the name of the dead be not cut off from among his brethren, and from the gate of his place,¹⁵²Ruth 4:10. and yet she called him Obed,¹⁵³Ibid., Verse 21. not Machlon. Moreover, it says here, And Onan knew that the seed would not be his.¹⁵⁴Verse 9 here. Now what misfortune would have befallen him — to the point that he wasted his seed from before her — if his son was to be called by the name of his dead brother? Most people even desire to do so. Again, Scripture does not say, “And Onan said,” but instead it says, And Onan ‘knew’ that the seed would not be his.¹⁵⁴Verse 9 here. This would indicate that Onan had some definite kind of knowledge in this matter which made him certain that the seed would not be his.¹⁵⁴Verse 9 here.
The subject is indeed one of the great secrets of the Torah,¹⁵⁵Ramban here hints to the mystic doctrine of the transmigration of souls. Onan “knew” that when he married his brother’s wife his brother’s soul would become incarnate in his son. Therefore Onan did not consider the child to be his own. See my Hebrew commentary, pp. 214-5. concerning human reproduction, and it is evident to those observers who have eyes to see, and ears to hear.¹⁵⁶Deuteronomy 29:3. The ancient wise men who were prior to the Torah knew of the great benefit in marrying a childless dead brother’s wife, and that it was proper for the brother to take precedence in the matter, and upon his failure to do so, his next of kin would come after him, for any kinsman who was related to him, who would inherit his legacy, would derive a benefit from such a marriage. And it was customary for the dead man’s wife to be wed by the brother or father or the next of kin in the family. We do not know whether this was an ancient custom preceding Judah’s era. In Bereshith Rabbah¹⁵⁷85:6. they say that Judah was the one who inaugurated the commandment of marrying a childless person’s widow, for since he had received the secret¹⁵⁵Ramban here hints to the mystic doctrine of the transmigration of souls. Onan “knew” that when he married his brother’s wife his brother’s soul would become incarnate in his son. Therefore Onan did not consider the child to be his own. See my Hebrew commentary, pp. 214-5. from his ancestors he was quick to fulfill it. Now when the Torah came and prohibited marrying former wives of certain relatives, it was the will of the Holy One, blessed be He, to abrogate the prohibition against marrying a brother’s wife in case he dies childless, but it was not His will that the prohibition against marrying a father’s brother’s wife or a son’s wife or similar wives of relatives be set aside. It was only in the case of a brother that the custom had established itself,¹⁵⁸Prior to the giving of the Torah. and the benefit is likely with him and not with the others,¹⁵⁹Ramban’s intent is that when two brothers come from one father, the soul of the dead one finds closer identification with the child that his brother will beget rather than with that of any of the other relatives. (Abarbanel; see my Hebrew commentary, p. 215). as I have mentioned. Now it was considered a matter of great cruelty when a brother did not want to marry his dead brother’s wife, and they would call it the house of him that had his shoe loosed,¹⁶⁰Deuteronomy 25:10. for [after his dead brother’s wife had performed Chalitzah (the loosening of the shoe) of the brother-in-law], he¹⁶¹The soul of the dead brother. The Cabala has considered the subject of Chalitzah, as one of profound mystery. was now removed from them, and it is fitting that this commandment be fulfilled through the loosening of the shoe. Now the ancient wise men of Israel, having knowledge of this important matter, established it as a custom to be practised among all those inheriting the legacy, providing there is no prohibition against the marriage, and they called it Ge’ulah (Redemption).¹⁶²Ruth 4:7. This was the matter concerning Boaz, and the meaning of the words of Naomi and the women neighbors.¹⁶³Reference is to what the neighbors said; There is a son born to Naomi (Ruth 4:17), meaning that she was thereby given back the son Machlon whom she had lost. This explains why the women did not say, “There is a son born to Ruth or Boaz.” The man of insight¹⁶⁴A term denoting the student of the Cabala, the mystic doctrine of the Torah. will understand.

ויבם אותה, it appears that the practice of the levirate marriage, yibbum, was something accepted long before the Torah was given to the Jewish people.

ויבם אותה, “and perform a levirate marriage with her.” According to Nachmanides this was an accepted custom in earlier times, long before the Torah had been given when it was legislated to perform such levirate marriages and the scope of who was qualified to enter into such levirate marriages was greatly reduced at that time. The Torah made an exception in the laws of incest, permitting a brother to marry the widow of another brother who had died without offspring, although there was an overriding law not to marry the one time wife of a brother under all other circumstances.

The son will be called by the name of the one who is dead. Nachalas Yaakov extensively contradicts Ramban and Re’m, [who explain that the son would literally be named after the deceased]; see there. Nachalas Yaakov rather explains that calling the son after the deceased means that it is considered as if the deceased were his father. That is why the verse says, “Establish seed for your brother,” and not, “Establish a name for your brother,” for the name is not the issue. See there.

ויבם אותה, “he performed a levirate marriage ceremony on her.” This is one of the expressions which can be used positively as well as negatively, i.e. constructively and destructively. Other expressions that are similar are;,פארות, תפאר or מסעף פארה, בסעיפות קננו, in this instance it means he lifted marriage restrictions from her so that she could remarry. The same applies to the expression: ויבמה, “he preformed the levirate ritual of marriage for her.”