Teks -- Deuteronomy 25:5-16 (NET)

Respect for the Sanctity of Others

25:5 If brothers live together and one of them dies without having a son, the dead man’s wife must not remarry someone outside the family. Instead, her late husband’s brother must go to her, marry her, and perform the duty of a brother-in-law. 25:6 Then the first son she bears will continue the name of the dead brother, thus preventing his name from being blotted out of Israel. 25:7 But if the man does not want to marry his brother’s widow, then she must go to the elders at the town gate and say, “My husband’s brother refuses to preserve his brother’s name in Israel; he is unwilling to perform the duty of a brother-in-law to me!” 25:8 Then the elders of his city must summon him and speak to him. If he persists, saying, “I don’t want to marry her,” 25:9 then his sister-in-law must approach him in view of the elders, remove his sandal from his foot, and spit in his face. She will then respond, “Thus may it be done to any man who does not maintain his brother’s family line!” 25:10 His family name will be referred to in Israel as “the family of the one whose sandal was removed.” 25:11 If two men get into a hand-to-hand fight, and the wife of one of them gets involved to help her husband against his attacker, and she reaches out her hand and grabs his genitals, 25:12 then you must cut off her hand– do not pity her. 25:13 You must not have in your bag different stone weights, a heavy and a light one. 25:14 You must not have in your house different measuring containers, a large and a small one. 25:15 You must have an accurate and correct stone weight and an accurate and correct measuring container, so that your life may be extended in the land the Lord your God is about to give you. 25:16 For anyone who acts dishonestly in these ways is abhorrent to the Lord your God.

Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per frasa)

Wesley: Deu 25:5 - Together

In the same town, or at least country. For if the next brother had removed his habitation into remote parts, on were carried thither into captivity, then the wife of the dead had her liberty to marry the next kinsman that lived in the same place with her.

Wesley: Deu 25:5 - One

Any of them, for the words are general, and the reason of the law was to keep up the distinction of tribes and families, that so the Messiah might be discovered by the family from which he was appointed to proceed; and also of inheritances, which were divided among all the brethren, the first-born having only a double portion.

Wesley: Deu 25:5 - A stranger

To one of another family.

Wesley: Deu 25:6 - That his name be not put out

That a family be not lost. So this was a provision that the number of their families might not be diminished.

Wesley: Deu 25:9 - Loose his shoe

As a sign of his resignation of all his right to the woman, and to her husband's inheritance: for as the shoe was a sign of one's power and right, Psa 60:8, Psa 108:9, so the parting with the shoe was a token of the alienation of such right; and as a note of infamy, to signify that by this disingenuous action he was unworthy to be amongst free - men, and fit to be reduced to the condition of the meanest servants, who used to go barefoot, Isa 20:2, Isa 20:4.

Wesley: Deu 25:10 - His name

That is, his person, and his posterity also. So it was a lasting blot.

Wesley: Deu 25:13 - A great and a small

The great to buy with, the small for selling.

JFB: Deu 25:5-10 - the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger: her husband's brother . . . shall take her to him to wife

This usage existed before the age of Moses (Gen 38:8). But the Mosaic law rendered the custom obligatory (Mat 22:25) on younger brothers, or the nearest kinsman, to marry the widow (Rth 4:4), by associating the natural desire of perpetuating a brother's name with the preservation of property in the Hebrew families and tribes. If the younger brother declined to comply with the law, the widow brought her claim before the authorities of the place at a public assembly (the gate of the city); and he having declared his refusal, she was ordered to loose the thong of his shoe--a sign of degradation--following up that act by spitting on the ground-- the strongest expression of ignominy and contempt among Eastern people. The shoe was kept by the magistrate as an evidence of the transaction, and the parties separated.

JFB: Deu 25:13-16 - Thou shalt not have . . . divers weights

Weights were anciently made of stone and are frequently used still by Eastern shopkeepers and traders, who take them out of the bag and put them in the balance. The man who is not cheated by the trader and his bag of divers weights must be blessed with more acuteness than most of his fellows [ROBERTS]. (Compare Pro 16:11; Pro 20:10).

Clarke: Deu 25:9 - And loose his shoe

And loose his shoe - It is difficult to find the reason of these ceremonies of degradation. Perhaps the shoe was the emblem of power; and by stripping it off, deprivation of that power and authority was represented. Spitting in the face was a mark of the utmost ignominy; but the Jews, who are legitimate judges in this case, say that the spitting was not in his face, but before his face on the ground. And this is the way in which the Asiatics express their detestation of a person to the present day, as Niebuhr and other intelligent travelers assure us. It has been remarked that the prefix ב beth is seldom applied to פני peney ; but when it is it signifies as well before as in the face. See Jos 21:44; Jos 23:9; Est 9:2; and Eze 42:12; which texts are supposed to be proofs in point. The act of spitting, whether in or before the face, marked the strong contempt the woman felt for the man who had slighted her. And it appears that the man was ever after disgraced in Israel; for so much is certainly implied in the saying, Deu 25:10 : And his name shall be called in Israel, The house of him that hath his shoe loosed.

Clarke: Deu 25:13 - Divers weights

Divers weights - אבן ואבן eben vaaben , a stone and a stone, because the weights were anciently made of stone, and some had two sets of stones, a light and a heavy. With the latter they bought their wares, by the former they sold them. In our own country this was once a common case; smooth, round, or oval stones were generally chosen by the simple country people for selling their wares, especially such as were sold in pounds and half pounds. And hence the term a stone weight, which is still in use, though lead or iron be the matter that is used as a counterpoise: but the name itself shows us that a stone of a certain weight was the material formerly used as a weight. See the notes on Lev 19:35, Lev 19:36.

Clarke: Deu 25:14 - Divers measures

Divers measures - Literally, an ephah and an ephah; one large, to buy thy neighbor’ s wares, another small, to sell thy own by. So there were knaves in all ages, and among all nations. See the notes on Exo 16:16, and Lev 19:35 (note).

Calvin: Deu 25:5 - If brethren dwell together, and one of them die

5.If brethren dwell together, and one of them die. This law has some similarity with that which permits a betrothed person to return to the wife, whom he has not yet taken; since the object of both is to preserve to every man what he possesses, so that he may not be obliged to leave it to strangers, but that he may have heirs begotten of his own body: for, when a son succeeds to the father, whom he represents, there seems to be hardly any change made. Hence, too, it is manifest how greatly pleasing to God it is that no one should be deprived of his property, since He makes a provision even for the dying, that what they could not resign to others without regret and annoyance, should be preserved to their offspring. Unless, therefore, his kinsman should obviate the dead man’s childlessness, this inhumanity is accounted a kind of theft. For, since to be childless was a curse of God, it was a consolation in this condition to hope for a borrowed offspring, that the name might not be altogether extinct.

Since we now understand the intention of the law, we must also observe that the word brethren does not mean actual brothers, but cousins, and other kinsmen, whose marriage with the widows of their relative would not have been incestuous; otherwise God would contradict Himself. But these two things are quite compatible, that no one should uncover the nakedness of his brother, and yet that a widow should not marry out of her husband’s family, until she had raised up seed to him from some relation. In fact, Boaz did not marry Ruth because he was the brother of her deceased husband, but only his near kinsman. If any should object that it is not probable that other kinsmen should dwell together, I reply that this passage is improperly supposed to refer to actual living together, as if they dwelt in the same house, but that the precept is merely addressed to relations, whose near residence rendered it convenient to take the widows to their own homes; for, if any lived far away, liberty was accorded to both to seek the fulfillment of the provision elsewhere. Surely it is not probable that God would have authorized an incestuous marriage, which He had before expressed His abomination of. Nor can it be doubted, as I have above stated, but that the like necessity was imposed upon the woman of offering herself to the kinsman of her former husband; and although there was harshness in this, still she seemed to owe this much to his memory, that she should willingly raise up seed to the deceased; yet, if any one think differently, I will not contend the point with him. If, however, she were not obliged to do so, it was absurd that she should voluntarily obtrude herself: nor was there any other reason why she should bring to trial the kinsman, from whom she had suffered a repulse, except that she might acquire the liberty of marrying into another family. Yet it is not probable that he was to be condemned to an ignominious punishment, without being admitted to make his defense, because sometimes just reasons for refusal might be alleged. This disgrace, therefore, was only a penalty for inhumanity or avarice. By giving up his shoe, he renounced his right of relationship, and gave it up to another: for, by behaving so unkindly towards the dead, he became unworthy of reaping any of the advantages of his relationship.

Calvin: Deu 25:11 - NO PHRASE

This Law is apparently harsh, but its severity skews how very pleasing to God is modesty, whilst, on the other hand, He abominates indecency; for, if in the heat of a quarrel, when the agitation of the mind is an excuse for excesses, it was a crime thus heavily punished, for a woman to take hold of the private parts of a man who was not her husband, much less would God have her lasciviousness pardoned, if a woman were impelled by lust to do anything of the sort. Neither can we doubt but that the judges, in punishing obscenity, were bound to argue from the less to the greater. A threat is also added, lest the severity of the punishment should influence their minds to be tender and remiss ill inflicting it. It was indeed inexcusable effrontery, willfully to assail that part of the body, from the sight and touch of which all chaste women naturally recoil.

Defender: Deu 25:5 - her husband's brother

Deu 25:5-10 describes the rules applicable to so-called "Levirate marriages," the word "levirate" derived from a Latin word meaning "brother-in-law." If the brother either would not or could not fulfill this responsibility, the right and responsibility passed to the nearest kinsman (Rth 2:20; Rth 4:1-10)."

TSK: Deu 25:5 - brethren // husband’ s brother

brethren : Mat 22:24; Mar 12:19; Luk 20:28

husband’ s brother : or, next kinsman, Gen 38:8, Gen 38:9; Rth 1:12, Rth 1:13, Rth 3:9, Rth 4:5

TSK: Deu 25:6 - the firstborn // that his name

the firstborn : Gen 28:8-10

that his name : Deu 9:14, Deu 29:20; Rth 4:10-12; Psa 9:5, Psa 109:13, brother’ s wife, or, next kinsman’ s wife, go up, Deu 21:19; Rth 4:1-7

TSK: Deu 25:8 - I like not

I like not : Rth 4:6

TSK: Deu 25:9 - loose his shoe // spit // So shall

loose his shoe : Pulling off the shoe seems to express his being degraded to the situation of slaves, who generally went barefoot; and spitting in or rather before (biphney ) his face, was a mark of the utmost ignominy. Rth 4:7, Rth 4:8; Isa 20:2; Mar 1:7; Joh 1:27

spit : Num 12:14; Job 30:10; Isa 50:6; Mat 26:67, Mat 27:30; Mar 10:34

So shall : Gen 38:8-10; Rth 4:10, Rth 4:11; 1Sa 2:30

TSK: Deu 25:11 - to deliver her husband

to deliver her husband : Rom 3:8; 1Ti 2:9

TSK: Deu 25:12

Deu 19:13, Deu 19:21

TSK: Deu 25:13 - in thy bag // divers weights

in thy bag : Lev 19:35, Lev 19:36; Pro 11:1, Pro 16:11, Pro 20:10; Eze 45:10, Eze 45:11; Amo 8:5; Mic 6:11, Mic 6:12

divers weights : Heb. a stone and a stone, Aivenwaaiven ; because weights were anciently made of stone. Hence the expression, a stone weight, which is still in use, though the matter of which it is made be lead or iron, and the name itself shews us that a stone of a certain weight was formerly used.

TSK: Deu 25:14 - divers measures

divers measures : Heb. an ephah and an ephah, Aiphah waaiphah ; for this was the cost common measure among the Israelites, by which all the others were made and adjusted. They are not only forbidden to use divers weights and measures, one large or heavy to buy with, and another small and light to sell with, but they were not even allowed to keep such in the house. It is observable also, that these too common but dishonest actions are branded as ""an abomination to the Lord,""equally with idolatry, and other scandalous crimes. Deu 25:14

TSK: Deu 25:15 - that thy days

that thy days : Deu 4:40, Deu 5:16, Deu 5:33, Deu 6:18, Deu 11:9, Deu 17:20; Exo 20:12; Psa 34:12; Eph 6:3; 1Pe 3:10

TSK: Deu 25:16 - all that do

all that do : Deu 18:12, Deu 22:5; Pro 11:1, Pro 20:23; Amo 8:5-7; 1Co 6:9-11; 1Th 4:6; Rev 21:27

Tafsiran/Catatan -- Catatan Kata/Frasa (per Ayat)

Poole: Deu 25:5 - Brethren // Have no child // Unto a stranger // Her husband’ s brother shall go in unto her

Brethren strictly so called, as is evident from Deu 25:7 Gen 38:8 Rth 1:13 Mat 22:24,25 . Dwell together; either,

1. Strictly, in the same house or family; which is not probable, because the married brother may be presumed to have left his father’ s house, and set up a family of his own. Or,

2. More largely, in the same town or city, or, at least, country. This is added for a relief of their consciences, that if the next brother had removed his habitation into remote parts, or were carried thither into captivity, which God foresaw would be their case, then the wife of the dead had her liberty to marry to the next kinsman that lived in the same place with her. One of them ; either,

1. The first and eldest of them, as it was practised, Gen 38:6 , &c., and expounded, Mat 22:25 ; one being oft put for the first, as Gen 1:5 2:11 Hag 1:1 Mar 16:2 . And the chief care was about the first-born, who were invested with singular privileges, and were types of Christ. Or,

2. Any of them, for the words are general, and so the practice may seem to have been, Ru 3 ; and the reason of the law may seem to be in a great measure the same, which was to keep up the distinction, as of tribes and families, that so the Messias might be discovered by the family from which he was appointed to proceed, so also of inheritances, which were divided among all the brethren, the first-born having only a double portion.

Have no child Heb. no son . But son is oft put for any child , male or female, both in Scripture and other authors; and therefore the Hebrew no son is rendered no child here, as it is in effect, Mat 22:24 Mar 12:19 Luk 20:28 . And indeed this caution was not necessary when there was a daughter, whose child might be adopted into the name and family of its grandfather.

Unto a stranger i.e. to one of another family, as that word is oft used.

Her husband’ s brother shall go in unto her except he was married himself, as may appear by other scriptures, and by the reason of the thing, and, as some add, from the phrase of dwelling together , to wit, in their father’ s family.

Poole: Deu 25:6 - In the name of his brother // That his name be not put out of Israel

In the name of his brother shall be called and reputed his son. See Rth 4:17 .

That his name be not put out of Israel that a family be not lost. So this was a provision that the number of their families might not be diminished.

Poole: Deu 25:7 - To raise up unto his brother a name

To raise up unto his brother a name to revive his brother’ s name and memory.

Poole: Deu 25:8 - Speak unto him // If he stand to it

Speak unto him to convince him of the duty, and persuade him to it.

If he stand to it if he obstinately refuse it.

Poole: Deu 25:9 - Loose his shoe // Spit in his face // Build up

Loose his shoe partly as a sign of his resignation of all his right to the woman, and to her husband’ s inheritance; for as the shoe was a sign of one’ s power and right, Psa 60:8 108:9 ; so the parting with the shoe was a token of the alienation of such right, and that he would not, and henceforth might not, enter upon his brother’ s land; and partly as a note of infamy, to signify that by this unnatural and disingenuous action he was unworthy to be amongst free-men, and fit to be reduced to the condition of the meanest servants or captives, who used to go barefoot, Isa 20:2,4 .

Spit in his face as a return of his contempt upon himself. See Num 12:14 Isa 1:6 Mat 26:67 27:30 . This was not done, Ru 4 , either because he was not a brother, but a remoter kinsman, and so deserved less shame; or because Ruth did not prosecute him to the utmost, but freely consented to this exchange.

Build up a phrase oft used for the procreation of children, and the increase of a family. See Gen 16:2 Exo 1:21 1Ki 11:38 1Ch 17:25 .

Poole: Deu 25:10

i.e. His person, names being oft put for persons , and his posterity also. So it was a lasting blot.

Poole: Deu 25:12 - Thine eye shall not pity her

Partly because of the great mischief she did to him, both to his person and posterity, and partly to deter all women from all immodest and impudent carriages, and to secure that modesty which is indeed the guardian of all the virtues, as immodesty is an inlet to all vices, as the sad experience of this degenerate age shows; and therefore it is not strange that it is so severely restrained and punished.

Thine eye shall not pity her which thou wilt be very apt to do, because of the infirmity of her sex, and the urgency of the occasion, this being done for the necessary preservation of her husband.

Poole: Deu 25:13 - great

The

great either to buy with, or openly to make show of; the

small for their private use in selling.

Haydock: Deu 25:5 - Together

Together, as the sons of Juda did: (Genesis xxxviii. 8,) though custom (Calmet) and analogy extend this to other brothers, at least to those who live in the promised land, and have the inheritance in common, as appears from the history of Ruth, Ruth i. 13, &c. Noemi supposes that all the sons whom she might have had, would have been under the same obligation towards her daughter-in-law. The Rabbins restrain this law as much as they can, asserting that if the deceased left an adopted or natural child, the brother need not marry his widow, nor was any obliged but the next in age, and not married. St. Justin (q. 132,) teaches the reverse. (Calmet) ---

Half-brothers were included, (Menochius) and indeed every relation, in order, who, upon the refusal of the next heir, wished to take possession of the deceased person's land, Ruth iv. (Haydock) ---

The Jews no longer observe this law, as they have not possession of Chanaan. (Cuneus i. 7.) ---

Fagius asserts that it was neglected after the captivity of Babylon, because the inheritances were confounded. (Calmet) ---

This, however, does not seem to have been the opinion of those who have undertaken to reconcile the genealogy of our Saviour, given by Sts. Matthew and Luke, by supposing that St. Joseph was the son of Jacob by birth, and of Heli according to the law. (St. Hilary) Africanus says (Ep. to Aristides) that "Heli dying without issue, Jacob was obliged to marry his widow, by whom he had Joseph, a descendant of Solomon by Jacob, and of Nathan by Heli," as their common mother, Esta, had married successively Mathan and Melchi, (or rather Mathat) who sprung from those two branches of David's family. (Dupin) (Haydock) ---

The Athenians followed a similar regulation with respect to orphan young women, whom the next of kin were bound to marry and to endow. The Tartars assert their right to marry the widows of their brethren. The Egyptians did not consider the marriage as real, nor any relationship contracted, in case the woman had no issue, on which principle there was no impediment ot prevent the brother from marrying the widow of his brother. On other occasions such contracts were declared illegal, Leviticus xviii. 16. (Calmet) ---

This was a positive law, (Worthington; Genesis xxxviii.) which admitted of an exception.

Haydock: Deu 25:6 - Name

Name. Josephus ([Antiquities?] iv. 8) takes this literally, as St. Augustine once did, though afterwards he retracted that opinion, (B. ii. 12,) on considering that Booz called his son Obed, and not Mahalon, which was the name of the first husband of Ruth, Ruth iv. 17. (Calmet) ---

Houbigant thinks some omissions have taken place in the very short genealogy of David, mentioned in that chapter, and instead of Obed, he would substitute Jachin, as the first-born of Ruth. He thinks that Solomon alluded to two of his ancestors, when he styled the two pillars before the temple Jachin and Booz. "In strength it shall stand or establish," 3 Kings vii. 21. Hebrew, "the first-born which she beareth shall arise (or succeed) in the name (or by the right and title) of his brother." See Numbers xxiv. 3. (Haydock) ---

Name is sometimes put for succession, (Calmet) or instead of another. (Menochius)

Haydock: Deu 25:9 - In his face

In his face, or presence, upon the ground, as appears from the Gemarra of Jerusalem, where we read this form: (Haydock) "In our presence, (the three judges are specified) N, widow of N, hath taken off the shoe of N, son of N. She brought him before us, and took off the shoe from his right foot, and spat in our presence, so that we saw her spittle upon the ground; and she said to him, So shall he be treated who will not establish the house of his brother." Before this ceremony took place, the widow was obliged to wait three months, to prove that she was not in a state of pregnancy; for if she were, the brother could not marry her. He was never obliged to do it, but if he refused he was deemed infamous. The taking off the shoe was intended to humble him, as well as to shew that he relinquished all his claim to the inheritance. Josephus ([Antiquities?] v. 11) says, that Ruth gave the relation, who would not marry her, a slap on the face, or rather, as it ought to be printed, "she spat in his face," which was a mark of the greatest ignominy, chap. xii. 14., Isaias l. 6., and Matthew xxvi. 67. (Calmet)

Haydock: Deu 25:10 - Unshod

Unshod. Those who have no consideration for their brethren, or for the commonwealth, deserve to be despised. Much more do they who are appointed pastors of the Church, if they do not zealously endeavour to increase the number of God's servants, whom they must attach to him, and not to themselves. Thus the disciples of St. Paul were known by the general name of Christians. (St. Augustine, contra Faustus xxxii. 10.) (Worthington)

Haydock: Deu 25:12 - In her regard

In her regard: words supplied also by the Septuagint conformably to the context. (Calmet) ---

The indecency and impudence of the woman, left her no excuse; (Haydock) though the Rabbins falsely maintain, that she might transgress this law in case of necessity, and might cut off the hand of her husband's antagonist. (Grotius) (Calmet) ---

She would thus put the man in danger of having no posterity. (Menochius) ---

If even the imminent danger of her husband would not authorize her to act in this manner, when the person was stripped to fight, how severely will God punish all wanton liberties!

Haydock: Deu 25:16 - Injustice

Injustice. Proverbs xx. 10. To have a greater weight for buying and a less one for selling, is the way to grow rich here, or to obtain the mammon of iniquity; though, when such mean practices are detected, the man who cheats often loses more than he had gained; and at any rate, must either make restitution, if possible, or receive the wages of his unjust labour and craft in the world to come. (Haydock)

Gill: Deu 25:5 - If brethren dwell together // and one of them die, and have no child // the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger // her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife // and perform the duty of an husband's brother to her

If brethren dwell together,.... Not only in the same country, province, town, or city, but in the same house; such who had been from their youth brought up together in their father's house, and now one of them being married, as the case put supposes, they that were unmarried might live with him, and especially if the father was dead; and so may except such as were abroad, and in foreign countries, or at such a distance that this law coals not well be observed by them; though the Targum of Jonathan, and so Jarchi, interpret it of their being united in an inheritance, all by virtue of relation having a claim to their father's inheritance; so that it mattered not where they dwelt, it is the relation that is regarded, and their right of inheritance; and the above Targum describes them as brethren on the father's side, and so Jarchi says excepts his brother on the mother's side; for brethren by the mother's side, in case of inheritance, and the marrying of a brother's wife, were not reckoned brethren, as Maimonides ^h observes; who adds, that there is no brotherhood but on the father's side. Some think that when there were no brethren in a strict and proper sense, the near kinsmen, sometimes called brethren, were to do the office here enjoined, and which they conclude from the case of Boaz and Ruth; but Aben Ezra contradicts this, and says that instance is no proof of it, it respecting another affair, not marriage, but redemption; and says that brethren, absolutely and strictly speaking are here meant; which is agreeably to their tradition ⁱ:

and one of them die, and have no child: son, or daughter, son's son, or daughter's son, or daughter's daughter, as Jarchi notes; if there were either of these, children or grandchildren, of either sex, there was no obligation to marry a brother's wife; so, in the case put to Christ, there was no issue, the person was childless, Mat 22:24,

the wife of the dead shall not marry without unto a stranger; by whom is meant not a Gentile, or a proselyte of the gate, or of righteousness, but any Israelite whatever, that was not of her husband's family; she might not marry out of the family; that is, she was refused by all, the design of the law being to secure inheritances, and continue them in families to which they belonged:

her husband's brother shall go in unto her, and take her to him to wife; that is, supposing him to be unmarried, and this is indeed supposed in the first clause of the text, by dwelling with his brother; for had he been married, he would have dwelt with his wife and family apart; besides, if this law obliged a married man to marry his brother's wife, polygamy would be required and established by a law of God, which was never otherwise than permitted. This is to be understood of the eldest brother, as Jarchi, who is in an unmarried state; so it is said in the Misnah ^k,"the command is upon the eldest to marry his brother's wife; if he will not, they go to all the brethren; if they will not, they return to the eldest; and say to him, upon thee is the commandment, either allow the shoe to be plucked off, or marry;''and such a course we find was taken among the Jews in our Lord's time, Mat 22:25,

and perform the duty of an husband's brother to her; cohabit together as man and wife, in order to raise up seed to his brother, and perform all the offices and duties of an husband to a wife; but the marriage solemnity was not to take place when it was agreed to, until three months or ninety days had passed from the death of the brother, that it might be known whether she was with child or no by her husband, and in such a case this law had no force; so runs the Jewish canon ^l"a brother's wife may not pluck off the shoe, nor be married, until three months;''that is, after her husband's death.

Gill: Deu 25:6 - And it shall be that the firstborn that she beareth // shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead // that his name be not put out of Israel

And it shall be that the firstborn that she beareth,.... To her husband's brother, now married to her:

shall succeed in the name of his brother which is dead; the meaning is, as the Targum of Jonathan,"he shall rise up in the inheritance in the name of his brother;''or, as Jarchi expresses it,"he shall take the inheritance of the deceased in the goods of his father;''that is, he shall have his part and share in the inheritance that the deceased brother would have had if he had lived, which would come to him by his father:

that his name be not put out of Israel; that the family be not lost in Israel, and the inheritance belonging to it pass to another. This law was designed to keep families distinct, and inheritances in them, until the Messiah came, and that it might appear from what family he came; as he did from one in whom, as it is generally thought, this law took place: and it might have still a more special respect to him, as Ainsworth suggests; for Christ in the mystical sense may be signified by the deceased brother; he stands in the relation of a brother to his people, and has all the love, friendship, compassion, and condescension of one; he and they are of one and the same father, of the same family, and of the same nature, and have the same inheritance they being co-heirs with him; nor is he ashamed to own the relation. This brother of theirs is deceased; his death was according to the will of God, what he himself agreed to, and was foretold by the prophets; for which purpose he came into the world, and did die as to the flesh, and that for the sins of his people. Now the Jewish church was his wife, by whom he had no children through the law; that church was espoused to him, he stood in the relation of an husband to her, and she in the relation of a wife to him. Very few children were brought forth by her to him, see, Isa 54:1; and none by the law, by which there is no regeneration, but by the Gospel; it is through that, and not the law, the Spirit and his graces come; or souls are born again to Christ, renewed and sanctified. The apostles that survived Christ, and the ministers of the Gospel, are his brethren, Joh 20:17; and who are instruments in begetting souls to Christ; and these are a seed raised up unto him, and are called not after the name of the apostles and ministers of the word, through whose ministry they are begotten, 1Co 1:12; but after Christ; and have the name of Christians, or anointed ones, from him, and by which means his name is, and will be continued as long as the sun endures, Act 11:26.

Gill: Deu 25:7 - And the man like not to take his brother's wife // then let his brother's wife go up to the gate // unto the elders, and say // my husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother

And the man like not to take his brother's wife,.... The provision here made by this law, when this was the case, is such as did not take place before it became a law; for then Onan would have taken the advantage of it, and refused marrying his brother's wife, which it is plain was not agreeable to him, Gen 38:9; as many do now on one account or another. Leo of Modena ^l says,"it was anciently accounted the more laudable thing to take her, than to release her; but now the corruption of the times, and the hardness of men's hearts, are such, as that they only look after worldly ends, either of riches, or of the beauty of the woman; so that there are very few that in this case will marry a brother's widow, especially among the Dutch and Italian Jews, but they always release her:"

then let his brother's wife go up to the gate; to the gate of the city, where the judges sit for public affairs; to the gate of the sanhedrim, or court of judicature, as the Targum of Jonathan; and this affair was cognizable by the bench of three judges, and might be dispatched by them; for so it is said ^m,"the plucking off the shoe, and the refusal of marriage, are by three:''i.e. three judges, which was the lowest court of judicature with the Jews:

unto the elders, and say; which according to the above Targum were to be five wise men, of which three were to be judges, and two witnesses; and she was to say in the Hebrew language, in which, according to the Misnah ⁿ, she was to pronounce what follows:

my husband's brother refuseth to raise up unto his brother a name in Israel, he will not perform the duty of my husband's brother; that is, in a few words, he will not marry her.

Gill: Deu 25:8 - Then the elders of his city shall call him // and speak unto him // and if he stand to it: and say, I like not to take her

Then the elders of his city shall call him,.... Require him to come, before them, and declare his resolution, and the reasons for it; recite this law to him, and explain the nature of it, and exhort him to comply with it, or show reason why he does not, at least to have his final resolution upon it:

and speak unto him; talk with him upon this subject, and give him their best advice; and what that was Maimonides ^o more particularly informs us; if it is good and advisable to marry, they advise him to marry; but if it is better advice to pluck off the shoe, they give it; as when she is young and he is old, or she is old and he young, they advise him to allow the shoe to be plucked off:

and if he stand to it: and say, I like not to take her; if, after all the conversation, debate, and counsel between them, he is resolute, and abides by his first determination, that he will not marry her, then the following method was to be taken.

Gill: Deu 25:9 - Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders // and loose his shoe from off his foot // and spit in his face // and shall answer and say, so shall it be done unto the man that will not build up his brother's house

Then shall his brother's wife come unto him in the presence of the elders,.... The time and place being appointed the evening before by three Rabbins, and two witnesses, as Leo of Modena says ^p; of which she was apprized, and ordered to come tasting:

and loose his shoe from off his foot; his right foot, which was thus done;"they bring him a leather shoe, which has a heel, but not sewed with linen (linen thread), and he puts it on the right foot, and binds the latchet on his foot, and stands, he and she, in the court; he fixes his foot on the ground, and she sits and stretches out her hand in the court, and looses the latchet of his shoe from off his foot, and pulls off his shoe, and casts it to the ground ^q:''this he suffered to be done to show that he gave up his right to her; and he was so used by way of reproach, to signify that he deserved not to be reckoned among freemen, but among servants and slaves, that went barefooted, having no shoes on: and in the mystical sense of it, as Ainsworth observes, it spiritually signified, that such as would not beget children unto Christ (or preach his Gospel for that purpose), it should be declared of them that their feet are not shod with the preparation of the Gospel of Christ, Eph 6:15,

and spit in his face; in a way of contempt, as a token of shame and disgrace; but the Jewish writers generally interpret this in a softer manner, as if it was not in his face, but in his presence, upon the floor, and seen by the judges ^r:

and shall answer and say, so shall it be done unto the man that will not build up his brother's house; that is, in this contemptuous and shameful manner shall he be used.

Gill: Deu 25:10 - And his name shall be called in Israel // the house of him that hath his shoe loosed

And his name shall be called in Israel,.... Not his particular and personal name, but his family; for it seems that not only a mark of infamy was set upon him for refusing to marry his brother's widow, but upon his family also:

the house of him that hath his shoe loosed; which, as Leo of Modena says ^s, was repeated by her three times; and at every time the people with a loud voice answer and call him, one that had his shoe loosed; and then the Rabbin tells the man that he is at liberty now to marry whom he pleases; and if he desires a certificate from them of this setting free his kinswoman, they presently give him one; and she also had a writing given to her by the judges, certifying the same, that she was free also to marry another; of which the following is a short form or copy ^t."In such or such a session (or court), such an one, the daughter of such an one, plucked off the shoe of such an one, the son of such an one, before us; she brought him before us, and she loosed the shoe of his right foot, and spit before him spittle, which was seen by us upon the ground; and said, so shall it be done to the man that would not build up his brother's house.''A larger form may be seen in Maimonides ^u, as well as a type and copy of the matrimonial contract. From this law an high priest was free, Lev 21:14; and so a king, according to the Jewish canon ^w.

Gill: Deu 25:11 - When men strive together, one with another // and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him // and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets

When men strive together, one with another,.... Quarrel with one another, and come to blows, and strive for mastery, which shall beat, and be the best man:

and the wife of the one draweth near for to deliver her husband out of the hand of him that smiteth him; perceiving that his antagonist has more skill or strength, or both, for fighting, and is an more than a match for her husband, who is like to be much bruised and hurt; wherefore, to save him out of the hands of the smiter, she goes up to them to part them, or take her husband's side:

and putteth forth her hand, and taketh him by the secrets; or privy parts; in Hebrew his "shameful" parts ^x, which through shame are hidden, and modesty forbids to express in proper terms; and such is the purity of the Hebrew language, that no obscene words are used in it; for which reason, among others, it is called the holy tongue. This immodest action was done partly out of affection to her husband, to oblige his antagonist to let go his hold of him; and partly out of malice and revenge to him, to spoil him, and make him unfit for generation, and therefore was to be severely punished, as follows.

Gill: Deu 25:12 - Then thou shall cut off her hand // thine eye shall not pity her

Then thou shall cut off her hand,.... Which was to be done not by the man that strove with her husband, or by any bystander, but by the civil magistrate or his order. This severity was used to deter women from such an immodest as well as injurious action, who on such an occasion are very passionate and inconsiderate. Our Lord is thought to refer to this law, Mat 5:30; though the Jewish writers interpret this not of actual cutting off the hand, but of paying a valuable consideration, a price put upon it; so Jarchi; and Aben Ezra compares it with the law of retaliation, "eye for eye", Exo 21:24; which they commonly understand of paying a price for the both, &c. lost; and who adds, if she does not redeem her hand (i.e. by a price) it must be cut off:

thine eye shall not pity her; on account of the tenderness of her sex, or because of the plausible excuse that might be made for her action, being done hastily and in a passion, and out of affection to her husband; but these considerations were to have no place with the magistrate, who was to order the punishment inflicted, either in the strict literal sense, or by paying a sum of money.

Gill: Deu 25:13 - Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights // a great and a small

Thou shalt not have in thy bag divers weights,.... Or, "a stone and a stone" ^y; it being usual, in those times and countries, to have their weights of stone, as it was formerly with us here; we still say, that such a commodity is worth so much per stone, a stone being of such a weight; now these were not to be different:

a great and a small; great weights, to buy with them, and small weights, to sell with them, as the Targum of Jonathan paraphrases it.

Gill: Deu 25:14 - Thou shall not have in thine house divers, measures // a great and a small

Thou shall not have in thine house divers, measures,.... Or, "an ephah and an ephah"; which was one sort of measure in use with the Jews, and held above a bushel; and is put for all others, which should be alike, and not

a great and a small; one to buy with, and another to sell by, as before observed; which would be to cheat both seller and buyer in their turns; see Amo 8:5.

Gill: Deu 25:15 - But thou shall have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shall thou have // that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee

But thou shall have a perfect and just weight, a perfect and just measure shall thou have,.... That is, full weights, and full measures; and such as are alike, and everywhere used, according to the standard of the country; See Gill on Lev 19:36,

that thy days may be lengthened in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee; long life was always reckoned a blessing, and is frequently promised to, obedience, and particularly long life in the land of Canaan; which was a most delightful and fruitful land, and which a man might wish to live long in; deceitful men, are threatened with not living half their days, and such may they be said to be that use false weights and measures, Psa 55:23.

Gill: Deu 25:16 - For all that do such things // and all that do unrighteously // are an abomination unto the Lord thy God

For all that do such things,.... Keep, different weights and measures, and make use of them to defraud their neighbours in buying and selling:

and all that do unrighteously; what is not just and right between man and man, in any other instance whatever:

are an abomination unto the Lord thy God; both they and their actions; he is a righteous God, and loves righteousness, and hates injustice of every kind.