Berakhot 27
Today’s reading includes a discussion of the plight of a child bride. The reference to 3 year old girl (from Berakhot24) reverberates in this reference: “When an orphan girl, who was married off by her mother or brother before reaching the age of majority, reaches the age of majority, she may refuse to continue living with her husband and thereby retroactively annul their marriage.” The text further expounds that although normally such a refusal would be discouraged, it would be acceptable in the case of a levirate marriage (a marriage in which the brother of a deceased man is obliged to marry his brother's widow). The acceptance of the refusal is not out of concern that a young girl may not want to be married in the first place, but rather it is seen as a convenience for the sake of an ancient custom.
This suggests that if a man dies, the child he is married to could be passed to his brother. And I am debating what is meant by an orphan who is promised in marriage by her mother. Is that because she was promised before her mother died, and now as an orphan has to go ahead with the marriage. Or is there an inference that a child is an orphan if the father is dead but the mother is alive (the theme of women as secondary continues.) The supporting material in the Koren Talmud Bavli supports this in its discussion of “two sisters who are orphaned from their father.” It also explains that in the case of two sisters, where one passed the age of majority and the other is underage, the minor girl can opt out of the marriage if the husband of the older sister died and had to marry the older sister in consummation of a levirate marriage.
The expository text in the Koren further explains that a woman whose husband dies is allowed to remarry based on the testimony of just one witness who confirms the death in order to spare her “the never-ending status of a deserted life.”
The story about the removal of Gamliel as the head of the Rabbinic Court is wonderful in how it supports the values of debate and discourse. Gamliel was a bully who did not allow for dissenting opinion and the Rabbis worked together to remove him. Today’s daily email highlights how this reflects the beauty of the Talmud and its many voices, including “minority voices that may have fallen silent.” Of course, that did not include the voices of women and girls who could only object to an arranged marriage if it served another purpose.
I know like everyone else that I am interpreting things through my own sensibility, which is the only way I know of to make sense of the text.
Besides all that, I am struck with all the laws a religious person 2,000 years ago had to comply with in order to live an observant life.