FAMILY RELATIONSHIPS IN THE BIBLE

Instructor: Barbara Sutnick
sutnick@internet-zahav.net

Part 5
JUDAH AND TAMAR: A DUET OF DESTINY

The story of Judah and Tamar, chapter 38 of Genesis serves on a literary level as a type of "station break" in the saga of Joseph and his brothers (chap. 37-50). It appears in the text just as Joseph has been sold into slavery and before he arrives in Egypt. This detour into the life of Judah, the fourth brother, adds to the suspense of the Joseph narrative and at the same time sidetracks the reader. Our story raises many questions, the first being why does it appear at this point in the Bible? There are even more central questions: Why was Tamar so determined to do what she did, and do the ends justify her means? Please read Genesis 38 and begin to think about the issues I have raised before continuing with this lecture.

A first important detail in this story is that Judah marries the daughter of Shua, a Canaanite. As we saw in Lesson 2, "Courtship in Our First Families" the patriarchs and matriarchs took a rather dim view of their sons marrying Canaanite women. For both Isaac (Judah's grandfather) and Jacob (Judah's father), wives were brought in from abroad to prevent such marriages. Nonetheless, Judah's marriage is initially blessed with three sons. The death of Er and Onan as newlyweds, however, must have clearly embittered Judah's life. His wife dies before their third son, Shela, is married. I will return later to the symbolic role of Judah's Canaanite wife.

Judah takes Tamar as a wife for his son, Er. "But Er, Judah's first-born, was displeasing in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord took his life" (vs. 7). The Bible does not tell exactly what it was that Er did that was "displeasing" to the Lord. Our only textual clue is that the same language is used in verse 10 to describe Onan's transgression. From this, most of the commentators conclude that Er must have also "let his seed go to waste", and was therefore punished in the same swift and decisive way by God. This conclusion is satisfactory, except for the fact that Er does not have the same motivation for transgressing as did Onan. Rashi suggests that Er avoids impregnating his young wife so as not to ruin her girlish figure!

In verse 9 we read that Onan did not want to "provide offspring for his brother". He had been instructed by his father to marry Tamar "and perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her, and raise up offspring for your brother." This is a classic example of the Levirate marriage, which is still "on the books" in Jewish law today. The biblical source of the levirate marriage can be found in Deuteronomy 25:5 ff. It opens: "When brothers dwell together, and one of them dies and leaves no son, the wife of the deceased shall not be married to a stranger outside the family; her husband's brother shall unite with her, and take her as his wife, performing the levir's duty. The first son whom she bears shall be accounted to the dead brother, that his name may not be blotted out of Israel..." It is interesting to note that our story documents this law in practice centuries before it was officially handed down to Moses in the Torah.

We see from this text that the expressed purpose of the levirate marriage is to ensure at least one heir to each man, even if he does not live long enough to sire an heir himself. Looking more carefully, we notice that this law only applies to MARRIED men who die childless, and not to men who die before they are married. Thus it is every COUPLE that must be ensured an heir, and by extension, every young WIFE. Indeed, since inheritance in the Ancient Near East largely went from father to child, a widow without children could be left high and dry. It seems to me that the levirate law protects married women who are widowed when childless as much as it preserves the names of their late husbands.

Verses 7-10 in Deuteronomy 25 show that there is a way out the levirate commitment. The "halitza" ceremony described there is actually still performed by rabbinic courts today. Returning to Genesis 38, however, we see that Onan does not opt to be released from the levirate bond through halitza (assuming it was already in practice at the time). Perhaps he is not given this choice by his grieving father. On the other hand, Onan does not seek to honor the levirate commitment either. He lets his seed "go to waste" or "be spilled on the ground" (translations vary), and thus the term "onanism" derives from his name. (This is certainly the opposite extreme from having one's name "blotted out," as per Deut. 25!)

Onan's motive for avoiding impregnating Tamar is clearly stated: he does not want to provide offspring for his brother. In a society in which levirate marriage seems to be a norm, and in which Onan would not necessarily have been limited to one wife, it is hard to understand why he refuses. He was, in effect, sentencing his brother to an eternal death, that of no progeny. Was Onan repulsed by Tamar? Alternatively, was the levirite supposed to be a "one shot deal," while Onan wanted to prolong his opportunity for contacts with Tamar? Did he resent his father's demanding the levirate of him? Was he suspicious about Tamar being the cause of Er's death? (This is unlikely, since Judah would have been reticent to push the levirate marriage in this case.) The Bible is silent on this question. I would like to suggest the possibility that Onan may have harbored strong resentments for his brother. After all, their father, Judah, came from a family plagued by vicious sibling rivalry, and such family patterns unfortunately often repeat themselves. (We will return to this theme in Lesson 6.) If this were Onan's problem, then his grudge was pretty strong, since he apparently still bore it after the young Er's death.

The implied biblical prohibition against onanism derives from this story, but the traditional commentators differ as to precisely what Onan's transgression had been. Some say that Onan never consummated relations properly with Tamar, and some say it was "coitus interruptus." The Bible itself, makes no outright condemnation here of a specific sexual act. This is in contrast to other places in the Bible where specific sexual acts are denounced as "abominations." Thus it seems that what Onan stands judged for is what we might call a lack of "good family values". He refuses to sire a child on behalf of his late brother, a duty that had been expected of him. Also as we shall see, this was to be a very important child indeed.

After having buried two sons who died in the same mysterious way, Judah tells Tamar to go back to her father's house until his third son, Shela, grows up. Judah never sends for her. (It is interesting to note that we are told the name of the place in which Shela was born -- CH'ZiV, vs. 5 -- which translates from the Hebrew as "deception".) Judah's actions are on the one hand counter to the norms of his society, and on the other hand rather understandable from a psychological perspective. Tamar and Shela are still bound to each other by the levirate law, leaving Tamar unable to marry anybody else. Judah is thus still obligated to her. If Judah never intended to marry Tamar to Shela, as Rashi says (this is clearly borne out in the text), why did he not release them from their mutual commitment? This question is even stronger when we consider how Judah must have been feeling. He must have become suspicious of Tamar, or at the very least considered her to be bad luck for his family. (Please note that in Jewish law there is the concept of the ISHa KaTLanit, "femme fatale" or "deadly wife". A woman is called ISHa KaTLanit if THREE husbands have died while married to her. This designation then becomes an impediment to her remarriage. Even though this law is later than the Bible, the fact of its existence illustrates the psychological tendency to see such a pattern of deaths as other than coincidental.) As it turns out, Tamar is also determined to remain a part of Judah's family. A marriage to Shela, with the potential for thereby becoming an ISHa KaTLanit, would not have boded well for Tamar's long-term plans.

Tamar notices that time is passing. She is not getting any younger; and Shela has definitely gotten older. Judah has shown no signs of sending for her. Determined to have a child at last by Judah, Tamar changes out of her widow's clothes and veils herself so her father-in-law does not recognize her. She adopts the customary attire of prostitutes at that time, and Judah approaches her as she waits at the side of the road. Judah promises to send her a goat kid in exchange for her services, and Tamar has the presence of mind to demand collateral. Judah's passions must have clouded his thinking, for he agreed to part with his signet ring, his cord and his staff. In ancient times, this was comparable with leaving one's wedding ring, major credit card and driver's license as collateral! Afterwards Tamar removes her disguise, frustrating all attempts on her father-in-law's part to pay his debt to her and redeem his pledge.

When it becomes known that Tamar is pregnant, Judah pronounces her an adulteress and calls for her to be put to death. How convenient it would have been for Judah to be rid of her at last! Tamar sends word to Judah that she is pregnant by the man whose signet, cord, and staff she is holding. At this point, Judah acknowledges ownership of the items, and realizes that "She is more in the right than I, inasmuch as I did not give her to my son Shela" (vs. 26). It is noteworthy that Tamar chooses to confront Judah privately rather than challenge him in public as he had condemned her. This attests to her good character, Rashi aptly reminds us. The biblical narrator and the characters alike seem to have no problem whatsoever with the devious course of action that Tamar chose. We have the clear impression that everyone agreed that Judah left her no choice, and for her to have acted any other way might have been remiss!

What becomes of Judah and Tamar as a couple in the wake of this traumatic incident? The last few words of verse 26 are problematic in the Hebrew, but most commentators render them as Judah "is not intimate with her again." As Radak explains, this is because since he once debased her, relating to her as a prostitute, it might be difficult for him to treat her respectfully as befits a wife. What is more, their relationship would always recall his indiscretion. One or two esoteric ancient translations infer that Judah and Tamar did sustain marital relations after that time.

I maintain that from the Bible's viewpoint it is unimportant whether or not Judah and Tamar sustained a marriage. Their coupling when she was dressed in the guise of a prostitute was devoid of any interpersonal interaction. Judah had taken so little notice of her as a person when she lived in his home that he never even recognized her when in her bed. (The echoes with the events of Genesis 29, which we will study later, are unmistakable.) According to the rabbis, this was because Tamar was always so modestly clothed and veiled when in her father-in-law's house that he never properly saw her! In any event, her physical and personal qualities were not a factor in their relationship. She is absolutely determined to have a child, and it seems that Judah's child is her only option. Perhaps more correct is that it was ALWAYS meant to have been Judah's child (and not Shua the Canaanite's great-grandchild) that she was destined to bear, and her young husbands tragically and unconsciously participated in that destiny.

The fruit of Tamar's pregnancy by Judah is twin sons, Peretz and Zerah. It is from the line of Judah, through Peretz that King David is descended. According to Jewish tradition, the Messiah will come from the line of King David. Although the designation of the Messianic line is technically extra-biblical; David's ancestry is integral to the Bible itself (see Ruth 4:18-22). "The scepter shall never depart from Judah", a clear reference to royalty, is found in the book of Genesis itself (49:10). Knowing this, we can view in a different light Tamar's urgency about conceiving a child by Judah using any means necessary. An impetus stronger than the ticking of Tamar's biological clock is at work. The midrash describes the spiritual catalyst this way: Tamar saw through a prophetic vision that the Messiah was destined to be born of her progeny. Indeed the pledge that she asked of Judah, his signet, cord, and staff represent the kingship, royalty, and messiahship respectively (Bereshit Rabba 85.6-9). Thus, according to Jewish tradition, Tamar is operating under the influence of a strong spiritual/instinctual drift!

Even from the point of view of the biblical text itself, we can see that the relationship between Judah and Tamar is not about companionship or intimacy. It is about national destiny: the monarchy that is to spring from Judah's line. In this it differs somewhat from other biblical couples, for whom important interpersonal and psychological influences are also identifiable. Judah and Tamar are a paradigm for the component of biblical relationships that are governed by Divine will. It is often difficult when reading the Bible, to tease out the psychological from the Divine influence. In the case of Judah and Tamar, I see little need to make such an analysis, since all characters in the story seem to be unwittingly playing their pre-destined roles.

In light of Judah's destiny as father of the Davidic/messianic line, we can better understand why his union with a Canaanitess did not continue. The Bible has no tolerance for patriarchs marrying Canaanite women. Aside from all the other problems of "marrying out" discussed in Lesson 2, a King of Israel descended from a Canaanitess would cause untenable national problems. If King David were to have Canaanite ancestry, that could open the door for a Canaanite claim to the land. After all, the Bible documents that the Canaanites were expelled from the land of Israel beginning in the time of Joshua by the Lord's command. It would not do to have a Canaanite portion in the bloodline of the monarchy. It is significant that Tamar's tribe is never mentioned, and is in fact unknown. The midrash underscores that she was NOT Canaanite like her mother-in-law, which indeed led to some "in-law" conflict between them.

Let us return to the question of why this story is placed, as it is, just after the opening of the Joseph story. Judah rises above himself by immediately accepting responsibility for Tamar's pregnancy and by vindicating her. He could easily have taken back the collateral items and denied any connection to the pregnancy. Instead, he shows proper leadership qualities in his ability to admit he was wrong and modify his decrees and his actions. By this he sanctifies God's name in public (B. Talmud, Sotah 10b). Perhaps this is a foreshadowing of the reformed behavior he will show years later in Egypt, when he repents of what was done to his brother Joseph and eloquently pleads for Benjamin's release (see Genesis 44).

We also see that Judah successfully convinced his father to send Benjamin to Egypt in his (Judah's) care. When Judah says "I myself will be a surety for him; you may hold me responsible (Gen. 43:9), we can hear him speaking as one bereaved father to another. Perhaps this is why Jacob is finally persuaded to let Benjamin go in the care of one who understands his pain. (Contrast this with Reuben's asinine offer: "you can kill my two sons if I do not bring [Benjamin] back to you", vs. 42:37.)

Perhaps the most eloquent explanation for why the story of Judah and Tamar is embedded in the Joseph story lies in the overall purpose of each story. Joseph leads his family into Egypt, setting the stage for 400 years of exile and slavery, and creating the prototype for future exiles of the Jewish people. The union of Judah and Tamar is the basis of the future Judaic monarcy, from which King David will arise to unify and strengthen the nation. Rabbinic tradition furthermore sees Judah's line as ultimately producing the Messiah as well. Hence some rather potent antidotes to exile have already been ordained in this story even before the exile is to begin!

QUESTIONS FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION

1. Can you think of more than one reason why the Bible was concerned that a man's name not be "blotted out in Israel" (Deut. 25)?

2. There are several theories suggested above as to why Onan refused to preform the levirate duty with Tamar. Choose one to defend, or develop your own alternative explanation.

3. What thoughts do you think were going through Tamar's mind as she sat at the side of the road in her prostitute's garb and waited for Judah?

4. Do you think Tamar's ends justify her deceptive means?

5. According to the midrash, after Judah admits that Tamar is more righteous that he (vs 26) a voice called out from heaven saying "You are both innocent! It was the will of God that it should happen" (Ginzberg, II, pg. 35). - In what ways does the text substantiate this midrash?

5. Radak suggests that it is good for the people that the Davidic line began with such humble origins. What useful lessons could a king derive about his mandate/powers if he takes this story to heart? In what ways could knowing this story enhance a king's sense of superiority?

6. The midrash (pg. 4) claims that Tamar was always modestly covered in her father-in-law's house. What does this tell you about Tamar besides explaining why Judah did not recognize her?

[Previous] [Home] [Homepage] [Next]