Q&A: The Shoe Used for Halitzah
The Shoe Used for Halitzah
Question
Hello Rabbi!
From reading the verses in the Torah that deal with the halitzah ceremony, it seems that this is a ceremony whose point is to rebuke the brother-in-law who refuses to marry his deceased brother’s widow. One could perhaps suggest other reasons for this ceremony, but it seems to me that whatever reason one gives, it is hard to find a rationale for the many detailed laws concerning the shoe that the brother-in-law must wear so that his sister-in-law can remove it. (You can see this in the Shulchan Arukh, Even HaEzer, section 169, or at much greater length in the Encyclopedia Talmudit, vol. 15, entry “Halitzah”).
My question is: when the Sages and those who came after them dealt with this topic and clarified how this shoe must be made (its appearance is strange and unusual, and I very much doubt that at any point in history anyone actually wore such a shoe; the Encyclopedia Talmudit includes a picture), was what stood before their eyes the question of what God wants? In other words, is the assumption that when the Holy One, blessed be He, told Moses the passage of halitzah, it was essential to Him that this ceremony take place specifically with this shoe and not with a shoe like ours (which does not seem very plausible to me), or does Jewish law have a life of its own, with rules for how to “handle” the verses of the Torah and interpret them, and this whole discussion has no connection to the question whether it matters to the Holy One, blessed be He, that the brother-in-law receive his rebuke (or whatever this is) specifically through this strange shoe?
To tell the truth, this question is general and applies to many commandments. I asked about the halitzah shoe because here it stood out to me especially.
Answer
I do not understand the difference between the two options. What tools do the Sages have for knowing God’s will other than through interpretation of the Torah (or moral principles and logical reasoning)?! They have no direct access to the Holy One, blessed be He (and even if they did—”it is not in heaven”).
The connection between the details of the laws and their rationale is problematic, and many have already noted this. Maimonides, in Part III of The Guide for the Perplexed, argues that the details were fixed arbitrarily because it was necessary to establish a clear-cut law. That does not persuade me at all. Therefore, in my opinion, the whole matter of reasons for the commandments is very questionable, and I do not really deal with it.
Discussion on Answer
The truth, for example? That too is an option. Maybe they understood that this is what emerges from the verses, or that they indeed received it by tradition. Otherwise, what is your explanation? That they are just talking nonsense? You assume that every action of the Sages is agenda-driven, but as I said, truth is also an option.
Heaven forbid!
It never occurred to me that the Sages are talking nonsense.
I am asking because this issue is very difficult for me. That is all.
The point is that from reading the passage of halitzah, one gets an impression of what God wants. Suppose it is accepted by readers of the passage that this is a ceremony of rebuking the brother-in-law, and that removing the shoe is an act of humiliating him.
It is hard for me to imagine that the Holy One, blessed be He, would care which shoe is involved.
What motivation would cause the Sages to deal with the form of the shoe?