In Genesis 38, we read the story of Tamar. Joseph’s brother Judah defies God’s law and marries a Canaanite women named Shua, who gives him three sons, Er, Onan, and Shelah. Judah arranges a marriage between his oldest son and another Canaanite woman, Tamar. Because of his wickedness, Er dies. According to Levirate law, Onan marries Tamar to produce a son for Judah. But though he goes in to Tamar, he defrauds her by spilling his semen on the ground. His wickedness also leads to his death. Judah claims his youngest son, Shelah, is too young to marry so Tamar is sent home to her parents to wait until he is older. But, he never calls for her. Tamar decides on a shocking, risky plan: she plays the part of a harlot to become pregnant by her father-in-law, Judah.
Although Tamar’s story is scandalous to the modern religious mind, it seems the ancient Hebrew mind had a different perspective. Carolyn Custis James gives us one clue of the admiration Tamar’s descendants felt toward her, “Her descendants don’t regard her as a skeleton best kept hidden in the family closet. Moments when you’d think Tamar’s shady chapter of family history should remain behind closed doors are precisely the moments when they bring her out into the light.”(1) For example, her name is mentioned in a wedding blessing to Ruth and Boaz, that their family “be like that of Perez, whom Tamar bore to Judah.”(Ruth. 4:12, NIV). In a culture that placed great importance on names, in which parents chose names to inspire their children to greatness, several of Tamar’s descendants, including King David, named their daughters after her. She is one of four women included in Matthew’s genealogy of Jesus, though women were rarely included in genealogies. Perhaps the strongest evidence of a positive view of Tamar is Judah’s own words in which he described her as righteous immediately after learning about her masquerade.(Gen. 38:26) The ancient Hebrews do not seem scandalized by Tamar’s story, but proud of her. This should provoke us to take a deeper look into her story.
For us to fully understand Tamar’s story, and the choices she made that are so odious to us, we must consider the historical and cultural context in which she lived. For starters, she lived in a strongly patriarchal culture which meant men held all the power and authority and women were deprived of agency and legal rights. In Tamar’s life, this mean that Judah had life-and-death power over her. Furthermore, in such a culture, the life goal and purpose of a woman was to produce sons for her husband. Birthing sons brought her honor and guaranteed her a secure future. Without a son, dishonor and a compromised future would be her lot.
A third custom that comes into play in Tamar’s story is the Levirate(from the Latin levir, brother-in-law) marriage. This law decreed that if a man died without producing an heir, his brother was obligated to marry his widow to produce offspring for the dead man, “so that his name will not be blotted out from Israel.”(Deut. 25:6, NIV) The first son produced by this marriage was legally the son of the dead man; all subsequent sons were considered sons of the new husband. The purpose of this law was twofold. First, it provided an heir for a man who died childless. To have a son ensure that his name, and legacy, live on forever. This also involved the fictive descendant inheriting the dead man’s inheritance.
Another purpose of the levirate marriage was to provide for the widow of the deceased. A barren wife, particularly a childless widow, was an anomaly. As a barren wife, Tamar was no longer a virgin and no longer belongs in her father’s household. As a childless widow, she has no hope of becoming a fruitful member of her husband’s clan. “The law of the levirate suits a male-centered symbol system in that it neatens up that which has become anomalous according to the categories of that system.”(2)
Primogeniture, a custom that elevated firstborn sons over his siblings, is another important aspect in this narrative . As the firstborn, Er had a higher status in the family, and received twice the inheritance his brothers received. Any son that Tamar bore would be considered the heir of Er’s status and family inheritance. If Er had no son, the status and inheritance of the firstborn would go to the second-born son. Onan knew this; he knew that his inheritance increased drastically upon Er’s death, and would decrease just as drastically if Tamar bore Er a son through him. Therefore, acting out of self-interest, he refused to follow the law, honor Tamar, and produce an heir for his deceased brother.
Not only does Onan refuse, Judah commits a dishonorable act on several fronts. He sends Tamar home, with the pretense of Shelah’s youth and the promise of a future marriage to Tamar. At the outset of this decision, he could feign morality as well as interest in her welfare and Shelah’s. But as time went on, and he did not call for Tamar as he promised, his true motives became clear. He had no intention of wedding Tamar to Shelah, and therefore had no intention of upholding the family honor and fulfilling his duty to his oldest son. He also acted out of self-interest and, because of his authority and position, sentenced Tamar to live out her days in shame and dishonor.
Within that framework, we begin to understand why Tamar made the choice she did. Playing the harlot was the only way she could overcome the man who held complete power over her, give Er a son, and rid herself of a lifetime of shame and dishonor. Interestingly, Tamar must have been confident that Judah would be apt to solicit the services of a prostitute which is an incriminating indictment on his character. Tamar’s choice cannot be mistaken as a decision made because “ the end justifies the means.” Unlike Judah and Onan, she was not motivated by self-interest, but by family honor and duty to her dead husband. Carolyn Custis James remind us that Tamar “had only one objective in mind and was willing to risk her life to achieve it. In fact, it is fair to say that a good measure of desperation drove her to accomplish her goal through such unorthodox means”(3). Tamar took an outrageous, bold risk to ensure her honor and the inheritance of Er; she made the courageous decision to not wait for Judah any longer, but took matters into her own hands. She was willing to go against what her culture expected of her and choose what was right in God’s eyes. It is little wonder Judah declares, “She is more righteous than I.”(Gen. 38:26, NIV)
There are numerous clues in this narrative of just how far this son of Jacob had fallen. First, Judah married a Canaanite woman. Second, his decision to send Tamar home was unethical and violated Deuteronomic law. Third, Tamar seemed to have little doubt that Judah would fall for her scheme and solicit the services of a prostitute. Finally, reminiscent of his uncle Esau, Judah seemed indifferent to giving Tamar his cord, seal, and staff, symbols of his personhood as a pledge for his payment. Judah was in a downward spiral morally and spiritually, and was in need of a rescuer. Playing the part of a harlot, Tamar was actually fulfilling the role of an ezer.
Her “scandalous” actions became a pivotal point in Judah’s life; he became a better man because of her. This transformation in Judah’s life helps us make sense of the seemingly awkward placement of Tamar’s story in Genesis. Placed in the middle of Joseph’s story, between being sold to the Midianites and his encounter with Potiphar’s wife, it seems out of place. Prior to Tamar, with little concern for Joseph or their father, Judah convinced his brothers to sell Joseph to the Midianites. After Tamar, Judah not only shows compassion for his father, he is willing to be enslaved rather than endanger his younger brother Benjamin. It is impossible to explain the radical change that takes place in Judah without his eye-opening collision with Tamar. This story is not an irrelevant interruption but a turning point in Judah’s life and Joseph’s story(Vixens, p. 47).
Tamar displayed great courage in the midst of a desperate situation. No longer the Canaanite outcast nor the vixen who prostituted herself, but a true eschet chayil whose son continued the lineage of Judah, from whose line came Jesus, the Messiah.
Endnotes:
1. Glahn, S. (2017). Vindicating the Vixens: Revisiting Sexualized, Vilified, and Marginalized Women of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publishing, p. 32.
2. Newsom, C., Ringe, S. & Lapsley, J. (2012). Women’s Bible Commentary. Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press, p. 42.
3. Glahn, S. (2017). Vindicating the Vixens: Revisiting Sexualized, Vilified, and Marginalized Women of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI: Kregel Publishing, p. 43.
4. Ibid, p. 47.