Hopefully you’ve recently enjoyed attending a wonderful summer wedding. Summer has long been the most popular season for weddings, a tradition rooted in historical, cultural, and practical factors. From ancient Rome, where marriages in June were believed to receive the blessings of Juno (the goddess of marriage) to medieval Europe, where annual bathing customs made summer an ideal time for nuptials, these months has been favored for their pleasant weather, abundant flowers, and practical timing for agrarian societies.
In Jewish tradition, however, marriage customs are guided not only by seasonal considerations but also by spiritual and halachic concerns. One such example is the directive of Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid (1150–1217), who warned against certain name-based marital pairings. Specifically, he advised that couples in which the mother-in-law and daughter-in-law share the same name, or the father-in-law and son-in-law share the same name, should not marry. As we explore the significance of this restriction, we will consider the reasons behind it and the situations in which it applies.
Off the bat, we should state that Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive does not appear in traditional halachic works, but is first recorded in his ethical will. This has led to varying reactions among halachic authorities. Some disregard the directive entirely, while others apply it selectively – for instance, only in cases where a bride and her mother-in-law share the same name, but not when a groom and father-in-law share a name. Still, others take Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s instructions very seriously.
The rationale for this restriction has been interpreted in various ways. Throughout the ages, poskim have come up with different ways to minimize the application of Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive and argued that is simply was not said and/or was not even meant to be applied in certain situations.
Such heterim also heavily depend on the various reasons given for Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s instructions. For example, some poskim suggest that having a parent-in-law and child-in-law with the same name could create an ayin hara (“evil eye”), as it might cause jealousy and invite heavenly judgment upon the family. Following that understanding, Rabbi Chaim Palagi (1788–1868) ruled that if the potential parent-in-law is already deceased, then the restriction no longer applies, as a deceased person cannot arouse jealousy. Meaning, Avraham’s daughter can marry somebody named Avraham, if her father has already passed away.
Similarly, Rabbi Eliezer Chaim Deutsch of Bonyhad (1850–1915) argued that the concern only arises if the newlywed couple lives with the parent-in-law (as was the custom in some times and places), as proximity could lead to gossip and ayin hara. But if they live elsewhere, then their marriage won’t be the “talk of the town,” so there is no problem. He also maintained that Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s restrictions apply only to first marriages, not to individuals who have been previously married.
Others argue that the restriction has a basis in halacha, not just mysticism. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Deah §240:2) rules that a person is forbidden from saying their parents’ name, and under certain conditions, may even be prohibited from using that name in reference to someone else. Based on this, scholars like Rabbi Yosef Shaul Nathansohn (1810–1875) and Rabbi Baruch Halevi Epstein (1860–1941) explain that if, for example, a man whose mother is named Sarah marries a woman named Sarah, he might inadvertently say his mother’s name when referring to his wife. To avoid this, Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid forbade a man from marrying a woman with the same name as his mother (or a woman from marrying a man with the same name as her father). In light of this understanding, some poskim suggest that Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s restrictions could be lifted if the husband commits to never referring to his wife by her given name, instead using terms like “my wife.”
Another reason for Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s instructions centers on Ashkenazi naming customs, which traditionally prohibit naming a child after a living relative. If, for example, Moshe marries a woman whose father is also named Moshe, then when his father-in-law dies, the younger Moshe would be unable to name his future son after his deceased father-in-law, as it would conflict with his own name. This could be seen as a slight to the father-in-law’s memory, as a long-standing Ashkenazi custom is to name children after deceased ancestors. Instead of getting into these complicated situations, Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid would rather have couples where the parent-in-law and child-in-law have the same name avoid getting married altogether. However, some poskim argue that if the father-in-law waives the honor of having a child named after him posthumously, then Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s restriction no longer applies, as he has already forgone whatever honor he would otherwise be due.
Rabbi Yechezkel Landau (1713–1793), in his responsa Noda B’Yehudah, famously argued that the directives in Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s ethical will were intended only for his descendants, but not for the general public. Some have relied on this to assume that the restriction does not apply unless one is certain of their descent from Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid. However, given the extensive endogamy between Ashkenazi Jews over generations, it is possible that most Ashkenazim are indeed his descendants. This point is especially true in light of the phenomenon brought to the fore by geneticists, who have shown that a plurality of all Ashkenaz Jews can be traced to at least one of the four Ashkenazi women who lived in the time of Rashi. Others have argued that even if the rest of Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s ethical will was only meant for his descendants, the particular directives that we are discussing apply to everybody.
There are several leniencies in applying this restriction when the names do not totally match up. For example, if the names do not match exactly – such as a father-in-law named Yaakov Yosef and a son-in-law named Yosef – some poskim permit the marriage. There are different approaches as to whether one should look at the parties’ formal/halachic names (i.e., what they would write on a get/kesubah, or how they called up to the Torah) or one should just look at their popular name by which people typically refer to them. Because of these leniencies, some people advise either the parent-in-law or child-in-law changing their name before the couple gets married or formally engaged. Rabbi Yosef Shalom Elyashiv (1910–2012) provides detailed guidelines on what constitutes a matching name and how name changes can be implemented (see Ashrei HaIsh, Even HaEzer vol. 1 ch. 4).
Other rabbonim have written that there is room to be lenient when the shidduch pool for potential mates is limited (perhaps the contemporary shidduch crisis might fall under that category). Rabbi Ovadia Yosef (1920–2013) and others argue that if the potential groom is already twenty years old and has not gotten married, then he may totally disregard Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive. Others say that Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive does not apply to a man who has already fulfilled the commandant of procreation (by siring a son and daughter). Additionally, some say Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive applies only when a couple marrying will cause there to be three generations of the same name, but not when there is only two generations of the same name. Finally, some have argued that Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s restrictions do not apply to a couple if the potential bridegroom is a talmid chacham.
Most poskim agree that if a couple to whom the restriction should theoretically apply has already become engaged or married, the marriage should not be annulled. Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (1895–1986) and the Chazon Ish (1878–1953) both held that if the couple is not concerned about violating Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive, there is no need to enforce it.
A famous story involves Rabbi Moshe Sofer (1762–1839), the Chasam Sofer, who initially sought to arrange a marriage between his student, Rabbi Moshe Shick (1807–1879), and his own daughter, despite both men sharing the name Moshe. When questioned about his disregard for Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s directive, Rabbi Sofer realized that the custom had gained widespread acceptance and ultimately abandoned the match.
Rabbi Yehuda HaChassid’s name-based marriage restrictions remain a fascinating and complex topic in Jewish law. While the reasons behind the directive range from mystical concerns to practical halachic considerations, its application varies widely among different communities and authorities. For those seeking further details, the work Shemiras HaGuf VeHaNefesh (vol. 1, §169) by Rabbi Yosef Yitzchok Lerner provides a comprehensive analysis of the subject (full-disclosure: I studied under Rabbi Lerner and received my first semicha from him).
