For the source text click/tap here: Yevamot 32
To download, click/tap here: PDF
Rebbi Shimon maintains "Ein Isur Chal Al Isur" -- once an object is prohibited with one Isur, it cannot become prohibited again with another Isur.
Accordingly, when two brothers were married to two sisters and one brother died, if the surviving brother does Yibum with his brother's wife (to whom he is prohibited because of "Achos Ishto"), he is liable for transgressing only one Isur: If the first brother was married first the Isur of "Eshes Ach" took effect, and when the second brother marries the sister of his brother's wife the Isur of "Achos Ishto" cannot take effect.
If, however, the second brother married first and his wife's sister became forbidden to him as "Achos Ishto," when his brother marries the second sister the Isur of "Eshes Ach" cannot take effect.
Do we say issur ḥal al issur – that one prohibition can be added to another prohibition – or not?– it is not clear how far this idea applies.
Thus we find that Rabbi Yosei understands ein issur ḥal al issur to mean that there is no punishment for the second prohibition, but it still exists and the perpetrator of such a crime would be deemed a rasha – an evil person – who would not be buried in the Jewish cemetery.
Rabbi Shimon takes a simpler view of the ruling and argues that ein issur ḥal al issur means that there is no place for the second prohibition to be applied and it does not exist at all.
The Gemara in Yevamot adds that even Rabbi Shimon agrees that if the first prohibition no longer exists, the second one would take its place.
We explore the notion of levirate marriage in the late antique period.
What happened to biblical law when it was transferred into the new world of late antiquity? How was it understood, and what were the reasons for this particular interpretation? Answering these questions can provide a paradigm to help explain the development of late antique Christian legal traditions and discourse in their Greco-Roman and Jewish contexts.