arise violent jealousies and fierce contentions, producing an unspeakable multitude of evils."[1]
Philo, in this passage, certainly does not assert it to be lawful for a man to marry his deceased wife's sister. He asserts it to be a violation of the divine law, for a man to marry two sisters, either at one time, or at different times, while the first wife lives; and to be unlawful for her sister to form a connexion with her husband. He is silent in regard to what might be lawful after the death of the first wife. Now, if the Jews had never entertained a doubt, as Selden says, of the lawfulness of such a marriage on the death of the first wife, is it not highly probable that Philo would have stated the fact?
This appears the more probable, when we compare Philo's statement with the comment on Levit. 18: 18, by that famous Jewish Rabbi, Jonathan the son of Uzziel, who was contemporary with Philo. It is in these words: "Mulierem etiam vivente sorore non accipies, ad affligendum eam, ad revelandum turpitudinem ejus super ipsam, omnibus diebus ejus."
- ↑ De Specialibus Legibus, p. 602, printed at Geneva, 1613.
