Mishnah.org Logo
Perek 3

Mishnayos Kerisos Perek 3 Mishnah 7

כריתות פרק ג׳ משנה ז׳

7
Rabbi Akiva said: I asked Rabban Gamliel and Rabbi Yehoshua in the meat market [itlis] in Emmaus, where they went to purchase an animal for the wedding feast of the son of Rabban Gamliel: In the case of one who unwittingly engages in intercourse with his sister, and the sister of his father, and the sister of his mother, during one lapse of awareness, what is the halakha? Is he liable to bring one sin offering for all three prohibitions, or is he liable to bring a separate sin offering for each and every one of the prohibitions? They said to Rabbi Akiva: We did not hear a ruling from our teachers about that case, but we heard the following ruling: One who engages in intercourse with each of his five wives while they are menstruating, during one lapse of awareness, we heard that he is liable to bring a separate sin offering for having engaged in intercourse with each and every one of them. And it appears to me that these matters can be derived from an a fortiori inference: If he is liable to bring separate sin offerings for having engaged in intercourse with five menstruating women, who are forbidden by one prohibition, he should certainly be liable to bring separate sin offerings for having engaged in intercourse with his sister, the sister of his father, and the sister of his mother, who are forbidden by three separate prohibitions.
אָמַר רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, שָׁאַלְתִּי אֶת רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל וְאֶת רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בָּאִטְלִיס שֶׁל אֶמָּאוֹם, שֶׁהָלְכוּ לִקַּח בְּהֵמָה לְמִשְׁתֵּה בְנוֹ שֶׁל רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ וְעַל אֲחוֹת אָבִיו וְעַל אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד מַהוּ, חַיָּב אַחַת עַל כֻּלָּן, אוֹ אַחַת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאֶחָת, וְאָמְרוּ לִי, לֹא שָׁמָעְנוּ. אֲבָל שָׁמַעְנוּ, הַבָּא עַל חָמֵשׁ נָשָׁיו נִדּוֹת בְּהֶעְלֵם אֶחָד, שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. וְרוֹאִין אָנוּ שֶׁהַדְּבָרִים קַל וָחֹמֶר:
ז׳

באיטליס – a marketplace where they sell meat there.

של אמאום – the name of a city.

הבא על אחותו וכו' – this is what he said: he who has sexual relations with his sister who is the sister of of his father and the sister of his mother, and we have found such a case, as, for example, when Reuven had sexual relations with his mother and fathered from her two daughters and then he returned and had sexual relations with one of these daughters and from her fathered a so, and the son had sexual relations with his sister, who is the sister of his father and the sister of his mother.

וחומר – And what if a person had sexual intercourse with five wives who are menstruating women which are one category (Leviticus 18:19): “Do not come near a woman during her period of uncleanness,” he would be liable for each and every one. A person who has sexual relations with his siter, who is the sister of his father and the sister of his mother, which are three categories, meaning to say, three negative commandments that are divided, is it not the case that he should be liable for each and every one? But this a fortiori is refuted/raises an objection, for how can five women who are menstruating be separate/distinct bodies? But the reason, is because as Scripture states (Leviticus 20:17): “He has uncovered the nakedness of his sister, etc.,” and it is an extra verse, for at the beginning of the verse, it is written “If a man marries his sister….so that he sees her nakedness, etc.” Why should he review further “that he has uncovered his sister’s nakedness,” but rather to teach about his sister who is the father’s sister and his mother’s sister, who is liable for each and every one.

באטליס. שוק שמוכרים שם בשר:

של אמאום. שם העיר:

הבא על אחותו וכו׳ הכי קאמר, הבא על אחותו שהיא אחות אביו ואחות אמו. ומשכחת לה, כגון שבא ראובן על אמו והוליד ממנה שתי בנות וחזר ובא על אחת מבנותיו אלו והוליד ממנה בן, ובא הבן על אחותו שהיא אחות אביו ואחות אמו:

שהדברים קל וחומר. ומה הבא על חמש נשיו נדות שהם שם אחד, לנדה לא תקרב, חייב על כל אחת ואחת. הבא על אחותו שהיא אחות אביו ואחות אמו שהן שלשה שמות כלומר שלשה לאוין מחולקין, אינו דין שיהא חייב על כל אחת ואחת. והאי קל וחומר פריכא הוא, דמה לחמש נשים נדות שהן גופים מוחלקים. אלא טעמא, משום דאמר קרא (ויקרא כ׳:י״ז) ערות אחותו גלה וגו׳, וקרא יתירא הוא, דברישיה דקרא כתיב ואיש אשר יקח את אחותו וראה את ערותה וגו׳, למה לי למהדר תו ערות אחותו גלה, אלא ללמד על אחותו שהיא אחות אביו ואחות אמו שחייב על כל אחת ואחת: