Keritot 4

Chapter 4

א <big>גמ׳</big> מניינא למה לי א"ר יוחנן שאם עשאן כולן בהעלם אחת חייב על כל אחת ואחת

1 <big>GEMARA: </big>Why has a number been mentioned [in the Mishnah]? - Said R'Johanan: [To tell you] that if one commits all [these transgressions] in one spell of unawareness he is liable [to a sacrifice] for each of them.1 Again, as to that which we have learnt: 'There are thirty-nine principal categories of work prohibited on the Sabbath',2 why has a number been mentioned there?

ב ותו הא דתנן אבות מלאכות מ' חסר אחת מניינא למה לי שאם עשאן כולן בהעלם אחת חייב על כל אחת ואחת

2 [To tell you] that if one does them all in one spell of unawareness he is liable to a sacrifice for each of them. Again, as to that which we have learnt: 'There are four who require an act of atonement',3 - why has a number been mentioned there? - To exclude the view of R'Eliezer B'Jacob, who holds that there are five, as we have learnt: R'Eliezer B'Jacob says: A proselyte [too] requires atonement [and may not eat of sacred things] until the blood [of the sacrifice] has been sprinkled'.

ג תו הא דתנן ד' מחוסרי כפרה מניינא למה לי

3 This is why the number 'four' has been mentioned. Again, as to that which we have learnt: 'In four instances one brings the same sacrifice for wilful transgression as for transgression in error',4

ד לאפוקי מדר' אליעזר בן יעקב דאמר ה' הוי דתניא ר' אליעזר בן יעקב אומר גר מחוסר כפרה עד שיזרק דם עליו אהכי תנא ד'

4 - why has a number been mentioned there? - To exclude the view of R'Simeon, For it has been taught: R'Simeon holds, that in the case of a false oath concerning a deposit5 wilful transgression is not expiable by a sacrifice'.6 This is why the number 'four' has been mentioned there. Again, as to that which we have learnt: 'There are five Instances where one sacrifice is brought for several transgressions',7 - why has a number been mentioned? - Because it wishes to state in the sequel, 'And a nazirite who became unclean several times'.

ה תו הא דתנן ד' מביאין על הזדון כשגגה מניינא למה לי

5 Now this is rendered possible if he became defiled on the seventh [clean] day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A nazirite who is defiled during the period of his naziriteship has to count seven clean days and bring an offering on the eighth day. He has then to observe again his vow of naziriteship for the period stipulated, v. Num. VI, 9f. If he is defiled on the seventh of the clean days, he has to start again this period of cleanness, etc.');">8 and then again on the seventh day,9

ו לאפוקי מדרבי שמעון דתניא רבי שמעון אומר שבועת הפקדון לא ניתן זדונה לכפרה אהכי תנא ד'

6 and in accordance with the view of R'Jose son of R'Judah, who maintains that the 'Naziriteship of Cleanness'10 begins to operate from the seventh day.11 For according to Rabbi, who holds that the 'Naziriteship of Cleanness' does not become operative before the eighth day, how is this rendered possible? If he was defiled on the seventh day and then again on the seventh, the whole is one protracted period of uncleanness;12

ז תו הא דתנן ה' מביאין קרבן אחד על עבירות הרבה מניינא למה לי

7 and if he was defiled on the eighth day and then again on the eighth, since he had passed the time when the sacrifice became due, he should be liable to a separate offering for each defilement? It is thus proved that that [Mishnah] is in accordance with R'Jose son of R'Judah.13

ח משום דקא בעי למיתנא סיפא נזיר אם נטמא טומאות הרבה ומשכחת לה כגון דאיטמי בשביעי וחזר ונטמא בשביעי ומני ר' יוסי בר' יהודה היא דאמר נזירות דטהרה מן שביעי הוא דחייל עליה

8 Where is the dispute between Rabbi and R'Jose son of R'Judah? - As it has been taught: 'And he shall hallow his head the same day14 refers to the day of the bringing of the sacrifice, says Rabbi; R'Jose son of R'Judah says: T the day of the cutting of his hair',15 Again, as to that which we have learnt: 'Five must bring a sliding-scale offering' - why has a number been mentioned there?16 - Because it says in the sequel:17 'The same applies to the ruler'.18

ט דאי תאמר רבי היא כיון דנזירות דטהרה עד שמיני לא חיילא עליה היכי משכחת לה

9 He thus mentions the number 'five' to exclude the view of R'Eliezer who holds19

י אי דנטמא בז' וחזר ונטמא בז' כולה חדא טומאה אריכתא היא

10 that a ruler brings a goat as an offering.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the number has been mentioned to stress that in the instances of these five transgressions enumerated in the Mishnah, infra 9a, none but a sliding-scale sacrifice can be brought and consequently a ruler brings in such cases no offering at all, in accordance with the general rule that a ruler is altogether exempt whenever the prescribed offering is not fixed.');">20

יא ואי דנטמא בח' וחזר ונטמא בח' כיון דיצא בשעה הראויה להביא בה קרבן חייב על כל אחת ואחת אלא ש"מ רבי יוסי בר' יהודה היא

11 Again, as to that which we have learnt: 'There are four principal categories of damage',21

יב מאי רבי ומאי ר' יוסי בר' יהודה דתניא (במדבר ו, יא) וקדש את ראשו ביום ההוא ביום הבאת קרבנותיו דברי רבי ר' יוסי בר' יהודה אומר ביום תגלחתו

12 - why has a number been mentioned there? - To exclude the view of R'Oshaia, who holds there are thirteen such categories.22 But then why has R'Oshaia mentioned a number? - To exclude the view of R'Hiyya, who holds that there are twenty-four such categories.23 But then why has R'Hiyya mentioned a number? - To exclude an informer and one who renders a sacrifice piggul.24 The Master said: 'If one commits all these transgressions in one spell of unawareness, one is liable [to a sacrifice] for each of them'. It is well that you could not declare him exempted altogether, for it is written: For whosoever shall do any of these abominations [even the souls that do them] shall be cut off.25

יג תו הא דתנן ה' מביאין קרבן עולה ויורד מניינא למה לי

13 But why not say, if he commits one transgression of these he is liable to one sacrifice, if he transgresses them all in one spell of unawareness he is still liable only to one offering? - Replied R'Johanan: It is for this reason that [the penalty of] kareth has been specially mentioned in connection with 'his sister',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XX, 17; although this penalty is already implied in the collective statement in Lev. XVIII, 29. The superfluous mention of kareth in a single instance is to indicate that this penalty is prescribed for each transgression separately even when committed in conjunction with others.');">26 to intimate that each of them requires a separate atonement.27

יד משום דקתני סיפא נשיא כיוצא בהן ה' לאפוקי מדר"א דאמר נשיא מביא שעיר

14 R'Bibi B'Abaye demurred to this: Why not say, in the case of 'his sister', which Scripture has singled out, a separate offering is required, but as to the other transgressio there should be but one sacrifice [for them all] since they have been committed under one spell of unawareness?28 But as to R'Bibi B'Abaye, does he not accept [the general principle] which has been taught: 'If a law has been included in a class and has then been singled out for some specification, this specification applies not only to that law but to the whole class';29 for instance [Scripture reads]: And the soul that eateth of the flesh [of the sacrifice of peace-offering.'].30

טו תו הא דתנן ד' אבות נזיקין מנינא למה לי

15 Now, was not the peace-offering included in the general class of consecrated things,31 why has it been singled out?

טז לאפוקי מדרבי אושעיא דאמר י"ג אבות נזיקין הן ולר' אושעיא מניינא למה לי לאפוקי מדרבי חייא דאמר כ"ד אבות נזיקין ולר' חייא מנינא למה לי לאפוקי מסור ומפגל

16 To make [consecrated things]32 analogous [for the purpose of this law] to the peace-offerings: As the peace-offerings are dedications to the altar, and for this reason one is liable on their account to kareth, so also whatever are dedications to the altar, one is liable on account thereof to kareth; this excludes dedications for the Temple Repair [Fund]!33 - R'Bibi might reply: From this very [Baraitha one can prove the contrary]. Did you not say that dedications for the Temple Repair [Fund] were to be excluded? Likewise here [argue in a similar manner]: Just as 'his sister' is distinguished in that it is a relation which can never be permitted in the lifetime of the man who renders her forbidden,34 so must the others35 be such relatives as cannot be permitted in the lifetime of those who render them forbidden; this excludes the married woman, who can be permitted during the lifetime of him who renders her forbidden!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., she may remarry on divorce even in the lifetime of him who had hitherto rendered her forbidden, i.e., her husband. One might thus argue that one should not be liable to a separate offering for having relations with a married woman, if the transgression was committed together with other transgressions relating to forbidden relations, in one spell of unawareness.');">36

יז אמר מר שאם עשאן כולן בהעלם אחת חייב על כל אחת ואחת

17 - Said R'Jonah, or as some say, R'Huna the son of R'Joshua, Scripture says: For whosoever shall do any of these abominations etc. ;37 all other forbidden relations are thus made analogous to 'his sister': Just as in the case of 'his sister' one is liable on her account to a separate offering, so als other cases one is liable to a separate offering for each [transgression].

יח בשלמא פטור לגמרי לא מצית אמרת דכתיב (ויקרא יח, כט) כי כל אשר יעשה מכל התועבות האלה ונכרתו אלא אימא עבר חדא נתחייב חדא עבר כולהו בהעלם אחת אינו חייב אלא אחת

18 But according to R'Isaac who holds,38 All transgressions39 liable to kareth have been comprised in a general statement,40

יט אמר רבי יוחנן לכך יצאה כרת באחותו לחלק

19 and the reason that kareth has been singled out in the case of 'his sister' is to render [the offence] subject to the penalty of kar and not lashes,41 - wherefrom does he then derive that separate offerings have to be brought for each transgression? - He derives it from: And thou shalt not approach unto a woman while she is a niddah42

כ מתקיף לה רב ביבי בר אביי אימא אחותו דפרט קרא ניחייב חדא עלה וכולן כיון דבהעלם אחת לא ניחייב אלא אחת

20 by her uncleanness;43 a separate offering is brought for each woman.44

כא ולרב ביבי בר אביי מי לית ליה הדא דתניא כל דבר שהיה בכלל ויצא מן הכלל ללמד לא ללמד על עצמו יצא אלא ללמד על הכלל כולו יצא

21 But as to the Rabbis,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the opponents of R. Isaac, who hold that lashes effect expiation where kareth is predicated. The law referring to separate offerings seems according to them to be derived from 'his sister'.');">45 let them derive the law [relating to separate offerings] from: 'Unto a woman while she is a niddah by her uncleanness'? - Indeed they do.

כב כיצד (ויקרא ז, כ) והנפש אשר תאכל בשר וגו' והלא שלמים בכלל הקדשים היו למה יצאו

22 And for which purpose then has the penalty of kareth been mentioned in the case of 'his sister'? - [To teach] that separate sacrifices be brought for intercourse with 'his sister', 'his father's siste and 'his mother's sister'.

כג להקיש אליהן מה שלמים שהן קדשי מזבח וחייבין עליהן אף כל שהן קדשי מזבח חייבין עליהן יצאו קדשי בדק הבית

23 But is [a text] necessary to separate these [various offences],46

כד אמר ליה רב ביבי בר מינה לאו מי אמרת התם יצאו קדשי בדק הבית

24 are these [transgressions] not of different denominations and [committed with] different persons? - Rather, say that [three] separate sacrifices be required in the case of intercourse with 'his sister' who is at the same time his father's sister and his mother's sister.47 And whence will R'Isaac derive this? - He will derive it from the latter part of the verse: He hath uncovered his sister's nakedness.48 And for which purpose do the Rabbis apply 'his sister' in the latter part of the verse? - They apply it

כה הכא נמי מה אחותו מיוחדת שהיא ערוה ואין לה היתר בחיי אוסרה אף כל שאין לה היתר בחיי אוסרה יצאה אשת איש שיש לה היתר בחיי בעלה

כו א"ר יונה ואיתימא רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע אמר קרא כי כל אשר יעשה מכל התועבות וגו' הואיל וכך הקיש הוא הוקשו כל העריות כולן לאחותו מה אחותו חייבין עליה בפני עצמה אף כל חייבין עליה בפני עצמה

כז ולרבי יצחק דאמר חייבי כריתות בכלל היו ולמה יצאה כרת באחותו לדונה בכרת ולא במלקות

כח לחלק מנא ליה נפקא ליה (ויקרא יח, יט) מואל אשה בנדת טומאתה לא תקרב לחלק על כל אשה ואשה

כט ורבנן נמי תיפוק להו מואל אשה בנדת טומאתה אין ה"נ אלא כרת דאחותו למאי אתא מיבעי ליה לחלק על אחותו ועל אחות אביו ועל אחות אמו

ל הני למה להו לחלק הרי שמות מוחלקין והרי גופים מוחלקים אלא אימא לחלק על אחותו שהיא אחות אביו ושהיא אחות אמו

לא ורבי יצחק הא מילתא מנ"ל נפקא ליה מן סיפא דקרא דכתיב (ויקרא כ, יז) ערות אחותו גלה

לב ורבנן אחותו דסיפא דקרא מאי עבדי ליה מיבעי ליה

Previous Chapter Next Chapter