## Keritot Daf 14b

###### Keritot 14b:1
[Keritot 14b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:1)

גְּמָ׳ וְהָא לֵית לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי מֵאִיר אִיסּוּר חָל עַל אִיסּוּר! נְהִי דְּאִיסּוּר חָל עַל אִיסּוּר לֵית לֵיהּ, אִיסּוּר מוֹסִיף וְאִיסּוּר כּוֹלֵל אִית לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The Gemara asks: How could one become liable to bring multiple sin offerings? **But Rabbi Meir does not hold** that **a prohibition takes effect** where another **prohibition** already exists. The Gemara answers: **Although he** generally **does not hold** that **a prohibition takes effect** where another **prohibition** already exists, with regard to **an expanded prohibition and a more inclusive prohibition, he does hold** that it takes effect where another prohibition already exists.


###### Keritot 14b:2
[Keritot 14b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:2)

כְּגוֹן שֶׁבָּא עַל אִמּוֹ וְהוֹלִיד בַּת, דְּאִיסּוּר בִּתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי אָתֵי. נִשֵּׂאת לְאָחִיו, מִיגּוֹ דְּאִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּר לְגַבֵּי אַחִין – אִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּרָא לְגַבֵּי דִּידֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Consequently, the ruling stated in the mishna applies in a case **where one engaged in intercourse with his mother and** thereby **fathered a daughter, so** that **the prohibitions** against engaging in intercourse with **his daughter and** with **his sister come** into effect **simultaneously.** If that daughter **married his brother,** then **since a prohibition was added with regard to** his other **brothers,** to whom she has now become forbidden, it is an expanded prohibition, and therefore a further **prohibition is added with regard to him** as well.


###### Keritot 14b:3
[Keritot 14b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:3)

נִשֵּׂאת לַאֲחִי אָבִיו, מִיגּוֹ דְּאִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּרָא לְגַבֵּי שְׁאָר אֲחֵי אָבִיו – אִיתּוֹסַף לְגַבֵּי דִּידֵיהּ. הָוְיָא לַהּ אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, מִיגּוֹ דְּאִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּר לְגַבֵּי עָלְמָא – אִיתּוֹסַף נָמֵי לְגַבֵּי דִּידֵיהּ. הָוְיָא לַהּ נִדָּה, מִיגּוֹ דְּאִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּר לְגַבֵּי בַּעֲלַהּ – אִיתּוֹסַף נָמֵי לְגַבֵּי דִּידֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **she** later **married his father’s brother,** then **since a prohibition is added with regard to** the sons of **his father’s other brothers,** a prohibition **is** also **added with regard to him.** If **she becomes,** or remains, **a married woman, since a prohibition is added with regard to** every man in **the world** other than her husband, **a prohibition is added with regard to him as well.** If **she** then **becomes a menstruating woman, since a prohibition is added with regard to her husband, a prohibition is added with regard to him as well.**


###### Keritot 14b:4
[Keritot 14b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:4)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַבָּא עַל בַּת בִּתּוֹ – חַיָּיב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם בַּת בִּתּוֹ, וְכַלָּתוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, וְנִדָּה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אִם עָבַר זָקֵן וּנְשָׂאָהּ – חַיָּיב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** It is possible for **one who engages in intercourse with his daughter’s daughter** to be **liable** to bring sin offerings **due to** the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with **his daughter’s daughter, and his daughter-in-law, and the wife of his brother, and the wife of his father’s brother, and his wife’s sister, and a married woman, and a menstruating woman. Rabbi Yosei says: If** the **elder,** i.e., the man’s father, who is the woman’s great-grandfather, **transgressed and married her,** the man would also be **liable for** engaging in intercourse with **her due to** the prohibition of intercourse with **the wife of his father.**


###### Keritot 14b:5
[Keritot 14b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:5)

וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל בַּת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְעַל בַּת בִּתָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And likewise,** it is possible for **one who engages in intercourse with the daughter of his wife** to be liable to bring six sin offerings, similar to one who engages in intercourse with his own daughter, for violating the prohibitions against engaging in intercourse with his wife’s daughter, his sister, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, a married woman, and a menstruating woman. **And** it is possible for one who engages in intercourse **with** his wife’s **daughter’s daughter** to be liable to bring seven sin offerings, similar to one who engages in intercourse with his own daughter’s daughter, for violating the following prohibitions: Engaging in intercourse with his wife’s daughter’s daughter, his daughter-in-law, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father’s brother, his wife’s sister, a married woman, and a menstruating woman.


###### Keritot 14b:6
[Keritot 14b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:6)

**גְּמָ׳** קָתָנֵי: חַיָּיב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָב. מִי שַׁרְיָא לֵיהּ? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כְּגוֹן שֶׁנָּפְלָה לוֹ לְיִבּוּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **It is taught** in the mishna that Rabbi Yosei says: If the elder, i.e., the man’s father, who is the woman’s great-grandfather, transgressed and married her, the man would also be **liable for** engaging in intercourse with **her due to** the prohibition against engaging in intercourse with **the wife of his father.** The Gemara asks: **Is she permitted to** marry the man’s father? She had already been married to the man’s father’s brother, and therefore even if she was widowed or divorced from him, marriage would not even take effect with the man’s father, to whom she is forbidden as the wife of his brother. **Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** The marriage can take effect in a case **where she happened to** become designated to **him for levirate marriage,** when his brother died without children.


###### Keritot 14b:7
[Keritot 14b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:7)

אִי הָכִי, מַאי ״עָבַר״? אָמַר רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב: שֶׁעָבַר מִשּׁוּם כַּלַּת בְּנוֹ, שְׁנִיָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises an objection: **If so,** that they were married legitimately through levirate marriage, **what** is the reason for Rabbi Yosei’s statement that he **transgressed** and married her? **Rabbi Ya’akov said:** It means **that he transgressed** by marrying her **due to** her status as **his son’s daughter-in-law,** which renders her **a secondary relative,** forbidden to him by rabbinic law, albeit not by Torah law. Consequently, it was prohibited for him to enter into the levirate marriage.


###### Keritot 14b:8
[Keritot 14b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:8)

כִּדְתַנְיָא: כַּלָּתוֹ עֶרְוָה, כַּלַּת בְּנוֹ שְׁנִיָּה. וְכֵן אַתָּה מוֹצֵא בְּבַת בְּנוֹ, וּבְבַת בֶּן בְּנוֹ. עַד סוֹף כׇּל הַדּוֹרוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **One’s daughter-in-law is a forbidden relative** by Torah law, and **his son’s daughter-in-law is a secondary relative,** prohibited to him by rabbinic law, **and similarly, you find with regard to the daughter of his son,** who is prohibited to him by Torah law, **and with regard to the daughter of his son’s son, until the end of all generations;** the daughter of his son’s son, or of his son’s grandson, etc. They are all secondary relatives, prohibited to him by rabbinic law.


###### Keritot 14b:9
[Keritot 14b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:9)

וּמִי אִית לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אִיסּוּר חָל עַל אִיסּוּר? וְהָא תְנַן: עָבַר עֲבֵירָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ שְׁתֵּי מִיתוֹת – נִידּוֹן בַּחֲמוּרָה. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: נִידּוֹן בְּזִיקָּה רִאשׁוֹנָה שֶׁבָּאָה עָלָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And is Rabbi Yosei of** the opinion that **a prohibition takes effect** where another **prohibition** already exists? **But didn’t we learn** in a mishna (*Sanhedrin* 81a): If one **violated a transgression that** renders him liable to **two death penalties, he is sentenced to the harsher** one. **Rabbi Yosei says: He is sentenced according to** the **first prohibition that applied to him.**


###### Keritot 14b:10
[Keritot 14b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:10)

וְתַנְיָא: כֵּיצַד אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי נִידּוֹן בְּזִיקָּה רִאשׁוֹנָה? חֲמוֹתוֹ וְנַעֲשֵׂת אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ – נִידּוֹן מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And it is taught** in a *baraita*: **In what case did Rabbi Yosei say** that **he is sentenced according to** the **first prohibition that applied to him?** If **his mother-in-law** was widowed or divorced, and therefore forbidden to him only due to her status as his mother-in-law, and later she married **and became** forbidden as **a married woman,** and he engaged in intercourse with her, then **he is sentenced** to death by burning **due to** his violation of the prohibition proscribing intercourse with **his mother-in-law,** as this was the first prohibition to take effect.


###### Keritot 14b:11
[Keritot 14b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:11)

אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וְנַעֲשֵׂת חֲמוֹתוֹ – נִידּוֹן מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
By contrast, if she was **a married woman,** and then he married her daughter and she thereby **became his mother-in-law,** and he subsequently engaged in intercourse with her, **he is sentenced** to death by strangulation **due to** his violation of the prohibition against engaging in intercourse with **a married woman,** despite the fact that burning is considered the more severe death penalty. This proves that Rabbi Yosei maintains that a prohibition does not take effect where another prohibition already exists.


###### Keritot 14b:12
[Keritot 14b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:12)

אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּאִיסּוּר מוֹסִיף. וְכֵן כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מוֹדֶה רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּאִיסּוּר מוֹסִיף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Abbahu said: Rabbi Yosei concedes** that **in** the case of **an expanded prohibition** it takes effect even when another prohibition already exists. Consequently, he maintains in the mishna that the prohibition against intercourse with the wife of his father applies in addition to the previously existing prohibitions. **And similarly, when Ravin came** from Eretz Yisrael he said that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Yosei concedes with regard to an expanded prohibition.**


###### Keritot 14b:13
[Keritot 14b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:13)

מַאי אִיסּוּר מוֹסִיף אִיכָּא הָכָא? דְּאִיכָּא בְּרָא לְסָבָא, מִיגּוֹ דְּאִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּרָא לְגַבֵּי בְּרֵיהּ – אִיתּוֹסַף אִיסּוּרָא לְגַבֵּי דִּידֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What expanded prohibition is there here?** The Gemara answers: The expanded prohibition applies **when there is** another **son of the grandfather,** i.e., another son of the father of the subject of the mishna. Consequently, **since a prohibition** against intercourse with the woman **is added with regard to his** father’s other **son,** when his father marries this woman, another **prohibition** against intercourse with her **is added with regard to him** as well.


###### Keritot 14b:14
[Keritot 14b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:14)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ חַיָּיב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ, וְכַלָּתוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אָחִיו, וְאֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו, וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ, וְאֵשֶׁת אִישׁ, וְנִדָּה. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל אֵם חָמִיו, וְעַל אֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** It is possible for **one who engages in intercourse with his mother-in-law** to be **liable** to bring seven sin offerings **for** doing so, **due to** the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with **his mother-in-law, and his daughter-in-law, and the wife of his brother, and the wife of his father’s brother, and his wife’s sister, and a married woman, and a menstruating woman. And likewise,** the same applies with regard to **one who engages in intercourse with the mother of his father-in-law or with the mother of his mother-in-law.**


###### Keritot 14b:15
[Keritot 14b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:15)

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי אוֹמֵר: הַבָּא עַל חֲמוֹתוֹ חַיָּיב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם חֲמוֹתוֹ, וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ, וְאֵם חָמִיו. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: שְׁלׇשְׁתָּן שֵׁם אֶחָד הֵן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri says:** It is possible for **one who engages in intercourse with his mother-in-law** to be **liable due to** the unwitting violation of the prohibitions of engaging in intercourse with **his mother-in-law, and the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law.** The Rabbis **said to him: Those three** prohibitions **are** all **one category** of prohibition, derived from the same verse: “You shall not uncover the nakedness of a woman and her daughter; you shall not take her son’s daughter, or her daughter’s daughter” (Leviticus 18:17). Consequently, one is not liable to bring separate sin offerings for violating these prohibitions.


###### Keritot 14b:16
[Keritot 14b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Keritot/r/14b:16)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אָמַר רַבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָא: רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי וְסוֹמְכוֹס אָמְרוּ דָּבָר אֶחָד. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי – הָא דַּאֲמַרַן. סוֹמְכוֹס מַאי הִיא? דִּתְנַן:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rabbi Elazar says** that **Rabbi Hoshaya says: Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri and Sumakhos said the same thing.** With regard to **Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri,** this is referring to **that which we stated** in the mishna. With regard to **Sumakhos, what is** the equivalent ruling that he stated? It is the following ruling, **as we learned** in a mishna (*Ḥullin* 82a):