1

When a person performs many transgressions for which one is required to bring a sin-offering in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for a sin-offering for every individual transgression. Even if he performs all the 43 transgressions that we listed in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for 43 sin-offerings.

Similarly, if a person performed one deed for which he is liable for many transgressions, he is liable for every transgression, provided all of the prohibitions involved take effect at once, the latter prohibition causes the entity to be forbidden to additional people, or the scope of the latter prohibition encompasses other entities together with the entity that was originally prohibited.

What is implied? A person who slaughters consecrated animals outside the Temple, on the Sabbath, for the sake of a false divinity is liable for three sin-offerings, one for slaughtering consecrated animals outside the Temple Courtyard, one for desecrating the Sabbath, and one for serving false divinities, for the three transgressions take effect at the same time.

When does the above apply? When the person serving the false divinity states that he is serving it at the conclusion of the slaughter of the animal. If, however, this was not his intent, as soon as he performed a portion of the slaughter for the sake of a false divinity, it becomes forbidden. Since he is not liable for slaughtering an animal outside the Temple Courtyard until he slits the two organs, necessary to slit for ritual slaughter or the larger portion of these two organs, when he completed the slaughter, he will have slaughtered an animal that is forbidden to be offered as a sacrifice, in which instance, he is not liable for slaughtering it outside the Temple Courtyard, as we explained.

If it was a sin-offering of fowl and half of its windpipe was cut and a person increased the slit even the slightest amount on the Sabbath for the sake of a false divinity, he is liable for three sin-offerings, for the three prohibitions take effect at the same time.

Similarly, a person who performs forbidden labor on Yom Kippur when it occurs on the Sabbath, is liable to bring two sin-offerings, because the two prohibitions take effect at the same time. Also, a person who is intimate with the wife of his brother who is alive while she is in the niddah state, he must bring three sin-offerings: one because he was intimate with a married woman and one, because she was his brother's wife; these are two prohibitions that take effect at the same time; and one, because she was in the niddah state, which is a prohibition that forbids additional entities besides the entity that was originally prohibited. Since this prohibition would apply with regard to her husband, it also applies to her brother-in-law.

In the same vein, one who sodomizes his father is liable for two sin-offerings, one because of the prohibition, Leviticus 18:7: "Do not reveal the nakedness of your father" and one because of the prohibition, ibid.:22: "Do not lie with a man." Similarly, one who sodomizes his father's brother is liable for two sin-offerings, one because it is written ibid.:14: "Do not reveal the nakedness of your father's brother" and one because of the general prohibition against sodomy.

When one sodomizes a male and has a male sodomize him in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering, even though there are two bodies involved. This is derived from the prohibition: "Do not lie with a man" which makes both positions equally liable. Similarly, when one sodomizes an animal and has an animal sodomize him in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering. One is deemed equally liable for either position of intimacy when engaging in relations with an animal or a male.

א

הָעוֹשֶׂה עֲבֵרוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת חַיָּב חַטָּאת עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת אֲפִלּוּ עָשָׂה הָאַרְבָּעִים וְשָׁלֹשׁ אֵלּוּ שֶׁמָּנִינוּ בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת חַיָּב אַרְבָּעִים וְשָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. וְכֵן אִם עָשָׂה מַעֲשֶׂה אֶחָד שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עָלָיו מִשּׁוּם שֵׁמוֹת הַרְבֵּה חַיָּב עַל כָּל שֵׁם וְשֵׁם וְהוּא שֶׁהָיוּ הָאִסּוּרִין כֻּלָּן בָּאִין כְּאַחַת אוֹ אִסּוּר מוֹסִיף אוֹ אִסּוּר כּוֹלֵל. כֵּיצַד. הַשּׁוֹחֵט בֶּהֱמַת קָדָשִׁים חוּץ לָעֲזָרָה בְּשַׁבָּת לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה חַיָּב שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. מִשּׁוּם שׁוֹחֵט קָדָשִׁים בַּחוּץ וּמִשּׁוּם מְחַלֵּל שַׁבָּת וּמִשּׁוּם עוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה שֶׁהֲרֵי שְׁלֹשֶׁת הָאִסּוּרִין בָּאִין כְּאַחַת. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּאוֹמֵר בִּגְמַר זְבִיחָה הוּא עוֹבֵד אוֹתָהּ. אֲבָל אִם לֹא הָיְתָה כַּוָּנָתוֹ לְכָךְ מִשֶּׁיִּשְׁחֹט בָּהּ מְעַט לְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה תֵּאָסֵר וְאֵינוֹ חַיָּב מִשּׁוּם שְׁחוּטֵי חוּץ עַד שֶׁיִּשְׁחֹט שְׁנַיִם אוֹ רֹב שְׁנַיִם. וְנִמְצָא כְּשֶׁגָּמַר הַשְּׁחִיטָה שָׁחַט בְּהֵמָה הָאֲסוּרָה לְקָרְבָּן שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם שׁוֹחֵט בַּחוּץ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. הָיְתָה חַטָּאת הָעוֹף וְהָיָה חֲצִי קָנֶה שֶׁלָּהּ פָּגוּם וְהוֹסִיף בּוֹ כָּל שֶׁהוּא בְּשַׁבָּת לְשֵׁם עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה חַיָּב שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת שֶׁהֲרֵי שְׁלֹשֶׁת הָאִסּוּרִין בָּאִים כְּאַחַת. וְכֵן הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת חַיָּב שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשְּׁנֵי הָאִסּוּרִין בָּאִין כְּאַחַת. הַבָּא עַל אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו הַקַּיָּם כְּשֶׁהִיא נִדָּה מֵבִיא שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ וּמִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָח וְהֵן שְׁנֵי אִסּוּרִין הַבָּאִין כְּאַחַת וּמִשּׁוּם נִדָּה שֶׁהוּא אִסּוּר מוֹסִיף שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ שֶׁנִּתְוַסֵּף בָּהּ אִסּוּר זֶה לְבַעְלָהּ נוֹסַף לִיבָמָהּ. וְכֵן כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. הַבָּא עַל אָבִיו חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם אַחַת מִשּׁוּם (ויקרא יח ז) "עֶרְוַת אָבִיךָ לֹא תְגַלֵּה" וּמִשּׁוּם (ויקרא יח כב) "וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב". וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל אֲחִי אָבִיו חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יח יד) "עֶרְוַת אֲחִי אָבִיךָ לֹא תְגַלֵּה". הַבָּא עַל הַזָּכוּר וְהֵבִיא זָכוּר עָלָיו בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן שְׁנֵי גּוּפִין אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְאֶת זָכָר לֹא תִשְׁכַּב הַשּׁוֹכֵב וְהַנִּשְׁכָּב שֵׁם אֶחָד הוּא. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל הַבְּהֵמָה וְהֵבִיא בְּהֵמָה עָלָיו בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. עָשׂוּ הַשּׁוֹכֵב וְהַנִּשְׁכָּב בִּבְהֵמָה וְזָכוּר כִּבְעִילָה אַחַת:

2

It is possible that there be an instance where a person engages in a single act of intimacy and he is liable for eight sin-offerings.

What is implied? Jacob begat a daughter whose name was Timna from his wife Zilpa. Lavan married Timna and begat a daughter named Serach from her. Lavan does not have any daughters other than Rachel. Thus Serach is the daughter of Jacob's daughter, and his wife's sister on her father's side. These are two prohibitions that take effect at the same time. Serach married Reuven. She became forbidden to Jacob's other sons and thus became forbidden to Jacob as well, as his son's wife. If Reuven died or divorced her and Serach married Jacob's maternal brother, since she became forbidden to Jacob's other brothers through this marriage, she becomes forbidden to Jacob on another count, because she is the wife of his brother. If her husband died or divorced her and Serach married Yishmael, since she becomes forbidden to Yishmael's other brothers, a further prohibition takes effect with regard to Jacob, the prohibition against relations with the wife of his father's brother. If Yishmael died and Serach became eligible to undergo yibbum with Isaac and Isaac transgressed and performed yibbum with her even though she is forbidden to him as a secondary relation, since she became forbidden to Jacob's other paternal brothers, she also became forbidden to Jacob because she is his father's wife and because she is a married woman, for these are two prohibitions that take effect at the same time.

Now if Jacob acted inadvertently and was intimate with Serach when she was in the niddah state, during the lifetime of Isaac, her husband, and during the lifetime of Rachel, Jacob's wife, he is liable for eight sin-offerings because of his relations with her. She is his daughter's daughter, his wife's sister, his daughter-in-law, the wife of his brother, the wife of his father's brother, the wife of his father, a married woman, and in the niddah state. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

ב

יֵשׁ בּוֹעֵל בְּעִילָה אַחַת וְחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ שְׁמוֹנֶה חַטָּאוֹת. כֵּיצַד. יַעֲקֹב שֶׁהָיְתָה לוֹ בַּת מִזִּלְפָּה וּשְׁמָהּ תִּמְנַע. נָשָׂא לָבָן תִּמְנַע וְהוֹלִיד מִמֶּנָּה בַּת וּשְׁמָהּ סֶרַח. וְאֵין לְלָבָן בַּת אֶלָּא רָחֵל לְבַדָּהּ. נִמְצֵאת סֶרַח בַּת בַּת יַעֲקֹב וַאֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ מֵאָבִיהָ הֵן שְׁנֵי אִסּוּרִין הַבָּאִין כְּאַחַת. נִשֵּׂאת סֶרַח לִרְאוּבֵן וְנֶאֶסְרָה עַל שְׁאָר בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב נוֹסָף בָּהּ אִסּוּר לְיַעֲקֹב וַהֲרֵי הִיא כַּלָּתוֹ. מֵת רְאוּבֵן אוֹ גֵּרֵשׁ וְנִשֵּׂאת סֶרַח זוֹ לַאֲחִי יַעֲקֹב מֵאִמּוֹ מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֶסְרָה עַל שְׁאָר אֲחֵי יַעֲקֹב נוֹסַף לְיַעֲקֹב בָּהּ אִסּוּר אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו. מֵת אוֹ גֵּרֵשׁ וְנִשֵּׂאת סֶרַח זוֹ לְיִשְׁמָעֵאל מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֶסְרָה עַל שְׁאָר אֲחֵי יִשְׁמָעֵאל נוֹסַף לְיַעֲקֹב בָּהּ אִסּוּר אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו. מֵת יִשְׁמָעֵאל וְנָפְלָה לְיִבּוּם לִפְנֵי יִצְחָק וְעָבַר יִצְחָק וְיִבְּמָהּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא שְׁנִיָּה לוֹ מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁנֶּאֶסְרָה עַל שְׁאָר אֶחָיו נוֹסַף בָּהּ אִסּוּר לְיַעֲקֹב מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו וּמִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ שֶׁשְּׁנֵי הָאִסּוּרִין בָּאִין כְּאַחַת. אִם שָׁגַג יַעֲקֹב וּבָא עַל סֶרַח זוֹ כְּשֶׁהִיא נִדָּה בְּחַיֵּי יִצְחָק בַּעְלָהּ וּבְחַיֵּי רָחֵל אֵשֶׁת יַעֲקֹב הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ שְׁמוֹנֶה חַטָּאוֹת. מִשּׁוּם בַּת בִּתּוֹ. וּמִשּׁוּם אֲחוֹת אִשְׁתּוֹ. וּמִשּׁוּם כַּלָּתוֹ. וּמִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָחִיו. וּמִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אֲחִי אָבִיו. וּמִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו. וּמִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ. וּמִשּׁוּם נִדָּה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

3

In all situations when a woman who is forbidden as a relative becomes forbidden again due a prohibition that causes the entity to be forbidden to additional people, those additional people must be alive at that time, so that she will be forbidden to them. Then, as a result, since she becomes forbidden to them, a prohibition is also added applying to this individual. If, however, they are not alive, we do not say that since, would this man have had brothers or sons, she would have been forbidden to them, hence she is forbidden to the elder person. For at present, he has neither a son, nor a brother. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

ג

כָּל אֵלּוּ שֶׁתֵּאָסֵר זוֹ הָעֶרְוָה עֲלֵיהֶן בְּאִסּוּר מוֹסִיף. צָרִיךְ שֶׁיְּהוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֲחֵרִים מְצוּיִין בָּעוֹלָם כְּדֵי שֶׁתֵּאָסֵר עֲלֵיהֶן וּמִתּוֹךְ שֶׁתֵּאָסֵר עֲלֵיהֶן יִתְוַסֵּף אִסּוּר אַחֵר לָזֶה. אֲבָל אִם אֵינָן מְצוּיִין אֵין אוֹמְרִין הוֹאִיל אִלּוּ הָיָה לָזֶה בָּנִים אוֹ אַחִים הָיְתָה נֶאֶסְרָה עֲלֵיהֶן יִתְוַסֵּף בָּהּ אִסּוּר לַזָּקֵן. שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין שָׁם עַתָּה לֹא בֵּן וְלֹא אָח. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן:

4

The following laws apply when a man is married to three woman and he is intimate with the mother of one of them, and she is the mother of the mother of his second wife and the mother of the father of his third wife. Even though this elderly woman is his mother-in-law, the mother of his mother-in-law, and the mother of his father-in-law, and these are three distinct prohibitions and they all took effect at the same time, he is liable for only one sin-offering. The rationale is that the Torah uses the same phrase, Leviticus 18:17: "They are close relatives; it is a depraved design" with regard to relations with a woman and her daughter, her son's daughter, and her daughter's daughter. Thus the Torah considered the three as one body. Therefore the three prohibitions are considered as one.

ד

מִי שֶׁהָיָה נָשׂוּי שָׁלֹשׁ נָשִׁים. וּבָא עַל אִמָּהּ שֶׁל אַחַת מֵהֶן שֶׁהִיא אֵם אִמָּהּ שֶׁל שְׁנִיָּה שֶׁהִיא אֵם אָבִיהָ שֶׁל שְׁלִישִׁית. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁזְּקֵנָה זוֹ הִיא חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חֲמוֹתוֹ וְאֵם חָמִיו וּשְׁלֹשָׁה שֵׁמוֹת הֵן וְאִסּוּר בַּת אַחַת הִיא אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בְּאִשָּׁה וּבִתָּהּ וּבַת בְּנָהּ וּבַת בִּתָּהּ (ויקרא יח יז) "שַׁאֲרָה הֵנָּה זִמָּה הִיא". הַכָּתוּב עָשָׂה שְׁלֹשָׁה גּוּפִין כְּגוּף אֶחָד לְפִיכָךְ יֵחָשְׁבוּ הַשְּׁלֹשָׁה שֵׁמוֹת כְּשֵׁם אֶחָד:

5

If, however, one is intimate with his sister who is also the sister of his father and the sister of his mother, he is liable for three sin-offerings, as implied by Leviticus 20:17: "He revealed the nakedness of his sister." One might infer that he is liable for relations with his sister independently even though she is also the sister of his mother and the sister of his father.

How is such a situation possible? A man was intimate with his mother and begat two daughters with her. He was intimate with one of these daughters and begat a son. If this illegitimate child will be intimate with the other daughter, who is the sister of his illegitimate mother, who is his paternal sister, who is also the maternal sister of his father, he will be liable for three sin-offerings. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

ה

אֲבָל הַבָּא עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ שֶׁהִיא אֲחוֹת אָבִיו וְהִיא אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ חַיָּב שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כ יז) "עֶרְוַת אֲחוֹתוֹ גִּלָּה". חַיָּב עַל אֲחוֹתוֹ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ וַאֲחוֹת אָבִיו. וְהֵיאַךְ תִּהְיֶה זֹאת כְּגוֹן שֶׁבָּא עַל אִמּוֹ וְהוֹלִיד מִמֶּנָּה שְׁתֵּי בָּנוֹת וּבָעַל אַחַת מִבְּנוֹתָיו וְהוֹלִיד מִמֶּנָּה בֵּן. כְּשֶׁיָּבוֹא הַמַּמְזֵר הַזֶּה עַל הַבַּת הַשֵּׁנִית. שֶׁהִיא אֲחוֹת אִמּוֹ הַמַּמְזֶרֶת. שֶׁהִיא אֲחוֹתוֹ מֵאָבִיו. שֶׁהִיא אֲחוֹת אָבִיו מֵאִמּוֹ. חַיָּב שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה: