Sifra 10.0.15

Kedoshim, Chapter 11

1) (Vayikra 20:15) ("And if a man gives his lying to a beast, he shall be put to death, and the beast you shall kill.") "And a man": to exclude a minor. "who gives his lying to a beast" — whether full grown or not. "he shall be put to death": by stoning. You say by stoning, but perhaps it is by one of the other death penalties in the Torah; it is, therefore, written "and the beast you shall kill," and, elsewhere (Devarim 13:10) "You shall surely kill him." Just as there, by stoning; so, here, by stoning.

2) We have learned the punishment for the active participant. Whence do we derive the punishment for the passive participant? From (Shemoth 28:18) "Whoever lies with a beast shall be put to death." If it is not needed for the active participant, learn it as applying to the passive one. We have learned the punishment both for the active participant and for the passive one. Whence is derived the exhortation? From (Vayikra 18:23) "And with every beast do not give your lying to become unclean with it." We have learned the exhortation for the active participant. Whence do we learn that for the passive participant? From (Devarim 23:18) "There shall not be a harlot from the sons of Israel," and (I Kings 14:24) "And there was also a harlot in the land; they did as all the abominations of the nations, etc." These are the words of R. Yishmael. R. Akiva says: This is not needed; it is written "Do not give shechavtecha" ("your lying"), which can also be read as "Do not give shechivatecha" ("your being lain with.")

3) (Vayikra 20:16) ("And a woman who comes to any beast so that it mount her, you shall kill the woman and the beast. They shall be put to death; their blood is in them.") "They shall be put to death": by stoning. You say by stoning, but perhaps it is one of the other death penalties in the Torah. It is, therefore, written here "their blood is in them," and, elsewhere (Vayikra 20:27) "the blood is in them. Just as there, by stoning; here, too, by stoning.

4) We have heard the punishment, but not the exhortation; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 18:23) "And a woman shall not stand before a beast to mount her; it is perverse."

5) "and you shall kill the woman and the beast": If the man sinned, how did the beast sin? But because it led to the man's undoing, Scripture writes "Let it be stoned!" Now does this not follow a fortiori: If of beast, which cannot discriminate between good and evil, because it led to a man's undoing, Scripture writes "Let it be stoned!" then a man, who leads his fellow to veer from the path of life to the path of death — how much more so should the Holy One remove him from the world!

6) Similarly: (Devarim 12:2-3) "Destroy shall you destroy all the places … and you shall throw down their altars, etc." Now if of the places and the tree (used for idolatry), which cannot see and cannot hear and cannot speak, because they led to a man's undoing, Scripture writes "Destroy!" "Burn!" "Raze!" and "Remove (them) from the world!" then a man who leads his fellow to veer from the path of life to the path of death — how much more so should the Holy One remove him from the world! What is written of the righteous? (Devarim 20:19) "If you besiege a city many days to war upon it, to capture it, do not destroy its tree by lifting an axe against it, for from it shall you eat, but it shall you not cut down": Now does this not follow a fortiori: If trees, which do not see, and which do not hear, and which do not speak — because they grow fruits, the Holy One pitied them, not to remove them from the world, then a man who "grows" Torah and does the will of his Father in heaven — how much more so will the Holy One pity him against removing him from the world!

7) Of the wicked: (Devarim 20:20) "Only a tree that you know that it is not a fruitful tree, it shall you destroy and cut down, etc.": Now does this not follow a fortiori: If trees, which do not see, and which do not hear, and which do not speak, because they do not grow fruits, the Holy One did not pity them against removing them from the world, then a man who does not "grow" Torah and does not do the will of his Father in heaven, how much more so will the Holy One not pity him against removing him from the world.

8) R. Yochanan b. Zakkai said (Devarim 27:6) "Of whole (shleimoth) stones shall you build the altar of the L–rd your G d, etc.": "stones which make peace" (shalem). Now does this not follow a fortiori: If stones, which do not see, and which do not hear, and which do not speak — because they "make peace" between Israel and their Father in heaven, Scripture writes (Devarim 27:5) "You shall not lift iron over them," then a man who makes peace between a man and his wife, between family and family, between city and city, between country and country, and between one people and another — how much more so will calamity not befall him!

9) R. Shimon b. Elazar says: Iron was created to shorten a man's days, and the altar was created to lengthen them. It is not fit that the "shortener" be lifted over the "lengthener."

10) (Vayikra 20:17) ("And a man who takes his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother, and sees her nakedness, and she sees his nakedness, it is chesed. And they shall be cut off before the eyes of their people. The nakedness of his sister he has revealed; he shall bear his sin.") "And a man": to exclude a minor. "who takes his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother": This tells me only of the daughter of his father, who is not the daughter of his mother, or the daughter of his mother, who is not the daughter of his father. Whence do I derive (for inclusion his sister) both from his father and from his mother? From (the repetition of) "his sister" — in any event. — But even without the repetition, I would derive it a fortiori, viz.: If he is liable for his sister from his father, who is not the daughter of his mother, and from his mother, who is not the daughter of his father, how much more so (is he liable for his sister) both from his father and from his mother! — But if you say this, you have punished by means of an a fortiori argument — wherefore it is written "his sister," to teach that there is no punishment by means of an a fortiori argument.

11) "and sees her nakedness and she sees his nakedness": (In order for both to be liable to kareth) they must both transgress wilfully (and not unwittingly). "it is chesed" (connoting "shameful") And lest you say: But Cain married his sister! It is, therefore, written "it is chesed (sometimes connoting lovingkindness) and the world, in its beginning, was created only with lovingkindness, viz. (Tehillim 89:3) "For I have said: The world will be built by chesed."

12) "And they shall be cut off before the eyes of their people." We have heard the punishment, but we have not heard the exhortation. It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 18:9) "The nakedness of your sister, the daughter of your father or the daughter of your mother … you shall not reveal." This tells me only of ht daughter of his father who is not the daughter of his mother, or the daughter of his mother who is not the daughter of his father. Whence do I derive (for inclusion his sister) both from his father and from his mother? From (the repetition of ) "your sister" (Vayikra 18:11) — in any event. — But even without the repetition, I could derive it a fortiori, viz.: If he is exhorted for his sister from his father, who is not the daughter of his mother, and from his mother, who is not the daughter of his father, how much more so (is he exhorted for his sister) both from his father and from his mother! — But if you say this, you have exhorted by means of an a fortiori argument — wherefore it is written "your sister," to teach that there is no exhortation by means of an a fortiori argument.

13) If (Vayikra 18:9) "your sister," I might think even by a maidservant or by a gentile woman; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 18:11) "the daughter of your father's wife." If "the daughter of your father's wife," I would think even (the daughter) by another man; it is, therefore, written "begotten of your father" If so, why is it written (Vayikra 18:9) "born of the home or born of the outside? Whether (born of one concerning whom) we tell him "Keep her" (in the home, i.e., one that he was permitted to marry) or (born of one concerning whom) we tell him "Send her out" (i.e., one that he was not permitted to marry).