Study Keritot folio 23B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
דתניא: ״אשר לה׳״ – לרבות את האימורין.
As it is taught in a baraita with regard to the prohibition against eating sacrificial meat in a state of ritual impurity: “But the soul that eats from the meat of the sacrifice of peace offerings, which belong to YHWH, having his impurity upon him, that soul should be cut off from his people” (Leviticus 7:20). The phrase “which belong to YHWH” serves to include in the prohibition of an impure person consuming sacrificial food the sacrificial portions, which are meant to be sacrificed upon the altar and not eaten by other people. One who eats this meat while he is impure is liable to receive karet.
ואימורין קאי עלייהו באיסור עולין, וחלב קאי עלייהו באיסור כרת, וקאתי איסור טומאה חייל עליה.
The Talmud explains the proof from this baraita: In the case of sacrificial portions, the prohibition of items that are supposed to ascend upon the altar applies to it, and with regard to the parts of the sacrificial portions that are forbidden fat, the prohibition against eating forbidden fat, which is punishable by karet, applies to it. And nevertheless the prohibition of eating sacrificial food in a state of impurity comes and applies in addition to that prohibition. This indicates that with regard to sacrificial meat specifically, a prohibition takes effect where another prohibition already exists.
תדע שכן הוא, דהא רבי סבירא ליה איסור חל על איסור, (ואימא) והני מילי איסור חמור על איסור קל, אבל איסור קל חל על איסור והוא איסור חמור – לא. ובקדשים שמעינן ליה דאמר: איסור קל על איסור חמור נמי חייל,
The Talmud adds: Know that it is so, as R' Yehuda HaNasi maintains in general that a prohibition takes effect where another prohibition already exists, but this statement applies only with regard to a relatively severe prohibition taking effect where a relatively lenient prohibition already exists. But in the case of a lenient prohibition taking effect where there is already an existing prohibition, and that original prohibition is more severe than the second one, no, R' Yehuda HaNasi does not hold that the second prohibition takes effect. And yet with regard to sacrificial meat, we have heard that R' Yehuda HaNasi says that even a lenient prohibition takes effect where a severe prohibition already exists.