This can be explained as: “If you should afflict my daughters” by refraining from sex, “and if you should take other wives” causing them to suffer from additional rival wives. The Talmud objects: And say that this phrase and that phrase are both referring to taking rival wives. The Talmud rejects this: Is it written: If you take? “And if you should take” is written. Therefore, the clauses must be referring to two different kinds of affliction.
ואימא אידי ואידי מצרות, חד לצרות דידיה, וחד לצרות דאתיין ליה מעלמא, דומיא ד״אם תקח״! מי כתיב ״אם תקח ואם תענה״? ״אם תענה ואם תקח״ כתיב.
The Talmud challenges further: And say that this phrase and that phrase are referring to taking rival wives. One phrase is referring to his wives’ current rivals. “If you should afflict” means that Jacob should not elevate the position of the two female slaves, Bilhah and Zilpah, to the status of wife, which would make them co-wives with Laban’s daughters. And one phrase is referring to rivals who might come to him from the world at large, which would be similar in meaning to “if you should take.” The Talmud rejects this: Is it written: If you take and if you afflict? It is logical to first state the more severe warning and then the less severe one. But according to this proposed reading that “take” refers to rivals from the world at large and “afflict” refers to elevating the status of female slaves, the text would have first mentioned the less painful affliction of elevating the female slaves and then followed it with a warning about taking new rival wives, as “if you should afflict and if you should take” is written.