Chullin 202:1

ורבי יוסי הגלילי לית ליה איסור כולל

And does R'Jose the Galilean hold the view that a comprehensive prohibition cannot [be superimposed upon an existing prohibition]?

והתניא

Behold it has been taught: If the Day of Atonement happened to fall on the Sabbath and a person inadvertently did work thereon, whence do we know that he is guilty for each separately?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And must bring two sin-offerings, i.e., for breaking the Sabbath and also for profaning the Day of Atonement.');">¹</span>

שבת ויוה"כ שגג ועשה מלאכה מנין שחייב על זה בעצמו ועל זה בעצמו תלמוד לומר (ויקרא כג, ג) שבת היא (ויקרא כג, כז) יום הכפורים הוא דברי רבי יוסי הגלילי

Because it is written: It is a sabbath,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXIII, 3.');">²</span>

רבי עקיבא אומר

and also: It is the day of atonement;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 27. Here the prohibitions of the Sabbath and of the Day of Atonement come into force simultaneously, i.e., on the Friday evening after sunset; nevertheless R. Jose regards the person guilty for transgressing both prohibitions. Now if R. Jose were to hold that a comprehensive prohibition or one that involves a graver penalty can be superimposed upon an existing prohibition, then it is clear to understand his view here with regard to simultaneous prohibitions; since whichever of the two prohibitions were to set in first the other could be superimposed. For the Sabbath involves a graver penalty than that of the Day of Atonement (the former death and the latter kareth) ; and, on the other hand, the prohibition of the Day of Atonement is more comprehensive than that of the Sabbath (on the Sabbath only work is prohibited whilst on the Day of Atonement eating is also prohibited) . If, however, R. Jose were to hold that a comprehensive prohibition or one that involves a graver penalty cannot be superimposed upon an existing prohibition, what is his reason here for holding that two prohibitions can come into force simultaneously?');">³</span>

אינו חייב אלא אחת

so R'Jose the Galilean.

שלח רבין משום דרבי יוסי בר' חנינא

R'Akiba says: He has only incurred guilt once.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Tosef. Ker. II.');">⁴</span>

כך הצעה של משנה ואיפוך

- Rabin sent [from Palestine the following message] in the name of R'Jose son of R'Hanina: The construction of the teaching is as stated save that the authorities must be reversed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it was R. Jose who said that the offender had only incurred guilt once; for according to R. Jose in no circumstances can a prohibition be superimposed upon another prohibition, whether both come into force simultaneously or the later one is a comprehensive prohibition or one that involves a graver penalty.');">⁵</span>

שלח רב יצחק בר יעקב בר גיורי משום דרבי יוחנן

R'Isaac B'Jacob B'Giori sent the following in the name of R'Johanan: According to the view of R'Jose the Galilean, now that we have reversed the authorities, if a person being unaware that it was the Sabbath but knowing full well that it was the Day of Atonement [did work thereon] he is liable,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To bring a sin-offering for breaking the Sabbath inadvertently.');">⁶</span>

לדברי רבי יוסי הגלילי למאי דאפכן שגג בשבת והזיד ביום הכפורים חייב הזיד בשבת ושגג ביום הכפורים פטור

if [he did so] knowing full well that it was the Sabbath but being unaware that it was the Day of Atonement, he is not liable.

מאי טעמא

What is the reason [for this distinction]? - Abaye answered: The Sabbath is fixed and determined from all time, but the Day of Atonement is determined by the Beth Din.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is therefore considered as if the Sabbath set in first, so that the prohibition of the Day of Atonement cannot be superimposed upon the existing prohibition of the Sabbath. Consequently the only prohibition that enters into consideration is that of the Sabbath, and if a person did work knowing full well that it was the Sabbath, he is not liable to bring a sin-offering, for no offering may be brought for a deliberate transgression.');">⁷</span>

אמר אביי

Said Raba to him: But in fact both [prohibitions] set in simultaneously! - Rather explained Raba:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The original statement of R. Isaac b. Jacob had no reference to the opinion of R. Jose the Galilean, but dealt with a special ease that arose because of religious persecution.');">⁸</span>

שבת קביעא וקיימא יום הכפורים בי דינא דקא קבעי ליה

It was a time of religious persecution,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the observance of the Day of Atonement in its proper time was proscribed.');">⁹</span>

אמר ליה רבא

and they sent word from there [Palestine] that the Day of Atonement of that year should be observed on a Sabbath.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although that day was not the correct date of the Day of Atonement. Consequently any breach of the sanctity of that day can only be considered as a transgression of the Sabbath but not as a transgression of the Day of Atonement.');">¹⁰</span>

סוף סוף תרוייהו בהדי הדדי קאתו

When Rabin came and also all those who came down [from Palestine to Babylon], they explained it as Raba did.

אלא אמר רבא שמדא הוה ושלחו מתם

R'JUDAH ARGUED, WAS NOT THE SCIATIC NERVE FORBIDDEN FROM THE TIME OF THE SONS OF JACOB?

דיומא דכפורי דהא שתא שבתא הוא

etc.

וכן כי אתא רבין וכל נחותי אמרוה כרבא:

It was taught: [The Rabbis] said to R'Judah: Does it say [in the Torah], 'Therefore the children of Jacob eat not'?

אמר רבי יהודה והלא מבני יעקב [וכו']:

Surely it says: Therefore the children of Israel eat not.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Gen. XXXII, 33.');">¹¹</span>

תניא אמרו לו לר' יהודה

Now they were first styled the children of Israel only at [the giving of the law at] Sinai; therefore [we must say that] the law [of the sciatic nerve] was given at Sinai, but was written in its present place to indicate the reason why it was prohibited.

וכי נאמר על כן לא יאכלו בני יעקב

Raba raised an objection against this.

והלא לא נאמר אלא בני ישראל ולא נקראו בני ישראל עד סיני

It is written: And the sons of Israel carried Jacob their father!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XLVI,5. The reference is to the children of Jacob carrying their father to Egypt; thus they are styled 'the children of Israel' before the giving of the Law at mount Sinai.');">¹²</span>

אלא בסיני נאמר אלא שנכתב במקומו לידע מאיזה טעם נאסר להם

- That was after the incident.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When Jacob wrestled with the angel, after which incident God changed his name from Jacob to Israel.');">¹³</span>

מתיב רבא

R'Aha the son of Raba said to R'Ashi: Then it should be prohibited from that time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., from the time that they were first designated 'children of Israel', that is, when Jacob was taken to Egypt.');">¹⁴</span>

(בראשית מו, ה) וישאו בני ישראל את יעקב אביהם

onwards, should it not? - He replied: Was the Torah given at various times?

לאחר מעשה

And that time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 563, n. 8.');">¹⁵</span>

אמר ליה רב אחא בריה דרבא לרב אשי

was neither the time of the incident nor the time of the giving of the Law.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A particular law could have been ordained either generally at the giving of the Law at Sinai, or specially, even before Sinai, at the occurrence of the event that gave rise to that law, but at no other period.');">¹⁶</span>

מההיא שעתא ליתסר

Our Rabbis taught: The [prohibition of eating a] limb [severed] from a living creature applies to cattle, wild beasts and to birds, whether they be clean or unclean: so R'Judah and R'Eleazar; but the Sages say: It applies only to the clean animals.

אמר ליה

Said R'Johanan: Both views were inferred from the same verse, viz. , Only be steadfast in not eating the blood, for the blood is the life;

וכי תורה פעמים פעמים ניתנה

ההוא שעתא לאו שעת מעשה הואי ולא שעת מתן תורה הואי

ת"ר

אבר מן החי נוהג בבהמה חיה ועוף בין טמאין ובין טהורין דברי רבי יהודה ורבי אלעזר

וחכמים אומרים

אינו נוהג אלא בטהורין

אמר ר' יוחנן

ושניהן מקרא אחד דרשו

(דברים יב, כג) רק חזק לבלתי אכול הדם כי הדם הוא הנפש