Chullin 205
חייב שתים ור' שמעון בן לקיש אמר
I grant that this is right according to R'Johanan, but according to R'Simeon B'Lakish this is a difficulty, is it not?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For it is agreed by all that where the two prohibitions are derived from separate verses, as here, the offender is liable twice.');"><sup>1</sup></span>
אמר אביי
The other [R'Simeon B'Lakish] holds that an animal whilst alive does not stand to be dismembered into limbs, so that the prohibition of the 'limb' [when it does arise]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., when it was actually dismembered.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
מ"ס
Alternatively, you may say, all agree that an animal whilst alive does not stand to be dismembered into limbs, but they differ whether or no the prohibition of the limb [severed from a living creature] can be superimposed upon the [existing] prohibition of trefah.
בהמה בחייה לאברים עומדת ואיסור טרפה ואיסור אבר בהדי הדדי קאתו
One [R'Johanan] holds that the prohibition of the limb can be superimposed upon the [existing] prohibition of trefah;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the prohibition of the limb severed from a living creature is a grave restriction for it applies to the sons of Noah. V. supra ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
בהמה בחייה לאו לאברים עומדת ולא אתי איסור אבר חייל אאיסור טרפה
Alternatively, you may say, all agree that an animal whilst alive stands to be dismembered into limbs,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Consequently the prohibition of the 'limb' came into force at the birth of the animal.');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ואיבעית אימא דכ"ע בהמה בחייה לאו לאברים עומדת ובמיתי איסור אבר מיחל אאיסור טרפה קא מיפלגי
but in this case the animal was rendered trefah later on [and not at birth], and they differ whether or no the prohibition of trefah can be superimposed upon the [existing] prohibition of the limb.
אתי איסור אבר חייל אאיסור טרפה
and the other [R'Simeon B'Lakish] holds that it cannot.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The prohibition of trefah can only come into force after the animal has been slaughtered when the prohibition of the limb of a living animal has gone.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ומר סבר
Raba said: It is a case where the person tore away a limb from the living animal and thereby rendered it trefah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., he cut off the leg of a living animal above the knee-joint, v. supra 76a, and he ate it.');"><sup>9</sup></span>
איבעית אימא דכ"ע בהמה בחייה לאברים עומדת וכגון שנטרפה לאחר מכאן ובמיתי איסור טרפה חייל אאיסור אבר קא מיפלגי
The other [R'Simeon B'Lakish] holds that an animal [even] whilst alive stands to be dismembered into limbs, so that the prohibition of trefah cannot be superimposed upon the [existing] prohibition of the 'limb'.
מר סבר
R'Hiyya B'Abba said in the name of R'Johanan: If a person ate forbidden fat [which was torn away] from a living animal, which was trefah, he is liable twice.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although he has infringed three prohibitions, (i) of forbidden fat, (ii) of fat (i.e., a limb) taken from a living animal, and (iii) of trefah, he is o liable for two; v. infra.');"><sup>10</sup></span>
כגון שתלש ממנה אבר וטרפה בו
Now he who says [he is liable] thrice, is of the opinion that an animal [even] whilst alive stands to be dismembered into limbs, so that the prohibitions of the forbidden fat, of the limb [from a living creature], and of trefah come into force simultaneously;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., at the moment of birth these three prohibitions came into force, for whilst a fetus within the womb the whole of its fat was permitted; v. ruxhts supra 69a. V. however, Tosaf. s.v. .');"><sup>11</sup></span>
מר סבר
but he who says [he is liable] twice, is of the opinion that an animal whilst alive does not stand to be dismembered into limbs, so that there are [present from the time of birth] the prohibitions of the forbidden fat and of trefah, and the prohibition of the limb [from a living creature] cannot be superimposed upon them.
בהמה בחייה לאברים אינה עומדת איסור אבר ואיסור טרפה בהדי הדדי קאתו
Alternatively, you may say, all agree that an animal whilst alive does not stand to be dismembered into limbs, but they differ whether or no the prohibition of the limb [from a living creature] can be superimposed upon the [existing] prohibitions of the forbidden fat and of trefah.
בהמה בחייה לאברים עומדת ולא אתי איסור טרפה חייל אאיסור אבר
Alternatively, you may say, all agree that an animal [even] whilst alive stands to be dismembered into limbs, but in this case the animal was rendered trefah later on [and not at birth], and they differ whether or no the prohibition of trefah can be superimposed upon the prohibition of the limb [from a living creature].
אכל חלב מן החי מן הטרפה חייב שתים
just as it is the case with the forbidden fat, for a Master has said: Th Torah has expressly indicated that the prohibition of nebelah can be superimposed upon the prohibition of forbidden fat, and that the prohibition of trefah can be superimposed upon the prohibition of forbidden fat.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 37a, and Zeb. 70a.');"><sup>13</sup></span>