## Chullin Daf 101b

###### Chullin 101b:1
[Chullin 101b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:1)

וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי לֵית לֵיהּ אִיסּוּר כּוֹלֵל?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And does Rabbi Yosei HaGelili not** hold that a more **inclusive prohibition** takes effect where there is an already existing prohibition?


###### Chullin 101b:2
[Chullin 101b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:2)

וְהָתַנְיָא: שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים, שָׁגַג וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה, מִנַּיִן שֶׁחַיָּיב עַל זֶה בְּעַצְמוֹ וְעַל זֶה בְּעַצְמוֹ? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״שַׁבָּת הִיא״, ״יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים הוּא״, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אֵינוֹ חַיָּיב אֶלָּא אַחַת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: When **Shabbat and Yom Kippur** occur on the same day, if one acted **unwittingly and performed** prohibited **labor, from where** is it derived **that he is liable for this by itself and for that by itself,** i.e., he is liable to bring two sin offerings, for having transgressed both Shabbat and Yom Kippur? **The verse states:** “You shall do no manner of work; **it is a Shabbat** for the Lord in all your dwellings” (Leviticus 23:3), and another verse states: **“It is Yom Kippur”** (Leviticus 23:27). The term “it is” in each verse teaches that each of these days is considered independently even when it occurs together with another holy day. This is **the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. Rabbi Akiva says:** He **is liable** to bring **only one** sin offering because a prohibition does not take effect where another prohibition already exists.


###### Chullin 101b:3
[Chullin 101b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:3)

שְׁלַח רָבִין מִשּׁוּם דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: כָּךְ הַצָּעָה שֶׁל מִשְׁנָה, וְאֵיפוֹךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that on this topic **Ravin sent** a letter citing a statement **in the name of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina: This is the** correct **presentation of** this **teaching [*hatza’a shel mishna*],** i.e., the opinions in this *baraita* are accurate, **but** one must **reverse** the attributions of each opinion so that the first opinion is that of Rabbi Akiva and the second opinion is that of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. Consequently, Rabbi Yosei HaGelili holds that two prohibitions do not take effect at the same time even if one is more inclusive or stringent than the other.


###### Chullin 101b:4
[Chullin 101b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:4)

שְׁלַח רַב יִצְחָק בַּר יַעֲקֹב בַּר גִּיּוֹרֵי מִשּׁוּם דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי, לְמַאי דַּאֲפַכַן, שָׁגַג בְּשַׁבָּת וְהֵזִיד בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים – חַיָּיב, הֵזִיד בְּשַׁבָּת וְשָׁגַג בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים – פָּטוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues to discuss the opinion of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. **Rav Yitzḥak bar Ya’akov bar Giyorei sent** a letter citing a statement **in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan: According to the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, as** stated in the *baraita* once the attributions have been **reversed,** if one unwittingly performed a forbidden labor on a Yom Kippur that occurred on Shabbat, he is obligated to bring one sin offering. If he acted **unwittingly with regard to** the fact that it was **Shabbat,** i.e., he forgot that it was Shabbat, **but** acted **intentionally with regard to Yom Kippur,** he is **obligated** to bring a sin offering. But if he acted **intentionally with regard to Shabbat but unwittingly with regard to Yom Kippur,** he is **exempt** from bringing any offering.


###### Chullin 101b:5
[Chullin 101b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:5)

מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: שַׁבָּת קְבִיעָא וְקַיְימָא, יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים – בֵּי דִינָא דְּקָא קָבְעִי לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is the reason** for Rabbi Yoḥanan’s statement? **Abaye said: Shabbat is established and permanent,** i.e., it always occurs on the seventh day of the week, whereas in the case of **Yom Kippur,** it is **the court that establishes it,** as the Sages determine the New Moon. Consequently, Shabbat is considered to have preceded Yom Kippur, and the prohibition to perform labor on Yom Kippur does not apply, due to the fact that labor is already prohibited because it is Shabbat. Since one brings a sin offering only due to unwitting transgression, he is obligated to bring a sin offering only if he performed labor without realizing it was Shabbat.


###### Chullin 101b:6
[Chullin 101b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:6)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: סוֹף סוֹף, תַּרְוַיְיהוּ בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי קָאָתוּ. אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא: שְׁמָדָא הֲוָה, וּשְׁלַחוּ מִתָּם דְּיוֹמָא דְּכִפּוּרֵי דְּהָא שַׁתָּא שַׁבְּתָא הוּא. וְכֵן כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין וְכֹל נָחוֹתֵי אַמְרוּהָ כְּרָבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said to** Abaye: **Ultimately both of them,** i.e., Shabbat and Yom Kippur, **come** into effect **at the same time.** Since both take effect at the beginning of the calendar day, it cannot be said that Shabbat precedes Yom Kippur. **Rather Rava said** a different explanation. It **was** a time of religious **persecution, and they sent from there,** i.e., from Eretz Yisrael, a directive stating **that Yom Kippur of this year** will not be observed on its proper day but rather on **Shabbat.** Rabbi Yoḥanan was merely stating that on that particular year one who would unwittingly transgress Yom Kippur would be exempt from bringing a sin offering. **And similarly, when Ravin and all those who descended** from Eretz Yisrael **came** to Babylonia, **they said** that the true explanation is **in accordance with** the opinion of **Rava.**


###### Chullin 101b:7
[Chullin 101b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:7)

אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וַהֲלֹא מִבְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב [וְכוּ׳].

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **Rabbi Yehuda said** in explanation: **Wasn’t** the sciatic nerve forbidden for **the children of Jacob,** as it is written: “Therefore the children of Israel eat not the sciatic nerve” (Genesis 32:33), yet the meat of a non-kosher animal was still permitted to them? Since the sciatic nerve of non-kosher animals became forbidden at that time, it remains forbidden now.


###### Chullin 101b:8
[Chullin 101b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:8)

תַּנְיָא, אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה: וְכִי נֶאֱמַר ״עַל כֵּן לֹא יֹאכְלוּ בְּנֵי יַעֲקֹב״? וַהֲלֹא לֹא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא ״בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, וְלֹא נִקְרְאוּ ״בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״ עַד סִינַי! אֶלָּא בְּסִינַי נֶאֱמַר, אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּכְתַּב בִּמְקוֹמוֹ לֵידַע מֵאֵיזֶה טַעַם נֶאֱסַר לָהֶם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is taught** in a *baraita* that the Rabbis **said to Rabbi Yehuda: But is it stated** in the verse: **Therefore the children of Jacob do not eat** the sciatic nerve? **Isn’t** it true that **it is stated only** that: “Therefore **the children of Israel** do not eat the sciatic nerve?” **And** the Jewish people were **not called “the children of Israel” until** they received the Torah at Mount **Sinai. Rather,** this terminology indicates that the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve **was stated** to the Jewish people at Sinai, **but was written in its place,** after the incident of Jacob wrestling with the angel, to allow the Jewish people **to know the reason** the sciatic nerve **was forbidden to them.** Since the prohibition came into effect only at Sinai, there is no proof that it ever applied with regard to non-kosher animals.


###### Chullin 101b:9
[Chullin 101b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:9)

מֵתִיב רָבָא: ״וַיִּשְׂאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת יַעֲקֹב אֲבִיהֶם״, לְאַחַר מַעֲשֶׂה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava raises an objection** to this *baraita*: The verse states: “And Jacob rose up from Beersheba; **and the children of Israel carried Jacob their father,** and their little ones, and their wives in the wagons that Pharaoh had sent to carry him” (Genesis 46:5). This occurred before the Torah was given at Sinai, and therefore proves that the title “the children of Israel” was in use before the Torah was given. The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, this occurred **after the incident,** i.e., after Jacob wrestled with the angel and after the prophetic vision in which God changed Jacob’s name to Israel (Genesis 35:10).


###### Chullin 101b:10
[Chullin 101b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:10)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב אַחָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרָבָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: מֵהָהִיא שַׁעְתָּא לִיתְּסַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Aḥa, son of Rava, said to Rav Ashi:** In that case, the sciatic nerve **should be** understood as having become **forbidden** to them **from that time** when they were first called the children of Israel. Since this was before the giving of the Torah, this would be in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and not that of the Rabbis.


###### Chullin 101b:11
[Chullin 101b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:11)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְכִי תוֹרָה פְּעָמִים פְּעָמִים נִיתְּנָה? הָהוּא שַׁעְתָּא לָאו שְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה הֲוַאי, וְלָא שְׁעַת מַתַּן תּוֹרָה הֲוַאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Ashi **said to him: Was the Torah given** piecemeal, on numerous different **occasions?** It was given at Sinai. Rather, **that time** when the title “children of Israel” was first used **was not the time** when **the incident** of Jacob wrestling with the angel occurred **and** also **was not the time of the giving of the Torah** at Mount Sinai. Therefore, there is no reason to assume that the prohibition took effect at that time.


###### Chullin 101b:12
[Chullin 101b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:12)

תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵבֶר מִן הַחַי נוֹהֵג בִּבְהֵמָה, חַיָּה וָעוֹף, בֵּין טְמֵאִין וּבֵין טְהוֹרִין, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֶלָּא בִּטְהוֹרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna taught a dispute between Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis with regard to the prohibition of eating the sciatic nerve. The Gemara now cites a similar dispute between them with regard to eating a limb from a living animal. **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: The prohibition of eating **a limb from a living animal applies** whether the limb comes from **a domesticated animal, an undomesticated animal, or a bird,** and **whether** it is from **a non-kosher** species **or** from **a kosher** species; this is **the statement of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Elazar. But the Rabbis say:** The prohibition of eating a limb from a living animal **applies only to** a limb from **a kosher** species.


###### Chullin 101b:13
[Chullin 101b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Chullin/r/101b:13)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וּשְׁנֵיהֶן מִקְרָא אֶחָד דָּרְשׁוּ, ״רַק חֲזַק לְבִלְתִּי אֲכֹל הַדָּם כִּי הַדָּם הוּא הַנָּפֶשׁ

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan says: And both of them,** i.e., the Rabbis as well as Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Elazar, **derived** their opinions **from one verse: “Only be steadfast in not eating the blood, for the blood is the life;**