As we learned on yesterday’s daf Rabbi Yehuda rules that the prohibition of eating gid ha-nasheh – the sciatic nerve of an animal – applies to unclean animals as well as to kosher ones. The practical application of this suggestion would be whether someone who eats the gid ha-nasheh of an unclean animal would be liable for two punishments – one set of lashes for eating non-kosher and a second set of lashes for eating the gid ha-nasheh. Whether or not this is the case depends on how we rule on a general question in the Gemara: Do we say issur ḥal al issur – that one prohibition can be added to another prohibition – or not?
This question is the subject of a disagreement in Massekhet Yevamot (daf 32b), and although we rule that ein issur ḥal al issur – that one prohibition cannot be added to another prohibition – it is not clear how far this idea applies. Thus we find that Rabbi Yosei understands ein issur ḥal al issur to mean that there is no punishment for the second prohibition, but it still exists and the perpetrator of such a crime would be deemed a rasha – an evil person – who would not be buried in the Jewish cemetery. Rabbi Shimon takes a simpler view of the ruling and argues that ein issur ḥal al issur means that there is no place for the second prohibition to be applied and it does not exist at all. The Gemara in Yevamot adds that even Rabbi Shimon agrees that if the first prohibition no longer exists, the second one would take its place.
- Issur kollel means an inclusive prohibition. In a case of issur kollel we do not find an extra prohibition added, rather the new issur expands the context of the already existing prohibition so that this activity is now included under a different category at the same time that it retains its original prohibition.
- Issur mosif means an additional prohibition. This is where the expanded prohibition incorporates additional people in the list of those for whom the item is prohibited.