Study Yevamot folio 33A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
The Talmud asks: With regard to what principle do they disagree? The Talmud suggests that they disagree with regard to the issue of a more inclusive prohibition, and this dispute pertains to the status of a more inclusive prohibition specifically according to the opinion of R' Yosei. R' Ḥiyya holds
The Talmud asks: And what more inclusive prohibition is there here in these cases? Granted, in the case of a non-priest who served in the Temple on Shabbat, initially he was permitted to perform labor every day and was prohibited from engaging in the Temple service. When Shabbat came, since he is
The same is true with regard to a blemished priest who served in the Temple while ritually impure: Initially, prior to his becoming ritually impure, he was allowed to eat from the consecrated animals but was prohibited from performing the Temple service, like all blemished priests. When he was ren
Rather, the previous explanation is rejected and the Talmud suggests instead that they disagree with regard to an additional prohibition that takes effect simultaneously, and this dispute pertains to the status of these prohibitions specifically according to the opinion of R' Yosei. R' Ḥiyya holds
The Talmud challenges this explanation: But here, in the first two instances, what case of simultaneous prohibitions is there here? In the two previous cases the prohibitions took effect one after the other, and not simultaneously. The Talmud answers that these cases can also be interpreted as occ