Parallel
יומא 74:1
Soncino English Talmud · Berean Standard Bible
and in accord with R. Akiba, who said that a man may prohibit to himself anything in any quantity, however small. And if you would say that since it is permitted by the Torah, [the law relating to the] sacrifice for an oath is operative, surely we learned: An ‘oath of testimony’ applies only to those qualified to bear witness; and we raised the point: what does that mean to exclude, whereupon R. Papa said: This excludes a king, and R. Aha b. Jacob said: This excludes a professional dice-gambler. Now a dice-player, as far as Biblical law is concerned, is qualified to bear witness and only the Rabbis declared him unfit, and yet an oath does not apply to him? There it is different, for Scripture said: If he do not utter it, and this man cannot make a [valid] utterance. Now would you say that wherever the punishment is extirpation the term ‘forbidden’ is not used? Surely it was taught: Although the term ‘forbidden’ was used in connection with all of them, the punishment of extirpation applies only to him who eats or drinks, or engages in labour? — This is what is said: When the term ‘forbidden’ is used, it is applied but to less than the legal minimum, but where the legal minimum has been transgressed the punishment involved is extirpation; and also extirpation is the penalty, that is the case only with him who eats or drinks or engages in labour. Or, if you like, say: When [the Mishnah] uses the term ‘forbidden’, it refers to the rest [of the transgressions], for Rabbah and R. Joseph taught in the other books of the School of Rab: Whence do we know that it is forbidden on the Day of Atonement to anoint oneself, to wash, to put on shoes, and to have marital intercourse? Therefore the text reads: [It] is a Sabbath of solemn rest [unto you]. [To turn to] the main text: As for the matter of less than the legal minimum, R. Johanan said: It is forbidden by Biblical law, whilst Resh Lakish said: It is permitted by Biblical law. R.Johanan said, It is forbidden by Biblical law; since it could be joined [to form a minimum] it is forbidden food that he is eating. Resh Lakish said: It is permitted by Biblical law, for the Divine Law speaks of eating and this is not [eating]. — R. Johanan raised the following objection against Resh Lakish: I know only that whatsoever involves punishment is subject to a prohibition; but in the case of the koy, and what is less than the legal minimum, since they do not involve punishment, I might say that they are not subject to a prohibition either, therefore the text reads: No fat. — This is only Rabbinical and the text [adduced] is but a mere support. And that is also logical. For if one should assume that the prohibition is Biblical, surely [the status of] the koy is doubtful and no Scriptural text is necessary to cover a doubtful case! — Were it only for this there would be no argument, they would hold
—