Shabbat 71B

מכלל דרישא מין אחד ותמחוי אחד. מין אחד ותמחוי אחד צריכא למימר?! אמר רב הונא: הכא במאי עסקינן ⁠— כגון שהיתה לו ידיעה בינתיים. ורבן גמליאל היא דאמר: אין ידיעה לחצי שיעור.

by inference, the first clause in the Mishnah is referring to one type of food and one dish. The problem is then more difficult. In a case where one ate two halves of an olive-bulk from one type of food and in one dish, was it necessary to say that he is liable? That is obvious. Rav Huna said: With what are we dealing here? We are dealing with a case where he had a period of awareness between eating the two half olive-bulks. After eating the first half of an olive-bulk, he became aware that he had eaten food that was prohibited. Then he became unaware again and ate the second half of an olive-bulk. Although, with regard to sacrifices, awareness usually serves as a line of demarcation between unwitting transgressions performed prior to the period of awareness and unwitting transgressions performed after that, the Mishnah is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel who said: There is no awareness for half a measure. Since one is not liable to bring a sacrifice for half a measure, the fact that one became aware between consumption of the two halves of an olive-bulk is of no significance and does not demarcate between the two half-measures with regard to liability to bring a sin-offering.

איתמר: אכל שני זיתי חלב בהעלם אחד, ונודע לו על הראשון, וחזר ונודע לו על השני. רבי יוחנן אמר: חייב שתים. וריש לקיש אמר: אינו חייב אלא אחת. רבי יוחנן אמר חייב: ״על חטאתו ... והביא״. וריש לקיש אמר פטור: ״מחטאתו ונסלח לו״.

A dispute between amora’im was stated: With regard to one who ate two olive-bulks of forbidden fat in one lapse of awareness, and became aware of the transgression of eating the first olive-bulk, and then became aware of the transgression of eating the second, R' Yoḥanan said: He is liable to bring two sin-offerings, one offering for each transgression. And Reish Lakish said: He is liable to bring only one. Both rabbis cite proofs for their opinions. R' Yoḥanan said that he is liable as it is stated: “And he should offer for his sin that he sinned…and he should bring the ox” (Leviticus 4:3-4), indicating that he is liable to bring a separate sacrifice for each sin. And Reish Lakish said he is exempt, as it is stated: “And the priest should atone for him from his sin, and it should be forgiven for him” (Leviticus 4:26), indicating that even if he atoned from his sin, i.e., for part of his sin and not all of his sin, the entire transgression is forgiven.