They are not liable unless there be forgetfulness of the thing and unwittingness in act [i.e., If beth-din ruled (wrongly) for the congregation in one of all of the mitzvoth, they are not liable for a bullock of forgetfulness of the congregation, unless there be forgetfulness of the thing (that is, if their ruling were mistaken and the halachah escaped them), together with unwittingness in act, i.e., if most of the congregation erred and transgressed by their ruling, it being written (Leviticus 4:13): "And if the whole congregation of Israel err and the thing be hid" — unwittingness in the act and forgetfulness of the thing (the halachah)]. And thus with the anointed priest. [He is not liable for an offering unless the din escaped him. And they are not liable unless there be forgetfulness of the thing together with unwittingness in act [as with all the other mitzvoth; for we derive idolatry from the other mitzvoth by identity "by the eyes" — "by the eyes," as written above.] Beth-din are not liable unless they rule (wrongly) on a thing whose witting transgression is punishable by kareth and whose unwitting transgression requires a sin-offering (except for five of them whose unwitting transgression does not require a sin-offering: circumcision and the Pesach offering — Because they are positive commandments, even though their witting transgression is punishable by kareth, their unwitting transgression does not require a sin-offering, in respect to which it is written (Leviticus 4:13) "one of all the mitzvoth of the Torah which are not to be done"; and blaspheming, because it does not involve an act and Scripture write of a sin-offering (Numbers 15:29): "for him who acts unwittingly" — excluding blaspheming, where there is no act. And for defiling the sanctuary and its holy things, unwitting transgression requires (not a sin-offering, but) a sliding-scale offering, as mentioned in Leviticus. For all of these, beth-din and the anointed priest do not bring a sin-offering for unwitting transgression. We find, then, all the mitzvoth for which beth-din and the anointed priest bring an offering to total thirty-one, witting transgression of which is punishable by kareth, and unwitting transgression requiring a fixed sin-offering.] And thus with the anointed priest. And they are not liable (to bring an offering) for idolatry until they rule on something whose witting transgression is punishable by kareth and whose unwitting transgression requires a sin-offering.
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
.The [court] is not obligated [to bring a sacrifice] except where ignorance of the law – A beit din that ruled for the community on one of all the commandments does not need to bring a bull for a communal error-in-judgment (para ha’elem davar) sacrifice for the community but only for the ignorance of the matter in which it ruled in error and because they did not realize that they were transgressing.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
Introduction
Mishnah three continues to teach laws of errant rulings in which the court is treated the same way that a high priest is treated. It also continues to equate errant rulings with regard to idolatry with errant rulings with regard to other sins.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
Was accompanied by an unwitting action – The majority of the community erred and acted according to their ruling, as it is written, “they erred and the thing was hidden,” an act in error and the matter was hidden.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
The [court] is not obligated [to bring a sacrifice] except where ignorance of the law was accompanied by an unwitting action, and so it is with the anointed priest. Nor [is obligation incurred] in the case of idolatry unless ignorance of the law was accompanied by an unwitting action. The court is not obligated unless they ruled concerning a prohibition the punishment for which is kareth, if it was transgressed intentionally, and a sin offering if transgressed unwittingly, and so it is with the anointed priest. Nor [is obligation incurred] in the case of idolatry unless they ruled concerning a matter the punishment for which is kareth, if it was transgressed intentionally, and a sin offering if transgressed unwittingly. The court is not obligated to bring a sacrifice except in a case where they did not realize that they were issuing an errant ruling and those that acted did not realize that they were transgressing. The same is true if the high priest issues an errant ruling. He must rule and act unwittingly for him to be able to bring a bull as a sin offering. There is no difference in this rule between idolatry and all other commandments.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
So it is with the anointed priest – The high priest that was anointed with the anointing oil is not obligated to bring a sacrifice unless he forgets the law and he acts and rules in error, as it is written (Leviticus 4), “to bring guilt on the people,” which comes to teach that the anointed priest is like the people.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
The particular commandment with regard to which the court erred and the people transgressed unwittingly, must be one for which the punishment is kareth (heavenly excommunication) if done intentionally and a sin offering if done unwittingly. Examples of such commandments are Shabbat, many incest prohibitions, the eating of certain prohibited foods, work on Yom Kippur, and cursing God. These are all listed in tractate Karetoth 1:1-2. Idol worship is a sin for which one is potentially liable for kareth or a sin offering (if done unwittingly). However, not all forms of idol worship are punishable by kareth or a sin offering. If one worships an idol in an unusual manner, a type of worship that is not considered normal for that idol or any other idol, than he is not liable for kareth or a sin offering. If the court were to issue an errant ruling with regard to one of these types of worship, the court would not be liable to bring a bull as a sin offering.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
Nor [is obligation incurred] in the case of idolatry – The beit din issued a mistaken ruling regarding idol worship and they are obligated to bring a bull and a goat.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
Nor [is obligation incurred] in the case of idolatry unless ignorance of the law was accompanied by an unwitting action – Like all the other commandments. We learn about idol worship from the other commandments from a g’zeira shava (“equivalent form”) of “eyes” and “eyes”, as written above.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
The court is not obligated unless they ruled concerning a prohibition the punishment for which is karet, if it was transgressed intentionally, and a sin offering if transgressed unwittingly – There are 36 commandments in the Torah for which the punishment is “karet” and for each one a sin offering is required if the commandment was transgressed unwittingly, except for five that do not require a sin offering if transgressed in error: brit mila and the Passover sacrifice, since they are positive commandments. Even though wilfully transgressing them has a punishment of “karet” no sin offering is required if they are transgressed in error, as it is written about a sin offering (Leviticus 4), “do any of the things which the LORD hath commanded not to be done.” And making an oath, because there is no action and the Torah says about a sin offering to transgress in error: if an oath was uttered there was no action. And impurity in the Temple and of its contents create no obligation if transgressed in error, but rather a sliding scale sacrifice (oleh ve’yored), as said in Leviticus. And a beit din does not have to bring a sin offering if these are transgressed in error and neither does a high priest. There are 31 commandments for which the punishment is wilful transgression is “karet” and for erroneous transgression is a sin-offering, for which a beit din and a high priest have to bring a sacrifice.
