Mesorat%20hashas for Horayot 1:1

הוֹרוּ בֵית דִּין לַעֲבֹר עַל אַחַת מִכָּל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה, וְהָלַךְ הַיָּחִיד וְעָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג עַל פִּיהֶם, בֵּין שֶׁעָשׂוּ וְעָשָׂה עִמָּהֶן, בֵּין שֶׁעָשׂוּ וְעָשָׂה אַחֲרֵיהֶן, בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ וְעָשָׂה, פָּטוּר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁתָּלָה בְבֵית דִּין. הוֹרוּ בֵית דִּין וְיָדַע אֶחָד מֵהֶן שֶׁטָּעוּ, אוֹ תַלְמִיד וְהוּא רָאוּי לְהוֹרָאָה, וְהָלַךְ וְעָשָׂה עַל פִּיהֶן, בֵּין שֶׁעָשׂוּ וְעָשָׂה עִמָּהֶן, בֵּין שֶׁעָשׂוּ וְעָשָׂה אַחֲרֵיהֶן, בֵּין שֶׁלֹּא עָשׂוּ וְעָשָׂה, הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא תָלָה בְּבֵית דִּין. זֶה הַכְּלָל, הַתּוֹלֶה בְעַצְמוֹ, חַיָּב. וְהַתּוֹלֶה בְּבֵית דִּין, פָּטוּר:

If beth-din ruled to transgress one of all the mitzvoth written in the Torah [If they said: You are permitted to do something, deliberate transgression of which is punishable by kareth], and an individual went and transgressed unwittingly by their ruling, [(as opposed to an instance in which he did not transgress by the ruling of beth-din, as when beth-din ruled that chelev (forbidden fats) is permitted and he mistook chelev for shuman (permitted fats) and ate it, in which instance he is liable, not having eaten it by the ruling of beth-din)] — whether they transgressed and he transgressed with them or they did not transgress [by their ruling], he is exempt [and they are liable, for beth-din bring the offering only for unwittingness in ruling, the act being dependent on the congregation, and the ruling upon beth-din], (he is exempt) because he relied upon beth-din. [Our Mishnah is in accordance with R. Yehudah, who says: An individual who transgressed by the ruling of beth-din is exempt (from a sin-offering). The halachah, however, is in accordance with the Rabbis, who say that an individual who transgressed by the ruling of beth-din is liable. He is not exempt unless the transgressors are the majority of the dwellers of Eretz Yisrael or the majority of the tribes, in which instance beth-din bring a bullock of forgetfulness of the congregation and those who transgressed by their ruling are exempt.] If beth-din ruled (wrongly) and one of them knew that they were mistaken or if he were a Torah scholar eligible to rule and he went and transgressed by their ruling — whether they transgressed and he transgressed with them or they did not transgress and he transgressed, he is liable, because he did not rely upon beth-din (in transgressing). [And even though he sinned deliberately, knowing that beth-din had erred and, notwithstanding this, transgressed by their ruling, and a deliberate transgressor is not subject to an offering, the Gemara states that he is (considered) unwitting, having thought that it was a mitzvah to abide by beth-din's ruling, even though he knew that they had erred.] This is the rule: One who relies upon himself (in transgressing) is liable [to bring an offering (including one who "kicks" against the ruling (of beth-din), one whose way is not to act in accordance with their ruling, and who acted in accordance with their ruling, not because he relied upon their ruling but because it appeared to him that it was permitted, he is liable)]; one who relies upon (the ruling of) beth-din is exempt.

Explore mesorat%20hashas for Horayot 1:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.