Il n'y a aucune responsabilité (pour une offrande pour le péché) pour un commandement positif et un commandement négatif dans le sanctuaire. [Si Beth-Din a régné et s'est trompé dans la tumah du sanctuaire et de ses saintes choses, ils ne sont pas responsables d'une offrande de la congrégation. ("pour un commandement positif"): comme quand on devenait tamei dans le sanctuaire, étant une mitsva pour lui de partir par le court chemin, et il s'attardait et partait par le long chemin, il encourt des kareth. Et si Beth-Din lui a ordonné de partir par le long chemin, ils ne sont pas responsables d'une offrande, car il n'y a pas de sacrifice pour le péché pour cette inconscience; c'est-à-dire que si un individu a transgressé cela involontairement et laissé par le long chemin, il n'est pas responsable d'une offrande pour le péché mais d'une offrande à échelle variable. ("et un commandement négatif" :) de ne pas entrer dans le sanctuaire dans un état de tumah.] Et une offrande de culpabilité suspendue n'est pas apportée pour un commandement positif et un commandement négatif dans le sanctuaire. [Car, tout ce dont la transgression involontaire nécessite une offrande pour le péché fixe, requiert pour son inconscience une offrande dorée suspendue et une impureté du sanctuaire, puisque sa transgression involontaire ne nécessite pas un sacrifice pour le péché, son inconscience ne nécessite pas une offrande de culpabilité suspendue .] Mais il y a une responsabilité pour un commandement positif et un commandement négatif dans niddah [("pour un commandement positif" :) Si un homme vivait avec une femme pure, et qu'elle lui disait: "Je suis devenu impur", maintenant à le temps de la cohabitation, c'est une mitsva pour lui de se séparer. Mais il ne doit pas se séparer immédiatement, car une telle séparation lui est aussi agréable que la cohabitation. Mais "il enfonce ses ongles dans le sol" et attend que l'organe soit "mort" et se sépare sans dureté. C'est le "commandement positif" de niddah. Et si Beth-din s'est trompé dans cette décision et a décidé qu'il se séparait immédiatement, ils sont tenus d'apporter un taureau d'oubli, parce qu'un individu est tenu d'apporter une offrande pour le péché par inadvertance.] Quel est le commandement positif de niddah? Séparé de la niddah. Et quel est le commandement négatif? Ne cohabitez pas avec un niddah.
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
[The court] is not obligated [to bring a sacrifice] for the transgression of a positive or a negative commandment relating to the Temple – A beit din that issued a ruling and erred regarding impurity in the Temple and of its contents is not obligated to bring a communal offering.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
Introduction
Mishnah four discusses errant rulings with regard to Temple-related laws and compares them with errant rulings made in connection to a menstruating woman (a menstruant).
The mishnah also discusses a sacrifice known as the “asham talui” or the “hanging guilt offering”. The “asham talui” is brought by a person who may or may not have accidentally transgressed a prohibition, the punishment for which is kareth, if transgressed intentionally, and a sin offering if transgressed unwittingly. For instance if a person has two pieces of animal fat in front of him, one is permitted fat and the other is forbidden fat (helev) and he eats one but he doesn’t know which he ate, he brings an asham talui.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
For the transgression of a positive commandment – I.e. one who became impure while in the Temple and who is thus commanded to leave by the shortest route. If he left by a longer route, he is punished with “karet.” The beit din that ruled that he should leave by the longer route is not obligated to bring a sacrifice because on an error regarding this law one does not bring a sin-offering, i.e., an individual who erred in this commandment and left by a longer route needs to bring a sliding scale sacrifice and not a sin-offering.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
[The court] is not obligated [to bring a sacrifice] for the transgression of a positive or a negative commandment relating to the Temple; Nor [does anyone] bring an asham talui for the transgression of a positive or a negative commandment relating to the Temple. But they are liable for the transgression of a positive or a negative commandment relating to the menstruant; And [individuals] bring an asham talui for the transgression of a positive or negative commandment relating to the menstruant. Which is the positive commandment relating to the menstruant? Separate yourself from the menstruant. An impure person is not allowed to enter the Temple precincts and if he becomes impure while in the Temple, he must leave immediately. If the court issued an errant ruling with regard to this law, and an impure person followed their ruling, the court is not liable to bring a sin offering. This is true both for positive and negative commandments. A positive commandment is that if a person should become impure while in the Temple he must leave in the quickest, most direct manner possible. If the court ruled that he can take a longer route, and he does so, the court is not obligated to bring a sin offering. A negative commandment is that an impure person in not allowed to enter the Temple. If the court ruled that he may, they are not liable to bring a sin offering. This is because the impurity laws of the Temple are atoned for by sliding scale sacrifices and not by sin offerings (see Shevuoth 2:3). As we learned above, the court is obligated for errant rulings only if the sin was atoned for by a sin offering. This exact same rule applies to the laws regarding an asham talui. A person brings an asham talui (explained above in the intro) only if the sin was usually atoned for by a sin offering, and not, as in this case, by a sliding scale sacrifice.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
For the transgression of a negative commandment – That he should not enter the Temple while he is impure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
And the negative commandment? Do not have sexual relations with the menstruant. In contrast to the previous section, where the court was not held liable for their errant ruling, if they make an errant ruling with regard to a menstruant the court is liable, since transgressions of the prohibition of sexual relations with a menstruant are punishable by kareth (if done intentionally) and a sin offering (if done unwittingly). Similarly, one brings an asham talui for the transgression of positive and negative commandments involving a menstruant (such as a case where he does not know if he had relations with his wife while she was menstruating). The positive commandment with regard to a menstruant is that if a man is having sexual intercourse with his wife and she, in the middle of intercourse, tells him that she has become impure (she has begun to menstruate), he must not separate from her immediately, since his withdrawal is pleasurable (for further details see Shevuoth 2:4). Rather he must stop and wait until he loses an erection and only then withdraw. This waiting period is seen as a positive commandment. The negative commandment is the prohibition of having sexual relations with a menstruant.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
Nor [does anyone] bring an asham talui, etc. – For every commandment transgressed in error one is obligated to bring a sin-offering and an asham talui must be brought if he is in doubt whether or not he transgressed. Because transgressing in error the commandment regarding impurity in the Temple does not require a sin-offering, if it there is doubt whether he sinned he does not bring an asham talui.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Horayot
Questions for Further Thought: • Why does the mishnah compare the laws of Temple related impurity with those of having relations with a menstruant? Why doesn’t the mishnah use other prohibitions punishable by kareth and a sin offering as points of reference?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Horayot
For the transgression of a positive commandment relating to the menstruant – He was having relations with her when she was clean and in the midst of relations she tells him that she has become impure, the commandment is for him to withdraw. But he may not withdraw immediately because withdrawing is just as pleasurable as intercourse. Rather, he should dig his toenails in the ground and wait without moving until he loses his erection and then he should withdraw. And this is the positive commandment for the menstruant. If the beit din ruled erroneously that he should withdraw immediately, it is obligated to bring a bull for an error-in-judgment sacrifice, since the individual is obligated to bring a sin-offering for his error.
