Nie ponoszą odpowiedzialności, chyba że nastąpiło zapomnienie o tej rzeczy i nieświadomość w działaniu [tj. Jeśli bet-din rządził (niesłusznie) zborem w jednej ze wszystkich micwot, nie są oni odpowiedzialni za cielca zapomnienia zboru, chyba że zapominamy o rzeczy (to znaczy, jeśli ich orzeczenie było błędne i halacha uciekła im), wraz z nieświadomością w działaniu, tj. jeśli większość zboru popełniła błąd i przekroczyła swoje orzeczenie, zostało to zapisane (Kapłańska 4: 13): „A jeśli całe zgromadzenie Izraela zbłądzi i wszystko zostanie ukryte” —nieświadomość w działaniu i zapomnienie rzeczy (halacha)]. I tak z namaszczonym kapłanem. [On nie jest odpowiedzialny za ofiarę, chyba że uciekł mu hałas. I nie ponoszą odpowiedzialności, dopóki nie nastąpi zapomnienie o tej rzeczy wraz z nieświadomością w działaniu [jak w przypadku wszystkich innych micwot; bo bałwochwalstwo wywodzimy z innych micwot poprzez tożsamość „oczami”— „na oczy”, jak napisano powyżej]. Bet-din nie ponosi odpowiedzialności, chyba że rządzi (niewłaściwie) nad rzeczą, której przewinienie dowcipne podlega karze Kareth i której nieświadome przestępstwo wymaga ofiary za grzech (z wyjątkiem pięciu z nich, których nieświadomie przestępstwo nie wymaga ofiary za grzech: obrzezania i ofiary Pesach —Ponieważ są to przykazania pozytywne, mimo że ich przewinienie dowcipne podlega karze kareth, ich nieświadome przestępstwo nie wymaga ofiary za grzech, w odniesieniu do której jest napisane (Księga Kapłańska 4:13) „jedna ze wszystkich micw Tory, która nie są do zrobienia ”; i bluźnierstwo, ponieważ nie wiąże się z czynem, a Pismo Święte pisze o ofierze za grzech (Lb 15:29): „dla tego, kto działa nieświadomie”—z wyłączeniem bluźnierstwa, gdzie nie ma czynu. Aby zbezcześcić świątynię i jej święte rzeczy, mimowolny występek wymaga (nie ofiary za grzech, ale) ofiary o zmiennej skali, jak wspomniano w Księdze Kapłańskiej. Z tego powodu bet-din i namaszczony kapłan nie składają ofiary za grzech za nieumyślne przestępstwo. Znajdujemy więc wszystkie micwoty, za które bet-din i namaszczony kapłan składają ofiarę w łącznej liczbie trzydziestu jeden, których wykroczenie podlega karze kareth, a nieświadome przestępstwo wymaga stałej ofiary za grzech]. namaszczony kapłan. I nie są odpowiedzialni za bałwochwalstwo (składanie ofiary), dopóki nie rządzą czymś, czego przewinienie dowcipne podlega karze kareth, a którego nieświadome przestępstwo wymaga ofiary za grzech.
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.
