⚠️ Mishnah Horayot 2

הוֹרָה כֹהֵן מָשִׁיחַ לְעַצְמוֹ, שׁוֹגֵג וְעָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג, מֵבִיא פָר. שׁוֹגֵג וְעָשָׂה מֵזִיד, מֵזִיד וְעָשָׂה שׁוֹגֵג, פָּטוּר, שֶׁהוֹרָאַת כֹּהֵן מָשִׁיחַ לְעַצְמוֹ, כְהוֹרָאַ�� בֵּית דִּין לַצִּבּוּר:

In a case where an anointed priest, i.e., the High Priest, issued an erroneous ruling for himself permitting performance of an action prohibited by Torah law, if he issued the ruling unwittingly and then unwittingly performed the transgression in accordance with his ruling, he is liable to bring a bull as a sin-offering for an unwitting transgression by the anointed priest. If he issued the ruling unwittingly, and performed the transgression intentionally, or if he issued the ruling intentionally and performed the transgression unwittingly, he is exempt from liability to bring any offering, as there is a principle: The legal status of the ruling of an anointed priest for himself is like that of the ruling of the court for the general public. Therefore, the High Priest is liable to bring the bull as a sin-offering for his unwitting transgression in a case when the court would be liable to bring the bull as a communal sin-offering for an unwitting transgression performed by the general public.

הוֹרָה בִפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְעָשָׂה בִפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ, מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ בִפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ. הוֹרָה עִם הַצִּבּוּר וְעָשָׂה עִם הַצִּבּוּר, מִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ עִם הַצִּבּוּר, שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין חַיָּבִים עַד שֶׁיּוֹרוּ לְבַטֵּל מִקְצָת וּלְקַיֵּם מִקְצָת, וְכֵן הַמָּשִׁיחַ. וְלֹא בַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, עַד שֶׁיּוֹרוּ לְבַטֵּל מִקְצָת וּלְקַיֵּם מִקְצָת:

If the anointed priest issued a ruling by himself and performed a transgression by himself, he achieves atonement by himself by bringing a bull as his sin-offering. If he issued a ruling with the general public, i.e., the Sanhedrin, and performed a transgression with the general public, i.e., the Jewish people, he achieves atonement with the general public. As, the court is not liable unless the judges issue a ruling to nullify part of a commandment and to sustain part of that commandment, and likewise with regard to the ruling of the anointed priest. And the court and the priest are not liable for a ruling with regard to idol worship unless they issue a ruling to nullify part of that commandment and to sustain part of it.

אֵין חַיָּבִין אֶלָּא עַל הֶעְלֵם דָּבָר עִם שִׁגְגַת הַמַּעֲשֶׂה, וְכֵן הַמָּשִׁיחַ. וְלֹא בַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אֵין חַיָּבִין אֶלָּא עַל הֶעְלֵם דָּבָר עִם שִׁגְגַת הַמַּעֲשֶׂה. אֵין בֵּית דִּין חַיָּבִין עַד שֶׁיּוֹרוּ בְדָבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת וְשִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת. וְכֵן הַמָּשִׁיחַ. וְלֹא בַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, עַד שֶׁיּוֹרוּ עַל דָּבָר שֶׁזְּדוֹנוֹ כָרֵת וְשִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת:

The court is liable only for absence of awareness of the matter, leading to an erroneous ruling, together with unwitting performance of the action by the general public on the basis of that ruling. And likewise, the anointed priest is liable only for an erroneous ruling and his unwitting performance of an action on the basis of that ruling. And the court and the priest are liable for a ruling with regard to idol worship only for absence of awareness of the matter, leading to an erroneous ruling, together with unwitting performance of the action on the basis of that ruling. The court is not liable to bring an offering for absence of awareness of the matter unless they issue a ruling with regard to a matter for whose intentional violation one is liable to receive karet and for whose unwitting violation one is liable to bring a sin-offering. And likewise the anointed priest is liable only for such a ruling. Neither is the court liable to bring a sin-offering for idol worship unless the judges issue a ruling with regard to a matter for whose intentional violation one is liable to receive karet, and for whose unwitting violation one is liable to bring a sin-offering.

אֵין חַיָּבִין עַל עֲשֵׂה וְעַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבַּמִּקְדָּשׁ, וְאֵין מְבִיאִין אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל עֲשֵׂה וְעַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבַּמִּקְדָּשׁ. אֲבָל חַיָּבִין עַל עֲשֵׂה וְעַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבַּנִּדָּה, וּמְבִיאִין אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל עֲשֵׂה וְעַל לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁבַּנִּדָּה. אֵיזוֹ הִיא מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁבַּנִּדָּה, פְּרֹשׁ מִן הַנִּדָּה. וּמִצְוַת לֹא תַעֲשֶׂה, לֹא תָבֹא אֶל הַנִּדָּה:

The court is not liable to bring a bull as an unwitting communal sin-offering for issuing a ruling with regard to a positive mitzva or a prohibition related to the defiling of the Temple by one being there while ritually impure, or the defiling of its sacrificial foods by one partaking of them while ritually impure. There is a positive mitzva to remove impure people from the Temple, and there is a prohibition against entering the Temple while in a state of ritual impurity. And one does not bring a provisional guilt-offering for a positive mitzva or a prohibition related to the defiling of the Temple or its sacrificial foods. But the court is liable to bring a bull for a positive mitzva or for a prohibition that is related to a menstruating woman, and one brings a provisional guilt-offering for a positive mitzva or for a prohibition that is related to a menstruating woman. What is the positive mitzva that is related to a menstruating woman? Distance yourself from the menstruating woman. If a man engages in intercourse with a woman and she begins menstruating, he is required to separate from her. And what is the prohibition? Do not engage in intercourse with a woman whom you know is a menstruating woman.

אֵין חַיָּבִין עַל שְׁמִיעַת הַקּוֹל, וְעַל בִּטּוּי שְׂפָתַיִם, וְעַל טֻמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו. וְהַנָּשִׂיא כַּיּוֹצֵא בָהֶם, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, הַנָּשִׂיא חַיָּב בְּכֻלָּן חוּץ מִשְּׁמִיעַת הַקּוֹל, שֶׁהַמֶּלֶךְ לֹא דָן וְלֹא דָנִין אוֹתוֹ, לֹא מֵעִיד וְלֹא מְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ:

The court is not liable for issuing a ruling with regard to hearing of a voice, i.e., a false oath of testimony taken by a witness who refuses to testify on behalf of a litigant who demands that he testify, or for an utterance of the lips, i.e., a false oath stated about some matter, or for the defiling of the Temple or its sacrificial foods. And the status of the king is like that of the court, and he is exempt from bringing an offering in those cases; this is the statement of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili. Rabbi Akiva says: The king is liable in all of those cases except for the case of hearing of a voice, and even in that case, his exemption is not intrinsic to the mitzva. Rather, it is for technical reasons, as the king neither judges others nor do others judge him; he does not testify nor do others testify against him. Therefore, a demand that he testify is not applicable.

כָּל הַמִּצְוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה שֶׁחַיָּבִין עַל זְדוֹנָן כָּרֵת וְעַל שִׁגְגָתָן חַטָּאת, הַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא כִשְׂבָּה וּשְׂעִירָה, וְהַנָּשִׂיא שָׂעִיר, וּמָשִׁיחַ וּבֵית דִּין מְבִיאִין פָּר. וּבַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, הַיָּחִיד וְהַנָּשִׂיא וְהַמָּשִׁיחַ מְבִיאִין שְׂעִירָה, וּבֵית דִּין פַּר וְשָׂעִיר, פַּר לְעוֹלָה וְשָׂעִיר לְחַטָּאת:

In summation: For all mitzvot that are in the Torah for whose intentional violation one is liable to receive karet and for whose unwitting violation one is liable to bring a sin-offering, the individual brings a ewe or female goat for their unwitting transgression, and the king brings a male goat for their unwitting transgression, and an anointed priest and a court who issued an erroneous ruling bring a bull. And for unwittingly engaging in idol worship, the individual, and the king, and the anointed priest bring a female goat, and the court brings a bull and a goat: A bull for a burnt-offering and a goat for a sin-offering.

אָשָׁם תָּלוּי, הַיָּחִיד וְהַנָּשִׂיא חַיָּבִין, וּמָשִׁיחַ וּבֵית דִּין פְּטוּרִים. אָשָׁם וַדַּאי, הַיָּחִיד וְהַנָּשִׂיא וְהַמָּשִׁיחַ חַיָּבִין, וּבֵית דִּין פְּטוּרִין. עַל שְׁמִיעַת הַקּוֹל וְעַל בִּטּוּי שְׂפָתַיִם וְעַל טֻמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, בֵּית דִּין פְּטוּרִין, וְהַיָּחִיד וְהַנָּשִׂיא וְהַמָּשִׁיחַ חַיָּבִין, אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵין כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל חַיָּב עַל טֻמְאַת מִקְדָּשׁ וְקָדָשָׁיו, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וּמָה הֵן מְבִיאִין, קָרְבָּן עוֹלֶה וְיוֹרֵד. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר, הַנָּשִׂיא מֵבִיא שָׂעִיר:

With regard to a provisional guilt-offering, the individual and the king are liable, and an anointed priest and a court are exempt. With regard to a definite guilt-offering, the individual, the king, and the anointed priest are liable, and a court is exempt. For hearing of a voice, i.e., a false oath of testimony, and for a false oath on an utterance of the lips, and for the defiling of the Temple or its sacrificial foods, a court is exempt, and the individual, the king, and the anointed priest are liable. But an anointed High Priest is not liable for the defiling of the Temple or its sacrificial foods; this is the statement of Rabbi Shimon. And what offering are they liable to bring? It is a sliding-scale offering based on their financial circumstances, as delineated in the Torah (see Leviticus 5:1–13). Rabbi Elazar says: The king brings a goat.