Kapłańska 4:8 Odniesienia do Talmudu: Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot

⁸⁴Here starts the discussion of Mishnah 3. Would it not be reasonable that she should be permitted if she remarried with permission, forbidden if she remarried without permission? Rebbi Joḥanan said, the words of Rebbi Simeon [imply] that the court made their decision like intentional [relations between] man and woman⁸⁵Intentional adultery., if she remarried without permission⁸⁶The only case in which she could remarry without permission of the court is that two witnesses testified to the first husband’s death. Since two concurrent witnesses must be believed by biblical standards, her remarriage was an excusable error which can be atoned for by a purification sacrifice. like erroneous [relations between] man and woman. Rebbi Joḥanan said, there is no “free” here but “obligated”⁸⁷He holds that the woman acted in good faith in both cases and that, therefore, her adultery was unintentional in both cases and can be expiated by a purification sacrifice. This is the position of Ze‘iri in the Babli, 92a.. Rebbi Ḥaggai objected before Rebbi Yose: should it not be an act of instruction? When they instructed that it is permitted to sleep with an [otherwise] married woman⁸⁸Everybody knows that adultery is biblically prohibited and that it is not in the power of the court to permit it.. Is that not uprooting a principle⁸⁹It is agreed that if the supreme court instructs that a biblical commandment is invalidated, no individual has the right to follow that instruction; Horaiot 1:3 (fol. 46a), Babli 4a.? When they instructed that she is forbidden for five years, from then on permitted⁹⁰To declare the husband as dead after five years is within the competence of the court. If the wife remarried after five years, she was behaving correctly.. Then it should be so if she misbehaved! Misbehaving is like eating fat or blood. When they instructed that fat is permitted and [she ate] blood⁹¹“Any fat or blood” is forbidden to eat (Lev. 3:17). However, it is clear from the context that only fat is forbidden which may be burned on the altar (cf., e. g., Lev. 4:8). Therefore, a technical ruling is needed to define which fat of cattle, sheep, or goats qualifies as חלב. If the court rules that certain fat that was considered forbidden is now permitted, a lay person who follows their ruling is excused; the sin is the court’s. But if the layman uses the permission of fat to eat of the permitted fat when it still contains blood, he is guilty since the ruling never included permission to eat “unkoshered” fat. Similarly, a permission to remarry does not include permission of promiscuity whose prohibition has biblical roots that have nothing to do with adultery.
The Babli concurs, 92a..