וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר יְהוָ֖ה אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר׃
E falou יהוה a Moshe, dizendo:
Jerusalem Talmud Horayot
MISHNAH: If the Anointed Priest1This is the expression used in Lev.4:1–12 for the High Priest. Since the verse refers here to “the Anointed Priest” while in Lev. 21:10 he is called “the High Priest”, it is inferred (Mishnah 3:4, Megillah 1:9) that High Priests of the Second Temple who were not anointed were not entitled to this ceremony. The Anointed has to confess his sin while leaning with his hands on the bull’s head. The remainder of the ceremony, as also that of the Court’s bull, may be performed by a common priest. Sifra Wayyiqra 2 Parashah 3(6). ruled for himself in error and acted in error, he brings a bull2As described in Lev. 4:1–12, his private purification offering.. If in error but he acted intentionally, or intentionally and he acted in error, he is not liable3He cannot bring a purification offering unless it was an unintentional act. If he ruled wrongly but then did not act on his ruling because he did not trust his judgment, no sacrifice is due or possible. since the ruling of the Anointed Priest for himself is like the ruling of the Court for the public.
Jerusalem Talmud Horayot
22Here one returns to a discussion of the theme of the Tractate, viz., the obligation of the High Court, as representatives of the people, to offer a purification sacrifice for a wrong ruling as described in Lev. 4:13–21.
It is sinful to bring an animal into the Temple precinct which is not dedicated as a sacrifice. For voluntary offerings this presents no problem; one simply has to dedicate them when bringing. But for obligatory offerings it implies that a sacrifice may be presented only if all conditions which make it obligatory are actually fulfilled. They only are liable23To bring the sacrifice. for something24An official ruling by the Court. that was clear to them and then covered from them25They forgot either a precedent or their own ruling.. What is the reason? something was hidden26Lev. 4:13. An erring High Priest (Lev. 4:1–12) or ruler (22–26) have to offer a sacrifice if they err inadvertently; the condition that a ruling must have been forgotten is introduced only for the Court., something that was clear to them and then hidden from them. 27There is no problem with the explanation just given. One tries to connect the statement with a discussion about similar rules regarding sacrifices due for violations of either Temple purity or oaths (Lev. 5:1–13), where the same condition in mentioned in Lev. 5:2,3,4. R. Ismael and R. Aqiba differ in Ševuot 1:2 about the interpretation of the verses, but not about the actual rules. In the opinion of Rebbi Ismael who said, it became hidden from him, therefore he had known, and he knew28Lev. 5:4: …an oath which a man would utter without thinking, it became hidden from him, and he knew and realized his guilt …, these are two knowledges29One when he uttered the oath and one when he remembered it, separated by a period of oblivion.. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba who said, it became hidden, it became hidden, two times30R. Aqiba and R. Ismael actually are not differing in their interpretations; only R. Aqiba argues about violations of Temple purity (Lev. 5:2–3) where in both verses oblivion is mentioned but not remembering. However, in Babylonian sources [Ševuot 14b, Keritut 19a, Sifra Wayyiqra 2, Pereq 12(7)], R. Ismael is reported to read one about oblivion the impurity and the second oblivion about being in the Temple., therefore he had knowledge at the beginning and knowledge at the end and oblivion in between, 31Returning to our topic, Note 22. something that was clear to them and then hidden from them.
It is sinful to bring an animal into the Temple precinct which is not dedicated as a sacrifice. For voluntary offerings this presents no problem; one simply has to dedicate them when bringing. But for obligatory offerings it implies that a sacrifice may be presented only if all conditions which make it obligatory are actually fulfilled. They only are liable23To bring the sacrifice. for something24An official ruling by the Court. that was clear to them and then covered from them25They forgot either a precedent or their own ruling.. What is the reason? something was hidden26Lev. 4:13. An erring High Priest (Lev. 4:1–12) or ruler (22–26) have to offer a sacrifice if they err inadvertently; the condition that a ruling must have been forgotten is introduced only for the Court., something that was clear to them and then hidden from them. 27There is no problem with the explanation just given. One tries to connect the statement with a discussion about similar rules regarding sacrifices due for violations of either Temple purity or oaths (Lev. 5:1–13), where the same condition in mentioned in Lev. 5:2,3,4. R. Ismael and R. Aqiba differ in Ševuot 1:2 about the interpretation of the verses, but not about the actual rules. In the opinion of Rebbi Ismael who said, it became hidden from him, therefore he had known, and he knew28Lev. 5:4: …an oath which a man would utter without thinking, it became hidden from him, and he knew and realized his guilt …, these are two knowledges29One when he uttered the oath and one when he remembered it, separated by a period of oblivion.. In the opinion of Rebbi Aqiba who said, it became hidden, it became hidden, two times30R. Aqiba and R. Ismael actually are not differing in their interpretations; only R. Aqiba argues about violations of Temple purity (Lev. 5:2–3) where in both verses oblivion is mentioned but not remembering. However, in Babylonian sources [Ševuot 14b, Keritut 19a, Sifra Wayyiqra 2, Pereq 12(7)], R. Ismael is reported to read one about oblivion the impurity and the second oblivion about being in the Temple., therefore he had knowledge at the beginning and knowledge at the end and oblivion in between, 31Returning to our topic, Note 22. something that was clear to them and then hidden from them.
Jerusalem Talmud Horayot
MISHNAH: Anything which is more frequent than another precedes the other203Anything which is done more frequently is executed before anything less frequent is done. The statement of the Mishnah is repeated in Zebahim 10:1, where the implications for the Temple service are detailed. For example, if New Year’s Day falls on a Sabbath, the first sacrifices are the daily offerings (offered 365 days a year), followed by the Sabbath sacrifice (52 times), then the New Moon sacrifice (12 times), and last the New Year’s Day sacrifice (1). Synagogue practice imitates this rule.. Anything more holy than another precedes the other204For example, if a person brings animals for a purification sacrifice, an elevation sacrifice, and a well-being sacrifice to the Temple, they have to be offered in this order (Mishnah Zebahim 10:2).. If the bull of the Anointed and the bull of the community are standing, the Anointed’s bull precedes the community’s bull in all its ceremonies205The rules for the Court’s (the community’s) purification sacrifice (Lev. 4:13–21) are dependent on the Anointed’s sacrifice (Lev. 4:1–12). If they are offered simultaneously then the Anointed’s has precedence..
The man precedes the woman to be kept alive206This usually is interpreted to mean that if a man and a woman are simultaneously in mortal danger, the man has to be saved first. But it also could mean that if a man and a woman are looking for a livelihood, the man has to be considered first. and to regain his lost property207Cf. Mishnah Bava Mesiaˋ 2:13.. But the woman precedes the man for clothing208A poor man will not be hurt by appearing in rags. A woman cannot possibly be seen in rags. and to be freed from captivity209A woman is more likely to be raped in captivity than a man.. At a time when both are used for immorality210If they are forced into prostitution, the man is in addition forced into homosexuality., the man precedes the woman.
The man precedes the woman to be kept alive206This usually is interpreted to mean that if a man and a woman are simultaneously in mortal danger, the man has to be saved first. But it also could mean that if a man and a woman are looking for a livelihood, the man has to be considered first. and to regain his lost property207Cf. Mishnah Bava Mesiaˋ 2:13.. But the woman precedes the man for clothing208A poor man will not be hurt by appearing in rags. A woman cannot possibly be seen in rags. and to be freed from captivity209A woman is more likely to be raped in captivity than a man.. At a time when both are used for immorality210If they are forced into prostitution, the man is in addition forced into homosexuality., the man precedes the woman.