Вайикра 6:10 Связанные отрывки

¹³This is from Horaiot 3:2, Notes 40–45, and part of a longer disquisition (Notes 36–45). The quote here starts in the middle and, therefore, is not very intelligible. But in Horaiot the text is complete and completely intelligible. One ate five times the volume of an olive; he separately realized a doubt about each one. Afterwards it became known to him as a certainty. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the knowledge about his doubt determines his kind of sacrifices. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the knowledge about his doubt does not determine his kind of sacrifices. Rebbi Yose bar Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agrees that for the Anointed Priest the knowledge about his doubt does not determine his kind of purification sacrifice. What is the reason? Like purification offering, like reparation offering¹⁴Lev. 7:7.. The knowledge about his doubt determines the transgression for one who brings a suspended reparation offering. The knowledge about his doubt does not determine the transgression for one who does not bring a suspended reparation offering.

One ate five times the volume of an olive; he separately realized a doubt about each one. Afterwards it became known to him (in court) [as a certainty.⁴⁰The text in parentheses is from L, the one in brackets from B. Since the testimony as to the occurrence of a sinful act by a single witness in court is sufficient to obligate the perpetrator for a sacrifice (even though a single witness is not admissible in any criminal procedure and may be contradicted by an oath in civil proceedings) the text in parentheses has to be preferred as lectio difficilior while the meaning for the English reader is more easily understood from the text of B.] Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, the knowledge about his doubt determines his kind of transgression. Rebbi Joḥanan said, the knowledge about his doubt does not determine his kind of transgression⁴¹The problem discussed here has no direct connection with change of status; it applies as well to a commoner who progressively becomes aware of multiple transgressions of the same kind; Ševuot2:1 (33d l. 10) Babli Keritut 18b, Ševuot19b. The Babli finds here a tannaitic controversy. It was stated that the awareness of a transgression determines the obligation of a purification sacrifice, but the obligation of a suspended reparation sacrifice may cover separate incidents. The question then arises what are the obligations if the doubts about a single suspended reparation sacrifice are resolved on different occasions? (In the Babli, R. Simeon ben Laqish’s opinion is attributed to Rebbi, that of R. Johanan to Rebbi’s teachers R. Yose ben R. Jehudah and R. Eleazar ben R. Simeon.)
In the example, the doubt is whether he ate permitted or prohibited fat.. Rebbi Yose bar Abun in the name of Rebbi Samuel bar Rav Isaac: Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish agrees that for the Anointed Priest the knowledge about his doubt does not determine his kind of transgression⁴²The paragraph is referred to in Ševuot2:1.
Since the Anointed Priest is barred from bringing a reparation sacrifice, the knowledge of the doubt has no influence on his status.. What is the reason? Like purification offering, like reparation offering⁴³Lev. 7:7. The verse appears in a different context, i. e., that the technicalities of purification and reparation sacrifices are identical [Sifra Ṣaw Pereq 9(1)]. In Maimonides’s opinion, the quote here is an allusion, not a proof.. The knowledge about his doubt determines his kind of transgression for one who brings a suspended reparation offering. The knowledge about his doubt does not determine his kind of transgression for one who does not bring a suspended reparation offering.