וְאִם־נֶ֙פֶשׁ֙ כִּ֣י תֶֽחֱטָ֔א וְעָֽשְׂתָ֗ה אַחַת֙ מִכָּל־מִצְוֺ֣ת יְהוָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֖ר לֹ֣א תֵעָשֶׂ֑ינָה וְלֹֽא־יָדַ֥ע וְאָשֵׁ֖ם וְנָשָׂ֥א עֲוֺנֽוֹ׃
И если кто-нибудь согрешит и сделает что-нибудь из того, что повелел Господь, не совершать, хотя он не знает этого, тем не менее он виновен и понесет беззаконие свое.
Jerusalem Talmud Berakhot
Friday night, if someone saw one star and did work (forbidden on the Sabbath), he is free from punishment. Two, he brings a trespass offering for a sin in doubt26The trespass offering described in Lev. 5:17–19 for somebody who without premeditation commits an act of which he later has doubts whether it was sinful or not. By the preceding statement, at the time when exactly two stars are visible it is impossible to know whether it is day or not. The sin offering for sins committed in error is described Lev. 4:27–35.. Three, he brings a sin offering. Saturday night, if someone saw one star and did (forbidden) work, he brings a sin offering. Two, he brings a trespass offering for a sin in doubt. Three, he is free from punishment.
Jerusalem Talmud Pesachim
Rebbi Jehudah came back and presented another argument: Leavened matter is forbidden as food and leftover68Sacrificial meat left over after the time allotted for its consumption, depending on the kind of sacrifice either day and night or two daytimes with the night in between. is forbidden as food. Since the latter is to be burned81Lev. 19:8., the former is to be burned. They told him, carcass meat disproves since it is forbidden as food and is not to be burned20Deut. 14:21.. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food and for usufruct and leftover is forbidden as food and for usufruct; carcass meat does not disprove since it is not forbidden for usufruct. They told him, the stoned ox34The Babli 24b explains that one might use fat from the stoned ox to cover a wound.
The ox was stoned by order of the court because it killed humans (Ex. 21:28–29). Its meat is forbidden for usufruct as explained in the sequel. Cf. Mekhilta dR.Ismael Mišpaṭim10 (p. 282). disproves which is forbidden as food and for usufruct82Since it says, its meat may not be eaten(Ex. 21:18) in the passive voice, according to everybody this implies prohibition of usufruct. and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation83Ex. 12:19., [and leftover is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation]84Lev. 19:8.; the stoned ox does not disprove since it does not make liable for extirpation. They told him, the fat85Lev. 7:25. of the stoned ox disproves which is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time, and leftover is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time; the fat of the stoned ox does not disprove since it does not depend on time. They told him, a suspended sacrifice86The sacrifice by a person who suspects that he inadvertently committed a deadly sin. He may not bring a purification sacrifice since that is possible only if there is proof of inadvertent sin; Lev. 5:17–19. following your opinion87In Mishnah Temurah 7:6 it is stated that Sages hold that the body of an animal dedicated as a hung sacrifice which was wrongly slaughtered has to be burned, but R. Jehudah requires that it be buried. does disprove since it is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time, [but is not to be burned]. Rebbi Jehudah remained silent88And practice does not follow him..
The ox was stoned by order of the court because it killed humans (Ex. 21:28–29). Its meat is forbidden for usufruct as explained in the sequel. Cf. Mekhilta dR.Ismael Mišpaṭim10 (p. 282). disproves which is forbidden as food and for usufruct82Since it says, its meat may not be eaten(Ex. 21:18) in the passive voice, according to everybody this implies prohibition of usufruct. and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation83Ex. 12:19., [and leftover is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation]84Lev. 19:8.; the stoned ox does not disprove since it does not make liable for extirpation. They told him, the fat85Lev. 7:25. of the stoned ox disproves which is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is not to be burned. He said to them, leavened matter is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time, and leftover is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time; the fat of the stoned ox does not disprove since it does not depend on time. They told him, a suspended sacrifice86The sacrifice by a person who suspects that he inadvertently committed a deadly sin. He may not bring a purification sacrifice since that is possible only if there is proof of inadvertent sin; Lev. 5:17–19. following your opinion87In Mishnah Temurah 7:6 it is stated that Sages hold that the body of an animal dedicated as a hung sacrifice which was wrongly slaughtered has to be burned, but R. Jehudah requires that it be buried. does disprove since it is forbidden as food, and for usufruct, and makes liable for extirpation, and is dependent on time, [but is not to be burned]. Rebbi Jehudah remained silent88And practice does not follow him..
Jerusalem Talmud Yevamot
MISHNAH: If somebody marries his sister-in-law but she turned out to have been pregnant and gave birth. If the child is alive, [the levir] has to divorce her and they must bring a sacrifice41His marriage to her is incestuous; she is forbidden to him as sister-in-law with children. The sacrifice is a purification sacrifice, חַטָּאת (Lev. 4). One has to assume that the marriage was entered into without any suspicion of pregnancy.. If the child is not alive, he may keep her. If it is doubtful whether [the child is] a nine-month child of the first [brother] or a seven-month of the second, he has to divorce her, the child is legitimate, and they are obligated to bring a reparation offering for an uncertain case42His marriage to her is possibly incestuous; he must divorce her. A child is either a bastard or not a bastard; legally no children exist that possibly are bastards. The reparation offering is the אָשָּׁם required if it is uncertain whether a sin was committed or not (Lev. 5:17–19)..