משנה: הוֹרוּ בֵית דִּין שׁוֹגְגִין וְעָשׂוּ כָל הַקָּהָל שׁוֹגְגִין מְבִיאִין פָּר. מְזִידִין וְעָשׂוּ שׁוֹגְגִין מְבִיאִין כִּשְׂבָּה אוֹ שְׂעִירָה. שׁוֹגְגִין וְעָשׂוּ מְזִידִין הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ פְטוּרִין׃ MISHNAH: If the Court ruled in error and the public acted in error, they have to bring a bull; intentionally but they acted in error, they bring a female sheep or goat; in error but they acted intentionally, they are not liable128All purification sacrifices have a stated prerequisite, viz., that the sin to be expiated was committed unintentionally (Leviticus.4.2">Lev. 4:2,Leviticus.4.13">13,Leviticus.4.22">22,Leviticus.4.27">27). If both Court and public acted in error, the conditions for a sacrifice by the Court are satisfied. If the Court intentionally gave a false ruling, their sin cannot be atoned by a sacrifice; the public are forced to bring individual sacrifices. If the Court ruled in error but the public, although realizing the error, intentionally followed the false ruling, the Court cannot bring a sacrifice since the public did not follow their intent, and the public is barred from any sacrifice since they did not act in error..
הלכה: הוֹרוּ בֵית דִּין שׁוֹגְגִין כול׳. לֵית הָדָא פְלִיגָא עַל רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. דָּמַר רִבִּי אִמִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. מַתְנִיתָא כְּגוֹן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן עַזַּאי יוֹשֵׁב לִפְנֵיהֶן. וּמְזִידִין וְעָשׂוּ שׁוֹגְגִין. וְכִי יֵשׁ זָדוֹן לִשְׁגָגָה לְיָחִיד אֶצֶל הוֹרָייַת בֵּית דִּין. חֲבֵרַייָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. בְּשֶׁלֹּא קִיבְּלוּ רוֹב הַצִּיבּוּר עֲלֵיהֶן. רִבִּי זְעִירָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. בְּשֶׁבָּעֲטוּ בְהוֹרָייָתָן. מַה מַפְקָה מִבֵּינֵיהוֹן. קִיבְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן וְחָֽזְרוּ וּבָעֲטוּ. עַל דַּעְתּוֹן דַּחֲבֵרַייָא כֵּיוָן שֶׁבָּעֲטוּ פְטוּרִין. עַל דַּעְתֵּיהּ דְּרִבִּי זְעִירָא מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁקִּיבְּלוּ עֲלֵיהֶן מִשָּׁעָה רִאשׁוֹנָה הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ חַייָבִין. HALAKHAH: “If the Court ruled in error,” etc. Does this not disagree with Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish? Since Rebbi Immi said in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: Our Mishnah, for example, if Simeon ben Azzai40The paradigm of the know-all; he was ready to answer any question about religious law on the spot. The Babli knows of a number of famous rabbis who tried to imitate him but quickly were confronted with a question they could not answer. He never was ordained; therefore he could not have been part of the Court, but as an outsider he could have pointed out the Court’s error. was sitting before them129He would immediately have pointed out the error; then one would be back at the situation of Mishnah 4; the case of Mishnah 5 never could arise.. “Intentionally but they acted in error.” Is there intentional misdeed or error with respect of an instruction by the Court130It already was stated in Horayot 1:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Horayot.1.1.1">Mishnah 1 that a person acting upon the instructions of the Court is never liable for a purification offering, irrespective of the quality of the Court’s ruling. Why should the individual be held liable?? The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: If not most of the public accepted it131Then the main condition for a sacrifice of the Court is not fulfilled; automatically there is no valid ruling of the Court, only actions of individuals.. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish, if they rebelled against their instruction132A High Court without authority is no High Court; it cannot claim to be the subject of Leviticus.4.13">Lev. 4:13.. What is the difference between them? If they first accepted and then rebelled. In the opinions of the colleagues, since they rebelled, they are not liable133Since at the moment a sacrifice would be due the conditions are not met, the Court is no longer liable.. In the opinion of Rebbi Zeˋira, since at the first moment they accepted it, those are liable134Since the authority of the Court is acknowledged, a later rejection does not change the fact of the Court’s false ruling, and the Court is liable..