ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Horayos 5
HORAYOS 5 - Today's Daf has been dedicated by Rabbi Dr. Eli and Jeri Turkel,
of Ra'anana Israel, in honor of the births of the new grandchildren, Yisrael
Yehonatan (to Tamar and Netanel Casado) and Avigayil Zahava (to Limor and
(a) According to Rebbi Meir in our Mishnah, in a case where Beis-Din err
with regard to other sins, they bring a bull. If however, they err with
regard to Avodah-Zarah, they are obligated to bring a bull and a goat. Note,
that throughout the Sugya, whenever we speak about the obligation to bring
one bull, or a number of bulls for other sins, this automatically means,
one, or the equivalent number of, goats in the case of Avodah-Zarah.
(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah, if Beis-Din err with regard to most sins,
they bring twelve bulls; whereas if they err with regard to Avodah-Zarah,
they must bring twelve bulls and twelve goats.
(c) The basis of their Machlokes is - whether the onus to bring the Chatas
lies with Beis-Din (Rebbi Meir), or with the people (Rebbi Yehudah), and
each tribe, he holds, is called a Kahal.
(d) Where Rebbi Yehudah says twelve ... - Rebbi Shimon says thirteen,
because in his opinion, both each tribe and Beis-Din are obligated to bring
(a) According to Rebbi Meir, in a case where the majority of K'lal Yisrael
sinned following Beis-Din erroneous ruling, Beis-Din bring one bull.
According to ...
1. ... Rebbi Yehudah, in a case where one tribe sinned - then not only that
tribe, but even those tribes that did not sin must each bring one bull each.
(b) According to Rebbi Yehudah, if one tribe sinned following the erroneous
ruling of its own Beis-Din (of twenty-three) - it is obligated to bring one
2. ... Rebbi Shimon, in a case where seven tribes sinned - then they bring
eight bulls, one for each tribe that sinned and one for Beis-Din.
(c) The Chachamim learn from the Pasuk "ve'Im Kol Adas Yisrael Yishgu" -
that the Din of Shigegas Hora'ah only applies to Beis-Din ha'Gadol.
(d) This does not mean that no Korban is brought in this case - but that
each person brings the a regular Kisbah or Se'irah.
(a) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa learns from the Pasuk "ve'Nod'ah ha'Chatas
(Asher Chat'u Alehah, Ve'hikrivu)'' - that if Beis-Din become aware that
they erred, but are not sure whether the ruling that they issued concerned
Cheilev or Dam, they are Patur (because they have to know what their sin
was, and not just that they sinned).
(b) Rebbi Yehudah there learns from ...
1. ... "Asher Chat'u" - that if two tribes follow the Beis-Din ha'Gadol's
erroneous ruling, they must bring two bulls.
(c) Actually, even one tribe brings a bull, if it alone followed the ruling
of Beis-Din ha'Gadol. Nevertheless, he presents the case of two tribes that
sinned - to teach us that they must bring one bull for each tribe (and
cannot get away with one bull between them).
2. ... "Ve'hikrivu ha'Kahal" - that the remaining ten tribes that did not
din must each bring one, too.
(a) Rebbi Shimon learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Kahal" "Kahal"
("Ve'Hikrivu ha'Kahal" from "ve'Ne'elam me'Einei ha'Kahal") - that just as
the second Kahal (which is written earlier) requires the participation of
Beis-Din and the people, so too, must they bring separate Korbanos (as we
explained in our Mishnah).
(b) Rebbi Meir learns from the same 'Gezeirah-Shavah' that if seven tribes
followed Beis-Din's ruling, the latter bring only one bull - because he
Darshens "ve'Ne'elam *me'Einei ha'Kahal*" with reference to the error alone,
which pertains to the Beis-Din exclusively, and not to the Kahal).
(a) We initially presume that the Tana Kama of the current Beraisa
('Ve'nod'ah ha'Chatas') cannot be Rebbi Eliezer. Rebbi Eliezer (in another
Beraisa) rules that someone who knows that he ate either Cheilev or Nosar,
but is not sure which one - is Chayav a Chatas 'mi'Mah Nafshach'.
(b) Rav Ashi reconciles Rebbi Eliezer with the earlier Beraisa by citing the
Pasuk "Asher Chat'u Alehah", from which the Tana learns - that the Beis-Din
must know exactly which ruling they issued (a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' that is
confined to the Din of Shigegas Hora'ah, but not extend to a regular
(c) We counter this by citing the Pasuk "Asher Chata Bah" (in connection
with a regular connection) which has the same connotations. We refute this
Kashya however, on the grounds - that Rebbi Eliezer learns from there 'P'rat
le'Mis'asek' (that if someone meant to perform an act that is permitted, and
he inadvertently performed one that was forbidden, he is Patur).
(a) When, to explain Rebbi Yehudah's opinion, we refer to four times
"Kahal", we mean - the two times by Shigegas Hora'ah that the Torah writes
"ha'Kahal" (and which we Darshen "Kahal, ha'Kahal, Kahal ha'Kahal")
"me'Einei ha'Kahal" and "Ve'hikrivu ha'Kahal".
(b) The first of these comes to teach us that each tribe must bring a
Chatas, and the second, that it is the Beis-Din who must issue the ruling
and the Kahal who must act on it. The third "Kahal" comes to teach us
G'reirah - which means that each of the tribes that did not sin are also
obligated to bring a bull.
(c) From the fourth ''Kahal", Rebbi Yehudah learns - that each tribe is also
obligated to bring a Chatas if it sins following the erroneous ruling of its
(d) According to Rebbi Shimon, "me'Einei ha'Kahal" is not redundant, which
leaves him with only three times "Kahal". He too, agrees with Rebbi
Yehudah - in that each tribe is called 'Kahal' and is therefore obligated to
bring its own bull.
(a) From the other two 'Kahal's', Rebbi Shimon learns (with a
'Gezeirah-Shavah') - just as "me'Einei ha'Kahal" speaks about the Beis-Din
in conjunction with the tribes, so too, does "ve'Hikrivu ha'Kahal" (and that
Beis-Din is therefore obligated to bring a bull, too).
(b) Rebbi Meir learns the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' differently than Rebbi Shimon
(i.e. that just as "me'Einei ha'Kahal" speaks exclusively about the Beis-Din
[as we explained earlier], so too, does "ve'Hikrivu ha'Kahal" (and that
Beis-Din alone is therefore obligated to bring a bull). He only contends
with two of the 'Kahals and not three - because he does not Darshen "Kahal",
(c) Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar quoting Rebbi Meir Darshens from the Pasuk in
Sh'lach Lecha ...
1. ... "Ve'hayah Im me'Einei ha'Eidah" - that Beis-Din are obligated to
bring a bull even if only the minority of the Kahal sinned.
(d) He reconciles the two D'rashos - by establishing the first Pasuk when
seven tribes sinned, and the second Pasuk, when it was six.
2. ... "Ki le'Chol ha'Am bi'Shegagah" - that they only bring it if the
majority of K'lal Yisrael sinned.
(a) Abaye learns from the Pasuk "Ve'hayah Im me'Einei ha'Eidah Ne'es'sah
li'Shegagah" - that even according to Rebbi Shimon and Rebbi Meir, they only
bring a Chatas when the Kahal sin following Beis-Din's erroneous ruling.
(b) Rava learns it also from the Pasuk there "Ki le'Chol ha'Am bi'Shegagah",
which he needs to teach us - that the Din of Shigegas Hora'ah only applies
if the majority of Yisrael sin.
(c) And Abaye needs the Pasuk of "Ve'hayah . ... ", to teach us - that the
majority who sin do need to incorporate the Beis-Din themselves.
(d) Both these Pesukim are written in connection with Avodah-Zarah. Rebbi
Shimon and Rebbi Meir will apply all of this to Shigegas Hora'ah by other
Mitzvos - by means of the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "me'Einei" ("me'Einei ha'Kahal")
"me'Einei" ("Ve'hayah Im me'Einei he'Einei Ne'es'sah le'Shegagah").
(a) We ask whether, according to Rebbi Yehudah, if one tribe sins, each of
the other tribes are obligated to bring a Par as well. We think that maybe
Rebbi Yehudah only says it if a majority of tribes sin - in which case the
She'eilah extends to two, three, four, five or six tribes that sin, too.
(b) We try to resolve the She'eilah from a Beraisa, where the Tana Kama
obligates one bull, and Rebbi Shimon two. The Beraisa cannot be speaking
1. ... seven tribes that sinned - because then Rebbi Shimon would require
eight bulls, and not just two.
(c) So to resolve our She'eilah, we think the Beraisa must be speaking -
when one tribe sinned, and the Tana Kama is Rebbi Yehudah. So we see that
Rebbi Yehudah does not obligate the other tribes to bring a bull if less
than seven tribes sin.
2. ... one tribe that sinned following the erroneous ruling of its
Beis-Din - because then he would not require any bulls at all (as we just
(d) We refute the proof by establishing the Beraisa when six tribes
comprising the majority of Yisrael sinned - and the Tana Kama is Rebbi
Shimon ben Elazar.
(e) And Rebbi Shimon holds that each tribe must bring its own bull - only if
seven tribes comprising the majority of Yisrael sinned.
(a) We resolve our She'eilah from Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, who draws a
distinction between a tribe that sinned followed an erroneous ruling of its
own Beis-Din - obligating only that particular tribe to bring a bull, and
one that sinned following the erroneous ruling of Beis-Din ha'Gadol - where
he obligates each tribe to bring one.
(b) Rav Ashi support this from Rebbi Yehudah in our Mishnah, where (with
regard to one tribe following an erroneous ruling of its own Beis-Din) he
says 'Oso Sheivet Chayav, ve'Sha'ar Kol ha'Shevatim Peturim' - from the fact
that having said 'Oso Shevet Chayav', it would be unnecessary to add
've'Sha'ar Kol ha'Shevatim Peturim', unless it was to teach us the inference
that in the same case, but where Beis-Din ha'Gadol were the ones to have
erred, each tribe would indeed be obligated to bring its own bull.
(a) We ask whether, according to Rebbi Shimon, one tribe that sins is
obligated to bring a bull be'Shigegas Hora'ah (bearing in mind that he does,
after all hold, that one tribe is called 'Kahal'). Assuming that there are
not - they will be Patur from bringing anything (because 'Yachid she'Asah
be'Hora'as Beis-Din, Patur').
(b) We try to resolve the She'eilah citing the same Beraisa again, where the
Tana Kama obligates one bull, and Rebbi Shimon two, by establishing it when
one tribe sinned following the erroneous ruling of Beis-Din ha'Gadol. We are
forced to reject this explanation - because who would then be the Tana Kama,
seeing as Rabbi Meir requires the majority of Yisrael to sin, and Rebbi
Yehudah requires each tribe to bring its own bull.
(c) So we establish the Beraisa - when six tribes sinned, and the Tana Kama
is Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, as we explained above.
(d) We finally resolve the She'eilah from our Mishnah (with reference to
Rebbi Yehudah's ruling, obligating one tribe who sinned following its
Beis-Din's erroneous ruling) 'va'Chachamim Omrim Eino Chayav Ela al Hora'as
Beis-Din ha'Gadol'. The Chachamim must be Rebbi Shimon and not Rebbi Meir -
because Rebbi Meir requires the majority of Yisrael to sin.
(a) We try to prove from the Pasuk in Divrei Hayamim "Va'ya'amod Yehoshafat
bi'Kehal Yehudah vi'Yerushalayim ... " - that, one tribe is called 'Kahal'
(according to Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Shimon, and Rebbi Meir will not argue
(b) Rebbi Yochanan explains that "Lifnei Chatzer ha'Chadashah" in the same
Pasuk, refers to a new decree - namely, that a T'vul Yom (who had Toveled
from his Tum'ah, and was waiting for nightfall to become completely Tahor)
was forbidden to enter the Machaneh Leviyah.
(c) Rav Acha bar Ya'akov rejects the proof from there that one tribe is
called 'Kahal' on the grounds - that Yehudah incorporates Binyamin, so
perhaps it is only two tribes that are referred to as 'Kahal'.
(a) So Rav Acha bar Ya'akov proves it from the Pasuk "Hineni Mafrecha
Ve'hirbisicha u'Nesaticha li'Kehal Amim" - where Ya'akov is referring to
Binyamin (the only one of his sons still to be born at the time to which
this Pasuk refers) as 'Kahal'.
(b) Rav Sh'va asked Rav Kahana whether the Pasuk might not mean that when
Binyamin was born, then the twelve tribes, who were called 'Kahal' would be
complete. To which Rav Kahana replied - that it was impossible to say this,
since we just learned from the Pasuk in Vayechi that two tribes are
certainly called 'Kahal'.