(Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material
as long as this header and the footer at the end are included.)


Prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman
of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld

Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

Horayos 8

HORAYOS 8 (4 Sivan) - Dedicated by Rabbi Kornfeld's father, Mr. David Kornfeld, in memory of the members of his family who perished at the hands of the Nazi murderers in the Holocaust and whose Yahrzeit is observed today: his mother (Mirel bas Yakov Mordechai), brothers (Shraga Feivel, Aryeh Leib and Yisachar Dov, sons of Mordechai), grandfather (Reb Yakov Mordechai ben Reb David [Shpira]) and aunt (Charne bas Yakov Mordechai [wife of Reb Moshe Aryeh Cohen]).


(a) (Beraisa): All agree that he does not bring an Asham Taluy.
(b) Question: What is the source of this?
(c) Answer - part 1 (for Rebbi): "The Kohen will atone for Shigegaso (his mistake) Asher Shagag" - this applies to one who brings a Korban *only* on account of Shegagah (without Hora'ah), not to a Mashu'ach (for Mitzvos other than idolatry, he brings a Korban for Hora'ah with Shegagah).
1. Question: The verse does not say that his Korban is *always* due to Shegagah!
2. Answer: Indeed, it does - it could have said just "for Shigegaso";
i. It adds "Asher Shagag" to teach that his sin is always due to Shegagah.
(d) Answer - part 2 (for Chachamim): The verse discusses one whose brings a Korban for Shogeg (without Hora'ah), not to a Mashu'ach (who is never liable for Shogeg without Hora'ah).
(a) (Mishnah): Beis Din is liable only for (permitting) Chayavei Kerisus for which a Chatas is brought (if one was Shogeg); the same applies to a Mashu'ach;
(b) They are liable for idolatry only for something punishable by Kares/Chatas (for Mezid/Shogeg).
(c) (Gemara) Question: What is the source of this (regarding Mitzvos other than idolatry)?
(d) Answer #1 (Beraisa - Rebbi): We learn a Gezerah Shavah "Aleha-Aleha" from incest with one's wife's sister, which is punishable by Kares/Chatas.
1. Question: This is the source for Beis Din; what is the source regarding a Mashu'ach?
2. Answer: "L'Ashmas ha'Am" - a Mashu'ach is like the Tzibur.
i. We learn that this applies to a Nasi from a Gezerah Shavah "Mitzvos-Mitzvos".
ii. The same applies to a commoner - "*And* if a soul" teaches, the law of a commoner is like the previous law (of a Nasi).
(e) (Mishnah): They are liable for idolatry only...
(f) Question: What is the source regarding idolatry?
(g) Answer (Beraisa): Idolatry was written separately to teach that a different Korban is brought;
1. Suggestion: Perhaps they are liable even for something not punishable by Kares/Chatas?
2. Rejection: We learn a Gezerah Shavah "me'Einei-me'Einei" from other Mitzvos. Just as by other Mitzvos, they are liable only for Chayavei Kerisus/Chatas, also by idolatry.
(h) Question: This is the source for Beis Din;
1. What is the source for a commoner, Nasi or a Mashu'ach?
(i) Answer: "And if *one soul*" - this includes a commoner, Nasi and a Mashu'ach;
1. The 'Vov' ("*And*") teaches that the law of the previous Parsha (of Beis Din) applies.
(j) Question: Rebbi's starting point to learn all these laws was Beis Din, which was learned from a Gezerah Shavah 'Alehah-Alehah';
1. Chachamim say that "Aleha" teaches about relatives and their co-wives that fall to Yibum - how do they learn all these laws?
(k) Answer (and Answer #2 to Question (c)): They learn like R. Yehoshua ben Levi.
1. (R. Yehoshua be Levi): Regarding idolatry, it says "There will be one Torah (law) for you, for one who sins bi'Shgagah, and for Mezid" - the entire Torah is equated to idolatry:
i. Just as idolatry is Chayavei Kerisus/Chatas, also by other Mitzvos, one brings a Chatas only for such transgressions.
2. The verses before and after this discuss a "Nefesh", so this teaches about every individual, i.e. a commoner, Nasi or Mashu'ach, both by idolatry and other Mitzvos.
(l) Question: What is the source regarding the Tzibur?
(m) Answer: The Torah discusses the Tzibur right before an individual, we learn the law of the Tzibur from that of an individual.
(n) Question: Rebbi learned from "Alehah-Alehah" - how does he expound R. Yehoshua ben Levi's verse?
(o) Answer: He expounds like the following Beraisa.
1. (Beraisa): The Torah distinguishes between a majority (of a city that served idolatry b'Mezid) and a minority - a majority (Ir ha'Nidachas) is killed by the sword, and their money (and the whole city) is destroyed; a minority is killed by stoning, and their money goes to their heirs;
2. Suggestion: Perhaps we distinguish between a majority that serves idolatry b'Shogeg and a minority!
3. Rejection: "There will be one law to you...."
(p) Objection (Rav Chilkiyah of Hegronya): If not for this verse, they would have brought a different Korban - which would they bring?! (It should be different than all other Korbanos, just as Par He'elam Davar for idolatry is different than all other Korbanos - on the other hand, we should not innovate a new Korban by ourselves, it should be a Korban brought for something else!)
1. It cannot be a Par - (this is not different,) the Tzibur brings Parim for other Mitzvos!
2. It cannot be a Par for an Olah and a Sa'ir for a Chatas - the Tzibur brings this for idolatry!
3. It cannot be a Sa'ir - a Nasi brings this for other Mitzvos!
4. It cannot be a Se'irah - an individual brings this for idolatry!
(q) Answer #1: One might have thought that they bring a Par *Chatas* and a Sa'ir *Olah*, the opposite of what the Tzibur brings - the verse teaches, this is not so.
(r) Answer #2: One might have thought, they need to bring a different Korban, but they cannot (they do not get atonement).
(s) Question: Both Tana'im agree that the verses discuss idolatry - how do they know this?
(t) Answer #1 (Rava): "All these Mitzvos" - the Mitzvah equal to all the Mitzvos is idolatry.
(u) Answer #2 (d'vei Rebbi): It says "That Hash-m spoke to Moshe", and "That Hash-m commanded you through Moshe";
1. The Mitzvah which Yisrael heard Hash-m say and was explained through Moshe is idolatry.
i. (R. Yishmael): Yisrael heard "I (am Hash-m your G-d)" and "You will not have (other gods in front of me)" from Hash-m.
(v) Answer #3 (Tana d'vei R. Yishmael): "From the day that Hash-m commanded" - the first Mitzvah we received was idolatry.

(w) Rejection: We received 10 Mitzvos at Marah!
1. Rather, we must give one of the first two answers.
(a) (Mishnah): Beis Din is not liable for Hora'ah on a Lav or Asei in the Mikdash;
1. One does not bring an Asham Taluy for a Lav or Asei in the Mikdash;
(b) Beis Din is liable for a Lav or Asei regarding Nidah;
1. One brings an Asham Taluy for a Lav or Asei regarding Nidah.
2. An Asei regarding Nidah - separate from a Nidah (only after the Kishuy ceases, e.g. if she became Nidah during relations; Rashi - refrain from relations before a woman's Veses (her normal period when she becomes Nidah));
3. A Lav regarding Nidah - do not have relations with a Nidah.
(c) (Gemara) Question: What is the source of the first two laws?
(d) Answer (R. Yitzchak bar Avdimi): It says "V'Ashem (he transgressed)" regarding Chatas and Asham Taluy; it says "V'Ashemu" regarding the Tzibur.
1. Just as "V'Ashem" regarding an individual discusses a fixed Chatas (for which even a poor person must bring an animal), also regarding a Tzibur (it brings only for sins for which an individual brings a fixed Chatas);
2. Likewise, Asham Taluy is brought only for such sins.
(e) Question: If so, the same should apply to Oleh v'Yored (a varying Chatas, a poor man brings a bird or Minchah (flour-offering)) - it says, "V'Hayah Ki *Yesham* l'Achas me'Eleh"!
(f) Answer #1: We learn from "V'Ashem" from "V'Ashemu", for these are very similar, but we do not learn to "Yesham (he *will* be guilty)".
1. Question #1: We may learn, even though they are dissimilar!
i. (Tana d'vei R. Yishmael): "V'Shav ha'Kohen", "U'va ha'Kohen" - these both mean he will return, we learn a Gezerah Shavah between them.
2. Question #2: We should learn from "V'Ashem" regarding Tum'ah of the Mikdash and Kodshim (one brings Oleh v'Yored for this)!
(g) Answer #2 (Rav Papa): We only learn when it says in both places "V'Ashem" and "Mitzvos Hash-m".
(h) Objection (Rav Simi bar Ashi): Why not learn between places where it mentions both "V'Ashem" and "bearing sin"?
(i) Answer #3 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): We only learn between places where it says both "V'Ashem" and "Mitzvos Hash-m that may not be done".
(a) (Mishnah): Beis Din is not liable for Hora'ah regarding Shevu'as ha'Edus (the oath that one does not know testimony), Shevu'as Bituy (that one will or will not do an action), or Tum'ah of the Mikdash and Kodshim;
(b) R. Yosi ha'Galili says, the Nasi has the same law;
(c) R. Akiva says, the Nasi is liable for all of these except for the Shevu'as ha'Edus, because he does not judge and is not judged, he does not testify and we do not testify about him.
(d) (Gemara - Ula) Question: What is R. Yosi ha'Galili's reason?
(e) Answer #1 (Ula): "Ki Yesham *l'Achas* me'Eleh" - anyone who is liable for (any) one of these is liable for all, anyone who is exempt for (any) one is exempt for all.
(f) Objection: We should say that he is liable for one, even though he is not liable for all!
Next daf


For further information on
subscriptions, archives and sponsorships,
contact Kollel Iyun Hadaf,