Enter your email address to get our weekly email with fresh, exciting and thoughtful content that will enrich your inbox and your life.

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

Shegagot - Perek 6, Shegagot - Perek 7, Shegagot - Perek 8

Video & Audio Classes
Show content in:

Shegagot - Perek 6

1

The laws concerning inadvertent consumption of foods are the same as those concerning inadvertent intimate relations. Therefore if one partook of the same type of forbidden food many times in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering even though there were many days in the interim.

What is implied? One partook of forbidden fat on a given day and did so also on the following day, and the day following that in one state of lapsed awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering, even if they were cooked in different pots. If, by contrast, one inadvertently partook of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat, he became aware of the transgression and then again inadvertently partook of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and became aware of the transgression, he is liable for each time he ate. For gaining awareness causes each inadvertent transgression to be considered as distinct.

If one partook of half an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and then partook of another half of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat in one state of lapsed awareness, they are joined together, even though they were cooked and served in different pots and he made an interruption between partaking of them. For the different pots do not cause the inadvertent transgressions to be considered as distinct. This applies provided he did not take more than the time to eat three eggs between the two times he ate, as explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot. Just as anything eaten in this time is combined to comprise a minimum measure to make a person who did so willfully liable for lashes, so too, anything eaten in this time is combined to comprise a minimum measure to make a person who did so inadvertently liable to bring a sacrifice.

א

דִין שִׁגְגַת הַמַּאֲכָלוֹת כְּדִין שִׁגְגַת הַבְּעִילוֹת. לְפִיכָךְ אִם אָכַל אֲכִילוֹת הַרְבֵּה מִשֵּׁם אֶחָד בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בֵּינֵיהֶן יָמִים רַבִּים אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. כֵּיצַד. אָכַל חֵלֶב הַיּוֹם וְאָכַל חֵלֶב לְמָחָר וְחֵלֶב לְמָחָר בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה תַּמְחוּיִין אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא אַחַת. אֲבָל אִם אָכַל כְּזַיִת חֵלֶב וְנוֹדַע לוֹ וְחָזַר וְאָכַל כְּזַיִת חֵלֶב וְנוֹדַע לוֹ. חַיָּב עַל כָּל אֲכִילָה וַאֲכִילָה שֶׁהַיְדִיעוֹת מְחַלְּקוֹת הַשְּׁגָגוֹת. אָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת חֵלֶב וְחָזַר וְאָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת חֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן שֵׁנִי תַּמְחוּיִין וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִפְסִיק בֵּינֵיהֶן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מִצְטָרְפִין וּמֵבִיא חַטָּאת. שֶׁאֵין הַתַּמְחוּיִין מְחַלְּקִין. וְהוּא שֶׁלֹּא יִשְׁהֶה בֵּינֵיהֶן יוֹתֵר מִכְּדֵי אֲכִילַת שָׁלֹשׁ בֵּיצִים כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת מַאֲכָלוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת. שֶׁכְּשֵׁם שֶׁמִּצְטָרֵף הַשִּׁעוּר לְמֵזִיד לְמַלְקוֹת כָּךְ מִצְטָרֵף הַשִּׁעוּר לְשׁוֹגֵג לְקָרְבָּן:

2

If a person partook of notar from five different sacrifices, an olive-sized portion from each sacrifice, in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering, even if he partook of them in five different pots. The rationale is that they are all included in one prohibition and the different pots do not cause the inadvertent transgressions to be considered as distinct. Nor do the different bodies of the sacrifices cause the inadvertent transgressions to be considered as distinct. There is no difference whether one partakes of meat that is notar from one sacrifice or from many sacrifices.

Similarly, when one slaughters five sacrificial animals outside the Temple Courtyard in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering. To what can the matter be compared? To one who bows down to five forbidden images in one lapse of awareness.

ב

אָכַל נוֹתָר מֵחֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים כְּזַיִת מִכָּל זֶבַח בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֲכָלָן בַּחֲמִשָּׁה תַּמְחוּיִין אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת שֶׁכֻּלָּן שֵׁם אֶחָד הֵן וְהַתַּמְחוּיִין אֵינָן מְחַלְּקִין. וְגוּפֵי הַזְּבָחִים אֵינָן מְחַלְּקִין. שֶׁאֶחָד הָאוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר מִזְּבָחִים רַבִּים אוֹ מִזֶּבַח אֶחָד. וְכֵן הַשּׁוֹחֵט חֲמִשָּׁה זְבָחִים בַּחוּץ בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. הָא לְמָה זֶה דּוֹמֶה לְמִשְׁתַּחֲוֶה לְחָמֵשׁ צוּרוֹת בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת:

3

If one let the blood of his animal and received it in two cups and drank them both in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for only one sin-offering.

ג

הִקִּיז דָּם לִבְהֶמְתּוֹ וְקִבְּלוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי כּוֹסוֹת וּשְׁתָאָן בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת:

4

When a person eats foods that are forbidden because of different prohibitions in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for one sin-offering for every type of prohibition.

What is implied? One partook of an olive-sized portion of each of the following: forbidden fat, blood, notar, and piggul, in one lapse of awareness must bring four sin-offerings. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

Anyone who eats a single olive-sized portion of food that is forbidden because of many different prohibitions in one lapse of awareness must bring a sin-offering for every prohibition, provided the prohibitions either cause the entity to be forbidden to additional people, the scope of the latter prohibition encompasses other entities together with the entity that was originally prohibited, or the two prohibitions take effect at the same time.

For this reason, if a person who is ritually impure partook of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat that was notar on Yom Kippur, he must bring four sin-offerings and a guilt-offering: one sin-offering, because he was impure and he partook of consecrated food, one, because he partook of forbidden fat, one, because he partook of notar, and one, because he ate on Yom Kippur, provided another food is combined with this olive-sized portion so that it comprises a date-sized portion. And he must bring a guilt-offering for the misappropriation of consecrated property, for he inadvertently derived benefit from consecrated property.

ד

הָאוֹכֵל מַאֲכָלוֹת הַרְבֵּה מִשֵּׁמוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת חַיָּב עַל כָּל שֵׁם וְשֵׁם. כֵּיצַד. כְּגוֹן שֶׁאָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם וְנוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל כְּזַיִת מִכָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת מֵבִיא אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בְּאֵלּוּ. וְכֵן הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת אֶחָד שֶׁנִּתְקַבְּצוּ בּוֹ שֵׁמוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. אִם נִתְקַבְּצוּ בְּאִסּוּר מוֹסִיף אוֹ בְּאִסּוּר כּוֹלֵל אוֹ בְּאִסּוּר בַּת אַחַת חַיָּב עַל כָּל שֵׁם וְשֵׁם. לְפִיכָךְ הַטָּמֵא שֶׁאָכַל כְּזַיִת חֵלֶב וְנוֹתָר בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. מֵבִיא אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת וְאָשָׁם. חַטָּאת אַחַת מִשּׁוּם טָמֵא שֶׁאָכַל קוֹדֶשׁ. וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם אוֹכֵל חֵלֶב. וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם אוֹכֵל נוֹתָר. וְאַחַת מִשּׁוּם יוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים. וְהוּא שֶׁיִּצְטָרֵף אֹכֶל אַחֵר עִם כְּזַיִת זֶה עַד שֶׁיַּשְׁלִימוֹ לִכְכוֹתֶבֶת. וּמֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַדַּאי לִמְעִילָה שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶהֱנָה מִן הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ בִּשְׁגָגָה:

5

When a person eats and drinks on Yom Kippur in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Eating and drinking is considered as a single act.

ה

הָאוֹכֵל וְשׁוֹתֶה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. אֲכִילָה וּשְׁתִיָּה אַחַת הִיא:

6

When a person performs a forbidden labor on Yom Kippur that falls on the Sabbath, he is liable for two sin-offerings, because they are two prohibitions that take effect at the same time.

ו

הָעוֹשֶׂה מְלָאכָה בְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים שֶׁחָל לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת חַיָּב שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן שְׁנֵי אִסּוּרִין הַבָּאִין כְּאֶחָד:

7

When a person eats a half of an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and half an olive-sized portion of blood in one lapse of awareness, he is not liable for an offering. Just as the prohibitions are not combined to make one liable for lashes, as explained in Hilchot Ma'achalot Assurot, so too, they are not combined to make him liable for a sacrifice.

ז

אָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת חֵלֶב וְכַחֲצִי זַיִת דָּם בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב קָרְבָּן. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֵין הָאִסּוּרִין מִצְטָרְפִין לַמַּלְקוֹת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת מַאֲכָלוֹת אֲסוּרוֹת כָּךְ אֵין מִצְטָרְפִין לְקָרְבָּן:

8

When a person inadvertently partook of half an olive-sized portion of a forbidden substance and then became aware of his transgression, but forgot and partook of another half an olive-sized portion of the same substance in a second lapse of awareness, he is not liable for an offering. The rationale is that he became aware in the interim and awareness causes a distinction to be made even with regard to half the required measure.

Similarly, if one wrote one letter on the Sabbath inadvertently and then became aware of the matter and then forgot and then wrote another letter next to the first in a second lapse of awareness, he is not liable for a sin-offering. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

In a like vein, if a person transferred an article two cubits in the public domain on the Sabbath inadvertently, transferred it another two cubits in conscious violation of the Sabbath laws and then transferred it two cubits inadvertently, he is liable if he transferred it by throwing it. The rationale is not that his gaining awareness after half the measure is not significant, but rather that, after throwing the article, he is unable to bring it back. Therefore the awareness he gained in the interim is of no avail. If he transferred the article by passing it, he is exempt, because gaining awareness after half the required measure has been completed is significant.

ח

אָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת וְנוֹדַע לוֹ וְחָזַר וְשָׁכַח וְאָכַל כַּחֲצִי זַיִת אַחֵר בְּהֶעְלֵם שֵׁנִי פָּטוּר. שֶׁהֲרֵי נוֹדַע לוֹ בֵּינְתַיִם וְיֵשׁ יְדִיעָה לַחֲצִי שִׁעוּר. וְכֵן אִם כָּתַב אוֹת אַחַת [בְּשַׁבָּת] בִּשְׁגָגָה וְנוֹדַע לוֹ וְחָזַר וְשָׁכַח וְכָתַב אוֹת שְׁנִיָּה סְמוּכָה לָהּ בְּהֶעְלֵם שֵׁנִי פָּטוּר מִקָּרְבַּן חַטָּאת. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. וְכֵן אִם הוֹצִיא שְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת בְּשׁוֹגֵג וּשְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת בְּמֵזִיד וּשְׁתֵּי אַמּוֹת בְּשׁוֹגֵג. אִם בִּזְרִיקָה חַיָּב. לֹא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין יְדִיעָה לַחֲצִי שִׁעוּר אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין בְּיָדוֹ לְהַחְזִירָהּ. לְפִיכָךְ לֹא הוֹעִילָה לוֹ הַיְדִיעָה שֶׁבֵּינְתַיִם. וְאִם בְּהַעֲבָרָה פָּטוּר שֶׁיֵּשׁ יְדִיעָה לַחֲצִי שִׁעוּר כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

9

The following rules apply when a person ate an olive-sized portion of forbidden fat and then a second olive-sized portion of forbidden fat in one lapse of awareness. If he became aware of the first transgression and then became aware of the second, he must bring two sin-offerings, because the difference in his becoming aware of the transgressions creates a distinction even though he did not set a side a sacrificial animal yet. If, however, he became aware of both of them at the same time, he should bring only one sin-offering. Similarly, it appears to me that the law is the same with regard to forbidden sexual relations.

ט

הָאוֹכֵל כְּזַיִת חֵלֶב וּכְזַיִת חֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת וְנוֹדַע לוֹ עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן וְחָזַר וְנוֹדַע לוֹ עַל הַשֵּׁנִי מֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת שֶׁהַיְדִיעוֹת מְחַלְּקוֹת וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא הִפְרִישׁ הַקָּרְבָּן. אֲבָל אִם נוֹדַע לוֹ עַל שְׁנֵיהֶן כְּאַחַת מֵבִיא חַטָּאת אַחַת. וְכֵן יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהוּא הַדִּין בִּבְעִילוֹת:

10

If one ate an olive-sized portion and a half of forbidden fat in a single lapse of awareness, then became aware that he partook of the olive-sized portion and then, partook of another half of an olive-sized portion while he is unaware of partaking of the other half, he is only liable for one sin-offering. The rationale is that the second half of an olive-sized portion is not combined with the first half, even though it was eaten during its lapse of awareness, because he had become aware of part of the transgression performed in the initial lapse of awareness.

י

אָכַל כְּזַיִת וּמֶחֱצָה בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת וְנוֹדַע לוֹ עַל כְּזַיִת וְחָזַר וְאָכַל חֲצִי זַיִת בְּהֵעָלְמוֹ שֶׁל שֵׁנִי. אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. שֶׁאֵין חֲצִי זַיִת הָאַחֲרוֹן מִצְטָרֵף לָרִאשׁוֹן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא בְּהֵעָלְמוֹ שֶׁהֲרֵי נוֹדַע לוֹ עַל מִקְצָת הַעֲלָמָה רִאשׁוֹנָה:

11

A person partook of two olive-sized portions of forbidden fat and then became aware of eating one of them. He then partook of another olive-sized portion while he was unaware of the second transgression and then brought a sin-offering to atone for the first transgression. The first and the second transgressions are atoned for by this sacrifice, but not the third. Instead, when he becomes aware of it, he should bring another sin-offering.

If he brought a sin-offering for the third transgression, it secures atonement for the second and the third, because they both were committed during a single lapse of awareness, but atonement for the first is not secured by this sacrifice.

If he brought a sin-offering for the middle transgression, atonement is secured for all three. The rationale is that both the first and the third were performed during the same lapse of awareness that involved the second. Hence when he becomes aware of the first and the third transgressions, he does not have to bring an additional sin-offering.

יא

אָכַל שְׁנֵי זֵיתֵי חֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת וְנוֹדַע לוֹ עַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְחָזַר וְאָכַל כְּזַיִת אַחֵר בְּהֵעָלְמוֹ שֶׁל שֵׁנִי וְהֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן. רִאשׁוֹן וְשֵׁנִי מִתְכַּפְּרִין אֲבָל שְׁלִישִׁי לֹא נִתְכַּפֵּר. אֶלָּא כְּשֶׁיִּוָּדַע לוֹ עָלָיו יָבִיא חַטָּאת אַחֶרֶת. הֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. שְׁלִישִׁי וְשֵׁנִי מִתְכַּפְּרִין שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶם בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. וְרִאשׁוֹן לֹא נִתְכַּפֵּר בְּחַטָּאת זוֹ. הֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל הָאֶמְצָעִי. שְׁלָשְׁתָּן מִתְכַּפְּרִין. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָרִאשׁוֹן וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי בְּהֵעָלְמוֹ שֶׁל אֶמְצָעִי. וּכְשֶׁיִּוָּדַע לּוֹ עַל הָרִאשׁוֹן וְעַל הַשְּׁלִישִׁי אֵין צָרִיךְ לְהָבִיא חַטָּאת אַחֶרֶת:

12

A person ate one of two pieces of fat, one, kosher and one, forbidden and he was unsure whether he had eaten the permitted fat or the forbidden fat and then he ate another piece in a similar mixture and again he was unsure whether he had eaten the permitted fat or the forbidden fat. If, afterwards, he gained definitive knowledge that he ate forbidden fat on both occasions, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Although the lack of certainty concerning whether or not he transgressed is sufficient to create a distinction with regard to a tentative guilt-offering, it is not considered as gaining awareness to require a distinction between the sin-offerings brought for atonement.

יב

מִי שֶׁאָכַל חֲתִיכָה מִשְּׁתֵי חֲתִיכוֹת וְנִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם אָכַל חֵלֶב אוֹ שֻׁמָּן וְאָכַל חֲתִיכָה אַחֶרֶת מִשְּׁתֵי חֲתִיכוֹת וְנִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם אָכַל חֵלֶב אוֹ שֻׁמָּן וְאַחַר כָּךְ נוֹדַע לוֹ בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁחֵלֶב אָכַל בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבַשְּׁנִיָּה. אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. שֶׁיְּדִיעַת סָפֵק שֶׁהָיְתָה לוֹ בֵּינְתַיִם אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּחַלֶּקֶת לַאֲשָׁמוֹת אֵינָהּ מְחַלֶּקֶת לְחַטָּאוֹת:

Shegagot - Perek 7

1

When a person prostrates himself to a false deity, poured a libation to it, offers a burnt-offering to it, and slaughters an animal as a sacrifice to it in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for four sin-offerings. Similarly, if he defecated to Peor or threw a rock to Mercury in one lapse of awareness, he is liable for two sin-offerings. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations. The person will be liable for every act of service performed.

When does the above apply? When he consciously desired to serve a false deity, but was unaware that these acts constituted service. If, however, he willfully performed these acts, but inadvertently served a false deity, he is liable for only one sin-offering.

What is implied? He knew that a particular image was a false deity and that it is forbidden to serve it, but did not know that bowing down to it or pouring a libation constituted a transgression and bowed down and poured a libation, he is liable for two sin-offerings. If, however, he knew that these were ways in which false deities were served and that it is forbidden to perform these acts in service of a false deity, but did not know that a particular image was considered a false deity, because it was not made of gold or silver and he was under the mistaken impression that only images of gold and silver were considered as false deities and hence, performed all these acts of service to it, he is liable for only one sin-offering.

א

הַמִּשְׁתַחֲוְה לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְנִסֵּךְ וְקִטֵּר וְזִבֵּחַ בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת חַיָּב אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת. וְכֵן אִם פִּעֵר עַצְמוֹ לִפְעוֹר וְזָרַק אֶבֶן לְמַרְקוּלִיס בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה יְהֵא חַיָּב עַל כָּל עֲבוֹדָה וַעֲבוֹדָה. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּשֶׁהֵזִיד בַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְשָׁגַג בַּעֲבוֹדוֹת אֵלּוּ. אֲבָל אִם הֵזִיד בַּעֲבוֹדוֹת אֵלּוּ וְשָׁגַג בַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. כֵּיצַד. יָדַע שֶׁזּוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְשֶׁאָסוּר לְעָבְדָהּ אֲבָל לֹא יָדַע שֶׁהַהִשְׁתַּחֲוָיָה וְהַנִּסּוּךְ עֲבֵרָה וְהִשְׁתַּחֲוָה וְנִסֵּךְ חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם. יָדַע שֶׁאֵלּוּ עֲבוֹדוֹת הֵן וְאָסוּר לַעֲבֹד בָּהֶן לְאֵל אַחֵר וְלֹא יָדַע שֶׁזּוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה לְפִי שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב וְעָלָה עַל דַּעְתּוֹ שֶׁאֵין קְרוּיִין עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה אֶלָּא שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב וַעֲבָדָהּ בְּכָל הָעֲבוֹדוֹת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת:

2

A great general principle was stated with regard to the violation of the Sabbath prohibitions: Anyone who forgets the fundamental principle of the Sabbath, failing to recall that the Jews were commanded to observe the Sabbath or was captured and taken among gentiles while a child or converted in his childhood and remained living among gentiles, he is liable for only one sin-offering even though he performed many forbidden labors on many different Sabbaths, for it is all one lapse of awareness.

Similarly, he is liable for one sin-offering for all the forbidden fat that he ate, one sin-offering for all the blood that he ate. Similar laws apply to all analogous situations regarding these sins. Whenever one knows the fundamental principle of the Sabbath, but forgot that a given day was the Sabbath and thought it was an ordinary day, he is liable for only one sin-offering for the entire day, even though he performed many forbidden labors on it. Similarly, he is liable for a sin-offering for every Sabbath that he inadvertently desecrated.

ב

כְּלָל גָּדוֹל אָמְרוּ בְּשַׁבָּת כָּל הַשּׁוֹכֵחַ עִקַּר שַׁבָּת וְשָׁכַח שֶׁנִּצְטַוּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל עַל הַשַּׁבָּת. אוֹ שֶׁנִּשְׁבָּה וְהוּא קָטָן לְבֵין הָעַכּוּ''ם אוֹ נִתְגַּיֵּר קָטָן וְהוּא בֵּין הָעַכּוּ''ם. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעָשָׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת הַרְבֵּה אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת שֶׁהַכּל שְׁגָגָה אַחַת הִיא. וְכֵן חַיָּב חַטָּאת אַחַת עַל כָּל חֵלֶב שֶׁאָכַל וְחַטָּאת אַחַת עַל דָּם שֶׁאָכַל. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה בַּעֲבוֹדוֹת אֵלּוּ. וְכָל הַיּוֹדֵעַ עִקַּר שַׁבָּת אֲבָל שָׁכַח שֶׁהַיּוֹם שַׁבָּת וְדִמָּה שֶׁהוּא חֹל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעָשָׂה בּוֹ מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה חַיָּב חַטָּאת אַחַת עַל הַיּוֹם כֻּלּוֹ וְכֵן חַטָּאת עַל כָּל שַׁבָּת וְשַׁבָּת שֶׁשָּׁגַג בּוֹ:

3

Anyone who knows that a given day is the Sabbath, but inadvertently performed forbidden labors without knowing that these labors are forbidden or knew that they were forbidden, but did not know that one was liable for karet for their violation, is liable for a sin-offering for every general category of forbidden labor. Even if he performed all 39 forbidden labors in one lapse of awareness, he must bring 39 sin-offerings.

ג

וְכָל הַיּוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהַיּוֹם שַׁבָּת וְשָׁגַג בִּמְלָאכוֹת וְלֹא יָדַע שֶׁמְּלָאכוֹת אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרוֹת אוֹ שֶׁיָּדַע שֶׁהֵן אֲסוּרוֹת וְלֹא יָדַע שֶׁחַיָּבִין עֲלֵיהֶן כָּרֵת וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה. חַיָּב חַטָּאת עַל כָּל אַב מְלָאכָה וּמְלָאכָה. אֲפִלּוּ עָשָׂה הָאַרְבָּעִים חָסֵר אַחַת בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת מֵבִיא שְׁלֹשִׁים וְתֵשַׁע חַטָּאוֹת:

4

If he forgot that the day is the Sabbath and also forgot that these labors were forbidden, he is only liable for one sin-offering.

ד

שָׁכַח שֶׁהַיּוֹם שַׁבָּת וְשָׁגַג אַף בִּמְלָאכוֹת וְלֹא יָדַע שֶׁמְּלָאכוֹת אֵלּוּ אֲסוּרוֹת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת:

5

When a person performs an action that is the primary forbidden activity of a particular category of labor and also a derivative in one lapse of awareness, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Needless to day, if he performs many derivatives of one category of forbidden labor, he is only liable for one sin-offering.

ה

הָעוֹשֶׂה אָב וְתוֹלְדוֹתָיו בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר הָעוֹשֶׂה תּוֹלָדוֹת הַרְבֵּה שֶׁל אָב אֶחָד שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת:

6

If he performs derivatives of one category of forbidden labor and derivatives of another category of forbidden labor in one lapse of awareness, it appears to me that he is liable for two sin-offerings.

ו

עָשָׂה תּוֹלָדָה שֶׁל אָב זֶה וְתוֹלָדָה שֶׁל אָב זֶה בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב שְׁתֵּי חַטָּאוֹת:

7

If he performs several activities comprising a single category of forbidden labor in one lapse of awareness, e.g., he sowed, extended a vine by replanting one of its branches, grafted a branch onto a tree, he is liable for only one sin-offering. In Hilchot Shabbat, it has already been explained which activities are primary labors, which are derivatives, and which activities comprise a single category of forbidden labor.

ז

עָשָׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה מֵעֵין מְלָאכָה אַחַת. כְּגוֹן שֶׁזָּרַע וְהִבְרִיךְ וְהִרְכִּיב בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת אֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. וּכְבָר נִתְבָּאֵר בְּהִלְכוֹת שַׁבָּת הָאָבוֹת וְהַתּוֹלָדוֹת וְהַמְּלָאכוֹת שֶׁהֵן מֵעֵין אָבוֹת:

8

When a person performs activities comprising a single category of forbidden labor on many Sabbaths, whether he was aware that it was the Sabbath, but unaware that he was performing forbidden labors or he was unaware that it was the Sabbath, but aware that the labor he performed is forbidden on the Sabbath, he is liable for a sin-offering for every forbidden labor he performs.

What is implied? He knew that it was the Sabbath and sowed on that day, because he did not know that sowing constituted forbidden labor. Similarly, on the following Sabbath, he knew that it was the Sabbath and planted because he did not know that planting constituted forbidden labor. Similarly, on the third Sabbath, he extended a vine, because he did not know that extending constituted forbidden labor, he is liable for a sin-offering for each one, even though they all comprise a single category of forbidden labor, because the different Sabbaths are considered like different bodies.

ח

עָשָׂה מְלָאכוֹת הַרְבֵּה מֵעֵין מְלָאכָה אַחַת בְּשַׁבָּתוֹת הַרְבֵּה בֵּין בִּזְדוֹן שַׁבּתַ וְשִׁגְגַת מְלָאכוֹת בֵּין בְּשִׁגְגַת שַׁבָּת וּזְדוֹן מְלָאכוֹת חַיָּב עַל כָּל מְלָאכָה וּמְלָאכָה. כֵּיצַד. יָדַע שֶׁהַיּוֹם שַׁבָּת וְזָרַע בּוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָדַע שֶׁהַזְּרִיעָה מְלָאכָה. וְכֵן בְּשַׁבָּת שְׁנִיָּה יָדַע שֶׁהוּא שַׁבָּת וְנָטַע בָּהּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָדַע שֶׁהַנְּטִיעָה אֲסוּרָה מִשּׁוּם מְלָאכָה. וְכֵן בְּשַׁבָּת שְׁלִישִׁית הִבְרִיךְ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא יָדַע שֶׁהַהַבְרָכָה מְלָאכָה. חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא מֵעֵין מְלָאכָה אַחַת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַשַּׁבָּתוֹת כְּגוּפִין מֻחְלָקִין:

9

When a person was unaware that it was the Sabbath and sowed upon it, although he knew that sowing is a forbidden labor, on the following Sabbath, he forgot that it was Sabbath and planted, although he knew that planting is a forbidden labor, and on the third Sabbath, he forgot that it was Sabbath and extended, although he knew that extending is a forbidden labor, he is liable for a sin-offering for every Sabbath. The rationale is that the days between each Sabbath are considered equivalent to gaining awareness of one's transgression and create a distinction.

ט

שָׁגַג שֶׁהַיּוֹם שַׁבָּת וְזָרַע בּוֹ וְהוּא יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהַזְּרִיעָה מְלָאכָה. וְכֵן בְּשַׁבָּת שְׁנִיָּה שָׁכַח שֶׁהוּא שַׁבָּת וְנָטַע בּוֹ וְהוּא יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהַנְּטִיעָה מְלָאכָה. וְכֵן בַּשְּׁלִישִׁית שָׁכַח שֶׁהוּא שַׁבָּת וְהִבְרִיךְ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ שֶׁהַהַבְרָכָה מְלָאכָה. הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. שֶׁהַיָּמִים שֶׁבֵּין שַׁבָּת לְשַׁבָּת הֲרֵי הֵן כִּידִיעָה אַחַת לְחַלֵּק:

10

When a person harvested and ground a dried-fig-sized measure of grain without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden on the Sabbath, he is only liable for one sin-offering. Afterwards, he harvested and ground a dried-fig-sized measure of grain while aware that it is the Sabbath, but forgetting that these labors were forbidden, in which instance, he is liable for a sin-offering for every forbidden labor. He then became aware of the harvesting performed without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden on the Sabbath. In such an instance, the one act of harvesting draws the other after it and the one act of grinding draws the other after it. Thus it is as if he performed all four acts without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden on the Sabbath, in which instance he is liable for only one sin-offering. After he brings that sin-offering, he has secured atonement for all the other forbidden labors he performed. When he later becomes aware of them, he does not have to bring another sin-offering.

If, however, he first becomes conscious of the harvesting performed while aware that it is the Sabbath, but forgetting that these labors were forbidden, and brings a sin-offering, he receives atonement for the harvesting that he became aware of and on the harvesting and grinding performed without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that these labors are forbidden, because the two are considered as one labor and the harvesting and grinding are drawn after the harvesting performed when he was aware that it was the Sabbath. Thus there remains without atonement, only the grinding performed when he was aware that it was the Sabbath until he becomes aware of it and brings a second sin-offering.

If a person harvested half a dried-fig-sized measure without being aware that it is Sabbath, but knowing that this labor is forbidden and then harvested half a dried-fig-sized measure while aware that it is Sabbath, but not aware that this labor is forbidden, these two activities are combined. One harvesting draws the other after it. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations with regard to the other forbidden labors.

י

מִי שֶׁקָּצַר וְטָחַן כִּגְרוֹגֶרֶת בְּשִׁגְגַת שַׁבָּת וּזְדוֹן מְלָאכוֹת שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. וְחָזַר וְקָצַר וְטָחַן כִּגְרוֹגֶרֶת בִּזְדוֹן שַׁבָּת וְשִׁגְגַת מְלָאכוֹת שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עַל כָּל מְלָאכָה וּמְלָאכָה. וְנוֹדַע לוֹ עַל קְצִירָה שֶׁל שִׁגְגַת שַׁבָּת וּזְדוֹן מְלָאכוֹת. קְצִירָה גּוֹרֶרֶת קְצִירָה וּטְחִינָה גּוֹרֶרֶת טְחִינָה וּכְאִלּוּ עָשָׂה אַרְבַּעְתָּן בְּשִׁגְגַת שַׁבָּת וּזְדוֹן מְלָאכוֹת שֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָּב אֶלָּא חַטָּאת אַחַת. וְכֵיוָן שֶׁהִקְרִיב חַטָּאת זוֹ נִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ עַל הַכּל. וּכְשֶׁיְּדָעֵם אַחַר כֵּן אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהָבִיא חַטָּאת אַחֶרֶת. אֲבָל אִם נוֹדַע לוֹ תְּחִלָּה עַל קְצִירָהּ שֶׁל זְדוֹן שַׁבָּת וְשִׁגְגַת מְלָאכוֹת וְהִקְרִיב חַטָּאת. נִתְכַּפֵּר לוֹ עַל זוֹ הַקְּצִירָה שֶׁנּוֹדַע לוֹ עָלֶיהָ וְעַל הַקְּצִירָה וְהַטְּחִינָה שֶׁל שִׁגְגַת שַׁבָּת וּזְדוֹן מְלָאכוֹת. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁשְּׁנֵיהֶן כִּמְלָאכָה אַחַת וְנִגְרְרָה קְצִירָה וּטְחִינָה עִם הַקְּצִירָה וְתִשָּׁאֵר הַטְּחִינָה שֶׁל זְדוֹן שַׁבָּת עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע לוֹ עָלֶיהָ וְיָבִיא חַטָּאת שְׁנִיָּה. קָצַר כַּחֲצִי גְּרוֹגֶרֶת בְּשִׁגְגַת שַׁבָּת וּזְדוֹן מְלָאכוֹת וְחָזַר וְקָצַר כַּחֲצִי גְּרוֹגֶרֶת בִּזְדוֹן שַׁבָּת וְשִׁגְגַת מְלָאכוֹת הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מִצְטָרְפִין. קְצִירָהּ גּוֹרֶרֶת קְצִירָה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה בִּשְׁאָר מְלָאכוֹת:

11

When, on the Sabbath, a person had the intent to cut an object that was already severed from the ground, but instead, cut an object that was connected to the ground, even though he had the intent to cut, since his desired intent was not fulfilled, he is exempt from a sin-offering. He is considered as one who is merely busying himself and the Torah forbade only purposeful labor, as we explained several times.

יא

הַמִּתְכַּוֵּן לַחְתֹּךְ אֶת הַתָּלוּשׁ וְחָתַךְ אֶת הַמְחֻבָּר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנִּתְכַּוֵּן לַחֲתִיכָה הוֹאִיל וְלֹא עָשָׂה מַחְשַׁבְתּוֹ פָּטוּר מִן הַחַטָּאת שֶׁזֶּה כְּמִתְעַסֵּק וְלֹא אָסְרָה תּוֹרָה אֶלָּא מְלֶאכֶת מַחֲשֶׁבֶת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ כַּמָּה פְּעָמִים:

12

The following rule applies when a person stirs coals on the Sabbath, in which instance, he extinguishes the upper ones and ignites the lower ones. If he intended to extinguish and ignite, he is liable for two sin-offerings. If he stirred the coals to become warm and they were ignited on their own, he is liable, because one is liable for performing a forbidden labor even if he has no need for the actual labor he performed, as explained in Hilchot Shabbat. Just as he is liable for karet for the intentional performance of forbidden labor, he is liable for a sin-offering for unintentional violation.

יב

הַחוֹתֶה גֶּחָלִים בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁהוּא מְכַבֶּה אֶת הָעֶלְיוֹנוֹת וּמַדְלִיק אֶת הַתַּחְתּוֹנוֹת אִם נִתְכַּוֵּן לְכַבּוֹת וּלְהַבְעִיר חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם. חָתָה גֶּחָלִים לְהִתְחַמֵּם מֵהֶם וְהֻבְעֲרוּ מֵאֲלֵיהֶן חַיָּב שְׁתַּיִם מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּלָאכָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה לְגוּפָהּ חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת שַׁבָּת. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁחַיָּבִין עַל זְדוֹנָהּ כָּרֵת כָּךְ חַיָּב עַל שִׁגְגָתָהּ קָרְבַּן חַטָּאת:

Shegagot - Perek 8

1

Every transgression for which one is liable for a fixed sin-offering if he transgressed inadvertently carries liability for a provisional guilt-offering if he is unsure whether he violated it.

What does being unsure mean? If a person is in doubt whether he inadvertently violated this transgression or not, he is obligated to bring a guilt-offering, as Leviticus 5:17-18 states: "If he was unaware and became guilty, he shall bear his iniquity. He shall bring an unblemished ram from sheep, of the given value, as a guilt-offering." This is referred to as a provisional guilt-offering, for it brings atonement when the person is in doubt, tentatively, until he knows with certainty that he sinned inadvertently, at which time, he brings a sin-offering.

א

כָּל חֵטְא שֶׁחַיָּבִין עַל שִׁגְגָתוֹ חַטָּאת קְבוּעָה חַיָּבִין עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלּוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וּמַהוּ לֹא הוֹדַע. אִם נִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם שָׁגַג בְּדָבָר זֶה אוֹ לֹא שָׁגַג הֲרֵי זֶה מְצֻוֶּה לְהַקְרִיב אָשָׁם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ה יז) "וְלֹא יָדַע וְאָשֵׁם וְנָשָׂא עֲוֹנוֹ" (ויקרא ה יח) "וְהֵבִיא אַיִל תָּמִים מִן הַצֹּאן בְּעֶרְכְּךָ לְאָשָׁם" וְזֶהוּ הַנִּקְרָא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מְכַפֵּר עַל הַסָּפֵק וְתוֹלֶה לוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּוָּדַע לוֹ בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁחָטָא בִּשְׁגָגָה וְיַקְרִיב חַטָּאתוֹ:

2

A person is not liable for a provisional guilt-offering unless there is a prohibition that is established. What is implied? A person partook of forbidden fat, but was in doubt whether there was an olive-sized portion or not. There was a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of permitted fat before a person and he partook of one of them, but he did not know which one he ate. His wife and his sister were with him at home. He was intimate with one of them, but did not know with whom. Both the Sabbath and a weekday passed and he performed a forbidden labor on one of them, but did not know the day on which he acted. He performed a deed on the Sabbath, but did not know whether it falls into a category of forbidden labor. In all these and similar instances, he should bring a provisional guilt-offering.

If, however, a prohibition has not definitely been established, he is not liable for a provisional guilt-offering. Thus if there was one piece of fat before a person and he was unsure whether it was permitted or forbidden and he partook of it, he is exempt, for there is no established prohibition. Similarly, one who partakes of the fat of a ko'i is exempt from a provisional guilt-offering, for there is not an established prohibition.Similarly, when a man is intimate with a woman who is unsure whether or not she is in the niddah state or we are unsure whether she is an ervah due to family connections, he is exempt from a provisional guilt-offering.

Therefore a man who is intimate with a woman is exempt from this sacrifice, if: a) she finds blood on the examination cloth she uses after time has transpired, or

b) he married his yevamah within three months of his brother's death and she gave birth and it is not known whether the child was conceived by her first husband and was born after a nine-month pregnancy or he was conceived by her second husband and was born after a seven-month pregnancy.Similar laws apply in all analogous situations, for there is no established prohibition.

ב

אֵינוֹ חַיָּב בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה שָׁם אִסּוּר קָבוּעַ. כֵּיצַד. אָכַל חֵלֶב וְסָפֵק אִם הָיָה כְּזַיִת אוֹ פָּחוֹת מִכְּזַיִת. אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה לְפָנָיו חֲתִיכַת חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכַת שֻׁמָּן וְאָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זֶה מֵהֶן אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַּבַּיִת בָּעַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יוֹדֵעַ אֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן בָּעַל. שַׁבָּת וְחל וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכוֹת בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶם וְאֵין יָדוּעַ בְּאֵי זֶה יוֹם עָשָׂה. אוֹ שֶׁעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת וְלֹא יָדַע מֵעֵין אֵי זוֹ מְלָאכָה עָשָׂה. הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. אֲבָל אִם הָיְתָה לְפָנָיו חֲתִיכָה אַחַת סָפֵק שֶׁהִיא חֵלֶב סָפֵק שֶׁהִיא שֻׁמָּן וַאֲכָלָהּ פָּטוּר שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין כָּאן אִסּוּר קָבוּעַ. וְכָל הָאוֹכֵל חֵלֶב הַכְּוִי פָּטוּר מֵאָשָׁם תָּלוּי שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין כָּאן אִסּוּר קָבוּעַ. וְכֵן הַבָּא עַל אִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא סְפֵק נִדָּה אוֹ סְפֵק עֶרְוָה שֶׁל קֵרוּב בָּשָׂר פָּטוּר מֵאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. לְפִיכָךְ הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁנִּמְצָא דָּם עַל עֵד שֶׁלָּהּ לְאַחַר זְמַן וְהַנּוֹשֵׂא יְבִמְתּוֹ בְּתוֹךְ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וְיָלְדָה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן אוֹ בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ פְּטוּרִין מִן הַקָּרְבָּן. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בְּאֵלּוּ. שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵין שָׁם אִסּוּר קָבוּעַ:

3

An individual can be required to bring a provisional guilt-offering in the following circumstances:

a) he who ate a piece of fat and one witness states: "What you ate was forbidden fat," while the other states; "You did not partake of forbidden fat;

b) a woman said that he partook of forbidden fat and another woman said that he did not. Since he does not know whether he partook of the forbidden fat or not and the existence of the prohibited substance has been established, he is obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering.

Similarly, if one was intimate with a married woman about whom one witness states: "Her husband died," but another states: "He did not die," he is obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering. This law also applies when there is a question if a woman is divorced, for the prohibition was established.If, however, there is a doubt whether or not a woman was consecrated, one who is intimate with her is not liable, because the prohibition has not been established.

ג

הָאוֹכֵל חֲתִיכָה וְעֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר לוֹ זֶה שֶׁאָכַלְתָּ חֵלֶב הָיָה וְעֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר לֹא אָכַלְתָּ חֵלֶב. אִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת אָכַל וְאִשָּׁה אוֹמֶרֶת לֹא אָכַל. הוֹאִיל וְנִקְבַּע הָאִסּוּר וְהוּא אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אִם חָטָא אוֹ לֹא חָטָא הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וְכֵן כָּל הַבָּא עַל אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ שֶׁעֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר מֵת בַּעְלָהּ וְעֵד אֶחָד אוֹמֵר לֹא מֵת. חַיָּב בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וְהוּא הַדִּין לִסְפֵק מְגֹרֶשֶׁת שֶׁהֲרֵי נִקְבַּע הָאִסּוּר. אֲבָל סְפֵק מְקֻדֶּשֶׁת לֹא נִקְבַּע הָאִסּוּר:

4

A person is liable for a provisional guilt-offering in the following situations: There were two pieces of fat before him: one forbidden and one permitted. He ate one inadvertently and a gentile or a dog came and ate the second. The gentile or the dog ate the first and a Jew ate the second. One ate the first intentionally and the second, inadvertently, or he ate the first inadvertently and the second, intentionally. In all these situations, he is liable, because the existence of a prohibited substance had been established.

If, however, he partook of both of them intentionally, he is exempt from bringing a sacrifice. And if he ate them both inadvertently, he must bring a sin-offering. If he ate the first inadvertently and another person came and ate the second inadvertently, they are both obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

ד

מִי שֶׁהָיוּ לְפָנָיו שְׁתֵּי חֲתִיכוֹת אַחַת שֶׁל חֵלֶב וְאַחַת שֶׁל שֻׁמָּן. וְאָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וּבָא עַכּוּ''ם אוֹ כֶּלֶב וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה. אוֹ שֶׁאָכַל עַכּוּ''ם אוֹ כֶּלֶב אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּבָא יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָכַל הַשְּׁנִיָּה. אוֹ שֶׁאָכַל רִאשׁוֹנָה בְּזָדוֹן וּשְׁנִיָּה בִּשְׁגָגָה. אוֹ שֶׁאָכַל רִאשׁוֹנָה בִּשְׁגָגָה וּשְׁנִיָּה בְּזָדוֹן. הֲרֵי זֶה חַיָּב בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי הוֹאִיל וְהָיָה שָׁמָּה אִסּוּר קָבוּעַ. אָכַל שְׁתֵּיהֶן בְּזָדוֹן פָּטוּר מִקָּרְבָּן. אָכַל שְׁתֵּיהֶן בִּשְׁגָגָה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. אָכַל אֶת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה בִּשְׁגָגָה וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה בִּשְׁגָגָה שְׁנֵיהֶן חַיָּבִין בְּאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

5

A transgressor is exempt from bringing a sacrifice in the following situations. There was a piece of forbidden fat and piece of notar before him. He ate one of them inadvertently, but did not know which one he ate. His wife who was in the niddah state and his sister were at home with him. He was intimate with one of them inadvertently, but did not know which one. The Sabbath and Yom Kippur followed directly after each other, he performed a forbidden labor in the twilight between them. He does not bring a sin-offering, because he does not know which transgression he performed, as we explained. Nor does he bring a provisional guilt-offering, because he knows with certainty that he transgressed.

ה

חֵלֶב וְנוֹתָר לְפָנָיו. אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן אָכַל. אִשְׁתּוֹ נִדָּה וַאֲחוֹתוֹ עִמּוֹ בַּבַּיִת וְשָׁגַג בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ מֵהֶן בָּעַל. שַׁבָּת וְיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים וְעָשָׂה מְלָאכָה בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן. הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר מִקָּרְבָּן וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא חַטָּאת שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ עַצְמוֹ שֶׁל חֵטְא כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וְאֵינוֹ מֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי שֶׁהֲרֵי יוֹדֵעַ בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁחָטָא:

6

Whenever a person performs a deed that obligates him for one fixed sin-offering when he knows with certainty that he transgressed, he is liable for a provisional guilt-offering if he is unsure whether he transgressed. Whenever a person performs a deed that obligates him for many fixed sin-offerings when he knows with certainty that he transgressed, he is liable for many provisional guilt-offerings, matching the number of sin-offerings, if he is unsure whether he transgressed.

What is implied? Just as a person who ate forbidden fat, blood, notar, and piggul in one lapse of awareness is liable for four sin-offerings,so, too, if he is uncertain whether he partook of them or not, he must bring four provisional guilt-offerings. Similarly, if he is unsure if the woman with whom he was intimate is his wife or so-and-so, another woman who is forbidden to him as an ervah and for whom he would be liable eight sin-offerings if he was intimate with her, he must bring eight provisional guilt-offerings.

ו

כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁחַיָּבִין עַל וַדָּאוֹ חַטָּאת קְבוּעָה אַחַת חַיָּבִין עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלּוֹ אָשָׁם תָּלוּי אֶחָד. וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁחַיָּבִין עַל וַדָּאוֹ חַטָּאוֹת הַרְבֵּה חַיָּבִין עַל לֹא הוֹדַע שֶׁלּוֹ אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין הַרְבֵּה כְּמִנְיַן הַחַטָּאוֹת. כֵּיצַד. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאִם אָכַל חֵלֶב וְדָם וְנוֹתָר וּפִגּוּל בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת חַיָּב אַרְבַּע חַטָּאוֹת. כָּךְ אִם נִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם אֲכָלָן אוֹ לֹא אָכַל אֶלָּא חֲתִיכוֹת שֶׁל הֶתֵּר שֶׁהָיוּ עִמָּהֶם מֵבִיא אַרְבָּעָה אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין. וְכֵן אִם נִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁבָּא עָלֶיהָ אִשְׁתּוֹ. אוֹ פְּלוֹנִית הָעֶרְוָה שֶׁהָיְתָה עִמָּהּ שֶׁחַיָּב עָלֶיהָ שְׁמוֹנֶה חַטָּאוֹת. הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא שְׁמוֹנָה אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין:

7

When a person ate one of two pieces of fat and he was unsure whether he ate forbidden fat or permitted fat, and after that doubt arose in his mind, he ate another one of two pieces of fat and he was unsure whether he ate forbidden fat or permitted fat, he must bring two provisional guilt-offerings.

ז

הָאוֹכֵל חֲתִיכָה מִשְּׁתֵי חֲתִיכוֹת וְנִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם שֶׁל חֵלֶב אָכַל אוֹ שֶׁל שֻׁמָּן אָכַל וְאַחַר שֶׁנּוֹלַד לוֹ הַסָּפֵק אָכַל חֲתִיכָה מִשְּׁתֵי חֲתִיכוֹת אֲחֵרוֹת וְנִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם שֶׁל חֵלֶב אָכַל אוֹ שֶׁל שֻׁמָּן. הֲרֵי זֶה מֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי אֲשָׁמוֹת תְּלוּיִין:

8

Just as the definitive knowledge that one transgressed creates a distinction with regard to sin-offerings, so too, the awareness that one possibly transgressed creates a distinction with regard to provisional guilt-offerings. Therefore if one partook of five olive-sized portions of forbidden fat in one lapse of awareness and then became aware of the possibility that he sinned with regard to one of them and later, became aware of the possibility that he sinned with regard to a second one, and then with regard to the subsequent ones, he is liable for a provisional guilt-offering for each one.

ח

כְּשֵׁם שֶׁיְּדִיעַת וַדַּאי בֵּינְתַיִם מְחַלֶּקֶת לְחַטָּאוֹת כָּךְ יְדִיעַת סָפֵק בֵּינְתַיִם מְחַלֶּקֶת לַאֲשָׁמוֹת. לְפִיכָךְ אִם אָכַל חֲמִשָּׁה זֵיתֵי חֵלֶב בְּהֶעְלֵם אַחַת. וְנוֹדַע לוֹ יְדִיעַת סָפֵק עַל אַחַת מֵהֶם וְחָזַר וְנוֹדַע לוֹ יְדִיעַת סָפֵק אַחֶרֶת עַל הַשֵּׁנִי. וְכֵן עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת. חַיָּב אָשָׁם תָּלוּי עַל כָּל אַחַת וְאַחַת:

9

When there is a piece of permitted fat and a piece of forbidden fat and a person ate one of them without knowing which and thus brought a provisional guilt-offering and then partook of the second piece of fat, he must bring a sin-offering. If another person partook of the second piece, that second person must bring a provisional guilt-offering, as stated.

ט

חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל שֻׁמָּן וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב. אָכַל אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ הִיא וְהֵבִיא אָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וְחָזַר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת. וְכֵן אִם אָכַל אַחֵר אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה מֵבִיא הָאַחֵר אָשָׁם תָּלוּי כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

10

When there is a piece of forbidden fat and a piece of forbidden fat that is notar and a person ate one of them without knowing which one, he must bring a sin-offering to atone for partaking of forbidden fat and a provisional guilt-offering because of the possibility that he partook of notar. If he ate the second piece in a second lapse of awareness, he must bring three sin-offerings. If the piece of notar was worth a p'rutah, he must also bring a definitive guilt-offering because of the misappropriation of consecrated articles.

If he ate one of the two pieces and another person came and ate the second, he should bring a sin-offering and a provisional guilt-offering and the second person should bring a sin-offering and a provisional guilt-offering. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

י

חֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב וַחֲתִיכָה שֶׁל חֵלֶב נוֹתָר. אָכַל אֶת אַחַת מֵהֶן וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אֵי זוֹ הִיא. מֵבִיא חַטָּאת עַל הַחֵלֶב וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי מִשּׁוּם נוֹתָר. אָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה בְּהֶעְלֵם שֵׁנִי מֵבִיא שָׁלֹשׁ חַטָּאוֹת. וְאִם הָיָה בָּהּ שְׁוֵה פְּרוּטָה מֵבִיא אָשָׁם וַדַּאי מִשּׁוּם מְעִילָה. אָכַל אֶחָד אֶת אַחַת מִשְּׁתֵּיהֶן. וּבָא אַחֵר וְאָכַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה. זֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי וְזֶה מֵבִיא חַטָּאת וְאָשָׁם תָּלוּי. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in the one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah