Study Horayot folio 3A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
“This is the law of the burnt-offering, it is that which goes up on its pyre on the altar” (Leviticus 6:2); these are 3 exclusionary terms: “This,” “the burnt-offering,” and “it is,” which serve to exclude 3 offerings concerning which the halakha is that even if they are placed on the altar they are
And if you wish, say that proof for the attribution of the baraitot may be cited from the second baraita, which begins with the phrase: Still I say. You cannot interpret that baraita in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda, as the baraita teaches: One might have thought that each member of a ma
§ Up to this point, the Talmud explained the Mishnah in accordance with the opinion of R' Yehuda and contrary to the opinion of the Rabbis, who disagree with him. And Rav Naḥman says that Shmuel says: The Mishnah is the statement of R' Meir, but the Rabbis say: An individual who performed a transgr
The Talmud asks: Who performed the transgression? If we say that it is the members of the court who performed the transgression, what is the reasoning of the Rabbis, who deem him liable? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: One might have thought that if the court issued a ruling and the members of the
Rather, the case in the baraita is where the court issued a ruling and the majority of the congregation performed a transgression on the basis of that ruling. If so, what is the reasoning of R' Meir, who deems them exempt? Rather, is it not referring to a case where the court issued a ruling and a