Study Horayot folio 7B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Rav Pappa says: The reference is to a case where both the anointed priest and the court, i.e., the judges, were distinguished Torah scholars with the authority to issue rulings.
§ Abaye thought to say that with regard to the cases in the Mishnah: If the anointed priest sinned by himself and performed a transgression by himself, what are the circumstances? It is a case where the priest and the court were convened in two different places and issuing rulings with regard to tw
The Talmud continues: It is obvious that in a case where the anointed priest issued a ruling with regard to forbidden fat and the judges issued a ruling with regard to idol worship, it is a case where the anointed priest sinned by himself. As in this case the rulings are distinct in terms of their r
But in a case where the anointed priest issued a ruling with regard to forbidden fat that covers the innards, For example: and the judges issued a ruling with regard to forbidden fat that is on the small intestines, what is the halakha? Do we say: Although their offerings are equal, nevertheless,
The Talmud continues: If you say that the category of forbidden fat is one designation, then in a case where the priest issues a ruling with regard to forbidden fat and the judges issue a ruling with regard to blood, what is the halakha? Do we say they are distinct in terms of their reasons, as eac