Horayot הוריות

The primary focus of tractate Horayot is erroneous rulings issued by the court and unwitting actions performed by prominent leaders of the Jewish people, and the offerings they are liable to bring to atone for this.

The commentaries ask: Why does this tractate, which addresses the halakhot of offerings and is codified by the Rambam in Sefer Korbanot, Hilkhot Shegagot, appear in the order of Nezikin, instead of in the more appropriate order of Kodashim? The reason is that this tractate is both an addition and a complement to tractate Sanhedrin. After analyzing the halakhot of judges and courts, especially the Sanhedrin, it was necessary to complete treatment of the topic by addressing the matter of erroneous rulings issued by a court. Human nature includes the potential for error; therefore, this tractate, which addresses erroneous rulings of the court and the ways in which one can gain atonement for them, was placed in the order of Nezikin (see Rambam's introduction to his Commentary on the Mishna).

The halakhot of atonement offerings for the entire nation and for prominent individuals among the people appear in two passages in the Torah (Leviticus 4:1-35; Numbers 15:22-29). The Sages explain that the first passage addresses the case of an unwitting transgression performed by the congregation in violation of any one of the mitzvot in the Torah, and the second passage addresses a case where the congregation engages in unwitting idol worship.

It is written concerning the unwitting transgression performed by the entire congregation: “And if the whole congregation of Israel shall err, and the matter is hidden from the eyes of the congregation” (Leviticus 4:13), and: “If it was performed unwittingly, hidden from the eyes of the congregation” (Numbers 15:24). These are, of necessity, interpreted with regard to an erroneous ruling issued to the public. An individual is apt to unwittingly perform an action due to ignorance of the halakha, forgetfulness, or ignorance with regard to the time or the place, e.g., if he is unaware that it is Shabbat. An unwitting transgression performed by the public is possible only when its leadership issues an erroneous ruling and draws the entire congregation after their ruling.

It is explained in the Torah with regard to the Sanhedrin: “And you shall come unto the priests the Levites, and unto the judge that shall be in those days...from that place that the Lord shall choose” (Deuteronomy 17:9-10). This teaches that the Sanhedrin is the ultimate authority, and one may not deviate from its rulings “to the right nor to the left” (Deuteronomy 17:11). Anyone who defies this court is liable to be executed (see Deuteronomy 17:12; Sanhedrin 86b-88b). Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that it is only the Sanhedrin that could lead the entire congregation to follow its ruling and unwittingly perform a transgression, and it is only that court which can reverse its ruling and concede that its initial conclusion was mistaken.

Since the reference in the verse is to the Sanhedrin and to an erroneous ruling its members issued, it is clear that the error in question does not involve abolition of matters written explicitly in the Torah. Although there were times when the public and its leadership violated the Torah, in those cases they performed the transgressions intentionally, as the Sages said: Eretz Yisrael was not destroyed until seven courts engaged in idol worship (Yalkut Shimoni). An unwitting erroneous ruling of the court is possible only as a result of incorrect interpretation of the details of a mitzva that causes unwitting performance of a transgression with regard to those details.

It is not explicit in the Torah whether these halakhot concerning unwitting transgressions are stated with regard to all mitzvot or only with regard to certain mitzvot. Rabbinic tradition corresponding to the meaning of the verses holds that these halakhot apply only to severe transgressions, with regard to which it is stated: “But the soul that shall perform an action highhandedly...shall be cut off” (Numbers 15:30).

The passage in the Torah that discusses unwitting actions accords special status to two public figures: The anointed High Priest and the Nasi, i.e., the king. These two are preeminent relative to the rest of the Jewish people, the High Priest in terms of sanctity and the king in terms of leadership. For these two there is a system of halakhot unique to them: For the High Priest in Leviticus 21:10-15 and for the king in Deuteronomy 17:14-20. Due to their standing they have unique obligations, and the offerings that they bring for their unwitting transgressions differ from those of the rest of the people.

Since tractate Horayot deals with unique individuals and their special standing, the tractate includes a fundamental discussion concerning the hierarchy within the Jewish people. While individuals who fill special roles have unique status with respect to sin-offerings they bring, the distinction is not limited to this. In the Torah itself there are distinctions between different groups within the population: Priests, Levites, and Israelites; those with flawed lineage, who may not marry into the Jewish people; the judge; and the convert and orphan.

Determining the hierarchy among the Jewish people is not limited to the matter of treating individuals with deference. Rather, it is the key to resolution of many practical problems. Although it would be desirable for all indigent Jews to have all their needs met, there are many cases where one must establish a hierarchy to determine precedence. This hierarchy plays a role in determining which person to appoint to fill a certain position. Likewise, it plays a role in determining which captive to redeem first or whose life to rescue first. Establishing this hierarchy is a necessity of life, and it is only appropriate that it be established within the framework of halakha rather than being decided arbitrarily on an ad hoc basis.

These are the central topics addressed in tractate Horayot. As usual, the Gemara discusses several matters that are related to or arise from them. Halakhic and aggadic statements related to the anointment of the High Priest and the king appear in this tractate, along with the theoretical and practical problems concerning treating others with deference and according precedence to one individual at the expense of another.

There are three chapters in tractate Horayot. Although each addresses a central topic of its own, there are matters that continue from one chapter to another. Certain topics introduced in the first chapter are discussed in the second chapter as well, and some introduced in the second chapter are discussed in the third.

Chapter One discusses the matter of the bull brought as a communal sin-offering. Among the questions are: With regard to what communal group is this halakha stated? What is the relationship between the court and the public? What is the definition of an unwitting transgression for which one is liable to bring an offering?

Chapter Two addresses the halakhot of unwitting transgressions performed by an anointed priest or the Nasi, i.e., the king. The discussion of the definition of an unwitting transgression for which one is liable to bring an offering continues in this chapter as well.

In Chapter Three the Gemara examines the following issues: Who is the priest known as the anointed priest, and to whom does the Torah refer with the term Nasi? In what circumstances are these two individuals liable to bring their unique offerings? The discussion expands to include the halakhic differences with regard to the status and precedence of various members of the Jewish people.