Horayot 1:2
How up-to-date must you keep for compliance?
讛讜专讜 讘讬转 讚讬谉, 讜讬讚注讜 砖讟注讜, 讜讞讝专讜 讘讛谉, 讘讬谉 砖讛讘讬讗讜 讻驻专转谉 讜讘讬谉 砖诇讗 讛讘讬讗讜 讻驻专转谉, 讜讛诇讱 讜注砖讛 注诇 驻讬讛谉, 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 驻讜讟专, 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讗讜诪专, 住驻拽. 讗讬讝讛讜 住驻拽, 讬砖讘 诇讜 讘转讜讱 讘讬转讜, 讞讬讘. 讛诇讱 诇讜 诇诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐, 驻讟讜专. 讗诪专 专讘讬 注拽讬讘讗, 诪讜讚讛 讗谞讬 讘讝讛 砖讛讜讗 拽专讜讘 诇驻讟讜专 诪谉 讛讞讜讘讛. 讗诪专 诇讜 讘谉 注讝讗讬, 诪讛 砖谞讛 讝讛 诪谉 讛讬讜砖讘 讘讘讬转讜, 砖讛讬讜砖讘 讘讘讬转讜 讗驻砖专 讛讬讛 诇讜 砖讬砖诪注, 讜讝讛 诇讗 讛讬讛 讗驻砖专 诇讜 砖讬砖诪注.
If a court issued a ruling, then realized its error and retracted [the ruling]鈥攚hether they had already brought their expiation offering or they had not brought their expiation offering鈥攁nd then a man went and acted based on their [first] ruling: Rabbi Shimon exempts [him from liability], and Rabbi Eliezer says it鈥檚 in doubt. What is the doubt? If [he followed the mistaken ruling] while at home then he is liable, but if while traveling abroad, he is exempt. Rabbi Akiva says, I agree regarding the one who is nearby [local] that he should be exempt from liability. Ben Azzai said to him, what is the distinction between this one [who is at home] and thus liable? [Rabbi Akiva replied], the one at home could have heard [the corrected ruling], but the other one [who was local, but preparing to travel] did not have the chance to hear [the corrected ruling].
Comments
Tractate Horayot, the final volume of Seder Nezikin, deals with court proceedings and errors by appointed officials, including the priesthood. In our mishnah, the court has retracted a ruling, but not before their erroneous instruction had been issued to the public. To what extent does the public remain responsible to keep updated on subsequent rulings of the court? Rabbi Eliezer compares the liability to doubt, a legal category that would require the transgressor to bring a special sacrifice calledasham talui (potential error offering). Rabbi Akiva is even more lenient, exempting not only the traveler but even one preparing to travel from the obligation to keep current with court rulings.
Questions
- Travelers (and even those about to travel) are exempt from the expectation of remaining current on rulings of the court. Would this be different in an era of broadcast journalism?
- Few citizens today are aware of all current legislation and judicial interpretation. To what extent should ignorance be an excuse for violating a law?
