Q&A: Regarding an Unwitting Sin Requiring a Sacrifice and an Unwitting Sin Regarding Karet
Regarding an Unwitting Sin Requiring a Sacrifice and an Unwitting Sin Regarding Karet
Question
Peace be upon you,
Recently we learned the topic at the beginning of the chapter Kelal Gadol in tractate Sabbath. I saw that the Rabbi gave several lectures on the subject, and even put them in writing. Thank God, I benefited from them (even if I did not agree with everything), and therefore my thanks are extended to the Rabbi.
There are two questions that trouble me a bit regarding the topic, and I would be happy if you could answer them:
- The first question is connected to things that you yourself also wrote in the lecture. It is difficult to understand Rabbeinu Chananel’s approach in explaining Monbaz’s words there. What exactly is an unwitting sin requiring a sacrifice? What knowledge is the person lacking? Does the person not know that he is obligated to bring a sacrifice? But in truth, if he did know that he was obligated to bring a sacrifice, then paradoxically he would not be obligated to bring a sacrifice (similar to the question of the Kehillot Yaakov that you also mentioned). Fine—for Rashi and Tosafot, one can say that he does not know that there is a sin-offering obligation for a complete unwitting sin, and that is his lack of knowledge (and perhaps that even justifies “he would refrain because of that knowledge”). But what will Rabbeinu Chananel say? After all, the only situation in which a person is obligated to bring a sacrifice is when he did not know about an unwitting sin requiring a sacrifice, so what exactly does he not know? I saw that you suggested there, based on Tosafot, that perhaps there is a sacrifice even where there is also karet. Then apparently there is a solution for Rabbeinu Chananel’s words. But I also did not merit to understand that—what is the case? After all, even Monbaz agrees that a sin-offering applies only to an unwitting sin, whereas karet is for an intentional sin, so how can there be such a situation?
- Rabbi Yohanan and Reish Lakish disagreed about the view of the Rabbis: what exactly counts as the unwittingness. According to Rabbi Yohanan, it is enough that one be mistaken about karet, and he may even intentionally violate the prohibition and still be obligated to bring a sin-offering. My question is whether Rabbi Yohanan distinguishes between a person who knew that there is a karet obligation for labor on the Sabbath but forgot it, and a person who never knew that there is a karet obligation for labor on the Sabbath. Simply speaking, when the Talmud asks there what the unwittingness is according to the Sages, it seems that the discussion concerns a person who forgot the prohibition, and their whole argument is only about what counts as forgetting the prohibition.
Thank you in advance
Answer
1. I no longer remember the details, but even if someone who knows that there is a sacrifice obligation for his act is not liable for a sacrifice, there is no contradiction in that. He knows that there is a sacrifice obligation for someone who does not know that there is a sacrifice obligation, and therefore when he knows, he is not liable. But if he erred and does not know that, then he is liable.
Regarding Tosafot, perhaps the intention is that there is karet for one who intentionally transgressed but did not become judicially liable for it (for example, because there were no witnesses and no warning), and therefore he is considered unwitting with respect to the punishment (warning was given only to distinguish between unwitting and intentional), and consequently he would also be obligated to bring a sacrifice. A religious court cannot know that he is intentional without witnesses and warning, but the truth is that he is intentional, and therefore in Heaven he will incur karet. An interesting question is whether the sacrifice would exempt him from karet, like those liable to karet who received lashes.
2. In my opinion there is no difference. This is like the general rule in sin-offerings: it does not speak only about a person who knew and forgot. True, someone who never knew may perhaps be like one who says “it is permitted.” But in Maimonides, at the beginning of chapter 11 of the laws of unwitting sins, it is explained otherwise (only regarding the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sacred offerings is it so). Even someone who never knew is obligated to bring a sin-offering.