Horayot

If so,  however, let them also bring a bullock in the case of an erroneous ruling! And if it be said that this is really the case,  then there would be more tribes!  — But, said R. Aha, son of R. Jacob: The tribe of Levi is not called 'congregation',  for it is written, Behold, I will make thee fruitful and multiply thee, and I will make of thee a congregation of peoples etc.  He who has a possession is designated 'congregation', but he who has no possession is not designated 'congregation'.  If so,  there would be less than twelve tribes! — Abaye replied: Ephraim and Manasseh, even as Reuben and Simeon, shall be mine.  Said Raba: But, surely, it is written, They shall be called after the name of their brethren it, their inheritance,  [which shows that] they were compared only in regard to 'inheritance' but not in any other respect!  — Were they not? Surely, they were also separated [when mentioned] in [connection with] the banners!  — Their campings were like their possessions; in order to show respect to their banners. But, surely, they were also separated in respect of their princes!  — That was done in order to show honor to the princes, as it was taught: 'Solomon celebrated seven days of dedication; what reason did Moses have for celebrating twelve days of dedication? In order to show honor to the princes.' What becomes of that?  — Come and hear that which has been taught: R. Simeon said: The following five kinds of sin offerings are to be left to die.  The young of a sin offering,  the exchange of a sin offering, a sin offering whose owner died — a sin offering whose owner has received atonement  and a sin offering that passed the age of a year. And since in the case of a congregation one cannot speak of the young of a sin offering, because no female offering is ever brought  by a congregation; and one cannot speak of an exchange of a sin offering in the case of a congregation because a congregation may not exchange an offering;  and one cannot speak, in the case of a congregation, of a sin offering whose owner died because a congregation does not die; while as regards one whose owner had received atonement and one that passed the age of a year we have not heard;  one might suppose that they should be left to die, it is, therefore, pointed out  that what is vague may be inferred from what is explicit; as in regard to the law  of the young of a sin offering, the exchange of a sin offering and one whose owner had died we find that it applies only to an individual owner  and not to a congregation, so also the law  in regard to the case of one whose owner has received atonement and one that passed the age of a year it is applicable to an individual and not to a congregation.  But may that which is possible  be deduced from that which is impossible?  — R. Simeon received the tradition [in regard to the five kinds of sin offering that they must be left to die] from one common source. MISHNAH. AN ANOINTED HIGH PRIEST  WHO MADE A DECISION FOR HIMSELF  THROUGH ERROR AND ACTED UNWITTINGLY ACCORDINGLY, MUST BRING A SIN OFFERING OF A BULLOCK.  IF, HOWEVER, HE MADE THE DECISION THROUGH ERROR BUT ACTED UPON IT WILFULLY, OR MADE IT WILFULLY BUT ACTED UPON IT UNWITTINGLY, HE IS EXEMPT; FOR A DECISION A HIGH PRIEST MADE FOR HIMSELF IS LIKE A RULING ISSUED BY THE COURT TO THE CONGREGATION. GEMARA. THROUGH ERROR AND ACTED UNWITTINGLY ACCORDINGLY MUST BRING A SIN OFFERING OF A BULLOCK. Is not this Obvious? — Abaye replied: The case dealt with here is one, for example, where  he made a decision and forgot on what ground his decision had been made, and at the time of his action  he declared, 'I am acting on the strength of my  decision;' in view of the fact that [in such a case] it might be assumed that, since, had he recollected  he might have retracted, he is like a wilful sinner  and, therefore, not liable to a sin offering, hence it was taught [that it is not so]. OR MADE IT WILFULLY BUT ACTED UPON IT UNWITTINGLY etc. Whence these words? — For our Rabbis taught: So as to bring guilt upon the people,  proves  that the anointed High Priest is like the congregation.  Could not this be arrived at by deduction?