do you any maarei mikomos on ignorance of the law is a valid excuse for either a yisroel and or a ben noach?
thank you
mendel wax, baltimore md
Dear Mendel,
(a) The Gemara Bava Kama 92a says that if a Ben Noach sins and says he thought that the act is permissible - he is culpable because he should have learned his responsibility - i.e. he cannot claim ignorance.
In Makos 9a, Abaye says Omer Mutar is considered Ones, but Rava considers it "close to Mezid". Rava's opinion seems to be consistent with the Gemara in Bava Kama that we mentioned.
The Rambam (Melachim 10:1) says a Ben Noach is killed when he does something wrong thinking that it is permitted since it is "close to Mezid" and a Ben Noach is only Patur by Shogeg.
(b) If a Jew does something wrong thinking that it is permitted (Omer Mutar), it is definitely not considered an Ones, yet it is also not equated with Mezid.
The Taz (Yoreh Deah 99:9) and the Magen Avraham (Orach Chaim 318:3 regarding a person who forgets the Halachah) call it Shogeg. Rebbi Akiva Eiger (Teshuva #206) calls a woman who marries without Chalitzah because she didn't know the details of Hilchos Yibum, "close to Mezid." See Yad Avraham on the Taz there and the Frankel edition of the Rambam Melachim 10:1 for more sources.
All the best,
Reuven Weiner
How about the Mishna in Avos Shegegas Talmud Oleh Zadon?
Dear Meir,
Rashi (Bava Metzia 33b DH sheShigigas explains that a Talmid Chacham is considered Mazid when he uses the wrong reason to explain the Halacha and therefore applies it wrongly to another case since he should have known from his teacher the correct reason.
Rashi in Avos explains that a Talmid Chacham is capable and therefore responsible to delve deeper in order not to err.
All the best,
Reuven Weiner