אבות ו׳:י״א - הוריות א׳:א׳

Only for His honor: [meaning,] for his praise.

Rabbi Chananya ben Akashia says, etc.: He did not say his statement concerning Tractate Avot, but rather in Tractate Makkot in [the chapter entitled] Ellu hen HaLokin. And since there is a nice ending to it, all the people are accustomed to say it at the end of each and every chapter, since we do not say Kaddish over mishnah but rather over aggadah (homiletical teachings). As the master said (Sotah 49a), ("Upon what does the world survive? Upon the Kedushah of the order) and upon the [declaration in Kaddish,] 'May His name be exalted' of aggadah." And these [chapters] were called The Chapters of the Fathers because they are the words that were arranged of the first fathers - that received the Torah one from another. For example, Moshe and Yehoshua and the elders [received it] one from the other, up until the men of the Great Assembly and Shammai and Hillel and Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai and their students. And Rebbi [who redacted the Mishnah] let us know how their actions were correct and that they would caution the people of their generations and guide them in the straight path. So too is it fitting for each sage to caution the people of his generation and to let them know of the straight path.

The beit din told the people that they are permitted to do (i.e. to transgress a commandment) one of the things for which the punishment is “karet”.

Rabbi Yehuda says that one who acted based on the beit din’s ruling is exempt. This is not the law. The rabbis said that an individual who acted based on the beit din’s ruling is obligated. He is not exempt until the majority of residents in the Land of Israel, or the majority of the tribes, act according to the beit din’s ruling, and then the beit din brings the bull for a communal error-in-judgment (para ha’elem davar) sacrifice, and those who acted according to the beit din’s ruling are exempt.

To exclude the case of one who does not rely on the beit din’s ruling, such as a case where the beit din ruled that forbidden fat (chelev) is permitted and the forbidden fat was switched with permitted fat (shuman) and he ate it; he is obligated because he did not eat it based on the beit din’s ruling.

If the beit din acted, i.e. upon its erroneous ruling, the individual is exempt and the beit din is obligated. The beit din does not bring an offering/sacrifice except when a person acted on an erroneous ruling, where the community acted and the beit din ruled.

Even though he transgressed wilfully, in that he knew the beit din ruled erroneously and still acted according to its ruling, he is not considered a wilful sinner who must bring an offering because in the gemara it says that he sinned in error, because he thought it was a positive commandment to act according to the beit din’s ruling, even when he knows the beit din is wrong.

That he rejects their ruling, that he does not usually act according to their ruling, but he acted according to the beit din’s ruling not because he relied on it but because in his own opinion it was permitted to do – therefore, he is obligated.