Verse structure: 4 words, 18 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·spoke" (וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר, 5 letters). 4 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "saying" (root אמר, 79x in Leviticus); "and·spoke" (root דבר, 76x in Leviticus). Full calculation: וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר [and·spoke] (222) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה [to·Moses] (376) + לֵּאמֹֽר [saying] (271) = 895.
Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If any one shall sin through error, in any of the things which Hashem has commanded not to be done, and shall do any one of them:
verse value 5251 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 65 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "not" (לֹ֣א, 2 letters) and the longest is "when·one·shall·sin" (כִּֽי־תֶחֱטָ֤א, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "from·them" (מֵהֵֽנָּה). The root עשה appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "not" (root לא, 188x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root חטא ("when·one·shall·sin") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root שגג ("in·error") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'shall·be·done', dividing the verse into phrases of 13 and 3 words.
Onkelos
Speak with the children of Israel, saying: If a person sins inadvertently against any of the commandments of Hashem that are not lawful to be done, and commits one of them —
Rashi
'מכל מצות ה [IF A SOUL SIN IN ERROR] AGAINST ANY OF THE COMMANDMENTS OF THE LORD — Our Rabins explained ( Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 7; Shabbat 69a) that a sin-offering (of which this chapter speaks) is brought only for such a thing the wilful committal of which is forbidden by a לאו (a negative command) and is subject to the penalty of excision). מאחת מהנה — The prefix in מאחת, being the partitive מ, suggests: even if one infringes only a part of one of them. as, for instance, if one writes on Sabbath the two letters שם of the name שמעון having intended to write the whole word, or the letters נח of the word נחור, or דן of דניאל (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 1 4; Shabbat 103b).
Ramban
IF A SOUL SHALL SIN IN ERROR. Since the process of thinking is centered in the soul, and it is the soul which commits the error, Scripture mentions here nefesh (soul). The reason for the offerings for the erring soul is that all sins [even if committed unwittingly] produce a particular “stain” upon the soul and constitute a blemish thereon, and the soul is only worthy to be received by the countenance of its Creator when it is pure of all sin. Were it not so, then all the fools of the world would be deserving to come before Him. It is for this reason that the erring soul brings an offering, through which it becomes worthy of approaching unto G-d who gave it. It is on account of this that Scripture mentions here nefesh (soul). Our Rabbis have interpreted: “‘Nefesh’ (A soul) — this [word is used to] include proselytes and slaves” [thus teaching us that they too are under the obligation of bringing this offering, since the term nefesh is inclusive of them as well].Now in the case of the sin-offering of the anointed priest [first discussed here in Verses 3-12], He does not say “and [the priest] shall make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven,” as He mentions in the case of other sinners — namely, the whole congregation, the prince, and the common man. Perhaps the reason for this is that due to his great importance he cannot obtain atonement nor be forgiven completely until he prays and beseeches his G-d, for he is the messenger of the Eternal of hosts, and he must be of clean and pure hands [so that he can never be reproached with anything; hence in addition to the offering he must bring, he must also pray especially for forgiveness].Scripture does not mention here, when speaking about the bulls which were to be entirely burnt, that the burning of those portions offered on the altar is “of a pleasing odor,” or that it is “a fire-offering unto the Eternal.” The reason for this is that since part of them is burnt outside [the camp of Israel], it is therefore not for “the fire unto the Eternal.” In the case of the goat of the prince [which he brings as his sin-offering], He mentioned “atonement” [and the priest shall make atonement for him] but did not state that it is “a fire-offering, of a pleasing odor unto the Eternal,” because the offering is a sa’ir (a goat). In the case of the sin-offering of the common person, He mentions that it is for a pleasing odor unto the Eternal, but does not mention “a fire-offering,” for it is self-understood that it is such, since the whole purpose of the fire-offering is to the Eternal. The student learned [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand.
Ibn Ezra
"A person (nefesh) who sins" — [this refers to sinning] unintentionally against one of the negative commandments for which there is [ordinarily] the penalty of karet or lashes. The word nefesh is a general term encompassing both Israelites and the resident alien, as it is indeed written [in this way]. Afterward the text specifies, beginning with the High Priest, who is the anointed priest.
Or HaChaim
דבר אל בני ישראל, "speak to the children of Israel, etc." Torat Kohanim uses the expression בני ישראל as excluding Gentiles from offering sin-offerings in the event they violated any of the seven Noachide laws. This appears very difficult. Why should the idea that they could offer such sacrifices ever have arisen so that the Torah needed to refute it? If we would have made a comparison with the Gentile's right to offer free-will offerings, there is no comparison seeing that those offerings were not meant to achieve atonement as we know from Chulin 5 where the Talmud debated the source of denying the heretic the right to offer either total-offerings or sin-offerings respectively. The Talmud there makes it plain that the two kinds of offerings cannot be derived one from the other unless there was something in the text alluding to such entitlement. One argument used there is that if someone were denied to offer a free-will offering it does not follow automatically that he should be barred from offering a sin-offering seeing the latter is designed to help him achieve atonement. The same argument can be used here. As a result of such considerations, the Gentile would have been presumed as entitled to offer sin-offerings. The Torah therefore had to write בני ישראל, to exclude him from the privilege to offer such offerings. It appears to me that the need for this exclusion was accentuated by the word נפש which the Torah used in the very same verse in which it described who would be required (or entitled) to bring a sin-offering. The word נפש suggests that any human being is included in the legislation about to be unveiled. By writing first בני ישראל, the Torah enabled us to use the inclusive term נפש as including proselytes. The obvious question is why the Torah did not simply omit both the words בני ישראל and נפש, and I would have excluded the Gentiles and included the proselytes? What possible reason could there have been to exclude the proselyte from the privilege to offer a sin-offering that prompted the Torah to write a word designed to include him? This is no objection as we find that the Torah had included proselytes already in 1,2 where the Torah used the term אדם, and this term included proselytes. We would naturally have assumed that proselytes were included only in the right to offer burnt-offerings but not sin-offerings. The Torah therefore had to write the word נפש in our verse to tell us that proselytes have the right to offer sin-offerings. Unless the Torah had also excluded the Gentiles by the restrictive term בני ישראל, one could have argued that proselytes did not need to be specifically included as they had already been included at the beginning of the portion with the word אדם. I would then have concluded that the absence of any further restrictive clause indicated that the Torah has no objection to Gentiles offering sin-offerings. We have now learned that the word נפש here, though inclusive, includes only the proselyte and that ...
Chizkuni
כי תחטא בשגגה, “if you transgress a law inadvertently;” sin offerings as a form of atonement are acceptable only when that sin had not been committed deliberately. Deliberately committed sins cannot be atoned for by that method. [There are some exceptions. Ed.] מאחת מהנה, “of one of these;” the first letter מ in this expression is unnecessary, whereas the second letter מ introduces examples. An example of a similar construction is found in Hoseah 4,9: כעם ככהן, “ordinary people (will fare) as well as priests.” Another such construction can be found in Kings II 3,7: כמוני כמוך, כעמי כעמך, כסוסי כסוסיך, “I will do what you do; my troops will be your troops; my horses will be your horses.” A third example of such a construction is found in Psalms 139,12: כחשכה כאורה, “darkness is like light.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
נפש כי תחטא בשגגה , “when a person will sin inadvertently, etc.” The expression נפש includes the body and the invisible life-force. When G’d began to create man in Genesis 2,7 we find that the Torah wrote וייצר ה' אלו-הים את האדם עפר מן האדמה, “the Lord G’d formed man dust from the soil;” afterwards, the Torah added that “He blew into his nostrils a living soul;” as a result of these two parts being joined together man, i.e. האדם, became a living being, i.e. נפש חיה. In other words, the word אדם means “a combination of body and spirit.” The word הנפש just as האדם refers to a combination of body and spirit. It is important for us to know this so that we appreciate that whatever reward or punishment G’d metes out He metes out to both body and spirit. The spirit alone, or the body alone, are not capable of performing actions which qualify for either reward or punishment. This is the meaning of Leviticus 17,10: ונתתי פני בנפש האוכלת את הדם, “I will set My face against the person eating the blood, etc.” This is clear proof that the Torah calls the combination of body and spirit נפש, as the spirit by itself could not eat, and even if it could, it would not be culpable. When the Torah concludes the above verse it writes והכרתי אותו, “I will wipe him out, etc.” Seeing that the word נפש was treated as feminine at the beginning of this verse, it is clear that the Torah switching from the feminine to the masculine wants to teach us that the term נפש refers to the combination of spirit, נשמה, (feminine) and body i.e. עפר (masculine). In our verse here we also find the Torah using once the feminine כי תחטא instead of כי יחטא, whereas at the same time the Torah speaks of ועשה, “and he committed,” instead of ועשתה, “and she committed.” This grammatically otherwise untenable combination is proof that man is a composition of body and spirit. In the next verse the Torah describes such an unintentional sin by the High Priest with the words: אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, “If the High Priest sins” (all masculine). The formula is in order as the High Priest consists of body and spirit. Seeing that the term נפש has been used by the Torah in Genesis to describe man, we find in a variety of instances that the Torah employs the same term when speaking of a living human being. Whenever this term occurs it never refers to the invisible spirit alone but always to a human being, i.e. a combination of body and spirit. On other occasions when the Torah describes the creature addressed as אדם, what is meant is also this combination of body and spirit. However, in other parts of the Bible, we do encounter the term נפש as applying only to the body. Examples are Kings I 20,31 where the servants of Ben Haddad advise their king to surrender himself to the Jewish king, claiming that the soft-hearted King Achav might spare his life. The word נפשך in that line can hardly apply to Ben Haddad’s soul as it was not within the power of Achav to make dispositions of Ben Haddad’s soul. Besides souls are not mortal. When the prophet Bileam wished himself a death such as the death of the righteous (Numbers 23,10) he referred to his body only seeing the soul is not mortal anyway. Our sages (in Sifra nedavah 1,1), comment as follows on the words נפש כי תחטא, “the expression נפש is meant to include converts and slaves of the Jews.” We have another Midrash (Tanchuma Vayikra 6) according to which the emphasis of the verse is on the words בשגגה, inadvertently. The Torah refers to what Solomon spoke about in Proverbs 19,2 “it is also not good for a person (נפש) to lack knowledge, he who rushes in with his feet sins.” This verse applies to two individuals, Achav ben Kulliah and Tzidkiyah ben Massiayh who were junior prophets (disciples of a school of prophets) at the time of the last King of Yehudah Tzidkiyah in Jerusalem, and who, according to tradition committed sins in Jerusalem and even after having been exiled continued sinning in Babylon. Their sin consisted in abusing their supposed prophetic powers to gain access to married women having in mind immoral and illegitimate relations with these women. They would obtain these women’s husbands permission to be alone with their wives by claiming that they had a message for them from G’d which was only for their ears. Once they had gained access to these women they told them that G’d wanted them to become the mothers of future prophets. They would therefore suggest that the woman in question have intercourse with their respective friend and partner in crime so that the lady would become pregnant. Seeing that they did not demand sexual satisfaction for themselves but for another their story sounded more plausible and they were not suspected of being corrupt. They made this kind of deceit their regular mode of operation. Although they were such exceedingly wicked men they established for themselves a reputation of being great prophets in Babylon. Seeing that they had such a reputation pregnant women would ask them if they were going to give birth to a male child or to a female child. They would tell the pregnant woman that she would have son, but at the same time tell her girlfriend that the woman in question would have a daughter. When the woman who had been told she would have a son found that she gave birth to a daughter, her girlfriend would tell her that she knew this all along as the prophet had told her in confidence. The reason he had not told this to the pregnant woman was in order to save her the distress over expecting a daughter and having to endure pregnancy with such a prospect all the time. Eventually, one of them approached the wife of King Nebuchadnezzar in a similar fashion, asking that she sleep with his friend if she wanted to become the mother of a prophet. The lady said that she would not agree unless her husband had agreed to this first. She told the King about what Tzidkiyah had proposed to her, i.e. that she sleep with Achav. The King called in both Achav and Tzidkiyah repeating what his wife told him, but adding that he was aware that the G’d of the Jews hated all manner of sexual licentiousness. He quoted the example of Zimri ben Salu who had been slain by Pinchas on account of sleeping with the princess of Midian, and how prior to Pinchas’ deed 24,000 Israelites had died by the plague because they committed the sin of sexual licentiousness. He challenged them to prove that they were not false prophets. He told them that once before he had wanted to know if Chananyah, Mishael and Azzaryah had been true prophets of the G’d in heaven and in order to know he heated a kiln for seven days, threw them into it bound hands and feet and they walked out unharmed. The King proposed that when examining Tzidkiyah and Achav he would heat up the same kiln for only one day. If G’d would save them he would recognise them as true prophets and would agree that his wife become pregnant by one of them. Thereupon these two fakers said that seeing Chananyah, Mishael and Azzaryah were three it was understandable that G’d extended Himself in order to save them. Seeing there were only the two of them, it was unlikely that G’d would perform a miracle on their account. Nebuchadnezzar countered that there was indeed a third man, a Jew who used to be the High Priest in Jerusalem. He, Nebuchadnezzar, would throw all three of them into the heated kiln and they would find out the result. The two false prophets were now encouraged by this, thinking that G’d would save them as He would not allow the High Priest to die such a death. They therefore agreed to the test. Nebuchadnezzar threw all three of them into the kiln; the two false prophets were burned whereas the High Priest Yehoshua was saved. This is the reason that Zecharyah 3,2 described this High Priest as “a brand who had been saved from the fire.” The incidence of these two false prophets Achav and Tzidkiyah became so widely known during the exile of the Jews in Babylon that when people had occasion to curse someone they would curse them by saying: “may G’d treat you as the King of Babylon treated Achav and Tzidkiyah whom he consigned to the flames (Jeremiah 29,22).” When trying to determine what was the downfall of these two men, we are reminded of their eagerness to run and commit sins (Proverbs 19,2), something far worse than being unable to resist temptation when it comes one’s way.
Kli Yakar
When a soul sins. We find three expressions regarding sinners: ki [when/if], im [if], and asher [that/who]. For an individual sinner, it is written When/if a soul sins. For many sinners, it says (4:13) If the entire congregation of Israel errs. And regarding a ruler, it is written (4:22) That a ruler sins. The commentators have said that the term ki indicates more certainty than the term im, and the term asher indicates more certainty than the term ki. Therefore, regarding the sin of the masses, which is something uncommon — for many to agree upon a sin — it says If the entire congregation of Israel errs, which indicates doubt. Similarly, regarding the anointed priest, it says (4:3) If the anointed priest sins, because it is remote and uncommon for the anointed priest or many people to sin. But an ordinary individual easily comes to sin; therefore it says When a soul sins, as the term ki indicates something that is almost certain to happen. However, the ruler who lifts himself above everyone and conducts his authority haughtily will certainly come to sin through his pride; therefore it says That a ruler sins, for the term asher indicates something that will definitely occur without doubt. And so you will find in the Zohar, in Rabbeinu Bachya, and in Toldot Yitzchak. But I find this difficult because if so, why does it say (4:27) And if one soul sins — why does it mention for an individual sometimes the term “im” and sometimes the term “ki”? And furthermore, why does it say one soul, since by saying soul we know it is one and not two? And if the Scripture’s way is to say one soul, then why does it say When a soul sins and not say “one”? And it seems to me that it is common in the world that every individual who sins unintentionally, sins in matters where he sees many people stumbling and not being careful about that matter. Therefore, he errs in saying that no sin will befall him in this matter. And it is an extremely rare minority where you have some individual who sins even in a matter where he does not see many people stumbling in that matter, and he is unique in this behavior. This is something that is not common and his thinking is extraordinary. Therefore, it says, And if one soul shall sin (Leviticus 4:27). This means that the sinner would be one soul alone and would have no parallel or companion among the creatures. This is something uncommonly found, therefore the Torah uses the language of if, which indicates doubt, similar to what is said regarding the anointed priest and the Sanhedrin. But when it says a soul that sins, it does not mention the word “one” because this speaks of an individual who sins in matters where he sees that many are not careful about it. Therefore, the matter is common and it is almost certain that he too will stumble in it, hence the Torah uses the language of when [ki]. And as a sort of proof for this is what is written, and if one soul sins unintentionally, from the people of the land. This means that he is distinct in this sin from the people of the land, as he does not see others doing it and yet he does it. But with the language of when [ki], the phrase from the people of the land is not mentioned. And by way of allusion, one could say that this is why it is written “unintentionally from the people of the land.” To tell you that specifically for the common person it is considered unintentional, but the error of a Torah scholar is considered intentional. This is a proper allusion. And what is written And if a soul sins (Leviticus 5:17), it mentions if and when because this refers to the guilt offering of uncertainty [asham talui], and it uses the term when because it speaks of an individual who is almost certainly to come to sin. However, regarding the essence of the sin, it uses the term if, because such a sin is not common that one would have before him two pieces, one of fat, etc. Another explanation for why it says And if one soul sins is because it speaks of an individual who separates himself from the community, as it is written from the people of the land, meaning he separates himself from the people of the land and does not dwell among the common people because he fears lest he learn from their deeds. In this case, he is not likely to come to sin, therefore the term if is used, indicating doubt.
Tur HaArokh
נפש כי תחטא בשגגה, “when a person commits a sin of commission inadvertently, etc.” Nachmanides writes that the reason why the Torah prefaced this verse with the word נפש instead of the customary איש, is that we find when a person of no particular category is meant, that sin originates in our thoughts, and the biological soul, life force, is where our thoughts originate from, the Torah implies that the source of our sins lies not in a biological necessity, instinctive behaviour, but in our spiritual part. The rationale for the need of the person who has sinned inadvertently to have to atone by means of animal sacrifice, is that all sins bring in their wake stains which leave their marks on our souls, something which interferes with our ability to receive beneficial Divine input from celestial sources. Our personalities are only fully receptive to divine input when we can be described as ritually pure, in the sense of being free from unexpiated sin. To impress these thoughts upon us, the Torah chose the introductory word נפש here. Interestingly, in the case of the High Priest becoming guilty of any of the inadvertent sins the Torah does not mention in connection with the atonement for his sin the words וכפר עליו ונסלח לו, “he will provide atonement for him and it shall be forgiven to him.” Perhaps the Torah here hints at a criticism directed at the High Priest concerned, who, in spite of his stature, could become guilty of a sin caused by negligence. Possibly, for such a person the sacrifice will not obtain total forgiveness. The High Priest may have to add prayers asking G’d for forgiveness and apologising for being somehow remiss in his conduct before the balance of his guilt will be forgiven. Seeing that he has been likened to מלאך ה' צבאות, “an angel of the Lord of Hosts”, he needs to –allegorically speaking- have clean hands at all times. Some commentators see in the absence of the words וכפר עליו ונסלח לו, an allusion to the Talmudic rule (Baba Metzia 33) that שגגת תלמוד עולה זדון, “errors committed by a scholar are accounted as if they were deliberate,” because their standing in the community does not permit them to be careless.” When speaking of the פרים הנשרפים, the sin offerings by such High Priests, (Zevachim 5,2) and their being burned up, the customary statements that this will be a source of pleasant aroma, ריח ניחוח for Hashem, is missing, also indicating that the High Priest’s negligence has not yet been forgiven completely, even though he has offered the requisite offering.
Rashbam
אשר לא תעשינה, all the negative commandments violation of which carries the karet penalty when the violation was deliberate. There are only two positive commandments for which there is a karet penalty, where for the mere deliberate omission of performing the commandment the penalty is equal to corresponding negative commandments. They are Pessach, failing to bring or participate in eating of that offering at the right time, and failure to circumcise oneself if this rite has not been performed on one as a baby. מאחת מהנה, our sages in Torat Kohanim under the heading of חובה, consider this to mean “part of a whole,” as for instance the letters שם of the name שמעון, i.e. if one intended to write the name שמעון but was interrupted after having written the first two letters, seeing that they make sense one is liable for having performed the whole אב מלאכה of “writing.”
Daat Zkenim
נפש כי תחטא בשגגה, “if someone commits a sin inadvertently;” it is noteworthy that the verse does not commence with the word: אדם, “a human being,” as it does in Leviticus chapter one verse two, where it describes someone feeling the urge to offer a sacrifice to the Lord. When the prophet Ezekiel in Ezekiel 18,4, writes about the same subject, he too commences by referring to the subject as נפש, i.e. the animalistic part of our soul. The point that is being made in both these verses is that a sin can only be the product of the animalistic life force in our body, not the spiritual part that G–d blew into Adam’s nostrils when the result was his becoming a human being, אדם. (Compare Genesis 2,7 where he is then described as נפש חיה, “a living creature,” not just as נפש.) The creature described as נפש, is by definition mortal, as is clear from the verse quoted from Ezekiel 18,4, where the prophet concludes with the word: תמות, “it is bound to die.” Consider the following parable: two subjects had each committed a trespass against their king. One is an ordinary citizen, whereas the second one was one of the people engaged by the palace where he made his living. They were both arraigned for judgment. The King decreed that the ordinary citizen was to be released forthwith, whereas he imposed a painful penalty for the member of the palace staff who had committed a similar offence. The other members of the palace staff were very disturbed when they observed that their colleague had been singled out for harsher punishment. They questioned the king about this. The King told them that the first citizen, being a stranger, was not familiar with the good qualities of the king. He could therefore be forgiven for having committed this trespass. The palace employees, however, who were well aware of all the king had done for them, could not be forgiven for having trespassed against his rules instead of being especially careful not to commit such an offence. The same applies to creatures who possess only a body, i.e. who though human, did not have a Divine soul, which made them part of the heavenly regions, i.e. they are part of the staff of G–d’s Palace. They are charged with ensuring that their “uniform,” the soul, is in a state of purity at all times. As a result of this difference, the bodies who did not receive a נשמה, a soul from heaven, when they die are buried and this is all. Human beings endowed with a heavenly soul, however, come up for judgment to determine if the G–d given soul is being returned in the condition it had been given to them.
if the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people, then let him offer for his sin, which he has sinned, a young bullock without blemish to Hashem for a sin-offering.
verse value 4392 — חָטָ֜א = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 63 letters. Notable word values: "sinned" (חָטָ֜א) = 18, chai, 'life'. Verse gematria: 4392 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "if" (אִ֣ם, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·he·shall·bring" (וְהִקְרִ֡יב, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "to·guilt·of" (לְאַשְׁמַ֣ת). The root חטא appears 4 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root משיח ("the·anointed") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root אשמה ("to·guilt·of") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·people', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 10 words.
Onkelos
if the High Priest sins so as to bring guilt upon the people, he shall bring for his sin that he sinned a bull, an unblemished young of the herd, before Hashem as a sin-offering.
Rashi
אם הכהן המשיח יחטא לאשמת העם IF THE PRIEST THAT IS ANOINTED DO SIN לאשמת העם — The Halachic explanation is that he is liable to bring a sin-offering only when there was ignorance of the real matter (of the law in question; i. e. after having considered the case in question he came to a wrong decision) together with a mistaken action (i. e. where he erred in a Halachic decision and as a result of this error acted against the true law), just as it is stated with reference to the guilt of the whole people): (v. 13) “[And if the whole congregation of Israel err] and the thing be hid from the eyes of the assembly and they have done [somewhat against the commandments of the Lord]" (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 2 1; Horayot 7a; Rashi on v. 13). Its literal sense is according to the Agadic explanation: When the High-priest sins this is the guilt of the people (i. e. it results in the people remaining under a load of guilt), because they are dependent on him to effect atonement for them and to pray on their behalf, and now he himself has become degenerate and can thus not expiate for them, wherefor they remain under guilt. פר A BULLOCK — One might think that it may be an old one! Scripture, however, adds בן, a young animal. If, then, it must be בן, a young one, I might think a very young animal is fitted too (this being also implied in the term בן)! Scripture, however, states פר! How is this to be reconciled? By explaining פר בן בקר to be a bullock of three years (which is neither too old nor too young) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 3 1; cf. Rashi on Leviticus 9:7 and Note thereon).
Ibn Ezra
"For the guilt of the people" — [this means] that he ruled incorrectly and the people thereby incurred guilt, all of them having acted unwittingly; or alternatively, "for the guilt of the people" means [his sin is reckoned] as the guilt of all mankind — and it is stated thus because the priest is the bearer of the Torah and is himself careful [in his conduct] and consecrated to Hashem. "For his sin" — on account of his sin; and because he is of great [standing] he brings a bull, which is the greatest of all [animals] offered upon the altar.
Sforno
seeing that sinners are always on different levels morally and ethically, some being more prone to sin than others, the Torah addresses these different groups of people in different ways, each one appropriate to their specific rating in society. The Torah begins with the High Priest, the one who is least likely to commit a sin, and writes: אם הכהן המשיח יחטא לאשמת העם, implying that a sin by the High Priest is most likely the outcome of guilt by the people, their conduct having contributed to his committing such an error. The Talmud (Berachot 34b:29) quotes that if someone makes an error in his private prayer this is a bad omen for him. If, however, the cantor, i.e. the person hired to pray on behalf of the people makes an error, not only he but all those on whose behalf he offered his prayers will suffer the consequences of his error. The sacrifice of a priest who committed an error must be burned and no one derives the slightest benefit from such an offering. Such considerations account for the fact that the Torah did not write here ואשם, “he sinned,” which would have been a warning for the errant person to do teshuvah. Had the Torah phrased its address to the High Priest thus this would not have been appropriate as the error committed by the High Priest did not originate within his heart but his faulty prayer had been due to the sinfulness of the people he represented which had insidiously influenced the words he was uttering.
Or HaChaim
אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, If the anointed priest shall sin, etc. The Torah begins its list with the sin of an individual, although the Torah writes לאשמת העם, that this individual thereby brings guilt on the entire people. This is to tell us that an inadvertent sin committed by the High Priest is equivalent to an inadvertent sin by the whole community. If so, why did the Torah not begin the list of people who have to bring sin-offerings with 4,13 where the sin of the community is described, and wait with mentioning a sin by the High Priest until after verse 21 when inadvertent sins by individuals are listed? Perhaps the Torah meant to tell us that in the event of the High Priest and the community having committed an inadvertent sin, the sin-offering of the High Priest takes precedence over that of the community as a whole. The same rule would apply if both the King and the people had committed a sin. The reason given in Horiot 13 is that the High Priest is active in securing atonement whereas the community achieves its atonement passively. I have found in Torat Kohanim on verse 13 (item 240) in our chapter that when both a high Priest and the community have to offer bullocks as sin offerings, the bullock of the High Priest has to be offered first. This ruling is based on the word ואם in verse 13 meaning that what is listed here is only secondary to what has been listed before, i.e. the bullock of the High Priest. This raises the question why our sages could not have deduced this rule simply from the fact that the Torah has written about the bullock to be offered by the High Priest before it wrote about the bullock to be offered by the community in the event the latter committed an error? Perhaps the sages reasoned that if there were no other hint that the High Priest's bullock takes precedence except the fact that the paragraph about the High Priest sinning was mentioned first, we would have misunderstood the words לאשמת העם as a reference to the error the people had committed which is described in verse 13. That verse deals with the people having acted on the basis of an erroneous decision of the High Court. I would have thought that the reason the Torah described the High Priest's error as "the sin of the people" was because he had concurrred with the erroneous decision of the High Court, or had even been part of the Court which handed down the erroneous decision. Such an interpretation would be wrong. If the High Priest had been part of the High Court which handed down an erroneous decision, his atonement is part of the atonement of the whole people, i.e. he does not have to bring a bullock as an individual sin-offering (Horiot 7). The Torah commenced the sin-offering legislation with the High Priest in order that we should not arrive at an erroneous conclusion. In view of this I would not have been able to use the fact that the first paragraph deals with the sin-offering of the High Priest as proof that his sin-offering takes precedence even ov...
Chizkuni
. אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, “if the anointed priest were to commit an inadvertent sin;” because he is the High Priest, his sin offering will reflect this and he will offer a bull instead of a female goat.” יחטא לאשמת העם, “so as to bring guilt on the people;” the High Priest may have given an erroneous halachic ruling, and the people, by following that ruling, all committed a sin by performing a forbidden act. We know that it was the duty of the people to accept the halachic rulings of the High Priest, seeing that the Torah wrote in Deuteronomy 33,10: יורו משפטיך ליעקב, “they (the Levites) are to teach you (the people) your laws.” על חטאתו אשר חטא, “on account of his sin which he has sinned;” the word על occurs in this context also in Leviticus 1,4: לכפר עליו, “to make atonement on account of it.” Compare also Psalms 44,23: כי עליך הורגנו כל היום, “for we are being killed on Your account all day long.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, “if the High Priest becomes guilty of a sin, etc.” The list of sinners mentioned in this chapter proceeds in the following order: 1) High Priest, 2) High Court (collectively); 3) King; 4) the common people. The reason the Torah commences with the High Priest is that he is an outstanding individual (Joshua 14,15) comparable to an angel of the Lord (Malachi 2,7). When the people observe that even the High Priest has to bring a sin-offering they will be careful to return to G’d in repentance themselves. They will be encouraged when they see the High Priest bringing such an offering, reasoning that if G’d is willing to forgive the trespass of even such an highly placed individual as the High Priest, He would most certainly be willing to forgive ordinary people for their trespasses against Him. It was a well known fact that G’d relates more severely to people of distinction who become guilty of a sin than He does to ordinary individuals. This is why Solomon said in Kohelet 1,18 that “the amount of (G’d’s) anger is determined by the degree of wisdom (of the sinner).” The more wisdom one possesses the less forgivable is one’s sin. The best example in Scripture of the truth of this statement is Moses who was punished grievously for committing an error when striking the rock instead of speaking to it (Numbers 20,12). לאשמת העם, “due to the guilt of the people;” according to the custom of the people and their path, i.e. they are guilty. The Torah adds these words to teach that the High Priest should not be ashamed to confess and rectify his guilt when it was due to his falling into the bad habits practiced by the people. This is also the meaning of the words על אחת מכל אשר יעשה האדם לחטא בהנה, i.e. “one of the ways in which people are in the habit of sinning.” The expression אשם refers to habitual, knowing sin, whereas the expression יחטא which the Torah uses in connection with the sin of the High Priest refers to unintentional sin, something committed as an exception. The Torah teaches that the High Priest is to offer his offering and his mistake will be forgiven him just as G’d forgives the sins of the common people. Our sages in Midrash Eicha 3,34, comment on Lamentations 3,42: “we have sinned (knowingly) and we have rebelled, You have not forgiven.” The meaning is not that G’d did not forgive but that though if He had applied our own yardsticks He would not have forgiven, the fact is He applied His own yardstick and hence He did forgive. G’d’s yardsticks (attributes) enable Him to extend forgiveness even to habitual sinners completely — provided the sinner returns to Him in sincere and total repentance. Isaiah 55,7 confirms this when he writes: “let the wicked give up his ways, the sinful man his plans; let him turn back to the Lord, and He will pardon him.” The word רשע, “the wicked man,” used in that verse refers to the sinner who boasts of his sins, who is a complete heretic denying that there is a G’d in heaven and that therefore there is no divine supervision of what occurs on earth. The word רשע is used in this context by Psalms 10,4: “the wicked, arrogant as he is in all his scheming (thinks) ‘He does not call to account; G’d does not care.’” There is no need to emphasise that the attribute of Mercy will forgive such a sinner as even the attribute of Justice forgives a repentant sinner. This is the meaning of Isaiah 55,7 וישוב אל ה' ורחמהו ואל אלו-הינו כי ירבה לסלוח, ”let him turn back to the Lord and He will pardon him, and to our G’d, for He freely forgives.” We find the same idea expressed in Psalms 36,2 and 36,6: “I know what Transgression says to the wicked; he has no sense of the dread of the Lord.” “O Lord Your faithfulness reaches to heaven; Your steadfastness to the sky.” This entire hymn is based on the deeds of the wicked, the heretics. This is the reason David speaks of the attribute of חסד, of loving kindness, (verse 6) as this attribute is known by the nations through G’d’s extending forgiveness to those who appear to have no claim to such treatment. The reason the psalmist adds the letter ה at the beginning of the word בהשמים instead of the customary בשמים is that this letter is like an entrance, a gateway. David hints that the gateway to forgiveness is open. Seeing that this attribute is located in heaven, it is important to show that the gateway to heaven remains open. The shape of the latter ה, i.e. a shape in our terrestrial world; it is meant to show that even in our terrestrial world a door is open to heaven. G’d does not deny His love to those who want to return to Him in penitence.
Rashbam
לאשמת העם, our sages in Horiyot 7 state that these words are restrictive and mean that in this instance the High Priest’s error is treated in the same way as the public’s error, i.e. that he had first ruled (in error) that something was permitted, and had then acted in accordance with his ruling. However, if we were to go by the plain meaning of the text, the message is that if the priests who are charged with teaching the Torah to the people are liable for mistakes they make handing down rulings, then the High Priest who is regarded as the expert for everyone, and whose faulty ruling causes the entire people to commit a sin, is most certainly held to account for his error. As a result, 'והקריב על חטאתו וגו, he will have to bring an offering for his sin.
And he shall bring the bullock to the door of the tent of meeting before Hashem; and he shall lay his hand upon the head of the bullock, and kill the bullock before Hashem.
verse value 4219 — אֹ֥הֶל = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 64 letters. Notable word values: "tent·of" (אֹ֥הֶל) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "tent·of" (אֹ֥הֶל, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·he·shall·bring" (וְהֵבִ֣יא, 5 letters). Words sharing gematria 686: the·young·bull, the·young·bull. The root פרר appears 3 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "to·face·of" (root פנים, 102x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·bring" (root בוא, 81x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root פרר ("the·young·bull") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Hashem', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 8 words.
Onkelos
He shall bring the bull to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting before Hashem, and he shall lay his hand upon the head of the bull, and he shall slaughter the bull before Hashem.
Chizkuni
לפני ה, “before the Lord;” i.e. on the north side facing the entrance to the Tabernacle. וסמך את ידו, “and he is to place the weight of his body with his hand;” no heaving or libations are required with this offering.
Targum Yonatan
He shall bring in the bullock to the gate of the tabernacle of ordinance, to the presence of the Lord, and lay his right hand upon the head of the bullock, and the slayer shall kill the bullock before the Lord.
And the anointed priest shall take of the blood of the bullock, and bring it to the tent of meeting.
verse value 1574
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 36 letters. The shortest word is "from·blood·of" (מִדַּ֣ם, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·anointed" (הַמָּשִׁ֖יחַ, 5 letters). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "from·blood·of" (root דם, 81x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·bring" (root בוא, 81x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root לקח ("and·he·shall·take") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·young·bull', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְלָקַ֛ח [and·he·shall·take] (144) + הַכֹּהֵ֥ן [the·priest] (80) + הַמָּשִׁ֖יחַ [the·anointed] (363) + מִדַּ֣ם [from·blood·of] (84) + הַפָּ֑ר [the·young·bull] (285) + וְהֵבִ֥יא [and·he·shall·bring] (24) + אֹת֖וֹ [it] (407) + אֶל־אֹ֥הֶל [to·tent·of] (67) + מוֹעֵֽד [meeting] (120) = 1574.
Onkelos
The High Priest shall take some of the blood of the bull and bring it into the Tent of Meeting.
Rashi
אל אהל מועד [AND THE PRIEST … SHALL BRING IT] TO THE APPOINTED TENT — to the Tabernacle — and, later, in the House of Eternity (the Temple at Jerusalem), into the Heichal (cf. Rashi on Exodus 29:43).
Chizkuni
ולקח הכהן המשיח מדם הפר, “the High Priest is to take some of the blood of this bull;” the expression לקח both here and again in Exodus 24,6 [in the past tense, i.e. ויקח] teach us that just as in Exodus Moses used a bowl in which the blood was placed, so the High Priest here is also supposed to place that blood in a bowl first.
Targum Yonatan
And the high priest who is anointed with oil shall take of the blood of the bullock, and carry it into the tabernacle of ordinance;.
And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before Hashem, in front of the veil of the sanctuary.
verse value 3363 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 56 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "in·the·blood" (בַּדָּ֑ם, 3 letters) and the longest is "his·finger" (אֶת־אֶצְבָּע֖וֹ, 7 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "curtain·of" (פָּרֹ֥כֶת). The root דם appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "to·face·of" (root פנים, 102x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root טבל ("and·he·shall·dip") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root אצבע ("his·finger") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·the·blood', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 9 words. Full calculation: וְטָבַ֧ל [and·he·shall·dip] (47) + הַכֹּהֵ֛ן [the·priest] (80) + אֶת־אֶצְבָּע֖וֹ [his·finger] (570) + בַּדָּ֑ם [in·the·blood] (46) + וְהִזָּ֨ה [and·he·shall·sprinkle] (23) + מִן־הַדָּ֜ם [from·the·blood] (139) + שֶׁ֤בַע [seven] (372) + פְּעָמִים֙ [times] (240) + לִפְנֵ֣י [to·face·of] (170) + יְהֹוָ֔ה [Hashem] (26) + אֶת־פְּנֵ֖י [the·face·of] (541) + פָּרֹ֥כֶת [curtain·of] (700) + הַקֹּֽדֶשׁ [the·Shrine] (409) = 3363.
Onkelos
The priest shall dip his finger in the blood and sprinkle some of the blood seven times before Hashem, in front of the curtain of the sanctuary.
Rashi
את פני פרכת הקדש [AND THE PRIEST SHALL … SPRINKLE OF THE BLOOD …] BEFORE THE PARTITION VAIL OF THE קדש — i.e. before that spot where it is exceedingly holy — exactly in front of the space between the staves of the Ark (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 3 10). The blood did not touch the Partition Vail (since he was standing some distance off), but if it happened to touch it, then it touched it, (and it did not invalidate the ceremony) (Yoma 57a).
Ibn Ezra
"And the priest shall dip" — he himself, the anointed one. The reason for the [sprinkling] seven times — you will find it [discussed] in the portion of Balak. And because of the great distinction of the High Priest, he sprinkles from the blood of his sin-offering upon the Parokhet of the Sanctuary and upon the horns of the incense altar; and the entire bull, apart from the fat-portions, he burns outside, for it is not a burnt-offering.
Chizkuni
וטבל, והזה, “the priest will dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle;” every sprinkling of the blood has to be preceded by the priest dipping his finger in the blood; אצבעו, “his finger”; this finger is mentioned both here and again in Leviticus 14,16. Just as in that verse the right index finger is the one to be used, so here too he is to perform this procedure with the index finger of his right hand. (Sifra) שבע פעמים, “seven times.” He is to count seven times during this procedure, not the way the High Priest does during the sprinkling on the Day of Atonement, (Sifra, here) where he counted:; “one, plus seven.” שבע פעמים, seven times.” The number seven occurs on many separate occasions repeatedly in matters involving heaven. There are seven constellations of major stars, we speak of seven layers of the heavens, and the earth, correspondingly, is referred to by seven different names, i.e: ,ארץ, אדמה, ארקא, חרבה, יבשה, תבל and חלד There are seven deserts mentioned in the Torah; there are seven “worlds,” (i.e. G-d created seven universes, and destroys six of them) compare (Pirkey de Rabbi Eliezer) the week has seven days, we count seven years of the sh’mittah cycle, seven times seven for the Jubilee cycle. The candlestick in the Temple had seven lamps. Bileam, the sorcerer, built seven different altars. (Compare more on this in Avot de Rabbi Natan, chapter 37.)
Daat Zkenim
את פני פרכת הקדש, “in front of the veil of the Sanctuary.” In verse 17, where we have a similar procedure, the adjective “holy” after the word: פרכת is missing. Why is this? Is it not the same curtain? It is to teach us that if only the High Priest has committed a sin, the presence of G–d does not depart, but if an entire congregation commits a sin, that presence goes into “hiding,” i.e. people forfeit the privilege of G–d ”dwelling” on earth within the Tabernacle.
And the priest shall put of the blood upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before Hashem, which is in the tent of meeting; and all the remaining blood of the bullock he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the door of the tent of meeting.
verse value 5976 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 21 words, 93 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. Verse gematria: 5976 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "which" (אֲשֶׁ֖ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "upon·horns·of" (עַל־קַ֠רְנ֠וֹת, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, and·all·blood·of. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "the·spices" (הַסַּמִּים֙), "and·all·blood·of" (וְאֵ֣ת כׇּל־דַּ֣ם). The root מזבח appears 2 times in this verse. 18 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root קרן ("upon·horns·of") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root קטרת ("incense·of") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'meeting', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 9 words.
Onkelos
The priest shall put some of the blood on the horns of the altar of the incense of spices before Hashem, which is in the Tent of Meeting, and all the blood of the bull he shall pour out at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering that is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.
Rashi
ואת כל דם AND ALL THE BLOOD — i. e. all the remainder of the blood (since part of it had already been sprinkled) (Zevachim 25a).
Or HaChaim
לפני ה׳ אשר באהל מועד before the Lord who is in the Tent of Meeting, etc. In answer to the question why the Torah had to write the words "before the Lord" which had already been written in verse 6, Rabbi Nechemyah in Torat Kohanim says that seeing that we find that Aaron stood beyond the golden altar on the Day of Atonement when he sprinkled the blood on the dividing curtain, we could have assumed that the same procedure was to be followed here. The Torah therefore had to make clear that only the golden altar was "before the Lord," not Aaron. This suggests that except for the fact that the blood of the bullock on the Day of Atonement was sprinkled towards the dividing curtain, the words "before the Lord" in our verse would be superfluous. This is difficult. How would I have known where Aaron was to have stood if the Torah had not written the words "before the Lord?" Seeing that in that event the Torah had not designated a specific spot where Aaron had to stand to perform the sprinkling ceremony, I would have concluded that he had the choice of standing either in front of the golden altar or beyond it. The Torah therefore had to write the words: "in front of the Lord," to tell us that Aaron was to stand in front of the altar. Why was all this necessary? Because we find that there was another occasion when he was to stand beyond the golden altar. Another difficulty is this: why would I assume that Aaron was to perform the ritual of sprinkling the blood towards the dividing curtain while he was standing so far away that the altar was between him and the dividing curtain? Perhaps the words are to tell us that he was to sprinkle the blood on the altar while standing in front of it (facing the dividing curtain)? Seeing that in Leviticus 17,18 the Torah describes Aaron as exiting the Holy of Holies in the direction of the golden altar while putting some of the blood of the bullock on its corners, maybe the Torah wanted to tell us that the same procedure should be followed here, i.e. that when Aaron was to put the blood on the corners of the golden altar he was to do so while having his back to the dividing curtain and facing outwards before pouring out the excess blood at the base of the copper altar? As far as the sprinkling of blood towards the dividing curtain was concerned, however, this should take place when Aaron stood between the golden altar and the dividing curtain? If we had had no other detail than this to worry about, we could have answered this problem. However, I have seen that the same Rabbi Nechemyah speaking of the meaning of the words "and Aaron shall exit towards the altar which is in front of the Lord" (Leviticus 16,18), questions the meaning of these words. He answers that we find in connection with the bullock which Aaron has to offer concerning all the other inadvertently committed sins that he had to stand on the far side of the curtain with the altar between him and the dividing curtain. I might have concluded that he was to...
Chizkuni
על קרנות מזבח הקטורת הסמים לפני ה, “on the horns of the altar of sweet fragrances, in front of the Lord.” This does not mean that the priest is standing before the Lord, as he is standing in front of that altar when he sprinkles, and both the altar and the dividing curtain separate him from the Holy Ark in the Holy of Holies.
And all the fat of the bullock of the sin-offering he shall take off from it; the fat that covers the inwards, and all the fat that is upon the inwards,
verse value 3989
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 58 letters. The shortest word is "young·bull·of" (פַּ֥ר, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·all·the·fat" (וְאֵת֙ כׇּל־הַחֵ֔לֶב, 9 letters). Words sharing gematria 407: upon·the·entrails, upon·the·entrails. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "and·all·fat·of" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֵ֛לֶב). The root חלב appears 3 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "that" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·purgation·offering" (root חטא, 65x in Leviticus); "and·all·fat·of" (root חלב, 49x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'from·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 6 words. Full calculation: וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֵ֛לֶב [and·all·fat·of] (497) + פַּ֥ר [young·bull·of] (280) + הַֽחַטָּ֖את [the·purgation·offering] (423) + יָרִ֣ים [he·shall·remove] (260) + מִמֶּ֑נּוּ [from·it] (136) + אֶת־הַחֵ֙לֶב֙ [the·fat] (446) + הַֽמְכַסֶּ֣ה [that·covers] (130) + עַל־הַקֶּ֔רֶב [upon·the·entrails] (407) + וְאֵת֙ כׇּל־הַחֵ֔לֶב [and·all·the·fat] (502) + אֲשֶׁ֖ר [that] (501) + עַל־הַקֶּֽרֶב [upon·the·entrails] (407) = 3989.
Onkelos
He shall separate all the fat of the bull of the sin-offering from it: the fat that covers the entrails, and all the fat that is upon the entrails,
Rashi
ואת כל חלב פר [AND HE SHALL TAKE UP …] ALL THE FAT OF THE BULLOCK — It ought to have said “its fat” (since the פר has just been mentioned); why does it state expressly “the fat of a bullock [of a sin-offering]” (i.e. any bullock brought as a sin-offering)? In order to include also the bullock of the Day of Atonement in respect to the burning of the kidneys, the fat portions and the lobe (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 1). החטאת — [THE FAT OF THE BULLOCK OF] THE SIN OFFERING (implying, the fat of the bullock because it is a sin-offering) consequently serves to include the goats brought as a sin-offering for idolatry (Numbers 15:24) in respect to the burning of the kidneys, the fat portions and the lobe of the liver (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 1; cf. Note on the previous passage). ירים ממנו AND HE SHALL TAKE FROM IT [ALL THE FAT] — from. “it”, i. e. from the bullock — consequently he must take it (the fat) whilst it is still connected with it (the animal), — that he must not dismember it before removing the fat from it. Thus is it explained in Torath Cohanim (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 1).
as it is taken off from the ox of the sacrifice of peace-offerings; and the priest shall make them smoke upon the altar of burnt-offering.
verse value 2482
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 42 letters. The shortest word is "upon" (עַ֖ל, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·he·shall·turn·them·into·smoke" (וְהִקְטִירָם֙, 7 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "is·removed" (יוּרַ֔ם), "from·ox·of" (מִשּׁ֖וֹר). 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "just·as" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "upon" (root על, 127x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root שור ("from·ox·of") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·well-being', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 5 words. Full calculation: כַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר [just·as] (521) + יוּרַ֔ם [is·removed] (256) + מִשּׁ֖וֹר [from·ox·of] (546) + זֶ֣בַח [sacrifice·of] (17) + הַשְּׁלָמִ֑ים [the·well-being] (425) + וְהִקְטִירָם֙ [and·he·shall·turn·them·into·smoke] (370) + הַכֹּהֵ֔ן [the·priest] (80) + עַ֖ל [upon] (100) + מִזְבַּ֥ח [altar·of] (57) + הָעֹלָֽה [the·burnt-offering] (110) = 2482.
Onkelos
Just as it is separated from the bull of the peace-offerings, the priest shall cause them to go up in smoke on the altar of the burnt-offering.
Rashi
כאשר יורם AS IT WAS TAKEN [FROM THE OX OF THE SACRIFICE OF THE PEACE OFFERINGS] — i. e. from those fat portions which are specified in the case of an ox brought as a sacrifice of peace-offerings. But what is specified in the case of a sacrifice of peace-offerings that is not specified here? Nothing at all! (Cf. Leviticus 3:3—4 with here.) What then is the force of the words כאשר יורם? But they are intended to declare it analogous to the peace-offerings: What is the case with שלמים? They must be burnt as such! So, too, must this be burnt as such!) And again what is the case with שלמים? They are intended to promote peace for the world! So, too, is this intended to promote peace for the world (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 4 2). In the Treatise on “the Slaughtering of Sacrifices” it (the passage 'כאשר יורם וכו) is stated to be necessary to deduce from it the rule that in the case of sacrifices we can derive no law from a law which is itself only derived from a text, and is not explicitly stated in Scripture. This is to be found in the chapter beginning with the words איזהו מקומן (Zevachim 49b). על הכבד על הכליות. על ראשו ועל כרעיו — All these words (על) are an expression denoting an addition — they meat: as much as “besides”.
Chizkuni
כאשר יורם, “as it is lifted off;” Rashi explains that the Torah had to spell out the “heaving” of the fat pieces of the High Priest’s sin offering in order that we learn from this that the same procedure also had to be performed in the case of the ox that was a peace offering. (Leviticus 3,3-10) Why did also the same procedure have to be spelled out again in verse 20 of our chapter instead of the Torah simply writing: “as in that instance?” What was different here from there? How could we make a legal comparison that had not been spelled out from a verse in which it had itself not been spelled out, i.e. seeing that in verse 20 the Torah only writes: “as he had done, etc.,” without saying what he had done in that other instance? According to our author rule number three out of 13 rules of how to interpret the written Torah, by Rabbi Yishmael, does not apply when the Torah deals with the subject of קדשים, offerings presented in the sacred precincts of the Temple. כאשר יורם משור זבח השלמים, “as it is taken off the ox of the sacrifice of peace offerings;” the reason why the Torah used this example to compare this offering to, is to teach that it too is instrumental in restoring peace between Israel and G-d, as opposed to comparing it to peace offerings consisting of sheep, which are brought on the Sabbath and in a state of uncleanliness, just like communal offerings, as in Leviticus 23,19.
But the skin of the bullock, and all its flesh, with its head, and with its legs, and its inwards, and its dung,
verse value 3858
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 42 letters. The shortest word is "the·young·bull" (הַפָּר֙, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·flesh" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ, 9 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "and·hide·of" (וְאֶת־ע֤וֹר), "and·all·its·flesh" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ), "and·with·its·legs" (וְעַל־כְּרָעָ֑יו). 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·its·entrails" (root קרב, 112x in Leviticus); "and·all·its·flesh" (root בשר, 56x in Leviticus); "with·its·head" (root ראש, 40x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root עור ("and·hide·of") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root בשר ("and·all·its·flesh") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·with·its·legs', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 2 words. 5 of the verse's 7 words begin with the letter ו. Full calculation: וְאֶת־ע֤וֹר [and·hide·of] (683) + הַפָּר֙ [the·young·bull] (285) + וְאֶת־כׇּל־בְּשָׂר֔וֹ [and·all·its·flesh] (965) + עַל־רֹאשׁ֖וֹ [with·its·head] (607) + וְעַל־כְּרָעָ֑יו [and·with·its·legs] (412) + וְקִרְבּ֖וֹ [and·its·entrails] (314) + וּפִרְשֽׁוֹ [and·its·dung] (592) = 3858.
Onkelos
But the hide of the bull and all its flesh, with its head and its legs, its entrails and its refuse —
Chizkuni
על ראשו ועל כרעיו, “with its head and its legs.” וקרבו ופרשו, “as well as its entrails and its excrement.” This teaches us that the animal is not skinned but is burned completely.
even the whole bullock he shall carry forth without the camp to a clean place, where the ashes are poured out, and burn it on wood with fire; where the ashes are poured out shall it be burnt.
verse value 5444
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 72 letters. The shortest word is "it" (אֹת֛וֹ, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·the·young·bull" (אֶת־כׇּל־הַ֠פָּ֠ר, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 359: the·ashes, the·ashes. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "all·the·young·bull" (אֶת־כׇּל־הַ֠פָּ֠ר), "to·ash-heap·of" (אֶל־שֶׁ֣פֶךְ), "upon·wood" (עַל־עֵצִ֖ים). The root אל appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·outside" (root אל, 59x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·take·out" (root יצא, 37x in Leviticus); "in·the·fire" (root אש, 30x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root יצא ("and·he·shall·take·out") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root מחנה ("to·the·camp") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·the·fire', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 3 words.
Onkelos
he shall carry the entire bull outside the camp to a clean place, to the place where the ashes are poured out, and he shall burn it on wood with fire; at the place where the ashes are poured out it shall be burned.
Rashi
אל מקום טהור [EVEN THE WHOLE BULLOCK SHALL HE BRING FORTH WITHOUT THE CAMP] UNTO A CLEAN PLACE — Because there was outside the city (Jerusalem) a place intended for depositing unclean things viz., to cast there the plague-stricken stones (cf. Leviticus 14:45) and to serve as a place of burial, Scripture was compelled to state regarding this term “without the camp” — which in the case of Jerusalem, is identical with: “without the city” — that the place where it was to be burnt shall be a clean one. מחוץ למחנה WITHOUT THE CAMP — i. e. without the three camps (מחנה שכינה, מחנה לויה ומחנה ישראל) ; and, in the case of the “House of Eternity” (the Temple), it was to be brought forth without the city, just as our Rabbis have explained it in Treatise Yoma 68a and in Treatise Sanhedrin 42b. אל שפך הדשן means: to the place where the ashes that were removed from the altar were cast, as it is said (Leviticus 6:4) “and he shall bring out the ashes without the camp”. על שפך הדשן UPON THE PLACE FOR SHEDDING THE ASHES [SHALL IT BE BURNT] — This is something which need not have been stated (since it says immediately before, that it shall be brought forth to this spot), but it is intended to teach that even if at the time there happen to be no ashes there, the bullock shall nevertheless be burnt there (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 5 5; Pesachim 75b).
Ibn Ezra
"Upon the place of the ash-deposit" — it is to be burned in the place where the ashes of the altar are deposited.
Chizkuni
והוציא את כל הפר, “he is to remove the entire bull, etc.” this teaches that he has to do so before the animal has been cut up into pieces; in other words: the head with the legs need to be cut up of this animal outside the sacred precincts.
Tur HaArokh
אל שפך הדשן ישרף אותו, “on the place where the ash is poured and burn it.” The Torah commanded that the burning of this sin offering including its skin must be performed outside the precincts of the Temple so that it would be observed by the public at large. This would show the people that even a High Priest would acknowledge that he had sinned and ask G’d to forgive him.
Rashbam
אל שפך הדשן, seeing that the Torah writes in Leviticus 6,4,והוציא את הדשן אל מחוץ למחנה “he shall take the ashes outside the encampment,” the Torah here had to tell us where the ash was stored.
And if the whole congregation of Israel shall err, the thing being hid from the eyes of the assembly, and do any of the things which Hashem has commanded not to be done, and are guilty:
verse value 5316 — יְהֹוָ֛ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 68 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֛ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "and·if" (וְאִ֨ם, 3 letters) and the longest is "shall·not·be·done" (לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֖ינָה, 8 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "all·community·of" (כׇּל־עֲדַ֤ת), "they·shall·err" (יִשְׁגּ֔וּ), "from·eyes·of" (מֵעֵינֵ֖י). The root עשה appears 2 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "that" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "and·they·shall·do" (root עשה, 94x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root עדה ("all·community·of") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root עלם ("and·it·escapes·notice") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·assembly', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 7 words.
Onkelos
And if the entire congregation of Israel goes astray, and the matter is hidden from the eyes of the assembly, and they do one of the commandments of Hashem that are not lawful to be done, and they incur guilt —
Rashi
עדת ישראל [AND IF THE WHOLE] CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL [ERR] — This is the Great Sanhedrin (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 4 2; cf. Horayot 4b). ונעלם דבר AND A THING (a matter of law) WAS HID [FROM THE EYES OF THE ASSEMBLY] — i. e. they (the Synhedrion) erred, deciding in respect to one of all those acts for which excision is, according to tradition), implicitly mentioned in the Torah that it is permissible (Horayot 8a). הקהל ועשו — [AND THE THING BE HID FROM THE EYES OF] THE ASSEMBLY AND THEY HAVE DONE — It means that the assembly did according to their (the Sanhedrin’s) decision (cf. Horayot 2a).
Sforno
in the event the Supreme Court issued an erroneous decree, a very remote chance, ישגו ונעלם דבר מעיני הקהל, although this court is to function as עיני הקהל, “the watchful eye of the community,” not only did they fail to protect their community from sinning but they did not even succeed in preventing themselves from committing such an error. Nonetheless the Torah attributes such an error by the Supreme Court as ואשמו, “they sinned,” the “they” being the congregation which is held responsible if their “seeing eye” fails. The Torah here warns of the need to do teshuvah, i.e. all those concerned, before proceeding with the sacrifice, as the sacrifice would be useless unless all the people had confessed their errors. Seeing that the combined guilt of the Supreme Court and the people of their generation is severe, the blood of the atonement is sprinkled on the dividing curtain inside the sanctuary and the sin offering is burned up on the altar completely.
Or HaChaim
ואם כל עדת ישראל ישגו, And if the entire community of Israel shall err, etc. The word עדת, "community of" is taken by Torat Kohanim as referring to the Sanhedrin, the Jewish Supreme Court. The word עדה in this verse and the word עדה in Numbers 35,24-25 both are a reference to the Sanhedrin of 71 sages. The word ישראל is presumed to mean the Court which is unique to Israel, i.e. the Court comprising 71 judges. The word ישגו teaches that the legislation introduced here applies only if the Court erred in its judgment and the people acted upon that error in judgment. If the members of the Court themselves acted upon their faulty judgment this is still no reason to apply the legislation stated in this paragraph seeing that the Torah writes הקהל ועשו, "and the community did accordingly." Thus far the Torat Kohanim. A moral-ethical approach to this verse considers the word ישגו as referring to Israeli society committing moral errors and departing from Jewish norms. As a result of such conduct it would follow that the Jewish Supreme Court will also hand down faulty judgments as the judges and their Torah knowledge reflect the level of the people whom they represent. They are to blame for the people straying as they had not used their authority in controlling public morals. It had been their duty to discipline the individuals who were responsible for a trend away from traditional Jewish values. We have the example of Abbaye in Gittin 60, who erred in a ruling as he had not first obtained permission from his teacher to issue a ruling. We have been told this specifically in Sanhedrin 5.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ואם כל עדת ישראל ישגו, “and if the entire assembly of Israel err, etc.” The “assembly” referred to in our verse is the Sanhedrin, the Supreme Court. It could not be otherwise, as it is quite impossible for the entire Jewish nation by themselves to commit the same sin by mistake. In order to make this point quite clear the Torah added the words ונעלם הדבר מעיני העדה, “and the matter became obscured from the eyes of the congregation.” The Supreme Court, prophets, and Torah scholars are traditionally regarded as “the eyes of the congregation.” An example of this is found in Isaiah 29,10: “and has shut your eyes, the prophets, and covered your heads, the seers.” Isaiah makes it plain that the prophets are the eyes of the people. We also have a statement by our sages (Sifra, Vayikra 4,2) to that effect where we are told: “I might have supposed that here we are talking about the entire community; to ensure we do not misunderstand the Torah wrote the words עדה, whereas in Numbers 35,24 the Torah also used the word עדה, when describing judgment being pronounced on a murderer; just as there the word עדה refers to a court and not to the whole people, so here too the Supreme Court is meant and not the whole people.” Just as in that instance a court comprising not less than 23 judges is meant, so here too a court of not fewer than 23 judges is meant. What then is the precise meaning of the words כל עדת ישראל? It means a congregation peculiar to the Jewish people, i.e. the great Sanhedrin which had its seat on the Temple Mount.
when the sin in which they have sinned is known, then the assembly shall offer a young bullock for a sin-offering, and bring it before the tent of meeting.
verse value 3518 — אֹ֥הֶל = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 65 letters. Notable word values: "tent·of" (אֹ֥הֶל) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "young·bull" (פַּ֤ר, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·they·shall·bring" (וְהִקְרִ֨יבוּ, 7 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "and·shall·be·known" (וְנֽוֹדְעָה֙). The root חטא appears 3 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "son·of·herd" (root בן, 143x in Leviticus); "upon·it" (root על, 127x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root ידע ("and·shall·be·known") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'upon·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 10 words.
Onkelos
when the sin that they sinned becomes known, the assembly shall bring a bull, a young of the herd, as a sin-offering, and they shall bring it before the Tent of Meeting.
Ramban
WHEN THE SIN WHEREIN THEY HAVE SINNED IS KNOWN [THEN THE ASSEMBLY SHALL OFFER A YOUNG BULLOCK …]. It is self-understood that they cannot offer a sin-offering until they know that they have sinned. [So why does Scripture mention it?] But it is a linguistic expression of the [Hebrew] language to say, “and when it becomes known to them that they have sinned, they should bring their offering.” Therefore He did not mention it [in Verse 3] in the case of the anointed priest, because there was no need for it. It is possible that [the reason why the verse says, when their sin wherein they have sinned is known, is not merely as a linguistic expression but to indicate] that the assembly is not obliged to bring this sin-offering unless they have definite knowledge of their sin but not if it is merely a doubt, as in the case of the suspensive guilt-offering. Our Rabbis have interpreted, [that the verse says, the sin … is known, to teach that] “if the court knew that they had given an [incorrect] decision [on one of two kinds of forbidden food, such as fat and blood, declaring that one of them may be eaten], but did not know which one it was that they permitted, [and the people had eaten both], I might think that the court is obligated to bring a sin-offering [as they usually are when they give an incorrect decision which the people followed]. Scripture therefore says, when ‘the’ sin wherein they have sinned is known — not when only the sinners are known.” This is not mentioned in the case [of the sin-offering] of the anointed priest, since He said there: If the anointed priest shall sin so as to bring guilt on the people, thus declaring [the law of the sin-offering of] the anointed priest to be like that of the public.
Ibn Ezra
"And the sin becomes known" — so too is the rule for the High Priest; but if it is not recalled — that is, if the sin was not made known to him — he does not bring the bull as a sin-offering. Some say that every year he brings [such an offering] in case he may have sinned. The text states [together] "the entire community of Israel" and "the sin becomes known," because it is possible for the priest to inform them [of their error], whereas there is no one to inform the priest except himself. The congregation's sin-offering follows the same rules in every respect as that of the High Priest; thus the High Priest is deemed equal in weight to all Israel.
Rabbeinu Bahya
והקריבו הקהל פר בן בקר לחטאת והביאו אותו לפני אהל מועד, “and the congregation is to bring a two year old bull as a sin-offering, and they shall bring it to the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.” The sin of original man, Adam, and that of the Jewish people in the desert had something in common; this is the reason that our sages were of the opinion that Adam offered a bull as his sin-offering. (Chulin 60). This is also the reason that our sages in Vayikra Rabbah 5,6 made a point of commenting that this is the reason it is the only sin-offering of which the Torah writes that it was to be brought at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting (verse 4). The matter may be understood by means of a parable. A king had a friend who had brought him a valuable gift. The king was so impressed that he told his friend to display it at the entrance to his palace for all to see what a valuable gift he had presented to his ruler. The author’s own teacher, Rabbi Shlomoh ben Aderet, explained that the beautiful gift referred to in the parable was the repentance (not the bull). When a person has followed the instincts of his heart and thereby committed a sin, there is no nicer gift he can make to His Creator than to present the very item with which he sinned as a gift to his Creator. This proves that his repentance is unreserved. When the Torah repeats the expression: “in front of the Tent of Meeting” no fewer than three times in connection with this sin-offering of the bull, i.e. “he will bring it,” “he will slaughter it,” “he will sprinkle its blood seven times”, this underlines the point. [The people’s sin, of course, was that of the golden calf, and atoning for it by offering a bull makes the parable fit. Ed.] Thus far רשב"א. (The author elaborated on this in his commentary on Genesis 3,6 ויאכל).
Tur HaArokh
ונודעה החטאת, “when the sin becomes known, etc.” Nachmanides derives from this that the sinner is not to offer a sin offering until the precise nature of the inadvertently committed sin has become known to himself. It is not unusual for the text to speak in generalities, so that we might have thought that others having heard or seen the sin committed in question is sufficient cause for the sinner to have to bring this offering. Possibly, the intent of the verse is to inform us that unless there is definitive knowledge that the sin has been committed, no sin offering is called for, or even approved.
And the elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bullock before Hashem; and the bullock shall be killed before Hashem.
verse value 3140 — יְהֹוָ֑ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 53 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֑ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "the·young·bull" (הַפָּ֖ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "their·hands" (אֶת־יְדֵיהֶ֛ם, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 170: to·face·of, to·face·of. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "elders" (זִקְנֵ֨י). The root פרר appears 2 times in this verse. 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "to·face·of" (root פנים, 102x in Leviticus); "their·hands" (root יד, 45x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root זקן ("elders") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Hashem', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְ֠סָמְכ֠וּ [and·they·shall·lay] (132) + זִקְנֵ֨י [elders] (167) + הָעֵדָ֧ה [the·community] (84) + אֶת־יְדֵיהֶ֛ם [their·hands] (470) + עַל־רֹ֥אשׁ [upon·head·of] (601) + הַפָּ֖ר [the·young·bull] (285) + לִפְנֵ֣י [to·face·of] (170) + יְהֹוָ֑ה [Hashem] (26) + וְשָׁחַ֥ט [and·he·shall·slaughter] (323) + אֶת־הַפָּ֖ר [the·young·bull] (686) + לִפְנֵ֥י [to·face·of] (170) + יְהֹוָֽה [Hashem] (26) = 3140.
Onkelos
The elders of the congregation shall lay their hands upon the head of the bull before Hashem, and the bull shall be slaughtered before Hashem.
Ibn Ezra
"The elders of the congregation" — these are the leaders, and they lay their hands [on the animal] on behalf of themselves and on behalf of all Israel, since it is not possible for all Israel to lay [their] hands.
Targum Yonatan
And twelve of the elders of the congregation, the counsellors (amarkelin) appointed over the twelve tribes, shall lay their hands firmly upon the head of the bullock, and the slayer shall kill the bullock before the Lord.
And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle it seven times before Hashem, in front of the veil.
verse value 2512 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 48 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "seven" (שֶׁ֤בַע, 3 letters) and the longest is "his·finger" (אֶצְבָּע֖וֹ, 5 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "the·curtain" (הַפָּרֹֽכֶת). The root פנים appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "to·face·of" (root פנים, 102x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'from·the·blood', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 7 words. Full calculation: וְטָבַ֧ל [and·he·shall·dip] (47) + הַכֹּהֵ֛ן [the·priest] (80) + אֶצְבָּע֖וֹ [his·finger] (169) + מִן־הַדָּ֑ם [from·the·blood] (139) + וְהִזָּ֞ה [and·he·shall·sprinkle] (23) + שֶׁ֤בַע [seven] (372) + פְּעָמִים֙ [times] (240) + לִפְנֵ֣י [to·face·of] (170) + יְהֹוָ֔ה [Hashem] (26) + אֵ֖ת פְּנֵ֥י [the·face·of] (541) + הַפָּרֹֽכֶת [the·curtain] (705) = 2512.
Onkelos
The priest shall dip his finger in some of the blood and sprinkle it seven times before Hashem, in front of the curtain.
Rashi
את פני הפרכת [AND THE PRIEST SPRINKLE IT …] BEFORE THE PARTITION VAIL — But above (v. 6) Scripture states את פני פרכת הקדש? A parable! This may be compared to the case of a king against whom the country revolted. If it is only a minority of it that revolts his council (familia) still exists, but if the whole country revolts his council no longer exists. So, also, here: When the anointed priest alone sinned, the appelation of sanctity that is attached to the place still remains on the Sanctuary, but as soon as all of them have sinned the holiness, God forbid, disappears (Zevachim 41b).
Rabbeinu Bahya
והזה שבע פעמים לפני ה' את פני הפרוכת, “he is to sprinkle (the blood) seven times before the Lord, before the curtain.” When describing a similar procedure performed with the sin-offering of the High Priest, the Torah wrote את פני פרוכת הקודש. What is the difference? We may again use a parable to illustrate the difference. When a king faces the rebellion of a small number of his subjects, his regime and his ministers will endure. If all his subjects rebel his regime will topple. As long as only the High Priest was guilty of a sin, the matter is not serious enough for the inner Sanctum, i.e. Dividing Curtain and what is beyond to lose its “holiness,” i.e. symbol of the kingdom. When the whole people rebelled, i.e. the entire Jewish nation was guilty of a sin of disloyalty, the “Dividing Curtain” could no longer be described as “holy”; its whole function had been undermined. By omitting mention of the adjective “holy” when speaking about the Dividing Curtain the Torah alluded to this difference.
Rashbam
את פני הפרכת, according to the plain meaning of the text the פרכת the Torah speaks of here is the dividing curtain between the sanctuary and the Holy of Holies. If, in verse 6, this dividing curtain was called פרכת הקודש, this may mean that the sprinkling of the blood had to be aimed at the middle of the curtain, i.e. at the area beyond which stood the Holy Ark, inside the Holy of Holies.
And he shall put of the blood upon the horns of the altar which is before Hashem, that is in the tent of meeting, and all the remaining blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt-offering, which is at the door of the tent of meeting.
verse value 5212 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 18 words, 81 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "he·shall·give" (יִתֵּ֣ן, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·all·the·blood" (וְאֵ֣ת כׇּל־הַדָּ֗ם, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, which. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "and·all·the·blood" (וְאֵ֣ת כׇּל־הַדָּ֗ם). The root מזבח appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "to·face·of" (root פנים, 102x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'meeting', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 8 words.
Onkelos
He shall put some of the blood on the horns of the altar that is before Hashem, which is in the Tent of Meeting, and all the blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering that is at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting.
Rashi
יסוד מזבח העלה אשר פתח אהל מועד [AND HE SHALL POUR OUT ALL THE BLOOD AT] THE BASE OF THE ALTAR OF THE BURNT-OFFERING WHICH IS AT THE ENTRANCE OF THE APPOINTED TENT — this is the base on the west side, for it was that which was opposite to the entrance of the tent (cf. Zevachim 51a).
And all the fat of it he shall take off from it, and make it smoke upon the altar.
verse value 1296
Insights
Verse structure: 5 words, 29 letters. Verse gematria: 1296 = 36². The shortest word is "he·shall·remove" (יָרִ֣ים, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·fat" (וְאֵ֥ת כׇּל־חֶלְבּ֖וֹ, 9 letters). 5 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·altar" (root מזבח, 95x in Leviticus); "and·all·its·fat" (root חלב, 49x in Leviticus); "from·it" (root מן, 41x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'from·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 2 words. Full calculation: וְאֵ֥ת כׇּל־חֶלְבּ֖וֹ [and·all·its·fat] (503) + יָרִ֣ים [he·shall·remove] (260) + מִמֶּ֑נּוּ [from·it] (136) + וְהִקְטִ֖יר [and·he·shall·turn·into·smoke] (330) + הַמִּזְבֵּֽחָה [the·altar] (67) = 1296.
Onkelos
He shall separate all its fat from it and cause it to go up in smoke on the altar.
Rashi
ואת כל חלבו ירים AND HE SHALL TAKE ALL HIS FAT — Although it does not expressly mention here the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys as portions that were to be taken (as it does in the case of the anointed priest’s sin-offering, v. 9) they may be derived from the statement (v. 20) “And he shall do with the bullock as he did [with the bullock of the sin-offering]”. But why are they not expressly mentioned? It was taught in the School of R. Ishmael: A parable! This may be compared to the case of a king who was angry with his friend and abridged the account of his offence because of the affection he bore him (Zevachim 41b). (Similarly Scripture does not give in detail all the rites that have to be carried out when the whole of the nation sins.)
Thus shall he do with the bullock; as he did with the bullock of the sin-offering, so shall he do with this; and the priest shall make atonement for them, and they shall be forgiven.
verse value 3571
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 50 letters. The shortest word is "thus" (כֵּ֖ן, 2 letters) and the longest is "he·shall·do·to·it" (יַעֲשֶׂה־לּ֑וֹ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 310: to·the·young·bull, to·young·bull·of. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "he·shall·do·to·it" (יַעֲשֶׂה־לּ֑וֹ), "for·them" (עֲלֵהֶ֛ם). The root עשה appears 3 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "just·as" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "for·them" (root על, 127x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root כן ("thus") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root סלח ("and·shall·be·forgiven") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'he·shall·do·to·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְעָשָׂ֣ה [and·he·shall·do] (381) + לַפָּ֔ר [to·the·young·bull] (310) + כַּאֲשֶׁ֤ר [just·as] (521) + עָשָׂה֙ [he·did] (375) + לְפַ֣ר [to·young·bull·of] (310) + הַֽחַטָּ֔את [the·purgation·offering] (423) + כֵּ֖ן [thus] (70) + יַעֲשֶׂה־לּ֑וֹ [he·shall·do·to·it] (421) + וְכִפֶּ֧ר [and·he·shall·make·atonement] (306) + עֲלֵהֶ֛ם [for·them] (145) + הַכֹּהֵ֖ן [the·priest] (80) + וְנִסְלַ֥ח [and·shall·be·forgiven] (154) + לָהֶֽם [to·them] (75) = 3571.
Onkelos
He shall do with the bull just as he did with the bull of the sin-offering — so shall he do with it; the priest shall make atonement for them and they shall be forgiven.
Rashi
ועשה לפר AND HE SHALL DO WITH THE BULLOCK — with this bullock —כאשר עשה לפר החטאת AS HE DID WITH THE BULLOCK FOR A SIN-OFFERING – i. e. as is expressly set forth in the case of the bullock of the anointed priest. This statement thus serves to bring under the command of offering the fat portions the lobe of the liver and the two kidneys which are not expressly mentioned there but which are not expressly mentioned here; and it serves also to repeat the command referring to these rites, teaching thereby that if he (the anointed priest) omitted one of all the applications of the blood it (the sacrifice) becomes invalid (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 6 5). Since we find in regard to blood which had to be placed on the outer altar, that if he places it there by one application alone he nevertheless effected atonement (cf. Mish. Zevachim 4:1), Scripture was compelled to intimate here that the omission of one application impedes the validity of the rite (Zevachim 39a).
Kli Yakar
“And he shall be forgiven.” The reason why the language of forgiveness is not mentioned regarding the anointed priest, as it is mentioned regarding the congregation, the leader, and the individual, is explained by Ramban as follows: Due to the priest’s high status, he will not be completely atoned for, because he is a messenger of the Lord of Hosts (Malachi 2:7), and his sin is too great to bear until he prays and beseeches his God. And Abarbanel wrote that what is said in the sin offering of the congregation, and they shall be forgiven, refers to both the priest and the congregation, including them together because both sinned in the matter of instruction by permitting what is forbidden. And it seems to me that this is why forgiveness is not mentioned regarding the anointed priest, because anyone who causes the public to sin bears the sin of the public, and regarding the anointed priest it states if the anointed priest sins, bringing guilt to the people (Leviticus 4:3). Rashi explains that his sin is the guilt of the people because they depend on him to atone for them, and he has become corrupted. But it is more correct to interpret bringing guilt to the people as meaning that he is included among those who cause the public to sin, because from him they observe and then act similarly through a fortiori reasoning. Therefore, “and he shall be forgiven” is not stated regarding him, because even though the sacrifice is sufficient to remove his sin from him and his iniquity is removed, nevertheless there still remains the impression of the public’s sin which depends on him, and for this there is no forgiveness. And do not challenge me from the fact that the language of forgiveness is used regarding a ruler who sins. This is because others do not learn from him at all; on the contrary, they attribute his sin to his position of authority, saying that because he conducted his authority with arrogance, he therefore came to sin, since everyone knows that haughtiness leads a person to transgress his Creator’s ways. Thus, people do not learn the sin from him; on the contrary, they learn from him the way of repentance, as it is written When a ruler sins (Leviticus 4:22), which Rashi interprets as “Fortunate is the generation, etc.” And regarding what [the Torah] says using the language of “forgiveness” in the section of If the whole congregation of Israel shall err. Whichever way you look at it — if the section is speaking about a complete congregation where literally everyone sinned, then there are no “causers of the many to sin” since everyone sinned as one. And if the section is speaking about the Sanhedrin [high court], as they learned from the gezeirah shavah [textual comparison] of congregation to congregation, then the [actual] congregation did not sin at all, because the Holy One, Blessed be He already commanded them to listen to the voice of their teachers. And if these [teachers] sinned and taught erroneously, what did these sheep [the people] do wrong? Thus, there are no “causers of the many to sin” here. And if you wish to say that this is still called “causers of the many to sin,” we can say that this is why [the Torah] concludes by saying it is a sin-offering [hatat, which can also mean sin] of the congregation — to say that even though it says and they shall be forgiven, nevertheless this is not a complete forgiveness, as it is a sin of the congregation and that impression remains permanent. It’s as if it’s saying that everything is forgiven except for the fact that it is a sin of the congregation — that sin remains permanent. And all of this serves as a great warning to teachers of rulings and to the great ones of Israel that they should be exceedingly careful in their actions, because an unintentional error in learning rises to the level of intentional sin. For what he does unintentionally causes others to see and similarly act intentionally, because they do not know that it was an error for them [the teachers].
And he shall carry forth the bullock without the camp, and burn it as he burned the first bullock; it is the sin-offering for the assembly.
verse value 5024
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 58 letters. The shortest word is "it" (אֹת֔וֹ, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·he·shall·take·out" (וְהוֹצִ֣יא, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 686: the·young·bull, the·young·bull. The root פרר appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "just·as" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "it" (root הוא, 102x in Leviticus); "the·purgation·offering·of" (root חטא, 65x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·first', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְהוֹצִ֣יא [and·he·shall·take·out] (118) + אֶת־הַפָּ֗ר [the·young·bull] (686) + אֶל־מִחוּץ֙ [to·outside] (175) + לַֽמַּחֲנֶ֔ה [to·the·camp] (133) + וְשָׂרַ֣ף [and·he·shall·burn] (586) + אֹת֔וֹ [it] (407) + כַּאֲשֶׁ֣ר [just·as] (521) + שָׂרַ֔ף [burned] (580) + אֵ֖ת הַפָּ֣ר [the·young·bull] (686) + הָרִאשׁ֑וֹן [the·first] (562) + חַטַּ֥את [the·purgation·offering·of] (418) + הַקָּהָ֖ל [the·assembly] (140) + הֽוּא [it] (12) = 5024.
Onkelos
He shall carry the bull outside the camp and burn it as he burned the first bull — it is the sin-offering of the congregation.
Ibn Ezra
"The sin-offering of the congregation, it is" — [referring to] the bull. And if Israel sins inadvertently and does not perform one of the positive commandments, they bring a bull as a burnt-offering and a goat as a sin-offering.
Rabbeinu Bahya
חטאת הקהל הוא, “it is a sin-offering by the congre-gation.” The word הוא [masculine, instead of the word היא which we would have expected as the appropriate pronoun applicable to the feminine חטאת, Ed.] refers to the word הפר, “the bull,” earlier in our verse. It is possible to view the word as an allusion to the sin of the golden calf (a male calf) which had been the only such collective sin of all the Jewish people in the desert. Our sages in Shemot Rabbah 42,5 state that because of this sin one of the feet of the merkavah, the carriers of G’d’s entourage, slipped at that time. They base this on Ezekiel 1,10 “and the face of the ox on the left of the four of them.” [In other words the “ox” symbolised the fact that through their sin at the golden calf the Israelites had undermined G’d’s throne, in particular the חיה with the face of an ox. Ed.] The type of sin-offerings to be brought by either the High Priest or the people [when they followed faulty High Court instructions] were the same, i.e. a two year old bull, because Aaron the High Priest had committed the error first [when making the golden calf, Ed.] and the people’s sin was a consequence of Aaron making the calf. The Torah ascribes the calf to the people when writing (Exodus 32,20) “the calf they had made.” A few verses later (verse 35) as if correcting itself, the Torah writes: “which Aaron had made.” In other words, the Torah is trying to explain the sin of the people as due to Aaron having committed the first error. You should also appreciate why, when the Torah describes the sin-offering of the High Priest in verse 3, the bull is described as 'תמים לה, “unblemished for the Lord,” whereas here the Torah only mentions “the congregation shall offer a two year old bull as a sin-offering,” without mentioning anything about it being unblemished. All of this is evidence that the Torah wishes to preserve the impression that Aaron’s part in the entire golden calf episode had been of pure, unblemished intention. When he had invited the people to celebrate a festival for the Lord on the morrow of the golden calf having emerged (32,5), he could not have known that some of the people had impure idolatrous intentions at that time and would treat this calf as a deity, as we know from Exodus 32,8: “they prostrated themselves before it and sacrificed to it.”
When a ruler sins, and does through error any one of all the things which Hashem his God has commanded not to be done, and is guilty:
verse value 4411 — יְהֹוָ֨ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 54 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֨ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "when" (אֲשֶׁ֥ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "shall·not·be·done" (לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֛ינָה, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: when, which. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "ruler" (נָשִׂ֖יא). The root אשר appears 2 times in this verse. 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "when" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·do" (root עשה, 94x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'he·shall·sin', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 9 words. Full calculation: אֲשֶׁ֥ר [when] (501) + נָשִׂ֖יא [ruler] (361) + יֶֽחֱטָ֑א [he·shall·sin] (28) + וְעָשָׂ֡ה [and·he·shall·do] (381) + אַחַ֣ת [one] (409) + מִכׇּל־מִצְוֺת֩ [from·all·commandments·of] (626) + יְהֹוָ֨ה [Hashem] (26) + אֱלֹהָ֜יו [his·God] (52) + אֲשֶׁ֧ר [which] (501) + לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֛ינָה [shall·not·be·done] (866) + בִּשְׁגָגָ֖ה [in·error] (313) + וְאָשֵֽׁם [and·he·shall·incur·guilt] (347) = 4411.
Onkelos
If a ruler sins and commits one of the commandments of Hashem his God that are not lawful to be done, inadvertently, and incurs guilt —
Rashi
אשר נשיא יחטא — The word אשר is connected in meaning with אשרי “happy”. Happy is the generation whose prince (king) takes care to bring an atonement sacrifice even for an inadvertent act of his; how much the more certain is it that he will do penance for his wilful sins (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Section 5 1; Horayot 10b)
Ramban
ASHER’ A PRINCE SINNETH. “The word asher is [here] derived from the expression ashrei (happy). Happy is the generation whose prince brings an offering for atonement [even] for his error. [Torath Kohanim]. 23. ‘O’ HIS SIN BE KNOWN TO HIM — ‘if’ his sin be known to him. There are many verses where the word o (or) is used in the sense of im (if), and conversely where im is used in the sense of o. Similarly, ‘o’ it be known that the ox was wont to gore [means ‘if’ it be known, and the word o which ordinarily means ‘or’ is here used in the sense of ‘im,’ meaning ‘if’].” Thus the language of Rashi. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented: “The sense of asher nasi yechta is as if the expression were inverted, making it read: asher yechta nasi (if ‘he who sins is the prince’), and it is connected with [the section] above, And if the whole congregation of Israel shall err. It is thus as if He had stated here: ‘and if he who sins is the prince [and he knows it of himself], or his sin be made known to him by others.’ Scripture, however, adopts a short form of expression, [omitting to state ‘that he knows the sin himself,’ or that it was made known to him ‘through others’], but the meaning is that either it becomes known to the prince by himself that he sinned, ‘o hoda eilav’ (or it be made known to him) — i.e., that another man who saw him doing it informed him of it. The grammatical form of hoda is then a past causative [like hodi’a — a man ‘informed’ him], this being similar to ‘v’heitzar lecha’ [the meaning of which is as if it said ‘v’heitzir lecha’ in the causative, i.e., and he will besiege thee]. The subject, however, is missing [for it should have said here, or ‘another man’ inform him, and there it should have stated, and ‘the enemy’ will besiege thee], just as ‘asher’ bore her to Levi” [which should have read ‘asher ishto’ (whose wife) bore her to Levi]. [All these are the words of Ibn Ezra.].But there is no need for all this, since the uses of the word asher are many. In some cases it indicates time, such as: ‘ka’asher’ (when) Joseph came unto his brethren; ‘ka’asher’ (when) they had eaten up the corn, and the like. Similarly, here too [asher is like ka’asher and indicates time]: ‘when’ a prince sinneth, with the kaf of cognizance [which would make it ka’asher — “when”] missing. So also, The blessing, ‘asher’ ye shall hearken unto the commandments of the Eternal, means ‘ka’asher’ (when) ye shall hearken. ‘Asher’ ye have seen the Egyptians today, ye shall see them again no more, means ‘ka’asher’ (when) ye have seen them [today ye shall see them no more]. Seven days thou shalt eat unleavened bread ‘asher’ I commanded thee, means ‘ka’asher’ (when) I commanded thee. At times this word [asher] is missing [not a kaf but] a beth. Thus: And also Maacah his mother he [King Asa of Judah] removed from being queen, ‘asher’ she made an abominable image for an Asherah means ‘ba’asher’ she made an abominable image for an Asherah, which denotes “because,” just like,...
Ibn Ezra
"That a prince (nasi) sins" — [the phrase] is inverted; the correct [reading of] the sense is: "that he who sins is the nasi," and it is connected to what precedes it. "And if the entire community of Israel" — it is as though it said: and if he who sins is the nasi of a tribe or the head of a father's house.
Sforno
אשר נשיא יחטא, when the King (or political head) sins; there is no conditional word אם, “if,” i.e. the Torah considers it as almost a given that the political head of the people will become guilty of at least an inadvertent sin. Moses describes such a likely scenario as the result of the people enjoying good times, when he says in Deuteronomy 32,15 וישמן ישורון ויבעט, “when Yeshurun waxed fat it kicked. ואשם, he realised himself that he had sinned; it did not have to be brought to his attention by others. או הודע לו, or his sin had to be brought to his attention by others. The vowel cholem on the letter vav substitutes for the vowel shuruk which would have made it clear that it is a passive mode.
Or HaChaim
אשר נשיא יחטא, When the prince (or king) commit an error, etc. This includes a situation where the ruler acted on the basis of a decision handed down by a properly constituted court. As long as the court is not guilty of a sin-offering on account of its decision, the ruler has to bring a a male goat as a sin-offering (Maimonides Hilchot Shigegot 15,8).
Chizkuni
אשר נשיא יחטא, “when the secular head of the nation commits an inadvertent sin;” the construction אשר נשיא יחטא, instead of: נשיא אשר יחטא, also occurs in Esther 6,8: ואשר נתן כתר מלכות על ראשו, where we would have expected the sequence of וכתר מלכות אשר נתן בראשו, “and the crown of the Kingdom which had been placed on his head.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
אשר נשיא יחטא, “when a prince (king) will sin inadvertently,” The word אשר in this instance is the same as if the Torah had written אם, “if a prince has sinned, etc.” We find the word אשר substituting for the word אם also In Deut. 11,27 את הברכה אשר תשמעו, “the blessing, if you will listen, etc.” Alternatively, we could understand the word to reflect a definitive statement, i.e. the Torah assuming that at one point or another a king is going to commit a sin and will have to offer a sin-offering. This then would account for the fact that the Torah did not choose to write אם נשיא יחטא, “if a king will sin, etc.” Seeing that the Torah had written אם הכהן המשיח יחטא, “if the High Priest will sin,” and it had written ואם כל עדת ישראל ישגו, “and if the entire congregation of Israel err, etc.,” the reason could be that seeing the High Priest is so careful not to sin, and the entire High Court cannot be presumed to err, the Torah did not want to write the word אשר in those instances which would have made a flat statement that these representatives of the people who are imbued with Holy Spirit would commit inadvertent sins. A king, who is no religious authority and to whom neither the people’s purity nor their piety is directly entrusted, is much more likely to err and sin; therefore the Torah used the expression אשר, to indicate that the Torah considers the fact that a king will sin at one time or another as a given. Kings have a hard time combating their arrogance and it is therefore not unusual for them to become guilty of sins. Keeping the pressures on kings to combat their egos in mind, the Torah devoted several verses to this in Deut. 17,20 and legislated certain restrictions on them to restrain their feeling all-powerful and above the law It was not accidental that the princes- the nearest thing to kings the Israelites had in those days- donated the precious stones for the shoulder piece and breastplate of the High Priest as they were to atone for the sin of arrogance. Compare what we wrote on Exodus 35,27. A Midrashic approach (Sifra Vayikra 5,1) to the words אשר נשיא יחטא: According to Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai the word אשר may be understood as אשרי, i.e. “hail to the generation whose king offers a sin-offering for having committed an inadvertent sin. If he is humble enough to acknowledge an error and to seek forgiveness, how much more so is he likely to repent and ask forgiveness for sins committed knowingly!” If the people observe that their king acknowledges errors by offering a sin-offering how much more so will their subjects be encouraged to acknowledge their mistakes and bring sin-offerings and ask G’d’s forgiveness! I might have thought that when the Torah writes the word נשיא it refers to a mere tribal head such as Nachshon prince of Yehudah. In order to make clear that this is not the kind of נשיא the Torah has in mind here, we find the words ועשה אחת מכל מצות ה' אלו-היו אשר לא תעשינה, “and he becomes guilty of committing one of the acts from all the commandments of Hashem which may not be done, etc.” In Deut. 17,19 the Torah writes: ”in order that he (the king) should learn to fear the Lord his G’d.” The message is that just as the king who has no human authority above him must respect divine authority, so here too, the “prince” is to understand that he must respect divine authority. The word נשיא as describing the highest temporal authority is also used in Ezekiel 12,12 where the prophet writes: והנשיא אשר בתוכם אל כתף ישא, which means that “that the king (Tzidkiyahu) should carry the vessels of exile on his shoulders.” The term נשיא is appropriate for a king as he is the most elevated person in the nation. This is also what the Torah meant in Exodus 22,27 where we read אלוהים לא תקלל ונשיא בעמך לא תאור, “you shall not curse G’d, nor shall you revile the leader of your people.” In that verse the Torah first warns against cursing the most high Being, i.e. G’d, followed by the most highly placed human being, i.e. the king who rules the land (or on earth). Our sages have said that when the people sin it is usually found that their king is punished for their sin. They base this on verse 21 in our chapter where the sin is described as חטאת העם, “the sin of the people,” and these words are followed immediately by the words “when a ruler sins.” They use this sequence to teach that anyone in authority who is able to protest wrongdoing and does not do so is considered as guilty of the wrongdoing committed (Shabbat 54).
Tur HaArokh
אשר נשיא יחטא, “when the political head of the nation commits an inadvertent sin, etc.” Rashi explains that it is a happy day for the people of Israel when a political head of the nation is called upon to bring this offering [It shows that such a head does not consider that he is infallible, and that he accepts admonitions by his subjects. Ed.] Ibn Ezra feels that the text is inverted and should be understood as if the Torah had written; “when a political head sins, etc.” The whole verse is a continuation of what has been written before, i.e. “in the event that the entire community of Israel has committed an inadvertent sin, etc.” The word אשר, according to Ibn Ezra, is not a statement of fact, but is conditional just as the word אם. מכל מצוות ה' אלוקיו, “of any of the negative commandments of his G’d.” Although up until now the Torah also spoke of violations of G’d’s commandments, the words מצוות אלוקיו underline that even the High Priest and the king, or other political leader, who owe obeisance only to G’d and not to a terrestrial ruler, need to be reminded by the Torah that they must always remain in awe of Hashem. He is the Supreme authority, including that of the King and High Priest. 4,23, או הודע אליו חטאתו, “or the sin that he is guilty of comes to his attention.” The Torah here abbreviated, seeing that earlier it had spoken of the example where the king himself had realized that he had committed an error. Here we speak about a situation where the king had been unaware himself that he had sinned, but that the fact and the nature of the sin had been brought to his attention by others. Nachmanides claims that there is no need for such convoluted ways of justifying the syntax of the Torah. The matter is simple. The word אשר simply means the same as כאשר, “when, or “as soon as,” There are many examples in Scripture where the word אשר appears meaning כאשר. As a result, the words או הודע אליו חטאתו refer to what had been stated previously in verse 1, i.e. ואשם, “he was conscious of some guilt.” and he became aware that he was guilty. At that time the sinner had either not taken any action in order to deal with how to atone for his transgression, or he had brought the offering but was not sure if it had been welcome in the eyes of G’d and had atoned for him. Other commentators feel that the reason why the Torah had not used wording such as או הודע אליו חטאתו except when the subject is the political head of the nation, or another individual, but not in connection with the community having sinned, or a High Priest having sinned, is that both a political head and an ordinary individual bring an אשם תלוית a contingent guilt offering, which protects them against punishment as long as the nature of their guilt has not been determined with certainty. After that, another offering, אשם ודאי, is called for. Our verse, accordingly would have to be understood thus: “if the person discussed entertains some doubt as to the precise nature of his guilt, he is to bring this אשם תלוי contingent guilt offering, pending clarification of his status. On the other hand, או הודע אליו חטאתו, if he is certain that he has to bring a sin offering to expiate his sin, he is only obliged to bring one offering, i.e. the sin offering under discussion.” The same rule applies to an ordinary priest who is subject to the same law as the ordinary Israelite. However, a High Priest or a political head of the people for whom the Torah has not made any provision to bring such contingent guilt offering in the event of doubt, as we know from the rider לאשמת העם, the guilt of the people which the Torah had added in the pertinent paragraph, (4,3) is treated in the same manner as the guilt of the community.
Rashbam
אשר נשיא יחטא, the word אשר in this verse is similar to the word ואשר in the line ואשר ניתן כתר מלכות בראשו, which means וכתר מלכות אשר נתן בראשו, and the crown of the Kingdom which he had placed on his head. (Esther 6,8) מצוות ה' אלוקיו, i.e. if he is a G’d fearing individual and has not sinned deliberately but inadvertently.
if his sin, in which he has sinned, be known to him, he shall bring for his offering a goat, a male without blemish.
verse value 3296 — חָטָ֖א = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 50 letters. Notable word values: "sinned" (חָטָ֖א) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "in·it" (בָּ֑הּ, 2 letters) and the longest is "his·offering" (אֶת־קׇרְבָּנ֛וֹ, 7 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "or·is·made·known" (אֽוֹ־הוֹדַ֤ע), "he-goat·of" (שְׂעִ֥יר). The root חטא appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·bring" (root בוא, 81x in Leviticus); "his·sin" (root חטא, 65x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root בה ("in·it") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root שעיר ("he-goat·of") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·it', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 6 words. Full calculation: אֽוֹ־הוֹדַ֤ע [or·is·made·known] (92) + אֵלָיו֙ [to·him] (47) + חַטָּאת֔וֹ [his·sin] (424) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [which] (501) + חָטָ֖א [sinned] (18) + בָּ֑הּ [in·it] (7) + וְהֵבִ֧יא [and·he·shall·bring] (24) + אֶת־קׇרְבָּנ֛וֹ [his·offering] (759) + שְׂעִ֥יר [he-goat·of] (580) + עִזִּ֖ים [goats] (127) + זָכָ֥ר [male] (227) + תָּמִֽים [without·blemish] (490) = 3296.
Onkelos
or his sin in which he sinned becomes known to him, he shall bring as his offering a male goat, a young of the goats, unblemished.
Rashi
או הודע is the same as “IF” (אם) [THE THING] WAS MADE KNOWN TO HIM — There are many passages where או is used in the sense of אם, and again where אם stands in the place of או. A similar instance is: (Exodus 21:36) “או נודע כי שור נגח הוא”, which means “if it was known that the ox was wont to thrust” (cf., however, Rashi on that verse and our Note thereon). הודע אליו IT WAS MADE KNOWN TO HIM — when he committed the sin he was under the belief that it was something permissible, afterwards it became known to him that it was a forbidden thing.
Ibn Ezra
"Or it is made known to him" — Scripture uses a compressed idiom, as [in the phrase] "to the priest" [where the agent is not specified]; the intent is that the prince either knows of himself that he sinned, or another person who saw him informs him. Grammatically, הוּדַע אֵלָיו [huda' elav] is a past-tense verb, like וְהֵצַר לָךְ [ve-hetzar lakh], with the informing party left implicit, as in "she who bore her to Levi" (Num. 26:59). Rabbi Moshe ha-Kohen said that it belongs to the passive construction (the building in which the name of the doer is not mentioned), since the holam and the shuruk are interchangeable, and it follows the pattern of "Joseph was brought down to Egypt" (Gen. 39:1). The prince brings a he-goat, [chosen] for the same reason as [the image of] "the greyhound" or "the he-goat" as the Gaon explains in his commentary on Proverbs — it [symbolizes] his standing as a male, befitting his princely rank. However, its blood is not brought into the interior of the Sanctuary, and the priests eat the nasi's sin-offering to make atonement for him, as it is written; but the High Priest does not eat his own sin-offering.
Or HaChaim
או הודע אליו חטאתו, or he has become aware of his inadvertent sin, etc. The Torah here writes "or" seeing in the previous verse it had written ואשם, that he was definite about having sinned. Torat Kohanim concludes that the ruler has to bring an אשם תלוי, a conditional sin-offering, if he is in doubt about having committed the sin in question. Our verse may discuss a situation where after having first offered an אשם תלוי while he was in doubt, the ruler now has to offer a definitive sin-offering as he is now certain that he committed the sin he had been in doubt about.
Rabbeinu Bahya
או הודע אליו, “or (the sin) becomes known to him, etc.” The meaning of the words is the same as if the Torah had written either והודע or וידע חטאתו, “he is aware of his sin.” In other words, the word או here is to be understood as the same as the connecting letter ו, “and.” We find a similar construction in Proverbs 30,31 זרזיר מתנים או תיש, where the words do not mean “a greyhound or a male goat,” but “a greyhound as well as a male goat.” [This is the view of commentators such as Rabbi Yonah quoted by Kimchi רד"ק.] This leaves us with the need to explain why the Torah chose this way of writing the word הודע with the letter ה in front as well as the additional word או. The reason may be that the sin-offering is related to the last letter ה in the tetragram. This is also why the Torah speaks of שעירת עזים תמימה נקבה in verse 28 where the reference to the subject which is masculine, i.e. קרבנו, should have rated the expression תמים instead of תמימה with the feminine ending at the end. The fact is that the letter ה really does refer to the word קרבנו and the message is that G’d inflicts afflictions on the sinner in order to prompt him to repent and to offer the sacrifice as proof of his repentance. It is the attribute of Justice represented by that last letter ה in the tetragram which initiates the afflictions setting the process of repentance-sin-offering in motion. The verse means that had the sinner not been victimised by such afflictions he would not have become aware of his sin.
Tur HaArokh
או הודע אליו חטאתו, “or the sin that he is guilty of comes to his attention.” The Torah here abbreviated, seeing that earlier it had spoken of the example where the king himself had realized that he had committed an error. Here we speak about a situation where the king had been unaware himself that he had sinned, but that the fact and the nature of the sin had been brought to his attention by others. Nachmanides claims that there is no need for such convoluted ways of justifying the syntax of the Torah. The matter is simple. The word אשר simply means the same as כאשר, “when, or “as soon as,” There are many examples in Scripture where the word אשר appears meaning כאשר. As a result, the words או הודע אליו חטאתו refer to what had been stated previously in verse 1, i.e. ואשם, “he was conscious of some guilt.” and he became aware that he was guilty. At that time the sinner had either not taken any action in order to deal with how to atone for his transgression, or he had brought the offering but was not sure if it had been welcome in the eyes of G’d and had atoned for him. Other commentators feel that the reason why the Torah had not used wording such as או הודע אליו חטאתו except when the subject is the political head of the nation, or another individual, but not in connection with the community having sinned, or a High Priest having sinned, is that both a political head and an ordinary individual bring an אשם תלוית a contingent guilt offering, which protects them against punishment as long as the nature of their guilt has not been determined with certainty. After that, another offering, אשם ודאי, is called for. Our verse, accordingly would have to be understood thus: “if the person discussed entertains some doubt as to the precise nature of his guilt, he is to bring this אשם תלוי contingent guilt offering, pending clarification of his status. On the other hand, או הודע אליו חטאתו, if he is certain that he has to bring a sin offering to expiate his sin, he is only obliged to bring one offering, i.e. the sin offering under discussion.” The same rule applies to an ordinary priest who is subject to the same law as the ordinary Israelite. However, a High Priest or a political head of the people for whom the Torah has not made any provision to bring such contingent guilt offering in the event of doubt, as we know from the rider לאשמת העם, the guilt of the people which the Torah had added in the pertinent paragraph, (4,3) is treated in the same manner as the guilt of the community.
Rashbam
או הודע, as if the Torah had written: אם הודע “if he became aware.” This is the conventional exegesis of these words. Personally, I feel that the line commences with the word ואשם from the last verse, so that the meaning would be that the individual committed an offense and it was brought to his attention by others.
Daat Zkenim
או הודע אליו, “or it has become known to him;” the Torah uses the singular mode here as well as in verse 28 where the individual who has become guilty of a sin is the leader of his tribe. Some commentators, including Rashi, understand both these verses as applying to people who at the time when they committed the trespass were convinced that what they did was perfectly permissible. Others understand the word או here to mean the same as אם, “if.” However, the author of the commentary b’chor shor of blessed memory, writes that seeing that both ordinary individuals as well as the leader of a tribe have to bring an asham taluy, sin offering of a suspended nature, [arresting potential punishment, until the doubt has been resolved, Ed] when in doubt if they had committed a certain sin. Our verse deals with that doubt having been resolved so that a sin offering to atone for a definitely committed sin is now required. The same situation also applies to verse 27 in this chapter, where the verse following deals with the situation after it has become clear. The author of בכור שור quotes as proof for his interpretation Torat Kohanim on the words: ממצות ה' אשר לא תעשינה, “from amongst one of G–d’s commandments that must not be violated.” (verse 27) The author of that volume understands the word ואשם at the end of that verse as indicating that this asham taluy is not appropriate in that situation. When a community has become guilty of such a sin and a doubt arises, no asham taluy is required. This is based on the fact that when the Torah discussed the situation requiring it, it had spoken of נפש כי תחטא, “if an individual had committed a sin.” When the High Priest had committed a sin, this is linked to a trespass by העם, “the people,” and this is the reason why the situation described as “or he had become aware of it,” is not mentioned there, as if the High Priest had been in doubt and everything he does, he does as the representative of the people, such an asham taluy was not appropriate.
And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the goat, and kill it in the place where they kill the burnt-offering before Hashem; it is a sin-offering.
verse value 4215 — יְהֹוָ֑ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 57 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֑ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "his·hand" (יָדוֹ֙, 3 letters) and the longest is "which·he·shall·slaughter" (אֲשֶׁר־יִשְׁחַ֥ט, 7 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "which·he·shall·slaughter" (אֲשֶׁר־יִשְׁחַ֥ט). The root שחט appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "to·face·of" (root פנים, 102x in Leviticus); "it" (root הוא, 102x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Hashem', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 2 words. Full calculation: וְסָמַ֤ךְ [and·he·shall·lay] (126) + יָדוֹ֙ [his·hand] (20) + עַל־רֹ֣אשׁ [upon·head·of] (601) + הַשָּׂעִ֔יר [the·he-goat] (585) + וְשָׁחַ֣ט [and·he·shall·slaughter] (323) + אֹת֗וֹ [it] (407) + בִּמְק֛וֹם [in·place·of] (188) + אֲשֶׁר־יִשְׁחַ֥ט [which·he·shall·slaughter] (828) + אֶת־הָעֹלָ֖ה [the·burnt-offering] (511) + לִפְנֵ֣י [to·face·of] (170) + יְהֹוָ֑ה [Hashem] (26) + חַטָּ֖את [a·purgation·offering] (418) + הֽוּא [it] (12) = 4215.
Onkelos
He shall lay his hand upon the head of the goat and slaughter it in the place where he slaughters the burnt-offering before Hashem — it is a sin-offering.
Rashi
במקום אשר ישחט את העלה [AND HE SHALL SLAUGHTER IT] IN THE PLACE WHERE THEY SLAUGHTER THE BURNT-OFFERING — on the north side of the altar which is expressly mentioned in the case of the burnt-offering (Leviticus 1:11) (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 8 5). חטאת הוא IT IS [TO BE] A SIN-OFFERING — Consequently, if he slaughtered it for the purpose of (i. e. having in mind that it is) a sin-offering it is valid, but if it is not done for this purpose (i. e. that the officiating priest had another sacrifice in mind) it is invalid (Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 8 6; Zevachim 10b; cf. also Rashi and Zevachim 5b).
Chizkuni
במקום אשר ישחט את העולה, “at the same place as he has to slaughter the burntoffering.” This was done in order not to embarrass a sinner, so that the people would think he is presenting a burnt offering.
And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin-offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and the remaining blood of it he shall pour out at the base of the altar of burnt-offering.
verse value 3570
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 64 letters. The shortest word is "from·blood·of" (מִדַּ֤ם, 3 letters) and the longest is "in·his·finger" (בְּאֶצְבָּע֔וֹ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 110: the·burnt-offering, the·burnt-offering. The root דם appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "altar·of" (root מזבח, 95x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·give" (root נתן, 86x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·burnt-offering', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְלָקַ֨ח [and·he·shall·take] (144) + הַכֹּהֵ֜ן [the·priest] (80) + מִדַּ֤ם [from·blood·of] (84) + הַֽחַטָּאת֙ [the·purgation·offering] (423) + בְּאֶצְבָּע֔וֹ [in·his·finger] (171) + וְנָתַ֕ן [and·he·shall·give] (506) + עַל־קַרְנֹ֖ת [upon·horns·of] (850) + מִזְבַּ֣ח [altar·of] (57) + הָעֹלָ֑ה [the·burnt-offering] (110) + וְאֶת־דָּמ֣וֹ [and·its·blood] (457) + יִשְׁפֹּ֔ךְ [he·shall·pour] (410) + אֶל־יְס֖וֹד [to·foundation·of] (111) + מִזְבַּ֥ח [altar·of] (57) + הָעֹלָֽה [the·burnt-offering] (110) = 3570.
Onkelos
The priest shall take some of the blood of the sin-offering with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of the burnt-offering, and its blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering.
Rashi
ואת דמו [AND HE SHALL POUR OUT] THE BLOOD — i. e. the remainder of the blood (cf. Rashi on v. 7).
Ramban
AND THE REMAINING BLOOD THEREOF SHALL HE POUR OUT AT THE BASE OF THE ALTAR OF BURNT-OFFERING. This is the same altar already mentioned [in the first part of the verse: and he shall put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering]. But such is the linguistic expression of the [Hebrew] language to mention the subject instead of [merely] the definite article [thus repeating “of burnt-offering” rather than just saying “the altar”]. Similarly, and he shall lay his hand upon the head of the bullock, and he shall slaughter the bullock. Our Rabbis have Midrashic interpretations on these verses, for the law of the Eternal is perfect, there being nothing in it which is omitted or redundant.
Chizkuni
על קרנות מזבח העולה, “on the horns (corners) of the altar for burnt offerings.” When either the High Priest or the community offers a sacrifice (sin offering), the blood for the atonement through these sacrifices is considered before the Almighty as if it had been offered inside the Sanctuary and having been sprinkled on the dividing curtain and on the golden altar. By the same token, the sins for which atonement had been sought may be perceived as if they had been cast out even beyond the three Camps of the Israelite nation, all according to the severity of the sin to be atoned for. If either the secular head of the people or another person find themselves in the same position, seeing that they are not so highly ranking individuals do not bother to offer the required sacrifice and do not consider either the blood of it or its entrails etc, the blood of their sacrifices is offered on the altar in the courtyard of the Temple, and the meat of these sacrifices may be consumed. (based on B’chor shor end of Vayikra)
Rashbam
מזבח העולה , the altar outside the sanctuary. This blood was not to be smeared on the interior altar as was the blood of the sin offering of the High Priest, or that of the sin-offering on behalf of the community at large. (verse 16-17).
And all the fat of it he shall make smoke upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of peace-offerings; and the priest shall make atonement for him as concerning his sin, and he shall be forgiven.
verse value 2557 — לֽוֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 58 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (לֽוֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (לֽוֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·fat" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֶלְבּוֹ֙, 9 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "as·fat·of" (כְּחֵ֖לֶב). The root חלב appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "for·him" (root על, 127x in Leviticus); "the·altar" (root מזבח, 95x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·well-being', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 6 words. Full calculation: וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֶלְבּוֹ֙ [and·all·its·fat] (503) + יַקְטִ֣יר [he·shall·turn·into·smoke] (329) + הַמִּזְבֵּ֔חָה [the·altar] (67) + כְּחֵ֖לֶב [as·fat·of] (60) + זֶ֣בַח [sacrifice·of] (17) + הַשְּׁלָמִ֑ים [the·well-being] (425) + וְכִפֶּ֨ר [and·he·shall·make·atonement] (306) + עָלָ֧יו [for·him] (116) + הַכֹּהֵ֛ן [the·priest] (80) + מֵחַטָּאת֖וֹ [from·his·sin] (464) + וְנִסְלַ֥ח [and·shall·be·forgiven] (154) + לֽוֹ [to·him] (36) = 2557.
Onkelos
All its fat he shall cause to go up in smoke on the altar, like the fat of the peace-offerings; the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin, and he shall be forgiven.
Rashi
כחלב זבח השלמים [AND HE SHALL CAUSE ALL ITS FAT TO ASCEND IN FUMES], AS THE FAT OF THE SACRIFICE OF PEACE OFFERINGS — i. e. as those fat portions which are specified in the case of the goat that is mentioned among the peace-offerings (Leviticus 3:14, 15).
And if any one of the common people sin through error, in doing any of the things which Hashem has commanded not to be done, and be guilty:
verse value 5565 — יְהֹוָ֛ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 57 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֛ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "one" (אַחַ֛ת, 3 letters) and the longest is "shall·not·be·made" (לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֖ינָה, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 409: one, one. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "from·people·of" (מֵעַ֣ם), "by·doing" (בַּ֠עֲשֹׂתָ֠הּ), "from·commandments·of" (מִמִּצְוֺ֧ת). The root אחד appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "that" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "by·doing" (root עשה, 94x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root ארץ ("the·land") in Leviticus. First appearance of the root מצוה ("from·commandments·of") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·land', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 7 words. Full calculation: וְאִם־נֶ֧פֶשׁ [and·if·a·person] (477) + אַחַ֛ת [one] (409) + תֶּחֱטָ֥א [shall·sin] (418) + בִשְׁגָגָ֖ה [in·error] (313) + מֵעַ֣ם [from·people·of] (150) + הָאָ֑רֶץ [the·land] (296) + בַּ֠עֲשֹׂתָ֠הּ [by·doing] (777) + אַחַ֨ת [one] (409) + מִמִּצְוֺ֧ת [from·commandments·of] (576) + יְהֹוָ֛ה [Hashem] (26) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [that] (501) + לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֖ינָה [shall·not·be·made] (866) + וְאָשֵֽׁם [and·he·shall·incur·guilt] (347) = 5565.
Onkelos
And if one person sins inadvertently from the people of the land, by committing one of the commandments of Hashem that are not lawful to be done, and incurs guilt —
Ibn Ezra
"From the people of the land" — these are all [ordinary] Israelites, together with the common priests and all the Levites. "And incurred guilt" (ve-asham) — a past-tense verb, like "for Isaac was old."
Sforno
ואם נפש אחת תחטא בשגגה מעם הארץ, if an ordinary citizen had committed an inadvertent sin, a likely event; here the Torah describes the sin as חטא, whereas when speaking of the King it describes it as אשם, in order to warn him at the same time to confess and do teshuvah before offering his sin offering. In both instances, as well as in all sacrifices described as asham, part of the sacrificial meat is eaten by the priests. The eating of those parts of the sacrifice by the priests is an essential ingredient in the atonement process for the guilty parties.
Or HaChaim
ואם נפש אחת תחטא, And if anyone of the common people sin through error, etc. The letter ו at the beginning of the word ואם connects this paragraph to the rules established in the previous paragraphs concerning the details of the procedures. מעם הארץ, amongst the common people, etc. Horiot 11 teaches that this excludes the High Priest if the latter erred without there having been an erroneous decision handed down by the High Court. In such an event the High Priest does not even have to bring a female goat as a sin-offering to atone for his error. Exegetes also use the letter ם in the word מעם to exclude culpability of a ruler in the event he ate half (part) of the minimum amount of a forbidden food whereas he had eaten the other half before becoming the ruler. The method of exegesis is based on the words מעם הארץ being superfluous in the first instance; the words נפש כי תחטא would have been quite sufficient. The expression is therefore used to exclude prominent individuals such as the High Priest. The additional letter ם is now also available for exegesis "dividing" the concept of עם הארץ. Hence the exegete applies it to a commoner who has consumed part of a forbidden amount of blood, for instance, and was subsequently elevated to the status of king or High Priest before he ate the second part of that blood which constituted an amount for which one is culpable of bringing a sin-offering. The extraneous letter teaches us that such a High Priest or King does not have to bring a sin-offering. בעשותה, when she (the נפש) has performed it (the sin). This word is extraneous and Torat Kohanim interprets it both restrictively and inclusively. It is used restrictively to teach that if the person who committed the sin did so as a result of carrying out a ruling handed down by the High Court, he is exonerated. He has to bring the sin-offering mentioned in our verse only if he acted in accordance with his own opinion. The Torah had to state this separately because I might have thought that when the Torah legislated the bullock as a sin offering in verse 14, only people who committed that sin as a result of having heard of the High Court's decision would be covered by it, but that if an individual had not heard of that ruling and had nonetheless committed the same sin he would have to bring the she-goat as a sin-offering; the Torah therefore wrote בעשותה that he is to bring the personal sin-offering only if he had acted on his own and there was no faulty ruling by the High Court. The word בעשותה is interpreted inclusively in the event that the individual complied with the High Court's faulty ruling though he was well enough versed in Torah to know that the ruling was faulty. In such a case he cannot shield himself behind the High Court's ruling but has to offer a personal sin-offering of a she-goat for having acted against his better judgment. His sin-offering then is in addition to the bullock prescribed in verse 14. Had the Torah written only בעשות, I woul...
Chizkuni
ואשם, “and he has become guilty;” he found out himself that he had committed an inadvertent sin.
if his sin, which he has sinned, be known to him, then he shall bring for his offering a goat, a female without blemish, for his sin which he has sinned.
verse value 4266 — חָטָ֑א = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 62 letters. Notable word values: "sinned" (חָטָ֑א) = 18, chai, 'life'. Verse gematria: 4266 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "or" (א֚וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "upon·his·sin" (עַל־חַטָּאת֖וֹ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, which. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "is·made·known" (הוֹדַ֣ע), "goat·of" (שְׂעִירַ֤ת). The root חטא appears 4 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "or" (root או, 101x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·bring" (root בוא, 81x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'sinned', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 9 words.
Onkelos
or his sin that he sinned becomes known to him, he shall bring as his offering a female goat, an unblemished female, for his sin that he sinned.
Ibn Ezra
"A female goat" — because his [social] standing is lower than that of the prince. And the meaning of "and he shall be forgiven" is explained in the portion of Shelah Lekha.
Chizkuni
או הודע אליו, “or it had been brought to his attention;”
And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering, and kill the sin-offering in the place of burnt-offering.
verse value 3016
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 39 letters. Verse gematria: 3016 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "upon" (עַ֖ל, 2 letters) and the longest is "the·purgation·offering" (אֶת־הַ֣חַטָּ֔את, 7 letters). The root חטא appears 2 times in this verse. 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "upon" (root על, 127x in Leviticus); "the·burnt-offering" (root עלה, 74x in Leviticus); "the·purgation·offering" (root חטא, 65x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·purgation·offering', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְסָמַךְ֙ [and·he·shall·lay] (126) + אֶת־יָד֔וֹ [his·hand] (421) + עַ֖ל [upon] (100) + רֹ֣אשׁ [head·of] (501) + הַֽחַטָּ֑את [the·purgation·offering] (423) + וְשָׁחַט֙ [and·he·shall·slaughter] (323) + אֶת־הַ֣חַטָּ֔את [the·purgation·offering] (824) + בִּמְק֖וֹם [in·place·of] (188) + הָעֹלָֽה [the·burnt-offering] (110) = 3016.
Onkelos
He shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering and slaughter the sin-offering in the place of the burnt-offering.
And the priest shall take of the blood of it with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and all the remaining blood of it he shall pour out at the base of the altar.
verse value 3096
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 59 letters. Verse gematria: 3096 is divisible by 86, the value of Elohim. The shortest word is "and·he·shall·take" (וְלָקַ֨ח, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·blood" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־דָּמָ֣הּ, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 506: and·he·shall·give, and·all·its·blood. The root דם appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "altar·of" (root מזבח, 95x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·give" (root נתן, 86x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·burnt-offering', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְלָקַ֨ח [and·he·shall·take] (144) + הַכֹּהֵ֤ן [the·priest] (80) + מִדָּמָהּ֙ [from·its·blood] (89) + בְּאֶצְבָּע֔וֹ [in·his·finger] (171) + וְנָתַ֕ן [and·he·shall·give] (506) + עַל־קַרְנֹ֖ת [upon·horns·of] (850) + מִזְבַּ֣ח [altar·of] (57) + הָעֹלָ֑ה [the·burnt-offering] (110) + וְאֶת־כׇּל־דָּמָ֣הּ [and·all·its·blood] (506) + יִשְׁפֹּ֔ךְ [he·shall·pour] (410) + אֶל־יְס֖וֹד [to·foundation·of] (111) + הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ [the·altar] (62) = 3096.
Onkelos
The priest shall take some of its blood with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of the burnt-offering, and all its blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar.
And all the fat of it he shall take away, as the fat is taken away from off the sacrifice of peace-offerings; and the priest shall make it smoke upon the altar for a sweet savor to Hashem; and the priest shall make atonement for him, and he shall be forgiven.
verse value 3745 — לֽוֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 19 words, 84 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (לֽוֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (לֽוֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·fat" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֶלְבָּ֣הּ, 9 letters). Words sharing gematria 80: the·priest, the·priest. 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "is·removed" (הוּסַ֣ר). The root חלב appears 2 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "to·Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "just·as" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Hashem', dividing the verse into phrases of 14 and 5 words.
Onkelos
He shall remove all its fat, just as the fat is removed from the peace-offerings, and the priest shall cause it to go up in smoke on the altar to be accepted with favour before Hashem; the priest shall make atonement for him and he shall be forgiven.
Rashi
כאשר הוסר הלב מעל זבח השלמים [AND HE SHALL REMOVE ALL THE FAT] AS THE FAT IS REMOVED FROM OFF THE SACRIFICE OF PEACE OFFERINGS — i.e. as the fat portions of the goat which are mentioned in the case of peace offerings (cf. previous verse).
Daat Zkenim
והקטיר המזבחה, “and make it smoke on the altar.” The expression ריח ניחוח, “of pleasing odour,” is missing here as when an individual of high rank sins, G–d is more harsh than He is with average people.
And if he bring a lamb as his offering for a sin-offering, he shall bring it a female without blemish.
verse value 1928
Insights
Verse structure: 7 words, 35 letters. The shortest word is "he·shall·bring" (יָבִ֥יא, 4 letters) and the longest is "and·if·young·ram" (וְאִם־כֶּ֛בֶשׂ, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "and·if·young·ram" (וְאִם־כֶּ֛בֶשׂ), "he·shall·bring·it" (יְבִיאֶֽנָּה). The root בוא appears 2 times in this verse. 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "he·shall·bring" (root בוא, 81x in Leviticus); "as·a·purgation·offering" (root חטא, 65x in Leviticus); "his·offering" (root קרבן, 40x in Leviticus). First appearance of the root כבש ("and·if·young·ram") in Leviticus. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'as·a·purgation·offering', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 3 words. Full calculation: וְאִם־כֶּ֛בֶשׂ [and·if·young·ram] (369) + יָבִ֥יא [he·shall·bring] (23) + קׇרְבָּנ֖וֹ [his·offering] (358) + לְחַטָּ֑את [as·a·purgation·offering] (448) + נְקֵבָ֥ה [female] (157) + תְמִימָ֖ה [without·blemish] (495) + יְבִיאֶֽנָּה [he·shall·bring·it] (78) = 1928.
Onkelos
And if he brings a lamb as his offering for a sin-offering, he shall bring a female, unblemished.
Ibn Ezra
"And if a sheep (kesev)" — if he brings from the sheep-kind as his sin-offering, he brings a female, just as [with] the female goat.
Or HaChaim
ואם כבש יביא קרבנו, And if he bring a lamb for his offering, etc. Why did the Torah have to make two separate paragraphs out of verses 27-31 and 32-35? Why did the Torah not simply state in the previous paragraph that the individual inadvertent sinner who is the subject in both paragraphs has the choice of bringing either a ewe or a she-goat to serve as his sin-offering? This would have eliminated the need for the entire paragraph commencing with verse 32? I believe that the reason why the Torah chose to write a separate paragraph is the same as why the Torah saw fit to write the paragraph starting with 3,6-11 and a separate paragraph commencing with 3,11-17 when the peace-offering consists of a she-goat. Torat Kohanim on 3,12 (item 185) explained all that. In our instance when the Torah speaks of sheep and goats as sin-offerings rather than as peace-offerings as in chapter three, the Torah (4,31) speaks of separating and burning up on the altar all of the fat of the she-goat sin-offering, comparing it with 3,9 where the fat-tail of sheep is included in the parts to be burned up as a peace-offering. In the case of a sin-offering consisting of a sheep, all of the fat parts are to be offered on the altar (4,35) including the fat-tail. We could not have derived the legislation pertaining to voluntary peace-offerings from legislation describing what is to be done with the same kind of animal when it is offered as a mandatory sin-offering. Concerning the words וסמך את ידו, that the owner- sinner has to place his weight on the sin-offering prior to its being slaughtered, something that I would have derived from the same rule pertaining to the she-goat sin-offering, Torat Kohanim uses the superfluous words as applying to sin-offerings by a Nazirite or a person struck with Tzora-at after he has been declared healed. Both of these people have to bring a mandatory sin-offering at the end of the term of Nazirism or when the affliction has disappeared (compare Numbers 6,14, and Leviticus 14,11). In either instance the Torah did not mention the need for the person who obtains atonement by means of that offering to perform the rite of placing his weight on the animal. Therefore, the superfluous words וסמך ידו in our verse are used as applicable to those sin-offerings. ושחט אותה לחטאת, and he is to slaughter it to be a sin-offering. Zevachim 7 derives from these words that the act of slaughtering must be accompanied by the intent that the animal in question become a sin-offering. This is another detail which could only have been derived by the repetition of this sentence. In the previous paragraph these words were needed for the plain meaning of the verse. You may learn from this verse that this rule applies both to the sin-offering of a she-goat and that of a ewe. במקום אשר ישחט את העולה, in the place where he (the priest) is to slaughter the burnt-offering. Zevachim 48 asks: "whence do I know that the sin-offering had to be slaughtered on the northern sid...
And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering, and kill it for a sin-offering in the place where they kill the burnt-offering.
verse value 4275
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 49 letters. The shortest word is "upon" (עַ֖ל, 2 letters) and the longest is "the·burnt-offering" (אֶת־הָעֹלָֽה, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: head·of, which. The root חטא appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "upon" (root על, 127x in Leviticus); "the·burnt-offering" (root עלה, 74x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·purgation·offering', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 7 words. Full calculation: וְסָמַךְ֙ [and·he·shall·lay] (126) + אֶת־יָד֔וֹ [his·hand] (421) + עַ֖ל [upon] (100) + רֹ֣אשׁ [head·of] (501) + הַֽחַטָּ֑את [the·purgation·offering] (423) + וְשָׁחַ֤ט [and·he·shall·slaughter] (323) + אֹתָהּ֙ [it] (406) + לְחַטָּ֔את [as·a·purgation·offering] (448) + בִּמְק֕וֹם [in·place·of] (188) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [which] (501) + יִשְׁחַ֖ט [he·shall·slaughter] (327) + אֶת־הָעֹלָֽה [the·burnt-offering] (511) = 4275.
Onkelos
He shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin-offering and slaughter it as a sin-offering in the place where he slaughters the burnt-offering.
Rashi
אותה ושחט לחטאת AND HE SHALL SLAUGHTER IT FOR A SIN-OFFERING — This means that its slaughtering shall be for the purpose of (with the intention of making it) a sin-offering (Zevachim 7b).
And the priest shall take of the blood of the sin-offering with his finger, and put it upon the horns of the altar of burnt-offering, and all the remaining blood of it he shall pour out at the base of the altar.
verse value 3514
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 63 letters. The shortest word is "from·blood·of" (מִדַּ֤ם, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·blood" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־דָּמָ֣הּ, 8 letters). Words sharing gematria 506: and·he·shall·give, and·all·its·blood. The root דם appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus); "altar·of" (root מזבח, 95x in Leviticus); "and·he·shall·give" (root נתן, 86x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·burnt-offering', dividing the verse into phrases of 9 and 4 words. Full calculation: וְלָקַ֨ח [and·he·shall·take] (144) + הַכֹּהֵ֜ן [the·priest] (80) + מִדַּ֤ם [from·blood·of] (84) + הַֽחַטָּאת֙ [the·purgation·offering] (423) + בְּאֶצְבָּע֔וֹ [in·his·finger] (171) + וְנָתַ֕ן [and·he·shall·give] (506) + עַל־קַרְנֹ֖ת [upon·horns·of] (850) + מִזְבַּ֣ח [altar·of] (57) + הָעֹלָ֑ה [the·burnt-offering] (110) + וְאֶת־כׇּל־דָּמָ֣הּ [and·all·its·blood] (506) + יִשְׁפֹּ֔ךְ [he·shall·pour] (410) + אֶל־יְס֖וֹד [to·foundation·of] (111) + הַמִּזְבֵּֽחַ [the·altar] (62) = 3514.
Onkelos
The priest shall take some of the blood of the sin-offering with his finger and put it on the horns of the altar of the burnt-offering, and all its blood he shall pour out at the base of the altar.
And all the fat of it he shall take away, as the fat of the lamb is taken away from the sacrifice of peace-offerings; and the priest shall make them smoke on the altar, upon the offerings of Hashem made by fire; and the priest shall make atonement for him as touching his sin that he has sinned, and he shall be forgiven.
verse value 5518 — יְהֹוָ֑ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 21 words, 98 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֑ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "upon" (עַ֖ל, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·all·its·fat" (וְאֶת־כׇּל־חֶלְבָּ֣הּ, 9 letters). Words sharing gematria 80: the·priest, the·priest. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Leviticus. Unique to this verse in Leviticus (hapax): "is·removed" (יוּסַ֥ר), "fat·of·the·young·ram" (חֵֽלֶב־הַכֶּ֘שֶׂב֮). The root חלב appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 308x in Leviticus); "just·as" (root אשר, 240x in Leviticus); "the·priest" (root כהן, 195x in Leviticus). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Hashem', dividing the verse into phrases of 14 and 7 words.
Onkelos
He shall remove all its fat, just as the fat of a lamb is removed from the peace-offerings, and the priest shall cause them to go up in smoke on the altar upon the offerings of Hashem; the priest shall make atonement for him for his sin that he sinned, and he shall be forgiven.
Rashi
כאשר יוסר חלב הכבש [AND HE SHALL REMOVE ALL THE FAT THEREOF] AS THE FAT OF THE LAMB IS REMOVED — the fat portions of which have been augmented by the addition of the fat-tail (cf. v. 9): thus, too, does a sin-offering, whenever it is brought as she-lamb, require the fat-tail to be removed together with the other fat portions (cf. Sifra, Vayikra Dibbura d'Chovah, Chapter 11 4). על אשי ה׳ means upon the fire-pyres which are made for the Lord; foailles in O. F.
Ibn Ezra
The reason for [the phrase] "as the fat of a sheep (kesev) is removed" — to include the fat tail, for there is no fat tail [to remove] with the she-goat.
Rashbam
כאשר יוסר חלב הכשב, the fatty part fo the sheep’s tail, opposite the rump, עצה.
Onkelos