Vayikro
Book 3: Leviticus

Chapter 01 - Text Notes

1 All parshiyos beginning "G-d spoke to Moshe...."

2 All Parshiyos beginning "G-d said to Moshe...."

3 Since the verse continues with "G-d spoke to him," why mention G-d's speaking to Moshe at all?

4 The use of the verb "He called" here expresses G-d's love for Moshe, and this serves to teach us that whenever a paroshoh begins with "G-d spoke," "G-d said," etc., G-d did not speak to Moshe abruptly, but first greeted him with "Moshe, Moshe!" and Moshe would answer "Here I am!" (S.C.)

5 Yeshayoh 6, 3.

6 Without greeting and with distaste rather than love; see Rashi to Bemidbar 23, 4.

7 Bemidbar 23, 4, 16. The word {Hebrew Ref} ("He happened upon") is similar to {Hebrew Ref} ("He called"), but is actually related to the word {Hebrew Ref} , which refers to unpleasant occurences; see Rashi to Bemidbar 23, 4.

8 That is, the sound of G-d's words.

9 Only to Moshe's ears, as the verse states.

10 Even Aharon did not hear this greeting; that is why the verse states "to Moshe" and then emphasizes, "to him."

11 Since a "call" began a paroshoh, perhaps it ended one also.

12 Why not write the Torah as one long paroshoh?

13 And give him a chance to absorb what he had just been taught before continuing on. Most of the Torah was given to Moshe during the relatively short time before the sin of the ten spies which kept the Jews in the desert for another 38 years, as Rashi notes in his comments at the end of this verse.

14 The teacher should not overload the student.

15 Out of respect for G-d the verse states that His voice spoke to itself, as it were, and Moshe merely overheard it.

16 Bemidbar 7, 89. This verse explains in more detail how G-d spoke to Moshe in the Tent of Meeting, and so Rashi,following the Midrash, uses it to explain what happened here in Vayikro.

17 Shemos 25, 22.

18 That is, all are listed in the Sifra, a halachic midrash on Vayikro, from which most of the foregoing is taken; see perek 2, 2. Note that Sifra is divided into non-overlapping perokim and parshiyos, with separate numbering systems for the paragraphs (mishnayos) in them. References will indicate whether the source is a perek (per.) or paroshoh (par.).

19 The phrase "uttering itself to him," using the word {Hebrew Ref} and not {Hebrew Ref} , indicates that the voice was specifically intended for Moshe and no one else, while {Hebrew Ref} does not have this implication (M.L.) As Rashi notes elsewhere (Bereishis 28, 14,d.h. dibbarti lach), {Hebrew Ref} (and therefore also lo) has the meaning of "for your sake." Thus {Hebrew Ref} has the implication Rashi explains here (G.A.).

20 The word {Hebrew Ref} has a double sense, excluding all Israel both from having heard the words the voice uttered and from hearing even the sound of the voice, while the second verse, from Shemos, which uses the word {Hebrew Ref} , teaches us that Aharon was excluded from hearing what Moshe heard (M.L.)

21 The phrase {Hebrew Ref} ("Tent of Meeting") seems unnecessary, since we know that Moshe had entered the Tent. Its presence in the verse and its placement next to the word "to him" indicates that the voice could be heard only by Moshe and not outside the Tent (M.L.).

22 Tehillim 29, 4--5.

23 After all, G-d's powerful voice should have been heard throughout the Israelite camp.

24 Yechezkel 10, 5.

25 Yechezkel ibid.

26 And not just from one spot.

27 Of the ark. Bemidbar 7,89.

28 Ibid. Teaching us that the voice---which could break cedars---could be concentrated between the two cherubim and not be heard elsewhere.

29 Ordinarily, when it appears in the common verse, "G-d spoke to Moshe, saying," the word {Hebrew Ref} , "saying," is not given the special meaning Rashi gives it here. But here the phrase "from the Tent of Meeting" interrupts the continuity of the sentence "spoke to Moshe, saying" (G.A.)

30 Though these words seem rather encouraging, the truth is that the thought that G-d speaks to Moshe only for the sake of the Jewish people brings a sense of added responsibility with it (B.B).

31 Literally, "closeted itself."

32 Devorim 2, 16--17. It was only when the generation of the spies died that G-d spoke again to Moshe.

33 Shemos 19, 8.

34 Since the verse states "If a man brings," the bringing must be entirely of his own free will.

35 Why use a word which is also the name of Adam, the first man created? Why not use the word ish, which also means "man,person"? (M.)

36 "The First Adam."

37 The whole world belonged to him, since at his creation no other human existed.

38 Vayikro Rabbo 2, 7.

39 Since in Devorim 14, 4--5, wild animals are included under the heading "these are the animals ( {Hebrew Ref} ) you should eat," we might think that here too wild animals are included in the category of {Hebrew Ref} (M.).

40 Cattle and sheep are specified further on, and so here too "animal" must refer to domesticated animals and not wild ones (M.).

41 The word {Hebrew Ref} , "from, of," implies that not all animals may be offered; some are forbidden.

42 These may not be brought as sacrifices because of the degraded use to which they had been put. M. notes that this must refer to the time before these animals are condemned to death along with the humans who were with them.

43 Again {Hebrew Ref} denotes an exclusion. This could not have been derived from the previous {Hebrew Ref} because here the sin is less severe, since the animal was not degraded bodily as in the previous case (M.L.).

44 {Hebrew Ref} once again denotes an exclusion which cannot be derived from the preceding ones, since setting aside an animal as a (future) gift to an idolatrous temple is not as heinous a sin as actually worshiping it (M.).

45 That is, aside from the word min, "of, from," there is another exclusion or limitation in this word, the letter vov,here translated "or," implying another exclusion. This is so despite the fact that a vov usually signals an inclusion; here however it marks an exclusion because it is connected with the exclusionary word {Hebrew Ref} .

46 A goring ox. Once again, this is not as severe a crime as the preceding ones, which involve the "cardinal" sins which a Jew must sacrifice himself rather than commit. Here the transgression is bound up with the owner's negligence in not keeping an adequate watch on the ox (M.L.).

47 The word {Hebrew Ref} , which comes to exclude something.

48 Menochos 5b. A {Hebrew Ref} , which cannot live because of a defective or diseased organ. Again, this exclusion is of less severity than those which came before, since it does not involve a sinful act (M.L.). In this case, the defect was discovered only after the animal was set aside as an offering, since if it had been discovered before that, it would have been forbidden even as food for humans, let alone for the altar! (M.). To sum up, each of these exclusions refers to a less severe transgression than the preceding ones; if there had been only one {Hebrew Ref} , we might have assumed that only the most severe category of animal was excluded from being used as a sacrifice; we therefore need them all.

49 Just as summer fruit (figs, grapes) come as dessert at the end of a meal, the "summer fruit" burnt-offerings came after all the obligatory sacrifices had been offered.

50 From the surplus of the yearly shekolim given by people to pay for communal sacrifices.

51 It is only the androginos that is excluded by the verse, but we do not need a specific verse to exclude an animal whose gender cannot be determined, since we merely apply the rule that in matters of Torah law, we take the more severe alternative (chumra) (G.A.).

52 {Hebrew Ref} can mean "perfect," so Rashi tells us that here it means merely without blemish, not necessarily the most beautiful of its kind. On the other hand, "perfect" implies more than not missing any limb, etc., but includes the blemishes set forth in Vayikro 22, 17--25 (N.Y.).

53 And the kohanim take it from there.

54 That is, one not dedicated as a sacrifice.

55 Such as those listed above in Rashi's comments on verse 3 above or verse 10 below---animals that have a fatal physical defect, or have been set aside for idol worship, etc.

56 A sin-offering and a guilt-offering, for example.

57 Only that animal, and for the purpose for which it was brought; it is for that reason that the verse repeats "he shall bring."

58 Sifra par. 3, 15, Arachin 21a. Since his essential nature is to be obedient to G-d, the use of force only serves to weaken his evil inclination and allow his natural good feelings to reassert themselves (Rambam, Hilchos Gerushin 2, 3).

59 Explaining why the last word of verse 3 is placed next to the first word of verse 4.

60 Sifra per. 4, 1. Because this section speaks of offerings brought "before Ad-noy" at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, this law applies only to the Tent and Temple, but not to a private altar, during the limited time when such altars were permitted, as between the time that Shiloh was destroyed (Tehillim 78, 60) and the building of the Temple by King Solomon; see Zevochim 112b.

61 Since the verse could have stated "on its head," or "on the head of his burnt-offering," the word "the burnt-offering"implies two inclusions, one because it did not use the less cumbersome expression "on the head of his burnt-offering," and one because it did not use the much shorter expression "on its head." In addition, the use of the word "the" in "the burnt-offering"implies an exclusion, which is accounted for in Rashi's next comment (M.).

62 To teach us that the law of laying (of hands) applies to obligatory burnt-offerings, which are not included in this section, which deals only with voluntary burnt-offerings.

63 Sifra per. 4, 5; see previous notes.

64 Sifra per. 4, 7. Again, the word "the" implies that only that one is permitted, but not another type of burnt-offering, in this case, a bird. The difference between obligatory burnt-offerings, which are included in the law of laying of the hands and birds,which are not, is that birds require an entirely different type of slaughter than animals, and thus constitute an much different category of burnt-offering. We thus include the first and exclude the second (M.).

65 "Favorably accepted" can also mean "atoned for." Rashi,based on Sifra par. 4, 8, asks what atonement the burnt-offering provides.

66 {Hebrew Ref} , or "being cut off" involves dying at or before age fifty and leaving no surviving children.

67 And that punishment itself atones for him.

68 Where the prohibition can be "reversed," as for example when a thief returns something he has stolen.

69 Sifra par. 4, 2. Since there is a change of person, from "he shall slaughter" to "the kohanim shall bring," this implies that the one who brings the sacrifice may slaughter it, but from then on he must hand it over to the Kohanim, and the rest of the sacrifice is done by the Kohanim (M.).

70 When the Torah wants to specify a location that is even holier than the entrance to the Tent, or the Temple courts, it does so by adding an additional phrase, as in "before G-d, in front of the Holy Curtain" (4, 6 below). Thus here it implies a more distant location (M.).

71 No great distance, since the slaughter takes place at the altar. The essential point is that the word "bring" as it is used here refers to catching the blood spurting from the animal's throat in a vessel, and not the carrying of it to the altar (M.). However, once the blood has been caught in a vessel, it must still be brought to the altar to be sprinkled, and this "bringing" is one of the four major components of the {Hebrew Ref} (atonement). Both operations---receiving the blood in a vessel and bringing it to the altar---are included in the Hebrew word {Hebrew Ref} , "and they will bring."

72 That is, those unfit for the Kehunah by birth or because they have contracted a forbidden marriage are also included?

73 Again, "the" implies only certain Kohanim, i.e., ones to perform the service in the Temple.

74 The word "it," which can be attached to the verb in Hebrew, could have been used. Why then did the Torah use two additional words? Clearly, these words come to include other categories of blood.

75 Since after all, these are all from the same type of sacrifice even though they come from animals of different owners.

76 Since after all, the blood of all these burnt-offerings is sprinkled below the red line, they may be sprinkled together even if mixed up (L.B.).

77 Such as those used for sinful purposes, etc.

78 Such as the blood of the kohein godol's sin-offering offered on Yom Kippur, which is sprinkled toward the cover of the Ark (the {Hebrew Ref} ); see 16, 14 below.

79 I.e., those sin-offerings whose blood must be sprinkled outside the Sanctuary, namely, ordinary sin-offerings; see 4, 6 below.

80 Which divides the altar into an "upper half" and a "lower half."

81 That is, the blood of burnt offering of our section.

82 Zevochim 81b. "Its" excludes these other types of sin-offering. Thus, the blood which is mixed with these must be poured out into the ditch which is used for such purposes.

83 The kohein sprinkles twice, against the northeast and southwest corners, thus "surrounding" the altar with the atoning blood.

84 Per. 5, 4.

85 Sifra per. 4, 12. Only when it is up is it called "a tent." M. notes that the description of the altar as being "at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting" is unnecessary, since when that altar is mentioned, it is usually mentioned without further specification, unlike the "golden altar" or the "incense altar." Therefore, that phrase is redundant, and must come to teach us the rule that these rituals cannot be performed when the Tent is not altogether put up.

86 Why not state: "he shall skin it" rather than "he shall skin the burnt-offering"? After all, the whole section deals only with burnt-offerings.

87 Sifra per. 5, 4.

88 And not rely on a fire sent from Heaven; Sifra per. 5, 9.

89 In the four garments or vestments.

90 Zevochim 18a.

91 Chullin 27a.

92 Since it is included in the previous mention of the "limbs."

93 Literally, "the place of slaughtering," that is, the place at which the slaughtering took place, the throat.

94 Literally, "for this is the way [to] honor of Heaven." Sifra per. 6, 2. So that the bloody, severed neck not be visible.

95 The Torah already commanded that the wood be placed on the altar. Why then the repetition? The word "on" implies that no pieces of wood should protrude outside the arrangement of wood on the altar (L.B.).

96 Sifra per. 4, 2.

97 Otherwise, why mention that this sacrifice "is a burnt-offering?" The whole section refers only to burnt-offerings!

98 I.e., with the intent of burning it, rather than merely singeing it or cooking it (Zevochim 46b).

99 Since even for human beings the smoke of burning flesh is hardly pleasant, how can this be referred to as "pleasing"? Clearly, the reference must be to the obedience that those who offer the burnt-offering show to G-d (L.B.).

100 Sifra per. 6, 8.

101 Since the "and" serves to connect them, why separate them in the first place? (M.)

102 So too above, see verse 1. The difference is that here there is only a change in paroshoh, but not in subject matter, and that is why Rashi does not repeat the phrase "and between each matter" (M.).

103 Again, the word {Hebrew Ref} implies an exclusion, and since each prefaces a separate section, each takes in a separate exclusion.

104 Sifra par. 5, 2. Each of these exclusions have a characteristic which make it unlike the others, and so all are necessary. Old age is a natural process, illness is not inevitable, and filth does not necessarily weaken the animal; on the other hand, filth is perceived as unpleasant, while old age and illness are not necessarily as repulsive (Temuroh 41a, G.A.).

105 Just as the thigh of a person is at his side, so too the "thigh" of the altar; see Rashi to Shemos 40:22.

106 Since here the phrase "before Ad-noy" is used yet again.

107 Because of the limitation implied by the word {Hebrew Ref} , "of,"some type of bird must be excluded. Rashi now explains what that might be.

108 An unblemished state.

109 Since "the" turtledoves are specified.

110 Since the expression "sons of doves" indicates small birds.

111 Literally, "among this or among this."

112 Chullin 22b.

113 Sifra par. 7, 1. Since the verse specifies "he shall bring it "---singular.

114 Since there really is no need to state "the kohein." As Sifra (par. 7, 3--5) puts it, "Could you really imagine that a non-kohein could enter the holy place?" Therefore, this redundancy must refer to a requirement that the kohein himself do the nipping with his own body.

115 That is, the windpipe and the gullet.

116 Sifra par. 7, 3--5. Or, as the Talmud describes it, "R. Zutra b. Tuviyoh said in Rav's name: He holds its two wings with two fingers, its two legs with two fingers, stretches its neck over the width of his thumb and nips it. In a baraisa it was taught: The bird is [held face-downward in the palm of his hand],he holds its wings with two fingers, its legs with two fingers, stretches its neck over the width of two fingers, and nips it"(Zevochim 64b).

117 Mishlei 30, 33.

118 Yeshayoh 16, 4.

119 Literally, "the place of slaughter."

120 Zevochim 65a.

121 Sifra par. 7, 9.

122 Eichoh 4:15.

123 Vayikro Rabbo 3.

124 Sifra per. 9, 3. If the verse intended to indicate the space east of the altar it would not have described the location as "by the altar, eastward ." Thus, this indicates the area east of the ramp, which was itself south of the altar. Since the ramp was narrower than the altar, there was room to the east and west of it, and it is in this eastern "corner" that the ashes went.

125 Shoftim 14, 6. Shimshon ripped the lion apart with his bare hands, as Rashi notes there; the verse states that he had nothing in his hands. So too here, the kohein must not use an instrument.

126 And not excrement, as above in verse 16.

127 A poor man who cannot afford to bring an animal, but only a bird, will nevertheless see the altar filled with his sacrifice; it is for that reason that the feathers too are offered (Vayikro Rabbo 3).

128 Whether one is a wealthy man and offers a bull or a poor man and offers a bird, as long as their intentions are proper, each sacrifice is equal in G-d's eyes.

129 Sifra per. 9, 6.

Chapter 02 - Text Notes

130 Menochos 104b.

131 Literally, "a meal-offering is on me."

132 It is mentioned first because it is the simplest in its halachic details (G.A.)

133 Shemos 29, 2.

134 An ephah is approximately 40 liters, though this approximation should not be used for halachic purposes.

135 Vayikro 14, 21.

136 "On it" can mean "on [all of] it" or "on [part of] it,"though the first meaning is more natural, and should be preferred for the first time the word occurs. It is only with the second,unnecessary, repetition of this phrase that the Torah wishes to indicate the second meaning (Malbim).

137 And that is why the Torah repeats "on it...on it." Two inclusions equal an exclusion, as two negatives make a positive.

138 In the next verse. The point is that the flour and oil are mixed and the fistful taken without the frankincense, since the continuation of the next verse says, "on [=in addition to]all its frankincense," implying that the flour and oil constitute one entity, and the frankincense another.

139 That is, the meal offering, i.e., the flour and water.

140 Sifra per. 10, 7.

141 Since it is only after the "bringing" that the "sons of Aharon" come into the picture.

142 Sifra par. 9, 2. Since the word "kohanim " is mentioned immediately next to the word "and he takes a fistful". ( {Hebrew Ref} ).

143 Which is the last place mentioned. If the intent of the phrase "from there" is "from the meal-offering," the verse should have stated "from it" (L.B.).

144 Yomo 16b.

145 Vayikro 6, 8. The implication is that he must separate from it, only that which is within the fistful. Here as elsewhere "it" is a limitation or exclusion.

146 As we have it in this verse.

147 Menochos 11a.

148 Literally, "on," meaning, "in addition to, aside from."

149 This is because the two words are adjacent to one another ( {Hebrew Ref} ).

150 Menochos 6a. The repitition of "of its flour and of its oil" implies that the fistful must contain only these substances and no salt or frankincense.

151 To G-d by their obedience to Him.

152 Sifra per. 11, 1. He may take up to half the amount,while the others have to divide up the remainder (M.L., see Yomo 17b).

153 Sifra per. 11, 4. From can refer to time or place---either from the fistful itself, or from the time it is offered; since the entire fistful is burnt, "from the fire-offering"cannot refer to that, and so it must refer to the time of the burning (M.).

154 A liquid measure.

155 Menochos 75a.

156 I.e., of lower grades or qualities; oil which comes from the pressing or squeezing the olives a second or third time.

157 76a.

158 See n. 113.

159 Menochos 74b.

160 Menochos 74b.

161 Menochos 75a. The inclusion is not from this phrase, but from the end of the verse, "it is a meal-offering;" see Rashi's next comment.

162 Since that meal-offering comes as both loaves and wafers,and there are two exclusions, "on it" and "it." Therefore both loaves and wafers are excluded.

163 This limitative word comes to exclude wafers as well. Sifra per. 12, 6.

164 Jello-like.

165 Sifra per. 12, 7.

166 In any of the types mentioned above, or similar ones brought to the altar, such as a sinner's meal-offering (see verse 11 below), but not the {Hebrew Ref} of Shemos 25, 30. The mem of {Hebrew Ref} ("of") indicates an exclusion---some of these, but not all of them (G.A.).

167 Zevochim 63b.

168 We learn this from the next verse, which deals with "first fruit offerings," indicating that the honey of our verse must refer to the honey of fruit (as in date-honey) rather than that of bees.

169 Vayikro 23, 17.

170 Menochos 58a.

171 Menochos 20a.

172 As explained in Rashi's next comment.

173 Bemidbar 36, 4.

174 The omer offering was brought on the sixteenth of Nisan, from new grain, and thereby permitted the new grain ("chodosh ") to be consumed; see Vayikro 23, 16--17.

175 Shemos 9, 31.

176 Just as {Hebrew Ref} there refers to barley, so too here; the word {Hebrew Ref} appears in Chumash in this form only in these two places, to teach you that {Hebrew Ref} refers to a barley offering.

177 Eichoh 3, 16. The exiles had to knead their dough in holes made in the ground, and so pebbles entered into their bread; when they bit into the bread, the pebbles cracked their teeth (Rashi in Eichoh).

178 Tehillim 119, 20.

179 A compound word made up of {Hebrew Ref} , "a husk," and {Hebrew Ref} , "full" (Shabbos 105a).

180 Melochim II, 4, 42.

Chapter 03 - Text Notes

181 Sifra per. 16, 2.

182 Sifra par. 14, 6. R. Yishmo'el includes both the fat on the stomach and the intestines, while R. Akiva includes only the fat on the intestines. The reason for this is that the stomach fat, while it resembles the intestine fat in that it is covered with a membrane which can be peeled off, is different from it in that it is not evenly attached to the stomach as the fat of the intestines is attached to the intestines, and so, according to R. Akiva, they constitute two separate categories of fat. According to R. Yishma'el, however, since the two kinds of fat have at least one characteristic in common---that they are covered with a membrane which can be peeled off---both are included within the phrase "all the fat" (see Chullin 49b, where, however, the two opinions are reversed).

183 That is, the fat on the kidneys is also on the flanks---the sides of the animal---when the animal is alive, and that is why the verse describes the fat as being both on the kidneys and on the flanks. "Above" and "below" (when the animal is hung by its ankles after being slaughtered) in Rashi's description refer to the "back" and "front" of the animal, respectively---that is,in back of the kidneys toward the tail is "above," and in front the kidneys inward is "below." (B.M.H.)

184 And thus over the hind legs.

185 The "height of the flanks" refers to the top of the animals "sides"---the animal's back (spine).

186 So that ordinarily it cannot be seen.

187 Which separates the respiratory system (lungs, etc.) from the digestive system (stomachs, intestines) (M.).

188 Vayikro 9, 10. That is, "on" here is equivalent to "from" there, to teach us that the kohein must take some of the liver with the fat.

189 "On" has two meanings, "together with" and "in addition to, aside from." Here it is used in the second way (G.A.).

190 See previous note.

191 Since the peace-offering comes "in addition to" the daily burnt-offering; this means that the burnt-offering precedes it (G.A.). For other proofs see Zevochim 89a and Pesochim 59a.

192 See Sifra per. 18, 4. In accordance with the rule that "any paroshoh which is said and repeated is only repeated for the new point to be learned from it" (see Sotoh 3a).

193 As Rashi explained in regard to 1, 5 above. The kohein sprinkles the blood on two diagonally opposite horns of the altar, thus covering the four directions. The kohein sprinkles twice, against the northeast and southwest corners, thus "surrounding" the altar with the atoning blood.

194 Zevochim 55a.

195 "Fat" is sometimes used metaphorically to express the idea of "the best" of something, as in Bemidbar 18, 30, where it refers to the {Hebrew Ref} which the Leviyim give the kohein from their {Hebrew Ref} , thus clearly referring to "the fat" of grain. Here "its fat" precedes the mention of "the fat tail," indicating that the best part of it, the entire fat tail, is to be offered.

196 Behind the kidneys.

197 See Rashi on Shemos 29, 22; the kidneys are considered the origin of good judgement.

198 Consumed by the fire, and not, {Hebrew Ref} , by G-d (L.B.).

199 For the sake of obeying His mitzvos.

200 Yirmiyoh 11, 19.

201 Daniel 5, 1, i.e., he made a great feast.

202 Koheles 10, 19. Note that each verse given illustrates another nuance of {Hebrew Ref} : fruit, food, and feast.

203 Sifra per. 20, 6. "An everlasting statute"---for the everlasting house [=the Temple, for once it was built, all other altars and temples were forever forbidden], "for all your descendants"---that this law should apply to the distant future,"in all your dwelling places"---in the land and outside the Land.

Chapter 04 - Text Notes

204 Which involves an action, as the verse continues, "which may not be done." As for the matter of {Hebrew Ref} , that is derived from another paroshoh, (Bemidbar 15, 27--31), which deals with the unintentional transgression of the laws of idolatry.

205 Sifra Chovoh par. 1, 7. Dying in one's fifties without descendants.

206 Again, the mem (=from) of {Hebrew Ref} is taken to mean "part of."

207 I.e., the first two letters of the name Shim`on can be read as a separate word or name, Shem.

208 Sifra Chovoh per. 1, 5.

209 An incorrect halakhic decision. Kohanim were generally the teachers and poskim.

210 Where someone acted on the kohein's incorrect decision.

211 In our verse.

212 Verse 13 below. The juxtaposition of "something is hidden from the congregation" and "they do" indicates that the error must result in a wrong action before an offering must be brought.

213 The "sanctuary," the middle room of the three rooms which made up the Temple proper; the room in which the Incense Altar and Menoroh were placed.

214 Since the expression "before the holy curtain" is used,and not "on the holy curtain."

215 And the sprinkling was still valid.

216 Zevochim 25a. Clearly, not all the blood could be spilled at the base of the altar, since some of it had already been sprinkled. Why then mention the word "all"? To teach us that the one who slaughters must take care to gather all the blood (M.).

217 Why does the Torah seemingly add an unnecessary word?

218 Sifra Chovoh per. 4, 1. In Vayikro 16, 25, which is part of the description of the Avodoh of Yom Kippur, the details of the separation and burning of the fat of the sin-offering bullock are not mentioned, and so the extra word here indicates that the same procedure is to be followed there.

219 Bemidbar 25, 24.

220 Sifra Chovoh per. 4, 1. Though "the" usually implies an exclusion, here it marks an inclusion because it is linked with the preceding "all." For the reverse process see n. 43.

221 Sifra Chovoh per. 4, 1. "From it" implies that "it" still exists as a whole, and so the removal of the fat must be done before the slaughtered animal is butchered and dismembered into its parts.

222 As explained above in 3, 3--4.

223 Why then mention the fact that the separation of the fats is the same here as in regard to the peace-offering? What does this tell us that we did not know?

224 And not some other sacrifice.

225 The Slaughter of Holy Things.

226 Zevochim 49b. Since the Torah is careful to spell out so many details in regard to {Hebrew Ref} in these sections of Vayikro, as in this case, it is clear that a deroshoh from an excess word or letter cannot be then used as a stepping stone for another deroshoh, as would be the case in other areas of Halachah. Thus, we could not derive by {Hebrew Ref} (analogy) the rules of burning the fat for the goats of Bemidbar 25, 24 from our verse, if it were not for the phrase "in the same manner..."which explicitly connects our verse to 3, 3--4.

227 In verse 9.

228 In verse 11.

229 Thus, the first means "together with the liver," the second, "along with the kidneys," etc., and not does not refer to fat on the liver or kidneys.

230 See 14, 45 below.

231 That of the Tent of Meeting, that of the Levites and that of the rest of the Israelites.

232 68a.

233 42b.

234 6, 4 below.

235 "The place where the ashes are thrown" was already mentioned in the first half of the verse; why the repetition?

236 If the place is usually used as an ash heap, but is temporarily empty of ashes, it may still be used.

237 Sifra Chovoh par. 4, 2. The "supreme court" of 71 Sages in Jerusalem. {Hebrew Ref} , "congregation," which usually refers to all of Yisroel, here refers to the high court, as it does in Bemidbar 24 and 25; this is derived from a {Hebrew Ref} which connects the two sections by the word {Hebrew Ref} . According to the Mishnah (in Horiyos 1, 3) the sin-offering described in this section is brought for an erroneous ruling by the high court which permits an act which could lead to the punishment of {Hebrew Ref} (being cut off, dying in one's fifties without surviving offspring) if done intentionally, but which is not explicitly mentioned in Chumash, and which is obeyed by the people. An example is the prohibition of hotzo'oh on Shabbos.

238 Horiyos 8a.

239 On the court's authority, literally, "according to their mouth." Rashi notes that the two words, "the community" "and they did" are juxtaposed in order to teach us that this sin-offering is brought only when the community relies on the court's decision in performing the forbidden act.

240 In verse 6, in reference to the Kohein G-dol---sinning.

241 Zevochim 41b.

242 As the end of the verse makes clear (Zevochim 51a).

243 Verse 20.

244 Zevochim 41b. The verse does not go into detail in order to minimize the sin of the Sanhedrin.

245 See Rashi on verse 8 above.

246 See Zevochim 36b.

247 Of the required sprinklings.

248 Zevochim 39a.

249 Rather than beginning the section with the usual "If a leader..." the Torah begins with the word {Hebrew Ref} , "in regard to." This can in turn be related to the root {Hebrew Ref} , "happiness," or the word {Hebrew Ref} , "fortunate is one...."

250 Sifra Chovoh par. 5, 1.

251 In Shemos 21, 36.

252 See 1, 11 above.

253 Sifra Chovoh per. 8, 6. Since the verse specifies "it is a sin-offering," this applies only when it is offered as such; if it is offered as another sacrifice, it is not valid.

254 In 3, 14--15 above, which specify the lobe and kidneys.

255 Zevochim 7b. That is why the verse specifies "he shall slaughter it as a sin-offering."

256 And not the fire which came down from Heaven (G.A.).

Chapter 05 - Text Notes

257 That is, he is a proper witness, not a relative of the person he is to testify for; according to Sifra, that is the reason for the seemingly redundant "and he is a witness," since the verse had already stated "he heard an oath" and continues with "or saw or knew".

258 Sifra Chovoh, per. 11, 4

259 Being cut off, dying at age fifty without surviving descendants.

260 Shevuos 14a.

261 A man who has a flow from his genital organ; see Vayikro 15, 1--15.

262 A woman from whom blood flows at a time other than her menstrual period; see Vayikro 15, 25--30.

263 The phrase "which causes impurity" is redundant, and therefore comes to include this category, that is, those who become impure not of themselves, but through contact with someone else, and in particular, those who become "fathers of uncleanness" to transmit their impurity to another person (M.L.).

264 Sifra Chovoh, per. 12, 8. Again, the word bah, "through itself" is seemingly unnecessary, and comes to include a related category of impurity, even though "through itself" is ordinarily considered a reason for an exclusion or limitation. Here,however, it comes to include, because it follows another limitation, and two successive limitations yield an inclusion, as two negatives yield a positive. The earlier limitation is that of the previous verse, which states, "he touches," which implies a transfer of impurity by touch and not by other means (see Shevuos 7b). "Through itself," literally, "in it," implies something which imparts impurity not through touch or the other, more ordinary methods, but through the carcass of a clean bird, which imparts impurity only by being swallowed (Malbim).

265 That is an essential requirement for bringing the sacrifice detailed here: he must have known of the impurity at first, then forgotten about it, and after having eaten holy food or having entered the Temple, remembered that he was impure.

266 Literally, "with his lips."

267 Sifra Chovoh par. 9, 2. That is, if he had thought of taking an oath but did not actually take one, he is not required to bring this offering (Sifra; Shevuos 26b).

268 But not to the detriment of others.

269 Shevuos 27a.

270 That is, he takes an oath that he had eaten or not eaten in the past, etc.

271 As explained below (verse 11), this is a sacrifice whose worth varies with the financial ability of the person bringing it.

272 As a general rule; Sifra Hovoh per. 18, 3.

273 Zevochim 7b.

274 Either the gullet or the windpipe; Chullin 21a. On the matter of "nipping" see 1, 15 above and notes.

275 I.e., the back of the head, corresponding to the face in front; in Yirmiyoh 2, 27, {Hebrew Ref} , "back of the head," and {Hebrew Ref} , "face," are counterposed; see Chullin 19b.

276 But not the entire back of the head. This is called the nape in English.

277 More probably, "the body," as Rashi explains in his comments to Zevochim 64b, d.h. {Hebrew Ref} : "he seizes the bird itself" ( {Hebrew Ref} ). The first edition of Rashi's commentary has "the bird" (L.B.).

278 Sifra Chovoh, per. 18, 9.

279 Vayikro 1, 14--17.

280 Menochos 6b.

281 Literally, "his."

282 Verse 6.

283 Verse 10.

284 Literally, "from" his sin-offering, i.e., a part of it.

285 An ephah is approximately 40 liters, though this approximation should not be used for halachic purposes.

286 That is, for the sacrifice which he can afford when he finally comes to bring it (Kerisos 27b).

287 Sifra Chovoh per. 19, 10.

288 Vayikro 6, 16; Sifra Chovoh per. 19, 11.

289 Literally, "changing." Thus, when one misappropriates Temple property he "changes" it from its proper use.

290 Divrei Hayomim II, 1, 5, 25.

291 Bemidbar 5, 12.

292 Vayikro 22, 9.

293 And not against deriving other benefit from the terumah,such as using it as fuel.

294 Since the root {Hebrew Ref} is repeated, this shows that not only eating but other benefits are forbidden; Sifra Chovoh par.11, 1.

295 Such as firstborn cattle, or Pesach offerings (Sifra Chovoh per. 20, 1).

296 Yechezkel 17, 13.

297 Sifra Chovoh per. 20, 6.

298 Since no number is specified, the Torah must intend the minimum of the plural, "shekalim," which implies two shekalim.

299 Since the verse says "and give it to the kohein" immediately afterwards, Rashi here wishes to insure that we do not misunderstand, and think that the monetary payment goes to the kohein; rather, the oshom mentioned in the previous verse is given to the kohein, as the verse continues to say (B.Y.).

300 That is, he is not sure whether he committed a sin whose punishment involves {Hebrew Ref} , being cut off in one's fifties without surviving offspring.

301 Kerisos 22b, 23a.

302 Literally, "the giving of the reward."

303 "The first Adam."

304 Literally, "his generations."

305 After all, we know that G-d's desire to reward is 500 times greater than His desire to punish; see Rashi to Shemos 20,

306 The sin of slaughtering a sacrifice with the intention of eating it in an improper place (see Rashi on Vayikro 19, 7).

307 Allowing a sacrifice to remain beyond its proper time of consumption.

308 And refrains from the other actions forbidden on Yom Kippur, such as drinking or washing.

309 Devorim 17, 6.

310 "Plotting" against someone by joining with false witnesses to testify against him, after which the testimony is proven false when other witnesses come to testify that the first set were actually in another place than where they claimed the crime or sin had been committed; see Rashi on Devorim 19, 15.

311 That is, the false testimony is validated by the first two witnesses, and there is actually no (legal) need for the third witness mentioned in the verse, as Rabbi Akivah notes. But that third man is punished equally with the others.

312 Sanhedrin 9a.

313 Devorim 24, 19.

314 That is, the one who lost the money; Sifra Chovoh par. 12.

315 See verse 15.

316 See Devorim 21, 4--9.

317 The atonement holds only while the murderer is unknown,but not once he is found. So too here: the guilt offering protects the person who may be guilty of a sin only while the matter is in doubt; once he knows that he has certainly committed a transgression, he must bring a sin-offering (Sifra Chovoh per.21, 2).

318 It is all superfluous.

319 As Rashi explains in the following lines (B.Y.).

320 See Vayikro 19, 20.

321 Who became unclean by contact with a dead body or the like; see Bemidbar 6, 12.

322 Someone suffering from a certain skin disease (commonly but incorrectly identified as "leprosy") who is cured and must bring a guilt offering; see Vayikro 14, 12. Perhaps these two guilt offerings (that of a nazirite and of a {Hebrew Ref} ) should also consist of a two-year old ram worth two shekalim?

323 Which is a limitation; only the guilt offering of an engaged maidservant is to consist of a two-year old ram worth two shekalim, but not the other two guilt offerings, which are not rams; Sifra Chovoh per. 21, 7.

324 Sifra Chovoh per. 22, 4.

325 Literally, "a placing of the hand."

326 Sifra Chovoh per. 22, 6.

327 That is, a fifth of a fifth, or a twenty-fifth.

328 Bovo Kammo 103b. According to the Malbim, the source of this rule is the word "his fifths" in our verse, which in Hebrew is not a pure pural, which would be {Hebrew Ref} , and not {Hebrew Ref} . This strange singular/plural points to the process Rashi outlines.

329 He cannot salve his conscience by donating the sum to charity or the like, but must return it to the man he defrauded,or, if the man is no longer alive, to his heirs (L.B.).