אדם כי יקריב מכם קרבן לה' מן הבהמה שיעור הכתוב הזה אדם מכם כי יקריב מן הבהמה קרבן לה' מן הבקר ומן הצאן תקריבו והענין בעבור שיצוה אחרי כן בקרבן העוף ובקרבן המנחה אמר כאן כשיקריב אדם קרבן בהמה יקריב מאלה השנים ולא חיה ולא שאר בהמות והנה זה לאו הבא מכלל עשה במקריב חיה כמו שאמרו בזבחים פרק שלישי (לד) המעלה אברי חיה ר' יוחנן אומר עובר בעשה: WHEN ANY MAN BRINGETH OF YOU AN OFFERING UNTO THE ETERNAL OF THE CATTLE. The meaning of this verse is as follows: “when any man of you brings from the cattle an offering to the Eternal, of the herd or of the flock you shall bring it.” The reason for this command is that since He commanded afterwards concerning fowl-offerings47Further, Verses 14-17. and meal-offerings,48Ibid., Chapter 2. He said here that when a man brings an offering of cattle, he must bring it of one of these two kinds [herd and flock], but not a wild beast nor any other cattle. Thus he who offers a beast [as an offering to G-d], violates a prohibition which is derived from a positive commandment [and carries the force of a positive commandment], just as the Rabbis have said in the third chapter of Tractate Zebachim:49Zebachim 34a. “Rabbi Yochanan said: one who offers the limbs of a [kosher] beast [upon the altar of G-d] transgresses a positive commandment.”
תקריבו מלמד ששנים מתנדבים עולה בשותפות קרבנכם מלמד שהיא באה נדבת צבור היא עולת קיץ המזבח הבאה מן המותרות לשון רש"י (רש"י על ויקרא א׳:ב׳) פירש הרב כן לומר שאם יתנדבו רבים להביא עולה עולת השותפין היא מה בין שנים המשתתפין בקרבן ובין עשרה ואלף שנשתתפו בו אבל קיץ המזבח הבאה מן המותרות לב ב"ד מתנה עליהן ולפיכך היא עולת צבור והנה לדעתו כל עולה שיביאו רבים חוץ מן המותרות דינה כדין עולת השותפין וטעונה סמיכה בכלם ונסכים קרבים משלהם ואולי לדעתו עולת העוף שהיא באה נדבת שנים ואינה באה נדבת צבור וכן השלמים שאמרו בהם שהשותפין מביאין אותם נדבה ואין הצבור מביאים אותם נדבה (תורת כהנים פרק טז ה) בכלן יכולין הרבים להתנדב להם בתחלה דעולת השותפין היא נקראת ושלמי שותפין הם נקראין ולא מעטו אלא שלא יביאו אותן מן הקופות ואפשר שנאמר שאם רצו צבור להפריש בתחלה לנדבה ויגבו אותה כאשר יגבו השקלים לתמידין ומוספין שתהיה נדבת צבור בעולת בהמה ואין בה סמיכה שנתרבה מן הכתוב הזה וכל זמן שיתנדבו בו רוב ישראל היא נדבת צבור ואינה בעולת העוף ולא בשלמים ומעוטן נדונין כיחידים והוא העיקר: ‘TAKRIVU’ (YE SHALL BRING). This teaches that two [or more] persons may bring a freewill burnt-offering in partnership. YOUR OFFERING. This teaches that a burnt-offering may be brought as a freewill offering of the [entire] public [not only of groups of individuals]. This refers to the burnt-offering of the altar’s summertime50When there was a lack of private offerings [due to the long summer days], freewill burnt-offerings were supplied from the surplus of the half-shekels of the previous year. which was supplied from the surplus [of the half-shekels of the past year].” This is Rashi’s language.
The meaning of the Rabbi’s interpretation is thus to state that if many persons voluntarily offer to bring a burnt-offering, it thereby becomes a burnt-offering of partners, for what difference is there between two persons who combine to bring an offering, and ten or a thousand who associate to do so? But the burnt-offering for the altar’s summer-time which is supplied from the surplus [of the previous year’s half-shekels], is deemed a “burnt-offering of the public” because the authorities [of the Sanctuary who receive the donations for the offerings] do so with the implied condition [that they may spend them at their discretion, and the burnt-offering of the public is distinguished in certain respects from a burnt-offering of partners]. Thus according to Rashi all burnt-offerings that are brought by many persons — except those which come from the surplus of the half-shekels — have the law of burnt-offerings of partners, and they all require the laying of [their owners’] hands upon the offering,51See Verse 4. and the libations connected with them52See Numbers 15:3-12. are taken from the owners [while “burnt-offerings of the public” need no laying of hands, and the libations are supplied by the Temple treasury]. Perhaps according to the opinion of Rashi it is permitted for the general public to offer [money] beforehand in order to bring a burnt-offering of fowls, which may be brought as a freewill offering by two [or more] persons but may [never] come as a freewill offering of the public, and similarly they [may combine to bring] a peace-offering, concerning which the Sages have said53Torath Kohanim, Vayikra 6:6. that it may be brought by partners as a freewill offering but may not be brought by the public54Peace-offerings of the public were only brought on the Festival of Shevuoth (see further, 23:19). — and in that case it is called “a burnt-offering of partners,” or “a peace-offering of partners.” They [i.e., the burnt-offering of fowls and the peace-offering], were only excluded in that they cannot be brought from the [money of the] baskets [containing the surplus of half-shekels which were already donated by the public for the general upkeep of the offerings, and not specifically donated for a burnt-offering or peace-offering].
We may possibly say that if the public wanted originally to set aside a fund for freewill offerings, and they collected it [for that purpose] as they collected the shekalim for the Daily [public] Offerings and the Additional Offerings [of Sabbaths and festivals], that there may then be a freewill public-offering of the cattle,55In other words, the freewill public burnt-offering for the altar’s summertime need not be limited exclusively to that brought out of the surplus in the baskets containing the previous year’s shekels. Money may be collected originally from the public for the purpose of bringing a freewill offering, and the offering will have the status of a public-offering in the sense that [like a public burnt-offering] it will not need the laying of hands on it, which is required in the case of an individual offering. Thus Ramban differs from Rashi’s opinion above that even the combination of a large group of individuals does not alter the status of the offering, which remains an offering of individual partners. Or it may be that Ramban means that even according to Rashi, if the community agreed beforehand, and the money was not left to be donated individually, but collected in the same way that the shekalim were collected, it thereby gains the status of a public-offering. Hence Ramban’s expression: “We may possibly say”, i.e., in explanation of Rashi. and it will not require the laying of hands on it, being that it is included in this verse [as a public offering]. As long as it is the majority of Israel who donated money to that end, the offering is called “a freewill offering of the public.” [This rule applies only to the freewill burnt-offering of the cattle] but does not apply to the burnt-offering of fowls, nor to the peace-offering. But if a minority of the people donated towards the freewill burnt-offering, [even if they are a large group], they are deemed as individuals [who bring such an offering in partnership, which would thus require the laying on it of the owners’ hands, and the libations would have to be supplied by the owners]. This is the correct explanation.