פרשת ויקרא תש"ד - חטאת

And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying:

Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: If any one shall sin through error, in any of the things which the LORD hath commanded not to be done, and shall do any one of them:

'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).

if anyone sins by mistakenly doing something that is prohibited, and punishable either by karet or by flogging anyone includes both the native born and the convert, as it is written [Numbers 15:15]. Scripture now goes into the details, beginning with the High Priest (i.e., the kohen who is anointed).

Speak unto the children of Israel, saying: If any one shall sin through error, in any of the things which the LORD hath commanded not to be done, and shall do any one of them:

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).

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.”

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.”

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.

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.

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.