## Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus Chapter 4

###### Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:2:1
[Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Da%27at%20Zekenim%20on%20Leviticus/r/4:2:1)

**נפש כי תחטא.**אדם כי יחטא אין כתיב כאן אלא נפש וכן הנפש החוטאת היא תמות להודיע שעיקר החטא תלוי בנפש משל לשני בני אדם שחטאו למלך אחד נכרי ואחד מבני פלטרין שלו העלו שניהם לבימה לדון וצוה המלך לפטור את הנכרי ואת בן הפלטרין לדון ביסורין אמרו לו בני פלטרין שלו והלא גם זה חטא לך אמר להם זה נכרי ואינו מכיר בטובי אבל זה שהוא מבני ביתי ומכיר בטובי ופשע בי יצא דין זה עליו כך הגוף הוא נכרי שנבר' מן התחתונים אבל הנשמה שהיא מן העליונים ודינה להיו' טהורה ואפ"ה חטאה לפיכך הגוף הושלך בקבר והנשמה תקבל היסורין ולעתיד לבא הקב"ה מביא גוף ונשמה ודן אותם וכו':

**Daat Zekenim translated by Rb. Eliyahu Munk:**
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.


###### Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:6:1
[Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Da%27at%20Zekenim%20on%20Leviticus/r/4:6:1)

**את פני פרכת הקדש.** וגבי חטאת הקהל כתיב: את פני הפרכת ולא כתיב הקדש, לומר לך דבשביל חטא כהן משיח לא נסתלקה שכינה, אבל בצבור חוטאין נסתלקה שכינה.

**Daat Zekenim translated by Rb. Eliyahu Munk:**
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.


###### Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:23:1
[Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:23:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Da%27at%20Zekenim%20on%20Leviticus/r/4:23:1)

**או הודע אליו.**כתיב כאן ביחיד ובנשיא חוטא וי"מ אותו כמו אם הודע אבל הרב בכור שור ז"ל כתב לפי שנשיא ויחיד מביאין אשם תלוי דכתיב בנשיא ועשה אחת מכל מצות ה' אלהיו כלומר שאין יודע אלא ה' אלהיו שהוא ספק ואשם מביא אשם תלוי או הודע אליו אז מביא חטאת וכן אתה דורשו גבי יחיד דכתיב ביה ממצות ה' וראיה מתורת כהנים דדריש ואשם מלמד שמביא אשם תלוי אבל צבור וכהן משיח אין מביאין אשם תלוי צבור דכתיב הכא נפש אחת תחטא דמשמע אחת ולא צבור כהן משיח דכתיב ביה לאשמת העם כהן משיח כצבור הלכך לא כתיב בהו או הודע:

**Daat Zekenim translated by Rb. Eliyahu Munk:**
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.


###### Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:31:1
[Da'at Zekenim on Leviticus 4:31:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Da%27at%20Zekenim%20on%20Leviticus/r/4:31:1)

**והקטיר הכהן המזבחה.**לא נאמר כאן ריח ניחוח רק בקרבן לפי שהקב"ה מקפיד יותר על הגדולים כשהן חוטאין:

**Daat Zekenim translated by Rb. Eliyahu Munk:**
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.