And sometimes a verb is repeated as an imperative to teach that the commandment can be done in any manner - and this will be if conditions are mentioned the first time the verb comes; in this case, the second time the verb comes will teach that even if the conditions that were mentioned are not satisfied, the commandment will nevertheless be considered to be fulfilled ex post facto.

When it is written ושרף אותו על עצים באש...על שפך הדשן ישרף (and burn it on wood with fire; where the ashes are poured out shall it be burnt)³⁴⁰ – even though there are no ashes.

footnotes: ³⁴⁰ Leviticus 4:12.

וטמאה שבעת ימים וכו' תטמא (then she shall be unclean seven days; as in the days of the impurity of her sickness shall she be unclean)³⁴¹ – even in the nights.

footnotes: ³⁴¹ Leviticus 12:2.

על כל שערו יגלח (all his hair he shall shave off)³⁴².

footnotes: ³⁴² Leviticus 14:9.

Or if I could use logic to conclude that the verb only applies under a certain condition – the verb is repeated to say that it can be done in any manner, as when they interpret that וזרקו (dash)³⁴³ is repeated by a flock to teach even in the absence of flesh.

footnotes: ³⁴³ Leviticus 1.

And moreover, any place where it says a verb with a condition and afterwards it is mentioned a second time without a condition – the condition is not necessary ex post facto.