Kommentar zu Wajikra 17:5

אשר הם זבחים [THAT THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL MAY BRING THEIR SACRIFICES] WHICH THEY SACRIFICE [IN THE OPEN FIELD ….. UNTO THE LORD] — "which they sacrifice" means, which they are at present accustomed to sacrifice.

זבחי שלמים לה׳. "sacrifices of peace-offerings to G'd." Why did the Torah not content itself by writing וזבחו אותם, instead of repeating the words זבחי שלמים once more? Perhaps G'd wanted to demonstrate His fondness of the holy offerings brought by His people. He did so by emphasising that He considered these offerings as "peace-offerings," offerings by means of which Israel and G'd are perceived as dining at the same table, just like children at the table of their father. When the Torah writes שלמים לה׳ אותם, we may view the word אותם as referring to the previous subject בני ישראל which was mentioned at the beginning of our verse. The Torah describes how the soul of the Israelites leaves its mortal sheath, so to speak, in order to perform the service for its Maker, completely unaware of the "exaggerated" fondness displayed in return by G'd towards a soul so attuned to its G'd. All this is still insignificant compared to what we owe G'd in response to all He has done on our behalf already before we got around to acknowledging this by means of any peace-offerings.

אשר הם זובחים על פני האדמה, some of them even err in slaughtering such animals as sacrifices to demons instead of as sacrifices to G’d.

Which they were accustomed to slaughter. Because if it refers to their actually slaughtering them, this would mean the same as “their sacrifices” and why would the verse repeat itself? Therefore one must say “they slaughter” means “which they are accustomed to slaughter.” Alternatively, you might ask that “which they slaughter” implies that the animal has already bee slaughtered, yet afterwards it is written, “And slaughter them as peace-offerings”? Re’m

וזבחו זבחי שלמים, “and slaughter them as meat offerings;” this verse has been written in an abbreviated mode as the word 'לה, “in honour of the Lord,” has been left out.