Midrasch zu Wajikra 4:13

1) (Vayikra 4:13): "And if (the whole congregation of Israel err"): "And if" "adds" (i.e., is secondary) to what precedes, (the section of the high-priest), so that if the bullock of the high-priest and the bullock of the congregation are awaiting (sacrifice), the first takes precedence in all services.

2) "the congregation of Israel": I might think the entire congregation is being referred to; it is, therefore, written here "congregation" and elsewhere (Numbers 35:24 and Numbers 35:25) "congregation." Just as a "congregation" there refers to beth-din, so, "congregation" here refers to beth-din. If so, I might think that just as "congregation" there refers to (a beth-din of) twenty-three, so, "congregation" here. It is, therefore, written: "the congregation of Israel." — the congregation which is "distinctive" in Israel. Which one is that? The Great Sanhedrin (of seventy-one), which sits in the lishkath hagazith (the "chamber of hewn stone").

3) I would think that if one of them (the beth-din) were a convert or a mamzer or a Nathin or an elder who never had children, they would be liable; it is, therefore, written here "congregation," and elsewhere (Numbers, Ibid.) "congregation." Just as "congregation" there refers to (a beth-din where) all are fit to judge, so, "congregation" here.

4) (Vayikra 4:2): ("If he sin unwittingly … and he do" [(If it now followed)] "one (of these"), I might think that he is not liable (for forbidden Sabbath labor) until he writes the entire name, until he weaves the entire garment, until he makes the entire sieve; it is, therefore, written (instead of "one of these") "of one of these." (i.e., even part of one). If (only) "of one" (were written) I might think (that he is liable) even if he wrote only one letter, even if he wove only one strand, even if he made only one link of a sieve or a basket; it is, therefore, written (in the other instances of unwitting sin [Vayikra 4:13, Vayikra 4:22, Vayikra 4:27]): "… do one." How is this to be reconciled? (He is not liable) until he writes a small name "from" a big name, e.g., "Shem," from (the intended) "Shimon" or "Shmuel"; "Noach," from "Nachor"; "Dan," from "Daniel"; "Gad," from "Gadiel."

4) I might think that if the mufla (the "chief justice") of beth-din were absent, or that if one of them said: "I do not know," or "you are mistaken," they are liable; it is, therefore, written: "… the congregation of Israel err" — They are not liable (for a sin-offering) until the entire (beth-din) rules (in error).

5) ("And if the whole congregation of Israel [the Sanhedrin]) err": I might think that they are liable (for a sin-offering) for unwittingness (of deed) alone; it is, therefore, written: (If they) "err and a thing be hid (from the eyes of the assembly"). They are liable only for "a thing being hid" (i.e., an error in judgment) with (i.e., which leads to) an unwitting sin (on the part of the people).

6) "of all the mitzvoth of the L–rd": I would understand this as meaning both positive and negative commandments; it is, therefore, written: "which may not be done." (only negative commandments are being referred to.) ("which may not be done" is written four times [Bamidbar 4:2, Bamidbar 4:13, Bamidbar 4:22, Bamidbar 4:28] for four exclusions): I would exclude (from a sin-offering) a lesser positive commandment, but not a greater one (e.g., the eradication of idolatry); it is, therefore, written: "which may not be done." (Only negative commandments are intended.) I would exclude (transgression of) mitzvoth not punishable by kareth, but not pesach and circumcision (transgression of which is) punishable by kareth; it is, therefore, written: "which may not be done." I would exclude pesach, which is not (a) constant (observance), but not circumcision, which is constant; it is, therefore, written: "which may not be done." But then I would exclude the positive commandment of (separation from a niddah (before the time of her flow); it is, therefore, written: "of all the mitzvoth of the L–rd," to include (for a sin-offering one who did not separate and was "surprised" by her flow). Why do you see fit to exclude all (positive) commandments and to include that of niddah? Since Scripture included and excluded, why do I exclude all the (positive) commandments? Because they have no counterpart in a negative commandment. And I include the positive commandment of niddah because it has its counterpart in a negative commandment (viz. [Bamidbar 18:19]: "And to a woman in the niddah state of her uncleanliness you shall not come near.")

6) Since idolatry was singled out for an independent ruling (i.e., the bringing of a bullock for a burnt-offering and a goat for a sin-offering [for unwitting transgression, as opposed to unwitting transgression of the other mitzvoth, where a bullock is brought for a sin-offering]), I might think that they (the Sanhedrin and the majority of the people) are liable for unwittingness of deed (alone) in respect to it (idolatry, [without error in judgment]). It is, therefore, written here (in respect to idolatry) [Bamidbar 15:24]: ("If) from the eyes (of the congregation it were done in error"), and, elsewhere (in respect to other mitzvoth) (Vayikra, Ibid.): ("and a thing be hid) from the eyes (of the assembly"). Just as "from the eyes" elsewhere refers to beth-din, here, too, (in respect to idolatry) it refers to beth-din. And just as "from the eyes" elsewhere refers to hiddenness of thing (i.e., an error in judgment on the part of beth-din) with unwittingness of deed (on the part of the congregation), here, too, (in respect to idolatry) there must be hiddenness of thing and unwittingness of deed.

(Lev. 5:1:) “And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing […, if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity].” This text is related (to Eccl. 5:1), “Do not be rash with your mouth, and let not your heart hasten to bring forth a word before God.” These [words refer to] people who vilify the name of the Holy One, blessed be He. Come and see, when the celestial beings were created, those below were created with half of the [divine] name, as stated (in Is. 26:4), “for through Yh,³⁸YH is the first half of the divine name, which the Hebrew spells out where the translation reads THE LORD. the Lord formed the worlds.”³⁹The midrash interprets tsur ‘olamim as FORMED THE WORLDS (i.e., this world and the world to come) rather than as the more usual EVERLASTING ROCK. For similar interpretations, see yHag. 2:1 (77c); Men. 29b; Gen. R. 12:10; M. Pss. 62:1; 114:3; cf. also M. Pss. 118:14. But why were they not created with all of it? So as not to mention the full name [of the Holy One, blessed be He] with him. Woe to those creatures who vilify the name of the Holy One, blessed be He, in vain. See what is written about offerings (in Lev. 1:2), “When one of you presents an offering to the Lord.” It does not say "to the Lord, an offering," but “an offering to the Lord” (so that who changes his mind about an offering in mid-sentence not mention God’s name for no reason).⁴⁰Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 1:6; Ned. 10ab; Sifra to Lev. 1:2, Wayyiqra, Parashah 2; Sifre, Deut.32:3 (306); Gen. R. 1:13. And [yet] people vilify the name of the Lord in vain. It is therefore stated (in Eccl. 5:1), “Do not be rash with your mouth…. for God is in heaven and you are on earth.” For who would say that God is not in heaven and that people are not on earth? [Accordingly], Solomon has said, “Every time that the weakest of the weak is above, he defeats the warrior below.” Go and learn from Abimelech (in Jud. 9:53), “But a certain woman dropped an upper millstone on Abimelech's head and cracked his skull.”⁴¹Since the woman was above the warrior Abimelech in the tower of Thebez, her killing him is an example of a relatively weak person defeating a warrior from above. And if he was a warrior among warriors and there was none like him, and [yet] a woman [was able to] kill him from above, how much the more so in the case of the Holy One, blessed be He! See what is written about Him (in Dan. 4:32), “All the inhabitants of the earth are of no account, and He does as He wishes [with the host of heaven and with the inhabitants of the earth].” It is also written (in Ps. 47:3), “For the Lord most high is awesome, a great King over all the earth,” and people are below. (Eccl. 5:1:) “Therefore let your words be few.” So what is there for you to do? To put your hand upon your mouth and upon your ear in order to neither speak nor hear. Ergo (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins.”⁴²These words also appear in Lev. 5:21 [6:2]. (Lev. 5:1:) [“And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing,] when he is a witness to what he has either seen or come to know, [if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity].” This text is related (to Prov. 29:24), “The one who shares with a thief hates his own soul; he hears swearing and does not speak out.” What has caused anyone to say of him, “If a soul sins?” [It is] simply because he did not come and tell a sage, “So-and-so blasphemed the name of the Holy One, blessed be He.” He therefore shares his iniquities with him, as stated (in Lev. 5:1), “if he does not speak out, he shall bear his iniquity.” Therefore Solomon has said (in Prov. 29:24), “The one who shares with a thief hates his own soul.” Just as when the thief is caught, his partner is convicted along with him;⁴³Cf. Lev. R. 6:2. so whoever hears blasphemy of the Holy One, blessed be He, and does not speak out is convicted along with him. And let no one say, “What denunciation (lashon hara’ah) do I say?” The Holy One, blessed be He, has said (in Lev. 5:1ff.), “’On every matter,’ there is a denunciation in it. [But] with cursing the name, there is no denunciation.” Why? Because [it is] just like a case of a person cursing his companion. When he hears him, it is of no concern to him. But if he has cursed his father in his presence, he puts his life on the line and says, “You have cursed my father.” Moses said (in Deut. 32:6), “Is He not your Father who created you?” (Lev. 5:1:) [“And if a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing,] when he is a witness to what he has seen.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If you want to bear witness, bear witness; but if not, I will bear witness.” Thus it is stated (ibid.), “when he (He) is a witness.” And where is it shown that the Holy One, blessed be He, is called a witness? Where it is stated (in Jer. 29:23), “I am the One who knows and bears witness, says the Lord.” Come and see. All the parashioth written in this book have “mistake” written in them, except for this parashah, in which “mistake” is not mentioned.⁴⁴In fact, MISTAKE (shegagah), i.e., UNINTENTIONAL SIN, does appear in this parashah (in 5:15, 18). Elsewhere in Lev. the word only appears in 4:2, 22, 27; 22:4.) About him Solomon has said (in Eccl. 5:5), “Do not let your mouth cause your flesh to sin, and do not say before the angel that it was a mistake,” (in Eccl. 5:1), “for God is in the heavens.” It is comparable to two people who threw stones at an image of a king.⁴⁵Gk.: eikonion, a diminutive form of eikon. One was drunk, and one was in possession of his senses. Both of them were caught and went to trial. [The judge] rendered a [guilty] verdict⁴⁶Gk.: apophasis. against the one with his senses and acquitted the one who was drunk. So it is in the case of whoever sins. It is concerning him that “mistake” is written (in Lev. 4:2) – “When a soul sins by mistake (rt.: shgg) [against any of the Lord's commandments]….”; (and likewise in Lev. 4:13) “And if the whole congregation of Israel should err (rt.: shgg).” And [about] all of them; because they sinned by mistake, they bring an offering and it shall be forgiven them. It is so stated (in Numb. 15:26), “The whole congregation of the Children of Israel and the stranger who resides in their midst shall be forgiven because [it happened] to all the people by mistake.” But the one who blasphemes receives a [guilty] verdict, as stated (in Lev. 24:16) “And the one who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall surely be put to death.” It is also written (in Jer. 4:2), “And you shall swear, ‘As the Lord lives,’ in truth, in justice, and in righteousness; then shall nations bless themselves in Him, and Him shall they glory.” Scripture also says (in Deut. 10:20), “The Lord your God you shall fear, Him you shall serve, to Him you shall hold fast”; then after that, “and by Him you shall swear.”⁴⁷See Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1. (Ibid.:) “The Lord your God you shall fear,” so that you will be like those three of whom it is written, “he feared God (yr' 'lhym)”: Abraham, Joseph and Job. About Abraham it is written (in Gen. 22:12), “for now I know that you fear God (yr' 'lhym).” About Joseph it is written (in Gen. 42:18), “I fear (yr') God ('lhym).” About Job it is written (in Job 1:2), “he feared God (yr' 'lhym) and shunned evil.” (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) “Him you shall serve,” in that you will be busy with the Torah and with [fulfilling] the commandments. (Ibid. cont.:) “To him you shall hold fast,” in that you will honor the Torah scholars and benefit them with your property. Moses said to Israel, “Do not think that I have allowed you to swear by His name, even in truth. It is only, if all these conditions (mentioned earlier in the verse) abide with you, that you are entitled to swear; and if not, you are not entitled to swear [by His name], even in truth.” You shall not be like those of whom it is written (in Jer. 7:9), “[Will you …] swear falsely and sacrifice to Baal?” Rather, fulfill all these conditions and after that you are Mine, as stated (in Jer. 4:1), “If you return, O Israel, says the Lord, if you return unto Me [….]” Then after that [it says] (in vs. 2), “And you shall swear, ‘as the Lord lives’….” Our masters have said, “Even in truth one cannot swear.” Why? Thus have our masters taught (in Dem. 2:3): Let not someone from Israel be unrestrained in vows⁴⁸See also Ned. 20a. or in jesting, (or to lead one's companion astray with an oath by saying it is not an oath). There is a story about the royal mountain where there were two thousand towns, and all of them were destroyed because of a truthful oath that was unnecessary.⁴⁹Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1; cf. also Git. 57a. Now if one who swears in truth has this happen, how much the more so in the case of one who swears to a lie? How did they act? One would utter an oath to his companion that he was going to such and such a place to eat and drink. Then they would go and act to fulfill their oath. It is therefore stated (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins in that it hears a voice swearing.” Now when the Holy One, blessed be He, comes to judge all people in the world to come, He will judge them along with sorcerers and adulterers. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (in Mal. 3:5), “Then I will draw near to you in judgment; and I will be a swift witness against sorcerers, against adulterers, against those who swear to a lie (in My name).” And I am finding them guilty and bringing them down to Gehinnom. The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “With the mouth that I gave you to be praising and glorifying My name, you are reproaching, blaspheming, and swearing to a lie in My name? Since I created all people to praise Me, as stated (in Prov. 16:4), “The Lord has made everything for His own purpose.” So is it not enough for you that you do not praise Me, but [that] you blaspheme [Me as well]! The Scripture has said (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea, [for it cannot rest (rt.: shqt)].” [They are] just like this [kind of] sea which has waves in its midst exalting themselves upward. When each and every one of them reaches the sand, it is broken and returns (hozer).⁵⁰The word also means “repents.” And its companion also looks at it breaking, and [yet] exalts itself upward without repenting (hozer). So are the wicked, who look at one another and exalt themselves. Therefore, they are likened to the sea, as stated (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea….” So did all the generations, the generation of Enosh, the generation of the flood, and the generation of the dispersion (i.e., of the Tower of Babel), not learn from each other. Instead they were exalting themselves. Therefore they are compared to the sea (in Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea.” (Is. 57:20, cont.:) “For it cannot rest (rt.: shqt).” The wicked have no rest in the world, but the righteous have serenity (shqt), as stated (in Jer. 30:10), “and Jacob shall again have peace (shqt) and quiet with none to make him afraid.” Another interpretation (of Is. 57:20), “But the wicked are like the troubled sea.” Just as the sea has its dirt and mud in its mouth, so the wicked have their stench in their mouth. Thus it is stated (at the end of Is. 57:20), “and its waters toss up slime and mud.” It is not from choice that one hears blasphemies and invectives, but from the midst of the sins which are within him. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 5:1), “If a soul sins and hears a voice swearing….”⁵¹Most translations equate the sinning with the swearing. This more literal translation illustrates the point that the swearing comes from a soul which has already sinned. You find [that there are] three things under human control and three things not under human control ….⁵²Tanh., Gen. 6:12 (i.e., Toledot 12); Gen. R. 67:12. And not only [now] but even in the world to come. [So it is stated] (in Job 12:23), “He exalts (msgy') nations and destroys them.” The written text (ketiv) is “mshg'” (which means, misleads).⁵³In unpointed Hebrew the Sin (S) and the Shin (Sh) look alike. Since MShG’, which is pointed mashge’, can also be spelled with the extra yod (i.e., Y), the two words are interchangable in an unpointed text. Then He destroys them [and] brings them down to Abaddon,⁵⁴Abbadon is a name for Hell, which means “destruction.” while the righteous watch them. Thus it is stated (in Is. 66:24), “Then they shall go out and look at the corpses of the people who have rebelled against Me; their worms shall not die nor shall their fire be quenched”.

7) "and a thing be hid": Not that the entire mitzvah be hid. How so? If they ruled: There is no (law of) niddah in the Torah, there is no Shabbath in the Torah, there is no idolatry in the Torah — I might think they are liable (for a sin-offering); it is, therefore, written: "and a thing be hid" (then there is liability) — not if the entire mitzvah is hidden.

8) But (conversely), if they ruled: There is (a law of) niddah in the Torah, but it is permitted to live with "shomereth yom keneged yom" (a woman observing a day of purity after a day of sighting between her normal niddah times); there is (a law of) Shabbath in the Torah, but it is permitted to carry from one (private) domain to another or from a private domain to a public domain, ([in a particular manner which is actually forbidden]); there is a law (against) idolatry in the Torah, but it is permitted to bow down to it, ([in a particular manner which is actually forbidden]) — I might think that they are not liable (for a sin-offering, [beth-din not having erred in an entire "thing"]); it is, therefore, written (as a prerequisite for a sin-offering): "and a thing be hid" — not (that) the entire body (of the mitzvah must be hidden).

9) Since idolatry was singled out for an independent ruling (see 6 above), I might think that (in the instance of idolatry) they are liable for (beth-din's) erring (even) in the entire mitzvah (i.e., ruling that idolatry itself is permitted). It is, therefore, written here (Vayikra) "from the eyes" and elsewhere (Bamidbar, in respect to idolatry), "from the eyes." Just as "from the eyes" here excludes (error in respect to) the entire body (of the mitzvah), so, "from the eyes" there.

10) If beth-din ruled (erroneously), and they (beth-din themselves) committed (the sin), I might think they are liable. It is, therefore, written: ("and a thing be hid from the eyes of) the assembly, and they do" — the ruling relates to beth-din, and the act to the people.

11) ("and they do one of all) the mitzvoth of the L–rd": Not the mitzvoth of the king and not the mitzvoth of beth-din. The mitzvoth referred to in respect to the high-priest (i.e., those liable to kareth for intentional transgression) are the mitzvoth referred to here. "of all the mitzvoth of the L–rd": and not all of the mitzvoth of the L–rd — to exclude (the bringing of a sin-offering for) "hearing the voice of an oath" (see 5:1), and "pronouncing with the lips" (see 5:4), and defilement of the sanctuary and its sacred things (see 5:2) (for all of which one brings a sliding-scale offering [oleh veyored]). "… which are not to be done, and they are guilty": Just as punishment is exacted of the individual (if he does not bring his sin-offering), so it is exacted of the congregation (even though they acted on the ruling of beth-din.)

(Lev. 5:1:) AND IF A SOUL SINS IN THAT IT HEARS A VOICE SWEARING, [WHEN HE IS A WITNESS TO WHAT HE HAS EITHER SEEN OR COME TO KNOW.] The Holy One said: If you want to bear witness, bear witness; but if not, I will bear witness. Thus it is stated (ibid.): WHEN HE IS A WITNESS. And where is it shown that the Holy One is called a witness? Where it is stated (in Jer. 29:23): I AM THE ONE WHO KNOWS AND BEARS WITNESS, SAYS THE LORD. Come and see. All the parashioth written in this book have MISTAKE written in them, except for this parashah, in which MISTAKE is not mentioned.⁵⁷In fact, MISTAKE (shegagah), i.e., UNINTENTIONAL SIN, does appear in this parashah (in 5:15, 18). Elsewhere in Lev. the word only appears in 4:2, 22, 27; 22:4.) About him Solomon has said (in Eccl. 5:5 [6]): DO NOT LET YOUR MOUTH CAUSE YOUR FLESH TO SIN, [AND DO NOT SAY BEFORE THE ANGEL THAT IT WAS A MISTAKE]. It is comparable to two people who threw stones at an image of a king.⁵⁸Gk.: eikonion, a diminutive form of eikon. One was drunk, and one was in possession of his senses. Both of them were caught and went to trial. <The judge> rendered a <guilty> verdict⁵⁹Gk.: apophasis. against the one with his senses and acquitted the one who was drunk. So it is in the case of whoever sins. It is concerning him that MISTAKE is written (in Lev. 4:2): WHEN A SOUL SINS BY MISTAKE (rt.: ShGG) < AGAINST ANY OF THE LORD'S COMMANDMENTS >…. (Lev. 4:13:) AND IF THE WHOLE CONGREGATION OF ISRAEL SHOULD ERR (rt.: ShGG), because they all sinned by mistake, they bring an offering, and shall be forgiven them. It is so stated (in Numb. 15:26): THE WHOLE CONGREGATION OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL AND THE STRANGER WHO RESIDES IN THEIR MIDST SHALL BE FORGIVEN BECAUSE <IT HAPPENED > TO ALL THE PEOPLE BY MISTAKE. But the one who blasphemes receives a < guilty> verdict, as stated (in Lev. 24:16) AND THE ONE WHO BLASPHEMES THE NAME OF THE LORD SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH. [It is also written] (in Jer. 4:2): AND YOU SHALL SWEAR: AS THE LORD LIVES, IN TRUTH, IN JUSTICE, AND IN RIGHTEOUSNESS. [THEN SHALL NATIONS BLESS THEMSELVES IN HIM, AND HIM SHALL THEY GLORY.] The Scripture also says (in Deut. 10:20): THE LORD YOUR GOD YOU SHALL FEAR, HIM YOU SHALL SERVE, TO HIM YOU SHALL HOLD FAST, then after that, AND BY HIM YOU SHALL SWEAR.⁶⁰See below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 9:1; Numb. R. 9:1. (Ibid.:) THE LORD YOUR GOD YOU SHALL FEAR, so that you will be like those three of whom it is written: HE FEARED GOD (YR' 'LHYM). About Abraham it is written (in Gen. 22:12): FOR NOW I KNOW THAT YOU FEAR GOD (YR' 'LHYM)…. About Joseph it is written (in Gen. 42:18): FOR I FEAR (YR') GOD ('LHYM). About Job it is written (in Job 1:2): HE FEARED GOD (YR' 'LHYM) AND SHUNNED EVIL. (Deut. 10:20, cont.:) HIM YOU SHALL SERVE, in that you will be busy with the Torah and with <fulfilling> the commandments. (Ibid., cont.:) TO HIM YOU SHALL HOLD FAST, in that you will honor the disciples of the wise and share your property with them. Moses said to Israel: Do not think that I may have allowed you to swear by my name, even in truth. It is only, if all these conditions (mentioned earlier in the verse) abide with you, that you are entitled to swear by my name; and if not, you are not entitled to swear by my name, even in truth. You shall not be like those of whom it is written (in Jer. 7:9): WILL YOU <…> SWEAR FALSELY AND SACRIFICE TO BAAL? Fulfill all these conditions and after that you are mine, as stated (in Jer. 4:1): IF YOU RETURN, O ISRAEL, SAYS THE LORD, IF YOU RETURN UNTO ME…. Then after that <it says> (in vs. 2): AND YOU SHALL SWEAR: AS THE LORD LIVES….

24 (Numb. 11:16) “Gather Me [seventy men from the elders of Israel]”: But did you not have elders before? Here now it is written concerning Mount Sinai (in Exod. 24:9), “Then there went up Moses […] and the seventy elders of Israel”; and this parashah (with Numb. 11:16) comes after that. So where were the[se earlier] elders? It is simply that, when Israel did those things which are stated (in Numb. 11:1), “Now the people were as murmurers […] then the fire of the Lord burned against them,” they were all destroyed by fire at that time. It is simply that their burning was like the burning of Nadab and Abihu, for they also had acted with disrespect on ascending Sinai, when they saw the Divine Presence. It is so stated (in Exod. 24:11), “they beheld God, and they ate and drank.” Was there eating and drinking there? To what is the matter comparable? To a servant who attended his master while [holding] a slice of bread in his hand and taking bites from it. Similarly had they acted with disrespect as though eating and drinking. So the elders along with Nadab and Abihu deserved to be destroyed by fire on that day; but because the giving of Torah was dear to the Holy One, blessed be He, He therefore did not want to harm them and bring calamity to them on that day. This is what is written (ibid.), “But He (the Holy One, blessed be He,) did not raise His hand against the nobles of the Children of Israel.” From this you may infer that they deserved to have a hand raised [against them]. After a time, however, He collected their debt: Nadab and Abihu were also destroyed by fire as they entered the tent of meeting, while the elders were destroyed by fire when they were filled with lusting, as stated (in Numb. 11:4), “Then the rabble (ha'safsuf) which was in their midst became filled with lust.” Who were the rabble (ha'safsuf)? R. Simeon ben Menasya and R. Simeon bar Abba [differed on the matter]. One said, “These were the proselytes who came up with them from Egypt and who were gathered (ne'esafim) together with them as stated (in Exod. 12:38), ‘And a mixed multitude went up with them.’” But the other said, “Rabble can only be a Sanhedrin, since it is stated (in Numb. 11:16), ‘Gather (esfah) Me seventy men.’” What [else] is written there (in Numb. 11:1)? “Then the fire of the Lord burned against them and consumed them in the outskirts (qetseh) of the camp,” [i.e.,] among the selected (muqetsim) in the camp. And where is it shown that those elders who went up onto the mountain were destroyed by fire? Where it is stated (in Ps. 106:18), “And fire broke out in their company ('edah),” since company ('edah) can only be a Sanhedrin as stated (in Numb. 15:24), “And it shall come to pass that if it was done [by mistake] away from the eyes of the congregation ('edah).”⁵¹I.e. the leaders of the congregation. So Rashi on Numb. 15:24. It is also written (in Lev. 4:13), “And if the whole congregation ('edah) of Israel⁵²This expression was often interpreted as denoting the Sanhedrin. So Sifra to Lev. 4:13 (42: Wayyiqra parashah 4); R. Meir in Hor. 5a; Rashi on Lev. 4:13. should err.” And likewise it says (in Ps. 78:31), “When God’s anger flared up at them, He slew their sturdiest,” these were the Sanhedrin; “struck down the chosen of Israel,” these were the chosen ones that were called elders, about whom it is written (in II Sam. 6:1), “And David still added to the chosen among Israel.” Then they wept again and demanded meat. Now you might say, “What they wanted was animal flesh? Did it not come about that the manna became whatever they wanted inside of their mouths, as stated (in Ps. 106:15), ‘So He gave them what they asked for...’?” And in case you should say that they did not have oxen and cattle in the desert, has it not already stated (in Exod. 12:38), “And a mixed multitude went up with them and flocks and herds.” And in case you should say they ate them in the desert, is it not written (in Numb. 32:1), “Now the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had much livestock?” From here R. Simeon said, “It was not meat for which they lusted, since it says so (in Ps. 78:27) – ‘And He rained down flesh (she'er) upon them like dust.’ Now she'er must denote illicit intercourse since it is stated (in Lev. 18:6), ‘None of you shall approach any close (she'er) relation to him.’ Ergo, it [really] says that they desired to permit illicit intercourse for themselves; and so it says (in Numb. 11:10), ‘Now Moses heard the people weeping for their families.’”⁵³See Yoma 75a according to which they were weeping here because of the family relations with whom they were forbidden to have intercourse. Thus when they desired such [relations] (ibid. cont.), “the Lord was very angry and it was bad in the eyes of Moses.” At that time Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He, (in vs. 11), “’Why have you mistreated Your servant […]?’ In the past there was one with me who would bear the burden of Israel, but now I am alone.” Thus it is written (in vs. 14-15), “I am not able to bear [all] this people alone…. So if You are dealing like this with me, please truly kill me.” At that time the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Appoint other elders instead of those elders.” It is so stated] (in vs. 16), “Gather Me seventy men.”

(Numb. 11:16:) “Gather Me seventy man (sic)⁶³The midrash is ignoring the fact that Hebrew uses singular nouns with large numbers in order to build an interpretation on this singular usage. from the elders of Israel.”⁶⁴Numb. R. 5:23. This text is related (to Prov. 22:11), “The one who loves purity of heart has grace on his lips, has a king as his friend.” Why did He not say to him (in Numb. 11:16), “seventy men" (with "men" in the plural), instead of “seventy man.” It is simply that He said to him, “seventy man (ish) [with the singular ish indicating] singular individuals,⁶⁵I.e. singular individuals like the one described in Prov. 22:11. because they were to be like Me and you, as stated (Exod. 15:3:) “The Lord is a Man (ish) of war,” [and it is likewise] stated (Numb. 12:3), “Now the man (ish) Moses was very humble.” (Numb. 11:16:) “Gather Me [seventy men from the elders of Israel].” But did you not have elders before?⁶⁶Numb. R. 15:24. Here now it is written concerning Mount Sinai (in Exod. 24:9), “Then there went up Moses […] and the seventy elders of Israel”; and this parashah (with Numb. 11:16) comes after that. So where were the[se earlier] elders? It is simply that, when Israel did those things which are stated (in Numb. 11:1), “Now the people were as murmurers […] then the fire of the Lord burned against them,” they were all destroyed by fire at that time. It is simply that their burning was like the burning of Nadab and Abihu, for they also had acted with disrespect on ascending Sinai, when they saw the Divine Presence. It is so stated (in Exod. 24:11), “they beheld God, and they ate and drank.” Was there eating and drinking there? To what is the matter comparable? To a servant who attended his master while [holding] a slice of bread in his hand and taking bites from it. Similarly had they acted with disrespect as though eating and drinking. So the elders along with Nadab and Abihu deserved to be destroyed by fire on that day; but because the giving of Torah was dear to the Holy One, blessed be He, He therefore did not want to harm them and bring calamity to them on that day. This is what is written (ibid.), “But He (the Holy One, blessed be He,) did not raise His hand against the nobles of the Children of Israel.” From this you may infer that they deserved to have a hand raised [against them]. After a time, however, they were destroyed by fire. Nadab and Abihu were destroyed by fire as they entered the tent of meeting, while the elders were destroyed by fire when they were filled with lusting, as stated (in Numb. 11:4), “Then the rabble (ha'safsuf) which was in their midst became filled with lust.” Who were the rabble (ha'safsuf)? R. Simeon ben Menasya and R. Simeon bar Abba [differed on the matter]. One said, “These were the proselytes who came up with them from Egypt and who were gathered (ne'esafim) together with them as stated (in Exod. 12:38), ‘And a mixed multitude went up with them.’” But the other said, “Rabble can only be a Sanhedrin, since it is stated (in Numb. 11:16), ‘Gather (esfah) Me seventy men.’” What [else] is written there (in Numb. 11:1)? “Then the fire of the Lord burned against them and consumed them in the outskirts (qetseh) of the camp,” [i.e.,] among the selected (muqetsim) in the camp. And where is it shown that those elders who went up onto the mountain were destroyed by fire? Where it is stated (in Ps. 106:18), “And fire broke out in their company ('edah),” since company ('edah) can only be a Sanhedrin as stated (in Numb. 15:24), “And it shall come to pass that if it was done [by mistake] away from the eyes of the congregation ('edah).”⁶⁷I.e. the leaders of the congregation. So Rashi on Numb. 15:24. It is also written (in Lev. 4:13), “And if the whole congregation ('edah) of Israel⁶⁸This expression was often interpreted as denoting the Sanhedrin. So Sifra to Lev. 4:13 (42: Wayyiqra parashah 4); R. Meir in Hor. 5a; Rashi on Lev. 4:13. should err.” And so did David say (in Ps. 78:31), “When God’s anger flared up at them, He slew their sturdiest,” these were the Sanhedrin; “struck down the chosen of Israel,” these were the chosen ones that were called elders, about whom it is written (in II Sam. 6:1), “And David still added to the chosen among Israel.” Then they wept again and demanded meat. Now you might say, “What they wanted was flesh? Did it not come about that the manna became whatever they wanted inside of their mouths, as stated (in Ps. 106:15), ‘So He gave them what they asked for...’?” And in case you should say that they did not have oxen and cattle in the desert, has it not already stated (in Exod. 12:38), “And a mixed multitude went up with them and flocks and herds.” And in case you should say they ate them in the desert, is it not written (in Numb. 32:1), “Now the children of Reuben and the children of Gad had much livestock?” From here R. Simeon said, “It was not meat for which they lusted, since it says so (in Ps. 78:27), ‘And He rained down flesh (she'er) upon them like dust.’ Now she'er must denote illicit intercourse since it is stated (in Lev. 18:6), ‘None of you shall approach any close (she'er) relation to him.’ Ergo, it [really] says that they desired to permit illicit intercourse for themselves; and so it says (in Numb. 11:10), ‘Now Moses heard the people weeping for their families.’”⁶⁹See Yoma 75a according to which they were weeping here because of the family relations with whom they were forbidden to have intercourse. Thus when they desired such [relations] (ibid. cont.), “the Lord was very angry and it was bad in the eyes of Moses.” At that time Moses said to the Holy One, blessed be He, (in vs. 11), “’Why have you mistreated Your servant […]?’ In the past there was one with me who would bear the burden of Israel, but now I am alone.” Thus it is written (in vs. 14-15), “I am not able to bear [all] this people alone…. So if You are dealing like this with me, please truly kill me.” At that time the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “Appoint other elders instead of those elders.” It is so stated] (in vs. 16), “Gather Me seventy men.” (Numb. 11:17:) “Then I will come down and speak with you there.” [This verse is] to inform you that the day for appointing elders was as dear to the Holy One, blessed be He, as the day for the giving of Torah.⁷⁰Numb. R. 15:25. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 19:11), “for on the third day the Lord will come down”; and also (in Numb. 11:17) with reference to appointing the elders, “I will come down,” is written. To what is the matter comparable? To a king who had an orchard and hired a guard for it. Then he gave him the payment of a guard for him to guard the orchard. After a time the guard said to him, “I cannot guard all of it myself. Rather give me others to guard it with me.” The king said to him, “I have given the entire orchard into your keeping, and I have given you all the payment for guarding it; but now you would say to me, ‘Go and bring others to guard it with me.’ See I am bringing others to guard with you, but observe that I am not giving them their payment from what belongs to me. Rather it is from your payment which I have given you that they are receiving their payment.” Similarly did the Holy One, blessed be He, speak to Moses. When [Moses] said to Him, “I cannot [do everything] alone,” the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, “I have given you understanding and knowledge to sustain⁷¹PRNS. Cf. Gk.: pronoos (“prudent”). My children. Moreover, I did not want others, simply so that you would have strength and knowledge and so that you would stand alone in that greatness. But now you are the one who wants others. Be aware that they will receive [payment], not from what is Mine, but from what is yours.” It is so stated (in Numb. 11:17.), “and I will set aside some of the spirit which is upon you and put it on them [...].” Nevertheless Moses did not lack anything. You should know that after forty years He said to Moses (in Numb. 27:18, 20), “Take Joshua ben Nun …. And put some of your glory upon him.” Then what is written about Joshua (in Deut. 34:9)? “Now Joshua ben Nun was filled with the spirit of wisdom.” Why? (Ibid. cont.:) “Because Moses had laid his hands upon him.” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “In this world [only] individuals have prophesied, but in the world to come all Israel shall become prophets.” It is so stated (in Joel 3:1), “And it shall come to pass afterward that I will pour out My spirit upon all flesh so that your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.”⁷²See also above Gen. 10:4; cf. Deut. R. 6:14. So did R. Tanchuma bar Abba expound.

(Numb. 11:16:) GATHER ME <SEVENTY PEOPLE FROM THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL>. But did you not have elders before?¹⁰¹Tanh. Numb. 3:16 cont.; Numb. R. 15:24. Here now it is written concerning Mount Sinai (in Exod. 24:9): THEN THERE WENT UP MOSES … AND THE SEVENTY ELDERS OF ISRAEL; and this parashah (with Numb. 11:16) comes after that. So where were the<se earlier> elders? It is simply that, when Israel did those things which are stated (in Numb. 11:1): NOW THE PEOPLE WERE AS MURMURERS […. THEN THE FIRE OF THE LORD BURNED AGAINST THEM], they were all destroyed by fire at that time. It is simply that their burning was like the burning of Nadab and Abihu, for they also had acted with disrespect on ascending Sinai, when they saw the Divine Presence. It is so stated (in Exod. 24:11): THEY BEHELD GOD, AND THEY ATE AND DRANK. Was there eating and drinking there? To what is the matter comparable? To a servant who attended his master while <holding> a slice of bread in his hand and taking bites from it. Similarly had they acted with disrespect as though eating and drinking. So the elders along with Nadab and Abihu deserved to be destroyed by fire on that day; but because the giving of Torah was dear to the Holy One, he therefore did not want to harm them and bring calamity to them on that day. This is what is written (ibid.): BUT HE (the Holy One) STILL DID NOT RAISE HIS HAND AGAINST THE NOBLES OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL. From this you may infer that they deserved to have a hand raised <against them>. After a time, however, they were destroyed by fire. Nadab and Abihu were destroyed by fire as they entered the tent of meeting, while the elders were destroyed by fire when they were filled with lusting, as stated (in Numb. 11:4): THEN THE RABBLE WHICH WAS IN THEIR MIDST <BECAME FILLED WITH LUST>. Who were THE RABBLE (ha'safsuf)? R. Simeon ben Menasya and R. Simeon bar Abba <differed>. One said: These were the proselytes who came up with them from Egypt and who were gathered (ne'esafim) together with them as stated (in Exod. 12:38): AND A MIXED MULTITUDE <WENT UP WITH THEM>…. But the other said: RABBLE can only be a sanhedrin, since it is stated (in Numb. 11:16:) GATHER ME [SEVENTY PEOPLE] <FROM THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL>. What <else> is written there (in vs. 1)? THEN THE FIRE OF THE LORD BURNED AGAINST THEM AND CONSUMED THEM IN THE OUTSKIRTS (qetseh) OF THE CAMP, <i.e.,> among the officers (qetsinim) in the camp. And where is it shown that those elders who went up onto the mountain were destroyed by fire? Where it is stated (in Ps. 106:18): AND FIRE BROKE OUT IN THEIR COMPANY ('edah), since COMPANY ('edah) can only be a sanhedrin as stated (in Numb. 15:24): AND IT SHALL COME TO PASS THAT IF IT WAS DONE <BY MISTAKE> AWAY FROM THE EYES OF THE CONGREGATION ('edah)….¹⁰²I.e. the leaders of the congregation. So Rashi on Numb. 15:24. It is also written (in Lev. 4:13): AND IF THE WHOLE CONGREGATION ('edah) OF ISRAEL¹⁰³This expression was often interpreted as denoting the Sanhedrin. So Sifra to Lev. 4:13 (42: Wayyiqra parashah 4); R. Meir in Hor. 5a; Rashi on Lev. 4:13. SHOULD ERR? Then they wept again and demanded meat. Now if you should say: What they wanted was flesh (not manna), did it not come about that the manna became whatever they wanted inside of their mouths. Thus it is stated (in Ps. 106:15): SO HE GAVE THEM WHAT THEY ASKED FOR. Again in case you should say that they did not have oxen and cattle in the desert, he caused to be written (in Exod. 12:38): AND A MIXED MULTITUDE WENT UP WITH THEM WITH FLOCKS AND HERDS. And in case you should say they ate them in the desert, is it not written (in Numb. 32:1): NOW THE CHILDREN OF REUBEN AND THE CHILDREN OF GAD HAD MUCH LIVESTOCK? From here R. Simeon said: It was not flesh for which they lusted, since it says so (in Ps. 78:27): AND HE RAINED DOWN MEAT (she'er) UPON THEM LIKE DUST. Now she'er must denote illicit intercourse since it is stated (in Lev. 18:6): NONE OF YOU SHALL APPROACH ANY CLOSE (she'er) RELATION TO HIM. Ergo, it <really> says that they desired to permit illicit intercourse for themselves; and so it says (in Numb. 11:10): NOW MOSES HEARD THE PEOPLE WEEPING FOR THEIR FAMILIES.¹⁰⁴See Yoma 75a according to which they were weeping here because of the family relations with whom they were forbidden to have intercourse. Thus when they desired such <relations> (ibid. cont.:) THE LORD WAS VERY ANGRY…. At that time Moses said to the Holy One (in vs. 11): WHY HAVE YOU MISTREATED YOUR SERVANT …? In the past there was one with me who would bear the burden of Israel, but now I am alone. Thus it is written (in vs. 14—15): I AM NOT ABLE TO BEAR <ALL THIS PEOPLE ALONE … SO IF YOU ARE DEALING LIKE THIS WITH ME…. At that time the Holy One said to him: Appoint other elders instead of those elders. [It is so stated] (in vs. 16): GATHER ME SEVENTY PEOPLE <FROM THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL>.

Another explanation for zeh hadavar: “Take with you words. . .”(d’varim, Ho 14:3). This is what is meant by what is written: “I wash my palms with cleanliness and circle your altar, Yahh, to voice thanks aloud and to tell of all your miracles.” (Ps 26:6f) One might also offer bulls and rams, but exegesis says to voice thanks aloud. Accordingly, Jews say, “Ribon HaOlam (“master of the universe”), leaders sin and bring and bring a korban (“offering”) and it atones for them. The mashiach sins and brings a korban and it atones for him. We, we have no korban.” He said to them: “And if all the congregation of Yisrael stray–and the matter is hidden from the eyes of the community–and they are guilty of doing one of the negative commandments of Yahh, then, if the sin guilt for which they sinned becomes known, the community shall offer a bull of the herd as a sin offering.”(Lev 4:13f) They say to him, “We are poor and we have not what to bring for korbanot.” He says to them, “Words, I request, as it is said, ‘Take with you words and return to Yahh’ and I annul all your misdeeds.” These words are none other than divrey Torah, as it is said, “These are the d’varim that Moshe spoke to all Yisrael.(Dt 1:1) They said to him, “We do not know.” He said to them, “Weep and pray before me and I accept it. Your ancestors, when they were enslaved in Mitsrayim, it wasn’t for prayer that I redeemed them, as it is said, ‘The B’neiYisrael groaned from the work and cried out.’(Ex 2:23)In the days of Y’hoshua it wasn’t for prayer that I made miracles for them, as it is said, ‘Y’hoshua tore his garment and fell on his face before the ark of Yahh till evening.’(Jos 7:6) So what did I say to him? ‘Hold out the spear which is in your hand towards The Ai, for I give it into your hand.’(Jos 8:18) In the days of the Judges, with weeping I heard their outcry, as it is said, ‘It happened, when the B’neiYisrael cried out to Yahh on account of Midyan.’(Ju 6:7) In the days of Sh’muel it was not in prayer that I heard them, as it is said, ‘Sh’muel cried out to Yahh on behalf of Yisrael and Yahh responded to him.’(Sam 7:9) And similarly the men of Y’rushalayim, even though they had angered me, because they wept before me I had mercy on them, as it is said, ‘For thus said Yahh, “Sing out joy to Ya’akov. . .”(Jer 31:7) Oh, I request from you not sacrifices and not korbanot but words, as it is said, ‘Take with you words. . .’ This is why David said, ‘I wash my hands with cleanliness’ not intending to make an offering but to voice thanks aloud, for I am thankful to you for divrey Torah.

(Ibid. 25) "And the Cohein shall make atonement for the entire congregation of the children of Israel": Whence is it derived that if one of the tribes did not bring (its offering) atonement is withheld? From "And the Cohein shall make atonement for the entire congregation of the children of Israel." (Ibid.) "and it shall be forgiven them, for it was unwitting": I might understand (that they are forgiven) whether unwitting or witting; it is, therefore, written "for it was unwitting." From (24) "by the eyes of the congregation (i.e., beth-din) it were done in error," I would understand that the ruling of beth-din was in error and not willful; but as to the doing (i.e., the transgression) of the congregation, willful was equated with unwitting; it is, therefore, written "the children of Israel … for it was unwitting." If some were willful, I might think that it were considered (collectively) unwitting; it is, therefore, written "for the entire congregation of the children of Israel … for it was unwitting." (Ibid.) "and they have brought their offering": R. Meir says: If a tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of its beth-din, I might think they bring (the offerings); it is, therefore, written "and they (i.e., all of the tribes) have brought their offering." R. Yoshiyah says: If one tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of beth-din, whence is it derived that the other tribes bring (the offerings) because of it? From "and they (connoting all of the tribes) have brought their offering, a fire-offering to the L-rd." For R. Yoshiyah says: A tribe that transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of beth-din is liable, and the other tribes are exempt. If a tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of the great beth-din (i.e., the Sanhedrin), then that tribe brings a bullock, and the other tribes bring because of it. And what do they bring because of it? Twelve bullocks. R. Shimon b. Yochai says: If a tribe transgressed according to the (erroneous) ruling of beth-din, it is exempt. If it transgressed according to the ruling of the great beth-din, they bring two bullocks: one for the tribe and one for the beth-din. When is this so? With other mitzvoth; but with idolatry, they bring two bullocks and two he-goats: one bullock for a burnt-offering and a he-goat for a sin-offering for that tribe, and the same for the beth-din. The majority of the congregation is reckoned as all of the congregation. "and they have brought their offering: a fire-offering to the L-rd": this is the burnt-offering; "and their sin-offering": this is the sin-offering for idolatry; "their error": this is the bullock of "concealment" of the congregation (viz. Vayikra 4:13-14). "their sin-offering … for their error": their sin-offering (i.e., the he-goats [offered] for idolatry) is like their error" the bullock of "concealment" of the congregation, in all of the procedures (of the offering). (Bamidbar, Ibid. 26) "And it shall be forgiven to the entire congregation of the sons of Israel": This tells me only of the men. Whence do I derive (the same for) the women? From "the entire congregation of the children of Israel." "and to the stranger who sojourns in their midst": Because this section is addressed to the Israelites (viz. 15:12), proselytes had to be (specifically) included. (Ibid.) "for to all the people it was in error": to exclude the high-priest, (who offers a she-goat, as an individual (viz. Ibid. 27). For it would follow (otherwise), viz.: Since the congregation bring a bullock for (transgression of) all the mitzvoth, and the high-priest brings a bullock for all the mitzvoth, then if I have learned about the congregation that just as they bring a bullock for all of the mitzvoth, so, they bring it for idolatry, then the high-priest, (too,) just as he brings a bullock for all the mitzvoth should bring a bullock for idolatry. And, furthermore, it follows a fortiori, viz.: If (in the Yom Kippur service) where the congregation does not bring a bullock, the high-priest brings a bullock (viz. Vayikra 16:3), here, (in respect to idolatry) where the congregation brings a bullock, how much more so should the high-priest bring a bullock! It is, therefore, written "for to all the people it was in error" — to exclude the high-priest.