Comentario sobre Números 29:6

מלבד עלת החדש BESIDES THE BURNT OFFERING OF THE NEW MOON — besides the additional offerings of the New Moon which is on the New Year Festival (the New Moon of the seventh month).

He mentioned [with reference to the Additional Offerings of] the first day of the seventh month [i.e., the New Year], beside the burnt-offering of the New Moon and the meal-offering thereof, but He did not mention the sin-offering of the New Moon,²⁰⁷Above, 28:15. while [with reference to] the Day of Atonement He did mention beside the sin-offering of atonement,²⁰⁸Further, Verse 11. but did not mention the burnt-offering of atonement.²⁰⁹Leviticus 16:5. The reason for this is that concerning the Day of Atonement, it is obvious that the burnt-offering which He commanded here to be brought on that day]²¹⁰Verse 8 here. is beside the burnt-offering which He commanded there,²⁰⁹Leviticus 16:5. for both of them are commanded with reference to the same day, and they are not equal; for there [in the Book of Leviticus] the Israelites were only commanded [to bring on the Day of Atonement] one ram for a burnt-offering,²⁰⁹Leviticus 16:5. and here He commanded as a burnt-offering [that they bring] a bullock, a ram, and seven he-lambs.²¹⁰Verse 8 here. If so, it is quite clear that these [offerings mentioned here] are in addition to those mentioned there. But [in the case of] the sin-offering, which is the same [both] here²⁰⁸Further, Verse 11. and there,²⁰⁹Leviticus 16:5. one might possibly have made a mistake in connection with it, and think that [the one commanded here] is the same sin-offering which is mentioned there, since [we do not find] two sin-offerings [brought] on one day. Therefore when mentioning it [here] He expressly stated: [one he-goat for a sin-offering] ‘beside the sin-offering of atonement,’²⁰⁸Further, Verse 11. for that sin-offering [mentioned in the Book of Leviticus] is the sin-offering of atonement, that is to say, it is the inner sin-offering²¹¹See Vol. III, p. 70, Note 52. that is burnt [outside the camp, or outside the city of Jerusalem], and atones for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel, and because of their transgressions, even all their sins;²¹²Leviticus 16:16. whereas this outer sin-offering²¹¹See Vol. III, p. 70, Note 52. is like other sin-offerings, which come together with the Additional Offerings.²¹³These sin-offerings were eaten by male priests in the Sanctuary Court on the same day that they were slaughtered, and on the evening of that day until midnight. In the case of the sin-offering of the Day of Atonement, however, since eating is forbidden on the actual Day of Atonement, the sin-offering could of course only be eaten in the evening after the fast until midnight. Similarly [when speaking about] the day of the first-fruits [the Festival of Weeks], it was not necessary to say that what is commanded here is “beside what has been said about it in the section of the festivals,”²¹⁴Leviticus, 23:18. since the two sections are said about the same day, and the offerings are not the same [and therefore it is self-understood that the offerings mentioned here are in addition to those mentioned there]. Nor was it necessary to state [here when speaking about the offerings of the Festival of Weeks, i.e., Shavuoth, that they are beside] the sin-offering [mentioned in the section of the festivals],²¹⁵Ibid., Verse 19. because Scripture said there explicitly, And ye shall present with the bread [seven lambs etc. And ye shall offer one he-goat for a sin-offering etc.],²¹⁶Ibid., Verses 18-19. and it is quite clear [therefore] that all [the offerings] mentioned there come because of the [two] loaves and must he brought with them, and that these mentioned here are in addition to them. But in the case of the New Moon of this seventh month, one might have thought that when Scripture says, And in your New Moons ye shall present etc.²¹⁷Above, 28:11. it applies to all the other months [of the year], but that [on the New Moon of] the seventh month the total offering is to be only this [group of] offerings which He especially commanded for it; therefore it was necessary to say, beside the burnt-offering of the New Moon, and the meal-offering thereof.²¹⁸Verse 6 here. And having mentioned this, we can already deduce that everything that is mentioned in the section of And in your New Moons²¹⁷Above, 28:11. is an obligation for all months, including the sin-offering [of the New Moon], and therefore it was not necessary to say [here in the case of the New Year]: “beside the burnt-offering of the New Moon, and the meal-offering thereof ‘and the sin-offering thereof.’”

מלבד עולת החודש ומנחתה, “not including the New Moon offering and its accompanying meal-offering.” Nachmanides writes that the Torah mentions only the עולה, burnt-offering of the New Moon by name, as well as its meal-offering, without mentioning the sin-offering. When summing up the offerings on the Day of Atonement, (verse 11) the Torah proceeds in a reverse fashion by mentioning by name the sin offering while omitting specific reference to the burnt-offering of that day. The reason, most likely, is that it was clear that the burnt offering commanded to be offered on that date was in addition to the daily burnt-offering, תמיד, seeing the legislation for both had been given on the same day. The two could not be confused with one another as one consisted of two bulls plus a ram, whereas the other consisted of a single bull plus a ram. [Plus seven sheep. Ed.] (Day of Atonement) Seeing that the sin-offerings on both days were identical, it was possible to err. One could think that on a single day no two sin-offerings (public) could or would be offered. In order to prevent us from making such an error, the Torah wrote מלבד חטאת הכפורים, “apart from the sin offering (exclusive) to the Day of Atonement.” The distinction of that sin offering (compare Leviticus 16,15) was that its blood was sprinkled on the golden altar. This sin offering, the flesh of which was completely burned up, atoned for sins committed by violating the sanctity of the Temple, etc. The sin offering of the day of the New Moon, in common with that of the other festivals, was offered on the major altar outside the Sanctuary, and seeing that both legislations were revealed to the people on the same day, it was clear that they could not be identical. There was also no need to especially mention the sin-offering as part of the additional sacrifices on Shavuot as it is clear that all the animal sacrifices mentioned there were only supplementary to the two loaves of the new wheat harvest, the major מנחה, gift offering, consisting of grain-based ingredients. On the first of the seventh month, i.e. Rosh Hashanah, seeing that the day is both the beginning of a new year and a new month, one could easily have thought that no additional sin-offering was required, seeing that every New Moon a publicly funded sin offering is offered; the Torah therefore had to spell out that one sin-offering belonged to the ritual of the New Year, and another to that of the New Moon.

V. 6. מלבד עלת החדש. Dieser ernste Teruacharakter des Tages kommt in dem ראש השנה-Mo'edopfer zu eigener Geltung, getragen von dem ihm vorangehenden ראש חדש-Opfer und dem diesem vorangehenden Tamidopfer (siehe den Kanon: כל התדיר מחבירו וכו׳ Kap. 28 V. 23) und allen dreien fehlen nicht die entsprechenden נסכים. Denn es hat der Tag eine dreifache Quelle zu Gott hinführender beseligender Gedanken: den Gott verkündenden Morgenstrahl des Tages, den zur Verjüngung ladenden Neumond und den zu Ein- und Rückkehr rufenden Teruaton. Alle drei finden ihren Hingebungs-, Huldigungs- und Beseligungsausdruck in ihren מנחה ,עולה und נסכים, sowie ראש חדש und ראש השנה ihren besonderen Sühneausdruck im חטאת (siehe 8b ר׳׳ה תוספו׳ ד׳׳ה שהחדש). Wie sie aber alle drei zu einem Gotte hinführen, so einigen sie sich auch alle drei zu einer Lebensheiligung, für welche die Opfer zusammen einen Ausdruck der Gotteswillfahrung durch Hingebung an die Feuermacht seines Gesetzes bilden: לריח ניחח אשה לד׳. —

מלבד עולת החדש, “in addition of the New Moon burnt offering;” if you were to ask why the Torah did not simply write: “in addition to the sinoffering for the New Moon,?” We would have to answer that all the burnt offerings have equal power to achieve atonement for its donors both those who transgressed negative commandments unintentionally and those who failed to perform negative commandments that are linked to the performance of a positive commandment. This works as follows: the burnt offerings of the new Moon achieve atonement for sins committed inadvertently, the sinner not having been aware of his sin when he committed it, nor after he had completed it. [He might have learned about the existence of such a commandment only after having become guilty of transgressing it. Ed.] Our sages explain this based on what is written in connection with the offering, the word 'לה, in verse 15 being apparently superfluous, [unless we consider the Midrash which interprets it as a sin offering actually offered on behalf of G-d, Who makes amends for having reduced the moon in size, as the plain meaning of the text. (Compare Talmud tractate Chulin folio 60. Ed.] On the other hand, (according to B’chor shor) the New Year burnt offerings presented on the same day affords atonement to sinners who did not know when they began to commit the transgression in question that it was a transgression, but who had become aware of the nature of their transgression before having completely carried it out. On account of this nuance, the Torah did not call the act of transgression an outright sin.

ונסכיהם, “and their respective drink offerings.” This refers to the drink offerings accompanying the offerings on Rosh Hashanah. It also includes the libations both of wine and meal offerings of both the burnt offering of the New Moon, and that of the daily communal burnt offering.