Commento su Levitico 16:16

מטמאת בני ישראל [AND HE SHALL MAKE AN EXPIATION FOR THE HOLY PLACE] BECAUSE OF THE UNCLEANNESS OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL — i. e. for those who entered the Sanctuary in a state of uncleanness without having finally become conscious of this fact (Shevuot 7b), for it is said לכל חטאתם, and the word חטאת implies a sin committed unconsciously.

השכן אתם בתוך טומאתם, “that dwells with them amidst their contamination.” Even though the Jewish people are contaminated the Shechinah is amongst them (Sifra Acharey 4, 5). This is the opinion of Rabbi Yehudah in the Talmud Sukkah where he states his view that one may cover the Sukkah with material which is subject to becoming contaminated, although his view is not shared by the other scholars. He based his opinion on the text in our verse.
We also have an opinion in Sanhedrin 37 according to which the words וירח את ריח בגדיו, “he inhaled the fragrance of his clothing” (Genesis 27,23) are understood as וירח את ריח בוגדיו, “he inhaled the fragrance of those who betray Him,” i.e. even though the person concerned is contaminated, seeing that they are Jews G’d does not totally reject them. Another allegorical approach along these lines is found in Shemot Rabbah 33,2 where the word עלית למרום שבית שבי (Psalms 68,19) are understood to mean that even if there were unfit Jews amongst the people this did not stop the Shechinah from being amongst them. The Midrash understands the words as a rebuttal to the Gentiles who believe that because Jews have served idols at one time they are forever cut off from G’d’s grace.
Another comment by the Midrash (Bereshit Rabbah 18,8) on the words of Maleachi 2,16: “for I detest divorce- said the Lord G’d of Israel,” points to the fact that the prophet Malachi when mentioning G’d always uses the expression אלוקי צבאות, and only in this instance does he refer to G’d as אלוקי ישראל, “the G’d of Israel.” The author of the Midrash sees a clear message in this that the prophet wanted to reassure the people that G’d’s presence does not abandon the Jewish people even when they are sinful.

In [a state of] impurity. Explanation: For being in impurity and inadvertently entering the Sanctuary or [eating] its sanctified items. However, [the verse is] not [speaking about] the impurity of idolatry or promiscuity or murder which are also called impurity. This is because it is written, “He will atone for the Sanctuary.” This indicates that it is speaking about the impurity of the Sanctuary and its sanctified things. See the Gemara, first chapter of Shavuos (7b), where this is explained well.

ומפשעיהם AND BECAUSE OF THEIR TRANSGRESSIONS — This implies atonement also for those who entered the Sanctuary presumptuously in a state of uncleanness (Shevuot 7b; cf. also Shevuot 2a and Sifra, Acharei Mot, Chapter 4 1).

[Which] was not known to them afterwards. Because if it was known afterwards, why does the verse command to bring a he-goat? Above in parshas Vayikra (4:13,14) it is written, “If the entire congregation of Yisroel erred ... [when] they realize the sin which they committed, the community shall bring a young bullock as a sin-offering...” Thus here we must say that it was completely inadvertent [and they did not realize even afterwards]. Therefore they bring a he-goat and not a bullock. This sacrifice is brought to suspend and to shield [in the meantime] from punishment, until the person realizes [that he sinned] and is then obligated to bring a sliding-scale sacrifice described in parshas Vayikra.

וכן יעשה לאהל מועד AND SO SHALL HE DO FOR THE APPOINTED TENT — Just as he sprinkled in the “Interior" (the Holy of Holies) from the blood of both of them (of the bullock and the goat) once upwards and seven times downwards so he sprinkles over against the Partition Vail from outside (i. e. standing in the היכל; cf. Leviticus 4:6) once upwards and seven times downwards (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Chapter 4 5; Yoma 56b).

And a transgression is unintentional. And so it says (above 4:2), “If a person unwittingly transgresses (תחטא).” “ומפשעיהם, are rebellious sins,” i.e., deliberate sins, as it says, (Melachim II 3:7), “The king of Moav rebelled (פשע) against me.” Here too, the case is that afterwards they do not know that they sinned.

השכן אתם בתוך טמאתם— This implies that although they are unclean nevertheless the Shechinah dwells in their midst (Sifra, Acharei Mot, Chapter 4 5; Yoma 57a).

Even intentionally entering in [a state of] impurity. You might ask: If intentional sin requires atonement, how much more so do intentional sins [require atonement]. The answer is: You may have thought that the severe intentional sin is severe that it is never atoned. Therefore it says “and from their rebellious sins.” You might ask: Once the verse has to mention intentional sin, it should not mention unintentional sin. The answer is: You might have thought that [only] an intentional sin which is severe requires atonement, but an unintentional sin which is not severe does not require atonement.

Just as he sprinkled. (Gur Aryeh) You might ask: Seven below and one above is not written in the he-goat itself but is derived from the bullock, and regarding sacrifices we do not derive a derivation from a derivation. The Gemara in chapter Hotzi’u Lo asked this question and answered that this is not a derivation from a derivation because “above” and “below” are written both for the bullock and for the he-goat, except that the number [one above and seven below] is not written explicitly [for both] and we derive the number from their comparison to each other; this is not called a derivation from a derivation but only a revelation of how many sprinklings must be made [see Re’m]. Nachalas Yaakov explains [why Rashi stresses “just as he sprinkled of the two of them. This is] so that you should not explain that “he shall do likewise” teaches that he has to sacrifice another bullock and he-goat; therefore, Rashi tells us that they are the same two mentioned above.

And that is that He commanded us to confess the transgressions and sins that we have done before God and to say them together with [our] repentance. And that is confession. And its intent is that one say, "Please, Lord, I have sinned, I have transgressed, I have rebelled and I have done such and such." And he should prolong the statement and request forgiveness about this matter according to the polish of his speech. And you should know that even the sins for which one is liable for the types of sacrifices that are mentioned - that He said that one offer them and it atones for him - do not suffice with the sacrifice when it is without confession. And that is His saying, "Speak to the children of Israel [saying], a man or woman who commits from any of the sins of man [...]. And they shall confess the sins that they did" (Numbers 5:6-7). And the language of the Mekhilta is, "Since it is stated (Leviticus 5:5), 'and he shall confess that which he has sinned upon it' - it is to be upon the sin-offering when it is in existence, not after it has been slaughtered. It is only understood that an individual confesses for entering the Temple [impure]" - for this verse appears in Parashat Vayikra about one who renders the Temple and its sanctified objects impure, and that which is mentioned with it, as we explained; and so the Mekhilta there raises the possibility that we would only learn the obligation for confession from Scripture about one who renders the Temple impure. "From where are you to include all the other commandments? [Hence] we learn to say, 'Speak to the children of Israel [...]. And they shall confess.' And from where [do we know] even [sins that bring punishments of] excision and death penalties of the court? It states, 'the sins,' to include negative commandments; 'that they did,' to include positive commandments." And there it says, "'From any of the sins of man' - for theft, for robbery, for evil speech; 'to commit a trespass' - to include one who swears falsely and a blasphemer; 'and be guilty' - to include all those guilty of death penalties. It might be even those who are killed according to the testimony of colluding ones. I only said, 'and that man be guilty.'" That means to say that he is not obligated to confess when he knows that he has not sinned, but rather what was testified against him was false. Behold it has been made clear to you that we are obligated to confess for all types of transgressions, big and small - and even [for] positive commandments. But because this command - that is, "And they shall confess" - appeared with an obligation for a sacrifice, it could have entered our mind that confession is not a commandment by itself, but is rather from those things that are an extension of the sacrifice. [Hence] they needed to clarify this in the Mekhilta with this language - "It might be that when they bring their sacrifices, they confess; when they do not bring their sacrifices, they do not confess. [Hence] we learn to say, 'Speak to the children of Israel [...]. And they shall confess.' But still, the understanding of confession is only in the Land [of Israel]. From where [do we know], also in the diaspora? [Hence] we learn to say, 'their iniquities [...] and the iniquities of their fathers' (Leviticus 26:40)." And likewise did Daniel say, "To You, Lord, is justice, etc." (Daniel 9:7). Behold that which we have mentioned has been made clear to you - that confession is a separate obligation; and that it is an obligation for the sinner for every sin that he did. Whether in the Land or outside of the Land; whether he brought a sacrifice or did not bring a sacrifice - he is obligated to confess, as it is stated, "And they shall confess for their iniquities." And the language of the [Sifra] is, "'And he shall confess' - that is confession of words." And the regulations of this commandment have already been explained in Tractate Yoma. (See Parashat Nasso; Mishneh Torah, Repentance 1).