Midrash sobre Levítico 4:4

1) (Vayikra 4:4): "And he shall bring (the bullock to the door of the tent of meeting."): even after Yom Kippur (i.e., Yom Kippur does not atone for those liable for categorical sin-offerings and guilt-offerings). "bullock": he brings a bullock and not an alternate (offering [i.e., a she-goat], as a [lay] individual may.)

2) For does it not follow (without the exclusion clause that he may bring an alternate), viz.: If the (lay) individual, whose offering for (unwitting sin) in respect to all the mitzvoth [i.e., a she-lamb] is not the same as his offering on Yom Kippur (i.e., the "dispatched" he-goat), (yet) his offering for all the mitzvoth is the same as his offering for the "distinct" mitzvah (that of idolatry, for which he brings a she-goat, [in that he may also bring for all mitzvoth a she-goat as an alternate for the she-lamb]) — the high-priest, whose offering for all the mitzvoth (i.e., a bullock) is the same as his offering on Yom Kippur — how much more should it follow that his offering for all the mitzvoth be the same as his offering for the "distinct" mitzvah (i.e., that he should be permitted to bring a she-goat as an alternate for the bullock)! — This is refuted by (the instance of) the nassi, whose offering for all mitzvoth (a he-goat) is the same as his offering on Yom Kippur, in spite of which his offering for all mitzvoth is not the same as his offering for the "distinct" mitzvah (i.e., he was not permitted to bring for all mitzvoth a she-goat as an alternate for the he-goat).

3) Here, too, then, do not wonder that the high-priest, even though his offering for all the mitzvoth is the same as his offering on Yom Kippur, still, his offering for all mitzvoth is not the same as his offering for the "distinct" mitzvah (and no exclusion clause is needed to tell us that he may not bring an alternate.) But, I might think that "And he shall bring" implies that he may bring an alternate; it is, therefore, written "bullock" — he brings a bullock and not an alternate.