Midrash sa Levitico 4:32: Sifra & Bereshit Rabbah

וְאִם־כֶּ֛בֶשׂ יָבִ֥יא קָרְבָּנ֖וֹ לְחַטָּ֑את נְקֵבָ֥ה תְמִימָ֖ה יְבִיאֶֽנָּה׃

At kung isang tupa ang dadalhin niya bilang kanyang handog para sa kasalanan, isang babaeng walang kapintasan ang dadalhin niya.

Sifra

1) (Vayikra 4:32): ("And if a lamb he shall bring as his offering for a sin-offering, a female without blemish shall he bring it.") What is the intent of (the redundant) "he shall bring"? Whence is it derived that if one sets aside his sin-offering and it is lost, and he sets aside a different one in its stead, and then the first one is found, and both are standing before him — whence is it derived that he may offer whichever he likes? From: "he shall bring" - "he shall bring." I might think that he may bring both; it is, therefore, written: "he shall bring it" — he brings (only) one and not two.
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

2) I might think that he may not bring both for two sins, but that he may bring both for one sin; it is, therefore, written: "he shall bring it" — he brings (only) one and not two.
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Sifra

5) (Vayikra 5:5): "a female" — not a tumtum (of unknown sex) or hermaphrodite. "flock" — anything that can be subsumed in "flock," even one that is mute, imbecilic, or dwarfish. "of the flock" — not a pilgess (a thirteen month sheep, see Chapter 10:2). "a lamb or a goat-kid, for a sin-offering": What does this come to teach us? If that if he did not find a lamb, he may bring a goat-kid, does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If for a sin-offering (a lamb) that is brought for all of the mitzvoth, a bird may not be substituted but a goat-kid may be substituted (viz. Vayikra 4:32) — this offering, for which a bird may be substituted (viz. Vayikra 5:7), a goat-kid may not be substituted? (Why, then, is a verse needed to tell us this?)
Magtanong sa isang RabbiBookmarkShareCopy