זֶ֣בַח רְ֭שָׁעִים תּוֹעֵבָ֑ה אַ֝֗ף כִּֽי־בְזִמָּ֥ה יְבִיאֶֽנּוּ׃
Ang handog ng masasama ay kasuklam-suklam; lalo pa kung dinadala niya ito nang may masamang balak.
Rabbeinu Bahya
A Midrashic approach to Proverbs 25,17 (based on Rashi, Chagigah 7): On the one hand Solomon wrote הוקר רגלך מבית רעך, “visit your neighbor's house sparingly;” on the other hand David wrote in Psalms 66,13 :אבא ביתך בעולות, “I enter Your house with burnt-offerings.” The apparent contradiction is resolved by applying the “house” mentioned in Proverbs to the occasions when one has to offer sin-offerings or guilt-offerings. One should strive to minimize the need for such visits to the Temple. On the other hand, the verse in Psalms refers to the occasions when one approaches G’d bearing burnt-offerings and peace-offerings, i.e. voluntary gifts, not offerings in order to obtain atonement and forgiveness. The message of this Midrash is that both Solomon and David refer to the Holy Temple as “the house of your friend.” We find a similar comment by our sages when they said that the Israelites are called “friends” i.e. ריעים of the Lord, citing such verses as Psalms 122,8 למען אחי ורעי, “for the sake of my kin and friends...for the sake of the house of the Lord.” Solomon also says of G’d: רעך ורע אביך אל תעזוב, “do not abandon your friend or the friend of your father” (Proverbs 27,10), and in Song of Songs he speaks of זה דודי וזה רעי, “this is my beloved, and this is my friend” (Song of Songs 5,16). The thought behind all these verses is that a person should be careful not to sin so that he does not have to abuse his friendship with the Lord by entering His house too frequently in order to offer sin-offerings. It is best not to have to offer such offerings altogether.
We find that the prophet Samuel (Samuel I 16,22) expresses similar sentiments when he says: “it is better to listen to G’d’s commandments (observe them) than to offer meat-offerings to the Lord (in the Temple).” The reference was to the animals captured from the Amalekites. which the people and Saul offered to G’d as sacrifices, consuming their meat. When Solomon counseled not to be a frequent visitor in one’s friend’s house he referred to the House of G’d who should remain one’s “friend.” When Solomon wrote in Proverbs 21,27 that the meat-offerings of the wicked are an abomination, he meant that at the time when a wicked person brings an offering to G’d, G’d automatically thinks of his sins turning the entire procedure into an abomination. However, when the offerings are not connected to sin but are brought by righteous people and this is reflected in the kind of animals being offered, David tells us that such offerings are welcome, i.e. אבא ביתך בעולות, “let me enter Your house with burnt-offerings.” One of the temptations we must resist is taking advantage of having a “friend” in the house of G’d to whom we bring זבח i.e. meat-offerings, as if it were something “He” needs, until “He gets fed up” with these frequent unwelcome intrusions by us. When David speaks about bringing burnt-offerings to the Temple, he means offerings which are to atone for sins not actually committed but contemplated. Such sinful thoughts occur mostly at night, and they are difficult for a person to be saved from as there are no social restrictions to man thinking sinful thoughts. He is not found out and his image with his peers is not affected by what he merely thinks about. This is one of the reasons that the time for bringing such an offering is the night when the sin is still fresh and can be forgiven immediately.
We find that the prophet Samuel (Samuel I 16,22) expresses similar sentiments when he says: “it is better to listen to G’d’s commandments (observe them) than to offer meat-offerings to the Lord (in the Temple).” The reference was to the animals captured from the Amalekites. which the people and Saul offered to G’d as sacrifices, consuming their meat. When Solomon counseled not to be a frequent visitor in one’s friend’s house he referred to the House of G’d who should remain one’s “friend.” When Solomon wrote in Proverbs 21,27 that the meat-offerings of the wicked are an abomination, he meant that at the time when a wicked person brings an offering to G’d, G’d automatically thinks of his sins turning the entire procedure into an abomination. However, when the offerings are not connected to sin but are brought by righteous people and this is reflected in the kind of animals being offered, David tells us that such offerings are welcome, i.e. אבא ביתך בעולות, “let me enter Your house with burnt-offerings.” One of the temptations we must resist is taking advantage of having a “friend” in the house of G’d to whom we bring זבח i.e. meat-offerings, as if it were something “He” needs, until “He gets fed up” with these frequent unwelcome intrusions by us. When David speaks about bringing burnt-offerings to the Temple, he means offerings which are to atone for sins not actually committed but contemplated. Such sinful thoughts occur mostly at night, and they are difficult for a person to be saved from as there are no social restrictions to man thinking sinful thoughts. He is not found out and his image with his peers is not affected by what he merely thinks about. This is one of the reasons that the time for bringing such an offering is the night when the sin is still fresh and can be forgiven immediately.
Radak
Their drink-offerings of blood will I not pour out: – Far be it from me that I should pour out their drink-offerings which are of blood. (It is to be taken) on the analogy of “and ye have brought (that which was taken by) violence” (Mal. 1:13); as though meaning their drink-offerings are not wine, but blood; for burnt-offerings and drink-offerings with wicked works neither profit nor deliver, but harm, as it says: “the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination” (Prov. 21:27).
Ramban
AND HE SHALL CONFESS THAT WHEREIN HE HATH SINNED. 6. AND HE SHALL BRING HIS GUILT-OFFERING. This was not the [order of the] procedure.339For the offering had to be brought first, then the laying of hands was performed during which [while his hands lay on the offering] he confessed his sin (see Note 64 above). Hence the expression and he shall bring his guilt-offering must mean “and he who comes to bring an offering to effect atonement for his guilt … ” Rather, he first brought the sin-offering and laid his hands upon it, and then confessed, similarly to that which is [explicitly] said further on, And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat, and confess over him all the iniquities of the children of Israel.340Further, 16:21. Here, however, Scripture does not state “and he shall lay his hand,” because He explained previously in the case of all sin-offerings341Above, Chapter 4, Verses 4, 15, 24 and 29. that they require the laying of hands, and similarly, in the case of freewill offerings.342Ibid., Chapter 1, Verse 4; Chapter 3, Verses 2, 8 and 13. See also Note 11 above. But He did not explain [the duty of] confession above in the case of the other sin-offerings, [although it is required in those cases as well].
In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it would appear that here He said and he shall confess, because in the case of an “oath of testimony”332The section here discusses the offering of higher or lower value (see above, Note 15), the verse before us stating that this offering is required in the case of a false oath concerning testimony. Thus, if the person interested in the evidence called upon him by an oath, adjuring him that if he knows any evidence favorable to him he should testify before the court, and he swore that he knows of no testimony concerning him, when in fact he does know, in such a case, if he swore either unintentionally or wilfully, he must offer what is called an offering of higher or lower value. See “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 82-83. In the following verse another transgression for which this offering is required is mentioned. — Ramban now proceeds to explain the sense of the triple expression, and he is a witness, or knows, or saw. the offering is to be brought even if the oath was taken wilfully. So also in the case of an “oath of deposit”343If Reuben says to Shimon, “Give me my deposit which you have,” and Shimon replies “I swear I have naught of yours,” or if Shimon said, “I have naught of yours,” and Reuben says, “I adjure thee” and he answers “Amen” — in this case too Shimon is liable to bring an offering [in addition to the restitution] even if he wilfully swore falsely. The offering, however, is not the one of higher or lower value mentioned in this section — but a guilt-offering, as explained further on (in Verses 23-26). Ramban mentions the “oath of deposit” here only to liken it to the “oath of testimony” in the sense that the offerings in each case are brought even if committed wilfully. This is a novel point in the law of offerings, for all other offerings brought for commission of a sin effect atonement only in case the transgression has been committed in error; otherwise, the offering of the wicked is an abomination (Proverbs 21:27). Ramban thus suggests [in line with the plain meaning of Scripture] that since the offerings in these two cases — that of the “oath of testimony” and the “oath of deposit” — are required to be brought even when committed wilfully, therefore the Torah mentions in their cases the subject of confession. But in the case of all other sin-offerings, since they are brought only when the transgression was committed in error, there is no need for confession of sin. However, Ramban will immediately refute this position, for the Rabbis have clearly interpreted that all sin-offerings require confession of sin. He mentioned, then they shall confess their sin which they have done.344Numbers 5:7. But in the case of the sin-offering brought for transgression in error, He did not mention confession.345“But [when bringing] the sin-offering for a sin committed in error he does not confess” (Tur in quoting the language of Ramban). But in the opinion of our Rabbis346Sifre Zuta 5:5. the expression, and he shall confess that wherein he hath sinned, refers to everything mentioned in this section, including the defiling of the Sanctuary and the holy food, and an “oath of utterance,”337This is the second type of case for which the offering of higher or lower value is required. It is known as “the defilement of the Sanctuary or its hallowed things.” Thus if a person who has been made unclean by any of the primary sources of uncleanness, unintentionally enters the Sanctuary, or unintentionally eats meat that is holy, he must bring the above-mentioned offering. A third — and final — case is if one swears an oath of utterance [“I shall eat” or “I shall not eat” and the like], and unintentionally fails to keep it. In this case too he is required to bring this offering. which offerings have to be brought [only] when [the sins are] committed in error, and [in the case of] all other sin-offerings [which are also brought only when the transgression was done in error, the need for confession when bringing them] is derived from here. He mentioned confession, however, [specifically] here because the “oath of testimony” and the “oath of utterance” do not make one liable to excision [if done wilfully, unlike the sin-offering which is brought only for those sins committed in error which, if committed wilfully, incur the punishment of excision], and yet He requires confession in these cases, and [thus it follows] all the more that in the case of the fixed347As distinct from the offering of higher or lower value, where the offering varies according to the means of the transgressor, a fixed sin-offering must be of an animal and is alike for poor and rich, so that if the poor cannot afford it he is not obligated to bring another offering in its stead, as is the case of the offering of higher or lower value. See “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 78-79. sin-offerings mentioned above, he must confess [since his sin, were it to be committed wilfully, would incur] the penalty of excision. Our Rabbis have said348Sifre Naso 2. that the expression here, and he shall confess that wherein he hath sinned is a general principle in the case of all sin-offerings, that they require confession. The verses written in the section of Naso, stating, and that soul shall be guilty. Then they shall confess their sin which they have done,349Numbers 5:6-7. is to include all guilt-offerings [in the requirement of confession]. So it is explained in the Sifre.348Sifre Naso 2. There the Rabbis have interpreted: “And that soul shall be guilty. Then they shall confess.349Numbers 5:6-7. This establishes the general rule for all those executed [by the court] that they require confession” [to achieve full forgiveness of their sin].
In line with the simple meaning of Scripture it would appear that here He said and he shall confess, because in the case of an “oath of testimony”332The section here discusses the offering of higher or lower value (see above, Note 15), the verse before us stating that this offering is required in the case of a false oath concerning testimony. Thus, if the person interested in the evidence called upon him by an oath, adjuring him that if he knows any evidence favorable to him he should testify before the court, and he swore that he knows of no testimony concerning him, when in fact he does know, in such a case, if he swore either unintentionally or wilfully, he must offer what is called an offering of higher or lower value. See “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 82-83. In the following verse another transgression for which this offering is required is mentioned. — Ramban now proceeds to explain the sense of the triple expression, and he is a witness, or knows, or saw. the offering is to be brought even if the oath was taken wilfully. So also in the case of an “oath of deposit”343If Reuben says to Shimon, “Give me my deposit which you have,” and Shimon replies “I swear I have naught of yours,” or if Shimon said, “I have naught of yours,” and Reuben says, “I adjure thee” and he answers “Amen” — in this case too Shimon is liable to bring an offering [in addition to the restitution] even if he wilfully swore falsely. The offering, however, is not the one of higher or lower value mentioned in this section — but a guilt-offering, as explained further on (in Verses 23-26). Ramban mentions the “oath of deposit” here only to liken it to the “oath of testimony” in the sense that the offerings in each case are brought even if committed wilfully. This is a novel point in the law of offerings, for all other offerings brought for commission of a sin effect atonement only in case the transgression has been committed in error; otherwise, the offering of the wicked is an abomination (Proverbs 21:27). Ramban thus suggests [in line with the plain meaning of Scripture] that since the offerings in these two cases — that of the “oath of testimony” and the “oath of deposit” — are required to be brought even when committed wilfully, therefore the Torah mentions in their cases the subject of confession. But in the case of all other sin-offerings, since they are brought only when the transgression was committed in error, there is no need for confession of sin. However, Ramban will immediately refute this position, for the Rabbis have clearly interpreted that all sin-offerings require confession of sin. He mentioned, then they shall confess their sin which they have done.344Numbers 5:7. But in the case of the sin-offering brought for transgression in error, He did not mention confession.345“But [when bringing] the sin-offering for a sin committed in error he does not confess” (Tur in quoting the language of Ramban). But in the opinion of our Rabbis346Sifre Zuta 5:5. the expression, and he shall confess that wherein he hath sinned, refers to everything mentioned in this section, including the defiling of the Sanctuary and the holy food, and an “oath of utterance,”337This is the second type of case for which the offering of higher or lower value is required. It is known as “the defilement of the Sanctuary or its hallowed things.” Thus if a person who has been made unclean by any of the primary sources of uncleanness, unintentionally enters the Sanctuary, or unintentionally eats meat that is holy, he must bring the above-mentioned offering. A third — and final — case is if one swears an oath of utterance [“I shall eat” or “I shall not eat” and the like], and unintentionally fails to keep it. In this case too he is required to bring this offering. which offerings have to be brought [only] when [the sins are] committed in error, and [in the case of] all other sin-offerings [which are also brought only when the transgression was done in error, the need for confession when bringing them] is derived from here. He mentioned confession, however, [specifically] here because the “oath of testimony” and the “oath of utterance” do not make one liable to excision [if done wilfully, unlike the sin-offering which is brought only for those sins committed in error which, if committed wilfully, incur the punishment of excision], and yet He requires confession in these cases, and [thus it follows] all the more that in the case of the fixed347As distinct from the offering of higher or lower value, where the offering varies according to the means of the transgressor, a fixed sin-offering must be of an animal and is alike for poor and rich, so that if the poor cannot afford it he is not obligated to bring another offering in its stead, as is the case of the offering of higher or lower value. See “The Commandments,” Vol. I, pp. 78-79. sin-offerings mentioned above, he must confess [since his sin, were it to be committed wilfully, would incur] the penalty of excision. Our Rabbis have said348Sifre Naso 2. that the expression here, and he shall confess that wherein he hath sinned is a general principle in the case of all sin-offerings, that they require confession. The verses written in the section of Naso, stating, and that soul shall be guilty. Then they shall confess their sin which they have done,349Numbers 5:6-7. is to include all guilt-offerings [in the requirement of confession]. So it is explained in the Sifre.348Sifre Naso 2. There the Rabbis have interpreted: “And that soul shall be guilty. Then they shall confess.349Numbers 5:6-7. This establishes the general rule for all those executed [by the court] that they require confession” [to achieve full forgiveness of their sin].
Rabbeinu Bahya
Para lamang sa mga Premium memberOr HaChaim
Para lamang sa mga Premium memberRashi
I do not want Since you transgress My Torah, the sacrifice of the wicked is an abomination [from Prov. 21:27].