ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף ויקרא 27:9

וְאִם־בְּהֵמָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר יַקְרִ֧יבוּ מִמֶּ֛נָּה קָרְבָּ֖ן לַֽיהוָ֑ה כֹּל֩ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִתֵּ֥ן מִמֶּ֛נּוּ לַיהוָ֖ה יִֽהְיֶה־קֹּֽדֶשׁ׃

און אױב דאָס איז אַ בהמה װאָס מע איז מקריבֿ דערפֿון אַ קָרבן צו גאָט, זאָל אַלץ װאָס ער גיט פֿון אַזעלכע צו גאָט, זײַן הײליק.

English Explanation of Mishnah Temurah

Leviticus 27: 9-10 9 If [the vow concerns] any animal that may be brought as an offering to the Lord, any such that may be given to the Lord shall be holy. 10 One may not exchange or substitute another for it, either good for bad, or bad for good; if one does substitute one animal for another, the thing vowed and its substitute shall both be holy.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Chizkuni

אשר כמוהו לא נהיתה, “the like of which had never occurred and will never occur again.” [The following is a comment on the grammatical incongruity in this verse where masculine and feminine constructions have been used inconsistently. Ed.] We find this kind of incongruity not only here but also in Leviticus 6,9: והרים ממנו בקומצו, as well as in Leviticus 27,9. Compare also Genesis 32,9. A different explanation: the word כמוהו, does not refer to the outcry of the Egyptians but to the night, לילה, which is masculine also. In chapter 11 verse 4, G-d had said that He would go out during that night. In our verse here the reference is to that night.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy

Chizkuni

והרים ממנו, “he will remove some of it,” (the gift offering) it has been written in the masculine mode (although the word מנחה is feminine) We find a similar grammatically incorrect construction in Leviticus 27,9: כל אשר יתן ממנו לה' יהיה קודש, where according to the grammar the Torah could have been expected to write ממנה instead of ממנו. There are numerous such incongruous constructions in different parts of the Torah.
פֿרעגט אַ רבֿBookmarkShareCopy