“Speak to the children of Israel” – it is taught: “Speak to the children of Israel” – it is by means of Israel that one confesses, but one does not confess30One does not add a fifth and bring a guilt offering for stealing from a gentile or a resident. by means of gentiles or by means of a resident.31This refers to a gentile who committed to perform the seven Noahide laws. “A man or woman” – this is to equate woman to man regarding all sins and damages in the Torah.
“When they will perform any sin of a person” – why is this portion stated? Because it says: “A person who shall sin [and commit a trespass against the Lord by lying to his counterpart]” (Leviticus 5:21), but regarding one who robs a proselyte we did not hear in the entire Torah. That is why it is stated: “A man or woman, when they will perform any sin of a person.” The verse came and taught regarding one who robs a proselyte and takes an oath to him32The thief takes a false oath denying the theft. that he pays the principal and one-fifth to the priests, and a guilt offering to the altar.
This is a principle in the Torah: Any matter that was stated in one place and one element was lacking in it, and it is then taught elsewhere, it is taught it only because it was lacking one element. “When they will perform” – they thought to perform but did not perform. It is to teach you that an action that a person thinks to sin is like a trespass against the Omnipresent. “Any sin of a person” – this is regarding what is between him and another, regarding thefts, robberies, and evil speech.
“To commit a trespass against the Lord” – this is to include one who took an oath in the Name of God falsely, and the blasphemer. Another matter: “Any sin of a person, to commit a trespass against the Lord” – why is it stated? Because it says: “A person who shall sin, [and commit a trespass against the Lord, and lies to his counterpart with regard to a deposit, or with regard to a loan, or with regard to robbery, or exploited his counterpart].
Or found a lost item [and lied in its regard, and took a false oath]” (Leviticus 5:21–22) – I have learned only regarding one who lied regarding these, that the Torah ascribes to him as though he lies to the Omnipresent. Regarding all matters, from where is it derived? The verse states: “When they will perform any sin of a person, to commit a trespass against the Lord…” “To commit a trespass” – trespass everywhere is nothing other than lying.
Likewise it says: “They trespassed against the Lord” (I Chronicles 5:25); and it says: “The children of Israel committed a trespass regarding the proscription” (Joshua 7:1); and it says: “Saul died on account of the trespass that he committed [against the Lord]” (I Chronicles 10:13); and it says regarding Uziya: “Leave the Temple, because you have trespassed” (II Chronicles 26:18); and it says: “And she committed a trespass against him” (Numbers 5:12).
“And that individual shall be guilty” – from where do you derive regarding one who robs a proselyte and takes a [false] oath to him, and he goes to bring the money and the guilt offering, but did not manage to bring it before he died, that the heirs will be exempt? The verse states: “And that individual shall be guilty.”33Only that individual, not his heirs, shall be guilty. Or, just as they are exempt from bringing the guilt offering, so are they exempt from the principal?
The verse states: “He shall give it to the one to whom he is guilty” (Numbers 5:7). “And that individual shall be guilty” – everyone is indicated; men, women, and proselytes are indicated. Does it indicate these and also include the minor? You say: If in the stringent case of idol worship the minor is exempted, all the more so regarding all the mitzvot in the Torah.
“They shall confess their sin that they had committed, and he shall make restitution for his guilt in its principal, and he shall add its one-fifth to it, and he shall give it to the one to whom he is guilty” (Numbers 5:7). “And that individual shall be guilty. They shall confess” (Numbers 5:6–7) – why is it stated? Because it says: “He shall confess regarding what he sinned” (Leviticus 5:5), I know only that a sin offering requires confession; from where is it derived regarding a guilt offering?
The verse states: “And that individual shall be guilty. They shall confess.” Rabbi Natan says: This is a paradigm for all those who are put to death, that they require confession. This indicates only confession in the land;34Offerings are brought only in the Temple, in the Land of Israel. from where is it derived that there is confession in the Diaspora as well?
It says: “They will confess their iniquity and the iniquity of their forbearers…” (Leviticus 26:40).35It states in the previous verse: “The survivors among you will waste away in their iniquity in the lands of your enemies, and also in the iniquities of their forbearers they will waste away with them.” Likewise Daniel says: “With You, Lord, is the righteousness, [and with us the shame…in all the lands where You have driven them]” (Daniel 9:7).
Why? It is because “we sinned against You” (Daniel 9:8). “They shall confess the sin that they committed” – but not that his father performed, as if one said to him: ‘Give me the deposit that I deposited with your father,’ and he says: ‘You did not give a deposit.’ ‘ I administer an oath to you,’ and he says: ‘Amen,’ but later, he remembers. Do I learn from here that he is liable?
The verse states: “They shall confess the sin that they committed,” but not that his father committed. “He shall make restitution for his guilt in its principal” – why is it stated? Because it says: “He shall repay it in its principal” (Leviticus 5:24), I have learned only the principal sum. From where is the one-fifth derived?
The verse states: “He shall make restitution for his guilt in its principal, and [he shall add] its one-fifth.” “In its principal, and he shall add its one-fifth” – when it is in its principal one brings one-fifth and a guilt offering, but one does not bring one-fifth and a guilt offering for double payment and the payment four and five times the principal.36Sometimes a thief has to pay a double payment or four or five times the principal.
If he falsely takes an oath that he does not have to pay the double payment he does not have to add a fifth and bring a guilt offering. “He shall add its one-fifth to it” – it and its one-fifth shall be five.37This means that “one-fifth” refers to one-fifth of the total amount, that is, of the principal plus the one-fifth payment. In other words, “one-fifth” is one-fourth of the principal. “He shall give it to the one to whom he is guilty” – to the one from whom it was robbed.
Rabbi Natan says: If the one who was robbed owed one hundred dinars to another and he came to court, but [the robber] did not manage to pay it before the creditor of the one who was robbed was located, from where is it derived that one removes it from the possession of the robber and gives it to the creditor of the one who was robbed? The verse states: “He shall give it to the one to whom he is guilty” – in any case.38In this case, “the one to whom he is guilty” refers to the one to whom the one who was robbed is guilty.
“But if the man has no redeemer to whom restitution can be made, the restitution that is returned is to the Lord, to the priest; besides the ram of atonement, with which he will atone for it” (Numbers 5:8). “But if the man has no redeemer” – I have derived only a man, from where is a woman derived? The verse states: “To whom restitution can be made, [the restitution that is returned…]”39The two restitutions are one for a man and one for a woman.
“The restitution [asham] that is returned is to the Lord, to the priest.” The verse is speaking of monetary payment. Or is it perhaps speaking only about the guilt offering? When it says: “Besides the ram of atonement,” it is stated of the guilt offering.
What is it that the verse states: “The asham that is returned is to the Lord”? The verse is speaking of monetary payment. “The asham” – this is the principal; “that is returned” – this is the one-fifth; “to the Lord” – to render it forbidden to non-priests. Or is it perhaps consecrated?
The verse states: “To the priest” – the Lord acquired it and gave it to the priests, to a priest that is one of the members of the priestly watch. “Besides the ram of atonement” – from here they said: The priestly watch that acquired the money acquires the ram. Regarding which ram is the verse speaking? It is regarding the ram stated elsewhere regarding the denier of a deposit and robbery: “His restitution he shall bring to the Lord, an unblemished ram from the flock…[as a guilt offering, to the priest]” (Leviticus 5:25).
“He will atone” – he must have the monetary payment precede the guilt offering;40This is based on the fact that “will atone” is in future tense. “with which” – to the exclusion of a ram that died.41If the ram died before it was sacrificed, he has to bring another ram for a guilt offering. “For it” – Rabbi Akiva would say: If one robbed another, took an oath to him, paid money to the members of the priestly watch, went to bring the guilt offering, but did not manage to bring it until he died, from where is it derived that his heirs are exempt from bringing a ram of atonement in his place? It is stated: “With which he will atone for it,” excluding this one whose life has atoned for him.