Who May Bring an Offering and Not Uttering the Holy Name in Vain

But is this not derived from here: "from the people of the land" (Leviticus 4:27), excluding the apostate? Rabbi Shimon ben Yehudah said in the name of Rabbi Shimon: "which may not be done, in error, and he becomes guilty; or his sin becomes known to him" (Leviticus 4:22-23) means that one who would turn back once he knows brings an offering for his unwitting sin, while one who would not turn back once he knows does not bring an offering for his unwitting sin. We asked: what is the practical difference between them? Rav Hamnuna said: the case of an apostate regarding eating forbidden fat who brought an offering for [unwitting consumption of] blood is the difference between them, one view treating the sin offering and the other the burnt offering; and both teachings are necessary. For had Scripture taught only the sin offering, one might think it is rejected because it is for atonement, but the burnt offering, which is a gift, might be accepted from him; and had Scripture taught only the burnt offering, one might think it is rejected because it is not an obligation, but the sin offering, which is an obligation, might be accepted from him; therefore both are taught. And wherever Scripture writes "animal" is it a term of degradation? Is it not written, "man and animal You save, O LORD" (Psalms 36:7), and Rav Yehudah said these are people who are shrewd in knowledge yet make themselves humble like an animal? There "man and animal" is written together; here "animal" stands alone. And wherever "man and animal" is written together is it a term of excellence? Is it not written, "I will sow the house of Israel, the seed of man and the seed of animal" (Jeremiah 31:26)? There the verse divided them, the seed of man on its own and the seed of animal on its own. "A man when he brings of you": one might think this is a decree; therefore Scripture says "when he brings," so it is only voluntary. "An offering to the LORD": that he should designate it as consecrated before offering it, the words of Rabbi Yehudah. Rabbi Shimon says: how do we know a person should not say "to the LORD a burnt offering," "to the LORD a sin offering," "to the LORD a meal offering," "to the LORD a peace offering"? Scripture says "an offering to the LORD" [naming the offering first, then the LORD]. And is this not an argument from the lesser to the greater? If, regarding one who is about to consecrate, the Torah said he should mention the name of Heaven only upon the offering, how much more should one not mention the name of Heaven in vain.