Commentary for Shevuot 27:6

יכול לא יביא משל צבור שאין הצבור מתכפרין בו אבל יביא משל אחיו הכהנים שאחיו הכהנים מתכפרין בו ת"ל (ויקרא טז, ו) אשר לו יכול לא יביא ואם הביא כשר ת"ל שוב אשר לו הכתוב שנה עליו לעכב

I might think that he should not bring it [from priestly subscriptions], but if he did, it is still valid,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sometimes an action which is not directly permissible before it is done is declared legitimate after it has been done, a distinction being drawn vkj,fk scghs between (before the act) and (after the act) . uk rat');">¹⁰</span> therefore Scripture says once more: which is for himself;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XVI, 11. occurs twice in this verse, and once in verse 6. The first, in verse 6, prohibits the buying of the High Priest's bullock cfgk from public funds; the second, in verse 11, prohibits its purchase from priestly funds; and the third, in verse 11, is , to emphasize that it must be bought from his own funds, and that even if it had already been bought from priestly funds it is invalid. uk rat');">¹¹</span> the verse repeats it in order to make [this condition] indispensable!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The phrase is, therefore, necessary for this deduction. How then could the Tanna suggest that it would come to limit the atonement by the bullock to the High Priest, and exclude other priests, were it not for the further arguments adduced to include them?');">¹²</span>

Explore commentary for Shevuot 27:6. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.