וְאִ֨ם כׇּל־עֲדַ֤ת יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ יִשְׁגּ֔וּ וְנֶעְלַ֣ם דָּבָ֔ר מֵעֵינֵ֖י הַקָּהָ֑ל וְ֠עָשׂ֠וּ אַחַ֨ת מִכׇּל־מִצְוֺ֧ת יְהֹוָ֛ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר לֹא־תֵעָשֶׂ֖ינָה וְאָשֵֽׁמוּ׃
If it is the whole community of Israel* that has erred and the matter escapes the notice of the congregation, so that they do any of the things that by GOD’s commandments ought not to be done, and they realize their guilt—
*whole community of Israel Or the elders, on the community’s behalf; cf v. 15.
(The above rendering and its footnote come from the RJPS translation, an adaptation of the NJPS translation.)
Here the expression כׇּל־עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל is used as a metonym, a conventional linguistic device that works on more than one level at a time. (See the section “Gender and Figurative Language” in this introduction, pp. 3–4.)
God is speaking about the elders—as indicated explicitly in verse 15—while labeling them in terms of their occasional role as representatives of the whole community. Presumably they also have the social authority to ensure that God’s instructions are carried out.
As the commentator Bernard Bamberger pointed out (1979), the topic of discussion in this passage is how to recover from a communal error of commission, which only a body of leaders could commit.
Construing a metonym literally is a common mistake made by readers of translated texts, whenever the source text presupposes a different convention from those of the translation’s language. The result can be that the translation appears to be less coherent (and less plausible) than the original text is, particularly with regard to the gender of those in view.
Such is the likelihood here. A footnote therefore points out the convention that is in play, so that it can be properly understood and appreciated.