[א] 'באצבעו ולקח' – שיקבל בימין; "באצבעו ונתן" – שיתן בימין. אמר ר' שמעון וכי נאמר בו "יד"! הואיל ולא נאמר בו "יד", קבל בשמאל – כשר. "וְנָתַן עַל קַרְנֹת מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה" – ולא על קרנות מזבח הפנימי. והלא דין הוא! משיח מוצא מכלל יחיד ונשיא מוצא מכלל יחיד. מה משיח – דם חטאתו נכנס לפנים, אף נשיא יהיה דם חטאתו נכנס לפנים! תלמוד לומר "וְנָתַן עַל קַרְנֹת מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה" – ולא על קרנות מזבח הפנימי. 1) (Vayikra 4:25): ("And the Cohein shall take of the blood of the sin-offering with his finger.") "with his finger .. and he shall take" (i.e., "with his finger" applies to "and he shall take") — that he take with his right ([index] finger [this being derived by identity from the instance of a leper]). "with his finger" and he shall place" ("it on the horns of the altar") — that he place with his right (finger, "with his finger" applying also to "and he shall place.") R. Shimon said: Is it written ("And he shall take with his) "hand"? (or "finger" [that we may derive "right" by identity from the instance of a leper? R. Shimon holds that a phrase, (in this instance "with his finger") is expounded proactively (as applying only to "and he shall place," and not retroactively (as applying to "and he shall take.")]. And since "hand" (more specifically, "finger") is not written (in respect to "and he shall take"), if he takes it with his left, it is kasher. "and he shall place it on the horns of the altar of the burnt-offering" — and not on the horns of the inner altar. For (without the exclusion clause) would it not follow (that he should place it on the horns of the inner altar), viz.: The high-priest is distinct from the (lay) individual (in that he brings a bullock), and the nassi (is distinct from) the individual (in that he brings a he-goat). Just as with the high-priest, the blood of his sin-offering enters within (the heichal), so with the sin-offering of the nassi, the blood of his sin-offering should enter within. It is, therefore, written (to negate this): "and he shall place it on the horns of the altar of the burnt-offering" — and not on the horns of the inner altar.
[ב] "וְאֶת דָּמוֹ יִשְׁפֹּךְ אֶל יְסוֹד מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה" – ולא על יסוד מזבח הפנימי. "אֶל יְסוֹד מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה" – תן יסוד למזבחה של עולה. אמר ר' ישמעאל, ומה אם שירי חטאת – שאין מכפרים – ניתנים על היסוד, תחלת העולה – שהיא מכפרת – אינו דין שתנתן על היסוד?! אמר ר' עקיבא מה שירי חטאת – שאין מכפרים ואין ראוים לכפר – ניתנים על היסוד, תחלת העולה – שהיא מכפרת וראויה לכפר – אינו דין שתנתן על היסוד?! אם כן למה נאמר "אֶל יְסוֹד מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה"? – שיהיה יסוד במזבחה של עולה. "אֶל יְסוֹד מִזְבַּח הָעֹלָה" (בס"א ממשיך בפסוק "אשר פתח אהל מועד") – זה יסוד דרומי. 2) And its (remaining) blood he shall pour at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering" — Apply (the law of) "base" (i.e., that the remainder is to be poured at the base) to the altar of the burnt-offering. (i.e., that the remainder of the blood of the burnt-offering is to be poured at the base.) (But perhaps it is meant to teach that the blood of the burnt-offering itself is to be applied [on the horns that are] in alignment with the base [to exclude the southeast corner, where there is no base]!) R. Yishmael said: (The verse is not needed for that, for) if the remainder (of the blood) of the sin-offering, which does not effect atonement is poured at the base, then the "beginning" blood of the burnt-offering (i.e., that applied to the horns) which does effect atonement, how much more so should it be applied at (i.e., in alignment with) the base! R. Akiva said: If the remainder of the sin-offering, which does not effect atonement and is not fit for atonement is poured at the base, then the "beginning" blood of the burnt-offering, which does effect atonement, and which is fit for atonement — how much more so must it be applied at (i.e., in alignment with) the base! What, then, is the intent of "at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering" — that the law of "base" (i.e., pouring the remainder at the base) apply to the altar of the burnt-offering." "at the base of the altar of the burnt-offering" — the southern base.
[ג] יכול זה יסוד מערבי? אמרת לאו. מה מצינו ביציאתו מן ההיכל – אינו נותן את הדמים אלא אל יסוד הסמוך לו, אף בירידתו מן המזבח – אינו נותן את הדם אלא אל יסוד הסמוך לו. ואיזה זה? – זה יסוד דרומית. 3) I might think it is the western base, (as it is in the case of inner sin-offerings), but this is to be negated. For just as we find that when he leaves the heichal he pours the (remaining) blood on the first base he chances on, (the western), so, in descending from the altar (after the blood applications of the outer sin-offering), he pours the (remaining) blood on the first base he chances on, (the southern).
[ד] "וְאֶת כָּל חֶלְבּוֹ יַקְטִיר הַמִּזְבֵּחָה כְּחֵלֶב זֶבַח הַשְּׁלָמִים" – מה פירש בזבח השלמים? חלב תותב קרום ונקלף שני כליות ויותרת; אף כאן – חלב תותב קרום ונקלף ושתי כליות ויותרת. 4) (Vayikra 4:26): "And all of its fat he shall smoke upon the altar, as the fat of the sacrifice of the peace-offerings." What is removed in the sacrifice of the peace-offerings? The fat that is an even layer, membranous, and easily peeled, and the two kidneys and the lobe. Here, too, (the same is removed).
[ה] "וְכִפֶּר עָלָיו" (ויקרא ד, כו) (שם, לא) (שם, לה) – שתהא כפרה לשמו; שלא יכפר לשנים כאחד; שיהיה כהן מכפר על ידי עצמו. "וְנִסְלַח לוֹ" – אין משיירין לו ליום הכפורים. יכול אף על פי שישב ולא הביא? תלמוד לומר: "לוֹ". 5) "and the Cohein shall make atonement for him": (This teaches us that) the atonement must be expressly for him (the owner of the offering), that he not atone for two at one time (by mixing the blood of the two offerings), and that the Cohein (performing the service) may atone for himself (i.e., It is not necessary that another Cohein perform the service for him.) "and it shall be forgiven him": his sin is not left "suspended" until Yom Kippur, (but he is forgiven completely). I might think that even if he (the Cohein) "sat" and did not offer it (the owner nevertheless receives atonement); it is, therefore, written ("and it shall be forgiven) him" (i.e., only him for whom the service has been performed.)