What is the significance of the fact that the Torah juxtaposes "ve'Samach Yado" to "Lifnei Hashem" (in Pasuk 3)?
Rashi: To extrapolate 1 that Korbanos that are brought on a Bamas Yachid 2 do not require Semichah. 3
Menachos, 93b: To teach us that Semichah on the Olah must be performed in the north. 4
Seeing as Semichah is performed with both hands (as in Tetzaveh, Sh'mos, 29:10 and Acharei-Mos, 16:21), why does the Torah write "ve'Samach Yado" (singular)?
Ramban and Moshav Zekenim: Presumably, to preclude a Shali'ach ? "Yado" 've'Lo Yad Shelucho'. 1
Menachos, 93a: To preclude the hand of his Eved, his Shali'ach or even his wife. 4
How is the Semichah performed?
Yoma, 36a: With the animal standing on the north of the Mizbe'ach, its face inclined westwards (towards the Kodesh Kodshim), the owner stands on its east facing westwards and places his two hands between the horns of the Korban with nothing interrupting between his hands and the head of the animal. He then confesses on a Chatas or Asham what ever sin he is bringing to atone for, and on an Olah for whichever Asei or La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei that he transgressed 1 (and leaned his hands forcefully on the head of animal). 2
The Gemara does not mention Shelamim, which does not require Viduy since a Shelamim does not come to atone for a sin. See Torah Temimah, note 31, who, citing the Rambam, explains that the Semichah of a Shelamim required the recital of praises of Hashem. See also Oznayim la'Torah DH 've'Samach Yado'. ... '.
Oznayim la'Torah: As opposed to the Semichah of a Chacham see Oznayim la'Torah) whose head the person giving Semichah did not need to touch ? since, whereas there, the initiation of a Chacham is 'not with strength and not with might', but with the spirit of Hashem, the Semichah here was to atone for for the sin which the sinner performed with all his physical strength (See Oznayim la'Torah).
What if the owner places his hands on the neck the back (just behind the head) or on the chest?
Menachos, 93b: He has not fulfilled the Mitzvah of Semichah. 1
Menachos (Ibid.): According to R. Eliezer ben Ya'akov, the preclusion includes the side of the head (the jaws and the cheeks).
Seeing as the Torah is discussing the Olah, why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfluou) word "al Rosh ha'Olah"?
Rashi #1: To incorporate an obligatory Olah and an Olah consisting of a lamb in the Din of Semichah. 1
Rashi #2 (citing the Sifra): To preclude an Olas ha'Of from Semichah. 2
What does an Olah atone for?
Rashi (citing the Sifra) and Ramban #1: It atones for the transgression of an Asei and of a La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei 1 (a La'av that can be rectified by performing an Asei). 2
Ramban #2 (citing Vayikra Rabah) and Moshav Zekenim (12:8 citing Midrash Yelamdenu) and Seforno (on Pasuk 2): It atones for sinful thoughts. 3
Da'as Zekenim and Hadar Zekenim: It atones for someone who was sure that he ate Shuman, and it turns out that he ate Cheilev, who is not Chayav a Chatas since he did not forget anything.
Ramban: be'Meizid, since the Torah did not prescribe any other punishment or atonement for them, and it does not mention Shogeg here, as it does by Chatas (seeing as the Torah specifies the punishment for Chayvei Kerisos and Misos Beis-Din ? Rashi). See Ramban who elaborates.
Even though Teshuvah atones for these sins, that only exempts him from punishment in this world, but, he may still have to give Din ve'Cheshbon in the world to come ? and the Olah obsolves him completely. See Oznayim la'Torah, DH 'Lechaper alav'.
Ramban: The Midrash learns this from "Ve'ha'Olah al Ruchachem" (Yechezkel 20:32) and Iyov (1:5) "ve'He'elah Olos? Ulai Chat'u? bi'Levavam." Since only Hashem knows the sin, the Korban goes entirely to Him.
What is the meaning of "ve'Nirtzah lo"?
Ramban #1: It means that Hashem will be pleased with his Korban and pardon him. 1
Ramban #2: His sin will be forgiven. 2
Seeing as the Kaparah is attained via the sprinkling of the blood, why does the Torah write "ve'Nirtzah lo" by the Semichah?
Yoma, 5a: To teach us that if the owner considers the Semichah of secondary importance and did not therefore perform it, although his Korban atones, his stonement is not complete. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 39.
What are the implication of the words "Venirtzah lo Lechaper ..."?
/Zevachim, 4b: It implies "Lo Lechaper", 've'Lo le'Chavero Lechaper', to teach us that the Z'rikas ha'Dam must be performed in the name of the owner. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 40.
What are the implications of the word "Lechaper alav" (as opposed to 'Ba'ado')?
Megilah, 8a: It implies that the owner is liable to replace the animal if it got lost, a Korban that is incumbant upon him (a Neder ? where he declared 'Harei Alai Korban!'), but not one that is not (a Nedavah ? where he declared 'Harei Zu Korban!'). 1
See Torah Temimah, note 41.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that Olah atones for an Asei and a La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei. If he did not repent, "Zevach Resha'im To'evah" (the Korban is not accepted), and If he did, he is immediately pardoned and does not require a Korban, as the Gemara writes in Yoma 86a?
Zevachim 7b: The Olah is a gift and does need to atone, since it is brought after the owner has done Teshuvah. .
Moshav Zekenim and Riva: The Pasuk is speaking where he repented, in which case he immediately merits a weak Kaparah; when he brings an Olah, he obtains a full Kaparah.
Rashi writes that Olah does not atone for sins for which the punishment is mentioned. Since we find that Sa'ir ha'Mishtale'ach atones for all Aveiros, even those with punishments, why can we not say the same about an Olah? Moreover, we say elsewhere that the Olah atones for [sinful] thoughts, or that it is a gift after Teshuvah?
Moshav Zekenim: Whereas Sa'ir ha'Mishtale'ach has a fixed time (Yom Kipur), and he can be punished before this, one can offer an Olah at any time. It is unreasonable for the sinner to be punished before he offers it. 1
One may bring Asham Taluy at any time, and one can be punished before he brings it! (PF)
Rashi writes that the Olah atones for an Asei and a La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei. What is a 'La'av ha'Nitak la'Asei'?
Moshav Zekenim: He was obligated in the Asei; there is no punishment for not fulfilling it, just he stumbled through a lack of zealousness to fulfill it. If he transgressed a La'av and fulfilled the Asei to which it is Nitak, he initially stumbled; an Olah atones for it.
Rashi writes that "Al Rosh ha'Olah" teaches us about Semichah for Olas Tzon and Olas Chovah. We can learn both of these from the word "ka'Mishpat" in Shemini, 9:16), which teaches us that Olas Chovah is like Olas Nedavah, which requires Semichah (Beitzah 20a); and this applies also to the lamb (Tzon)?
Moshav Zekenim (in Shemini, 9:16): One might have thought that "ka'Mishpat" teaches Semichah only for the calf, since we find Semichah on cattle of an Olas Nedavah, and it is due to "Al Rosh ha'Olah" that we establish it also for the lamb.
Rashi writes that "Al Rosh ha'Olah" teaches about Semichah for Olas Chovah. Why don't we learn this from "Vayakrev es Eil ha'Olah va'Yismechu?" (8:18)? And if it was a Hora'as Sha'ah, we cannot learn also from "ka'Mishpat" either?
Moshav Zekenim #1 (in 9:16): "Ka'Mishpat" implies that this is the Halachah, in which case it was not a Hora'as Sha'ah.
Moshav Zekenim #2 (in 9:16): Korban Aharon is different. We can say that learn other Olos from it.
