Having referred to the Chatas as "Ashamo" in the previous Pasuk, why does the Torah repeat it here?
Oznayim la'Torah #1 (on Pasuk 6, citing the Sifra): To teach us that, if one obtains a Korban cheaply, the balance goes to Nedavah (for Kayitz ha'Mizbe'ach (to bring Olos Nedavah on behalf of the Tzibur during the long summer days).
Oznayim la'Torah #2 (Ibid.): With reference to the two cases in the Parshah which are not subject to Kareis (Shevu'as Eidus and Shevu'as Bituy), on which one generally brings an Asham. 1
And by the same token, the Torah writes "al Chataso" and "le'Chatas" with reference to Tim'as Mikdash ve'Kodoshav, which are subject to Kareis.
Why is the Torah lenient on the sinner here, allowing him to bring a smaller Korban if he cannot afford a bigger one?
Ramban: In the two cases of Shevu'ah, it is because they are not subject to Kareis; Whereas in that of Tum'as Mikdash ve'Kodashav, it is because he erred with regard to a Mitzvah (either whilst eating Kodshim or whilst going to the Beis-ha'Mikdash to bow down to Hashem or to bring a Korban). 1
Da'as Zekenim, Hadar Zekenim (4:3), and Moshav Zekenim: He did not profit from his Aveirah, e.g. entering the Mikdash be'Tum'ah or a false Shevu'as Bituy. 2
Oznayim la'Torah: Because all three listed sins were not initially dictated by Hashem, but were created by the declaration of the sinner himself. 3
Moshav Zekenim: This is difficult, because if one has a baby to circumcises after Shabbos, and one circumcises him on Shabbos, all agree that he is liable (a Chatas Beheimah, even if he is poor), since he had no Mitzvah to do [that overrides Shabbos - Shabbos 137a]?
Hadar Zekenim and Moshav Zekenim; Someone who has two liabilities - he took from Hekdesh and benefited, or swore falsely and benefits (keeps the money), brings an Asham worth at least two Sela'im. The same applies to an Asham Taluy. Becaue, since people tend to be lenient by doubtful sin, the Torah is stringent and obligates him to bring an expensive Korban. (One who ate Kodshim be'Tum'ah, he benefited. Why does he bring an Oleh ve'Yored?- PF).
See Oznayim la'Torah, DH 've'Im Lo Sagi'a", #3.
Why does the Torah require the sinner to bring both an Olas ha'Of and a Chatas ha'Of?
Ramban and Moshav Zekenim (citing the Rosh - who cites the Ibn Ezra): Because they come in place of a Chatas Beheimah, of which part goes [on the fire on the Mizbe'ach] to Hashem, and part goes to the Kohanim. Consequently, he needs to bring both birds, since nothing from the Chatas ha'Of goes to Hashem, and the Kohanim do not receive anything from the Olas ha'Of.
Is the sinner obligated to borrow money or to open a business in order to avoid bringing the Korban of an Ani?
Sifra: No! Because "ve'Im Lo Sagi'a Yado ... " implies that if he cannot afford it, he brings the birds immediately. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 58. In similar vein, the Sifra ? on Pasuk 11, derives from the Pasuk there that, if the sinner is very poor, he brings flour and does not need to wait until he becomes rich in order to bring birds ? the source for the principle 'Chavivah Mitzvah be'Sha'atah'. See Torah Temimah, note 72.
What if the sinner has sufficient funds for the Korban of an Ashir, but he will then be short regarding his regular needs?
