Tanach · Rishonim on Tanach · Ibn Ezra · Torah
Ibn Ezra on Leviticus 10:18/אבן עזרא על ויקרא י׳:י״ח
אהן לא הובא את דמה אל הקדש פנימה. כפר הבא על כל המצות שהוא לכהן ולקהל. ואם ישאל שואל הנה פר חטאת שורף ולא הובא את דמו לפנים בקדש והטעם הפרכת ומזבח הזהב דע שפר חטאת הוא לחטאת על המזבח ושעיר החטאת הוא לעם ובשר החטאת לכהן:
1BEHOLD, THE BLOOD OF IT WAS NOT BROUGHT INTO THE SANCTUARY WITHIN. Like the bullock brought by the kohen and the congregation for violation of any of the commandments.45 Should one ask, “Look, the bullock of the sin offering46 was burned47 and its blood was not brought into the inner sanctuary,48 and the congregation, and yet it was not eaten. The point is, Moses implies that if the blood of a sin offering is not brought into the sanctuary, then the flesh of the sin offering must be eaten. However, the case of the sin offering offered during the seven days of consecration shows that this is not necessarily so. the reference being to the place of the curtain and the golden altar?” Know that the sin offering bullock49 was to purify the altar,50 consuming its flesh. Hence its flesh was burned. the he-goat sin offering51 was to atone for the people, and the flesh of the sin offering was for the kohen.52 eats the sin offering the sins of the people are forgiven. Hence Moses was angry that the flesh was burned and not eaten.
באכול תאכלו. היה ראוי שתאכלו אותה:
2YE SHOULD CERTAINLY HAVE EATEN IT. Akhol tokhelu53 literally means you will certainly eat it. Hence I.E.’s comment. is to be rendered, ye should have certainly eaten it.