Nature of the Chatat/2

Nature of the Chatat

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Sin Offering

The Chatat serves to atone for unintentional sins.

Sources:RambanVayikra 3:1Vayikra 5:15About R. Moshe b. Nachman

Meaning of Chatat

Common denominator

Purification Offering

The Chatat is primarily a purification offering, meant to purify the Mikdash.

Sources:R. David Zvi HoffmannVayikra 5:17About R. David Zvi Hoffmann

Meaning of Chatat – According to these sources, the root "חטא" means to purify, as proven by the many verses where it is clearly mentioned in the context of purification (sometimes being parallel to the root "טהר") including Vayikra 14:48-52, Bemidbar 8:7, Bemidbar 19:19 and Yechezkel 43:23-26.¹

Common denominator – R. D"Z Hoffmann asserts that the common denominator between all cases in which one must bring a Chatat is that they involve contraction of impurity, be it spiritual or physical. Thus, both those individuals who have created spiritual impurity by unintentionally transgressing a prohibition and those who have contracted physical impurity (a birthing mother, one who has tzara'at, one who has an emission, and a Nazirite who has come in contact with a corpse) are obligated to bring a Chatat.²

What does the Chatat purify? R. Hoffmann explains that sin defiles not just the person, but also the Mikdash,³ and as such, the Chatat comes to purify the Mikdash itself from impurity.⁴ As evidence that the Mikdash itself can be polluted not just via physical impurity but by sin as well, he points to Vayikra 16:16, "וְכִפֶּר עַל הַקֹּדֶשׁ מִטֻּמְאֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמִפִּשְׁעֵיהֶם לְכׇל חַטֹּאתָם" and Vayikra 20:3, "כִּי מִזַּרְעוֹ נָתַן לַמֹּלֶךְ לְמַעַן טַמֵּא אֶת מִקְדָּשִׁי".

Where is the Chatat blood sprinkled? In support of the assumption that the Chatat is meant to purify the Mikdash itself, R. Hoffmann notes that the blood of such offerings is sprinkled not on the person but in the Mikdash. He further suggests that the gravity of the sin determines the depths to which the Mikdash is polluted, and hence, where exactly the blood is sprinkled:

• Unintentional sins of an individual are the least defiling and affect only the courtyard. As such, the blood of these Chatatot is sprinkled on the outer altar.
• Inadvertent sins of the high priest (Vayikra 4:1-12) and community (Vayikra 4:13-21) affect even the Outer Sanctum and thus, the blood of their Chatatot is sprinkled on the Incense Altar.
• Brazen sins penetrate to even the Inner Sanctum, and this is purified through the blood of the Yom HaKippurim offerings, sprinkled in the Holy of Holies.

"וְנָתַן הַכֹּהֵן מִן הַדָּם" – The unique language of "נתינת דם" (rather than "זריקת דם") might point to the special role played by blood in the Chatat sacrifices specifically.  This language implies that the blood of the Chatat is not merely sprinkled, but actively placed on the defiled areas.⁵ As the blood acts as the purifying agent, a mere ssprinkling is not enough.

Not called an "אִשֶּׁה לַי״י" – R"Y Grossman suggests that while other sacrifices are referred to as an "אִשֶּׁה לַי״י", the Chatat is not because the focal point of the sacrifice is not its consumption by fire, but its purifying of the altar.

For which transgressions? This approach might suggest that any unintentional transgression, even if not overly severe, would require an offering, for all transgressions contaminate the Mikdash.⁶

¹ See also Shemot 29:36,Vayikra 8:15, and Yechezkel 45:18.

² The red heifer whose ashes come to purify one who has come into contact with a dead body is also referred to as a Chatat. In addition, during the Days of Consecration, a Chatat was brought to purify the Altar.

³ He suggests that this impurity takes the form of the distancing of the Shekhinah, while purification via sprinkling of blood allows the Shekhinah to return.

⁴ R. Hoffmann asserts that the sacrifice serves to purify both the sinner's soul and the Mikdash. Prof. Milgrom, though, goes a step further to suggest that the Chtat comes to purify only the Mikdash. To explain the process of sin's defilement, he uses Oscar Wilde's "The Picture of Dorian Gray" as an analogy. In the work, the corrupt and hedonistic Dorian Gary remains handsome and unblemished, while his portrait progressively reveals his corruption. So, too, Milgrom suggests that according to Sefer Vayikra, sinful actions might not always be revealed in the figure of the sinner, but every sin will progressively contaminate the Mikdash.

⁵ This is what leads Chazal to suggest that the Chatat requires four "gifts" of blood, while other sacrifices require only two.

⁶ R. Hoffmann, though, follows Chazal and limits the cases for which one needs to bring an offering to only those which one would have been obligated with כרת had one transgressed them intentionally.  Perhaps, it is only somewhat severe sins t