Parshas Vayikra - Why does Rashi derive that a korban must not be stolen from the korbanos of adam ha'rishon?

The passuk says in this week’s sedrah (Vayikra 1:2)

דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵהֶם אָדָם כִּי יַקְרִיב מִכֶּם קָרְבָּן לַה' מִן הַבְּהֵמָה מִן הַבָּקָר וּמִן הַצֹּאן תַּקְרִיבוּ אֶת קָרְבַּנְכֶם

Speak to the benei yisrael and say to them, “If a person from you brings an animal as a korban to Hashem, then you should bring your korban from cattle or from sheep.”

Rashi comments on this passuk

אדם - למה נאמר, מה אדם הראשון לא הקריב מן הגזל שהכל היה שלו אף אתם לא תקריבו מן הגזל

Why does the passuk use the word אדם to refer the person who brings a korban? To teach you that just as Adam ha’Rishon did not bring a korban from something stolen, because everything belonged to him, so to you, do not bring a korban from something stolen.

The gemara says in Succah (30a) says that we learn that a person may not bring a stolen korban from the fact that the passuk says מכם

If a person brings from yours, and this is not his - אדם כי יקריב מכם אמר רחמנא ולאו דידיה הוא

• If so, why does Rashi bring an additional derasha to exclude a stolen korban based on the word אדם?

The mishna says in Bava Metzia (2:4)

כיצד, משך הימנו פירות ולא נתן לו מעות, אינו יכול לחזור בו, נתן לו מעות ולא משך הימנו פירות, יכול לחזור בו. אבל אמרו, מי שפרע מאנשי דור המבול ומדור הפלגה, הוא עתיד להיפרע ממי שאינו עומד בדיבורו

If the purchaser has taken the produce and not paid money, then the vendor may not renege on the sale. However, if the purchaser has paid money but has not taken the produce, then the vendor may renege on the sale. But the chachamim said, “He who exacted vengeance from the men of the generation of the mabul and from the generation that was scattered by Hashem as a punishment for building the מגדל בבל, He will take vengeance from a person who does not stand by his word.”

We know that the דור המבול was punished for dishonesty, as Rashi says (Bereishis, 6:13)

כי מלאה הארץ חמס - לא נחתם גזר דינם אלא על הגזל (סנהדרין ק"ח)

For the world is full of violence before Me – their judgement was only sealed because of theft.

However the דור הפלגה was not punished because of dishonesty, to the contrary, they were saved because of the harmonious way in which they lived, as Rashi says in parshas Noach (11:9)

וכי איזו קשה של דור המבול או של דור הפלגה אלו לא פשטו יד בעיקר ואלו פשטו יד בעיקר להלחם בו ואלו נשטפו ואלו לא נאבדו מן העולם אלא שדור המבול היו גזלנים והיתה מריבה ביניהם לכך נאבדו ואלו היו נוהגים אהבה וריעות ביניהם שנאמר שפה אחת ודברים אחדים למדת ששנאוי המחלוקת וגדול השלום

Which aveirah is more severe, that of the דור המבול or that of the דור הפלגה? The דור המבול did not go to war against Hashem and the דור הפלגה did go to war against Hashem, however the punishment of the דור המבול was more severe, because they were drowned but the דור הפלגה was not destroyed [so the דור המבול which committed the lesser עבירה received the more severe punishment]?

Rather this is because the דור המבול were thieves and there was argument between them, therefore they were destroyed. However the דור הפלגה had love and friendship between them, as the passuk says שפה אחת ודברים אחדים [therefore although they did the more severe aveirah, they were not destroyed]. This teaches you that מחלוקת is hated by Hashem and שלום is very great.

• We see from Rashi that the דור הפלגה were actually saved because of the harmony and trust that existed between them. Why then is the punishment of the דור הפלגה quoted as an example of that which will befall someone who is dishonest?

The Chasam Sofer explains as follows:

The passuk says (Vayikra 2:1)

וְנֶפֶשׁ כִּי תַקְרִיב קָרְבַּן מִנְחָה לַה' סֹלֶת יִהְיֶה קָרְבָּנוֹ

If a person brings a קרבן מנחה to Hashem then his korban should be comprised of flour.

Rashi comments

ונפש כי תקריב - לא נאמר נפש בכל קרבנות נדבה אלא במנחה מי דרכו להתנדב מנחה? עני. אמר הקב"ה מעלה אני עליו כאלו הקריב נפשו.

And if a soul brings a korban – The word נפש is not used with any of the voluntary korbanos except for the קרבן מנחה. Who is wont to bring a קרבן מנחה? A poor man. Hashem said, “I consider as if this person brought their soul as a korban.”

Since the poor man expends his life’s efforts on making a living and is dependent on his meagre resources to be able to live, whatever he brings as a korban to Hashem reduces his sustenance and enjoyment. Therefore Hashem views it as if he has brought his own soul as a korban, since by using his meagre livelihood to bring a korban, the poor man has indeed brought of his own soul to Hashem.

The Chasam Sofer explains that the principle that when a person brings a korban then it should be as if he has brought of his own soul as a korban, applies to the korban of a wealthy man as well. The Torah teaches us this principle with regards to the korban of a poor man because there it is more obvious that the poor man has made a self-sacrifice in order to bring his korban, but the idea holds true for the korban brought by a wealthy man also.

What is the self-sacrifice that a wealthy man has in bringing a korban?

The passuk says in Mishlei (30:9)

פֶּן אֶשְׂבַּע וְכִחַשְׁתִּי וְאָמַרְתִּי מִי ה' וּפֶן אִוָּרֵשׁ וְגָנַבְתִּי וְתָפַשְׂתִּי שֵׁם אֱלֹקָי

Lest I become sated and then I will deny and I will say, “Who is Hashem?” And lest I become impoverished and I will steal, and I will swear falsely in the name of Hashem.

Since the wealthy man is self-sufficient, it is difficult for him to bring a korban because by doing so he acknowledges that all of this wealth is only given to him as a gift to use correctly in giving tzedakah and keeping the mitzvos. The korban that he brings is not expensive for him, but it does represent a declaration that none of his wealth is really his. Since the wealthy man has surrendered his wealth to Hashem to the same extent as the poor man, it is as he also has brought his own soul as a korban to Hashem.

Based on this idea, the Chasam Sofer explains that the dishonesty of the דור הפלגה did not lie in their stealing from each other, rather their dishonesty lay in their stealing olam hazeh as an entirety from Hashem. Subsequently the person who does not keep his word is criticised for being like the men of the דור המבול, who stole from each other, and also for being like the men of the דור הפלגה because since he is avaricious it would appear that he denies that his wealth comes from Hashem.

Not only did אדם הראשון not steal from anyone, it was also not possible for him to create a self-contained society and steal from Hashem, as the דור הפלגה did, since he was the interlocutor of Hashem and of no-one else.

That is why Rashi explains that all korbanos must be as pure as the korban of אדם הראשון, since אדם neither stole from anyone nor did he claim that his portion in olam hazeh was his alone.