What are the implications of "le'Achas me'Eileh"?
Shevu'os, 28b: It implies that one is only Chayav one Korban and not two ? with regard to a case of Shevu'as ha'Eidus which is also Shevu'as Bituy. 1
Shevu'os, 32a: It implies that if the litigant made him swear five times and he subsequently denied each one, he is Chayav a Korban for each denial. 2
Shevu'os, 33b: The 'Mem' of "me'Eileh" implies that sometimes he is Patur from a Korban Shevu'ah ? where the litigant makes him swear on a claim that is not a monetory one. 3
Sifra: It implies that if the sinner transgresses a. both Tamei Mikdash and Tum'as Kodesh, or b. Tum'as Mikdash or Tum'as Kodesh twice, he is Chayav to bring two Korbanos.
What is the significance of the word "ve'Hisvadah"? Why does the Torah insert it?
Rashi (in Shevu'os) and Ramban #1 (citing Sifri Zuta): It teaches us that all Chata'os 1 and Ashamos 2 require Viduy 3 (Teshuvah).
Ramban #2: The Torah mentions Viduy specifically here because it is discussing a Chatas that is brought be?Meizid, but other Chata?os that come to atone for be?Shogeg, do not require Viduy. 4
Kerisos, 12a: It implies that if one witness accuses him, he is only Chayav if he admits that he is Chayav, but not if he denies it. 5
Ramban (Ibid.): Even those that come to atone for Shogeg - although the current Chatas atones for Meizid.
Ramban: Which we learn from the Pasuk in Naso Bamidbar, 5:6 ?Ve?ashmah ha?Nefesh ha?Hi, Vehisvadu Es Chatasam?.
Which he performs whilst the animal is still alive - which we learn from the Viduy of the Kohen Gadol on Yim Kipur. See Torah Temimah DH' 'Vehisvadah' #2 and note 56.
See Torah Temimah note 56
Why does the Torah mention Viduy specifically here, and not by any of the other Chata'os?
Ramban #1 and Moshav Zekenim #1: Because, Shevu'as ha'Eidus, unlike the Chata'os mentioned earlier in the Parshah, is Chayav even be'Meizid. 1
Ramban #2 (citing the Sifri Zuta) and Moshav Zekenim #2: The Mitzvah of Viduy actually applies to all the Chata'os mentioned in the Parshah, and the Torah mentions it here because Shevu'as ha'Eidus and Shevu'as Bituy (in Pasuk 4) are not subject to Kareis. How much more so is Viduy required for Chayvei Kerisus!
And it is for the same reason, that the Torah mentions it by Shevu'as ha'Pikadon in Bamidbar 5:7 (Ramban).
How will we reconcile the current Pesukim ?Vehisvadah asher Chata alehah ? Veheivi es Ashamo la?Hashem ? ? with the Pasuk in Achrei-Mos ?Vesamach Aharon es Sh?tei Yadav al Rosh ha?Sa?ir ha?Chai Vehisvadah alav??
Ramban: The current two phrases need to be inverted.
