ויקרא, פרק ז׳, פסוק ב׳

The instructions for the guilt offering deliberately align it with the burnt offering, a comparison designed to elevate its status. Even though the guilt offering is not completely consumed by fire on the altar, its rank is no less significant [ביאור שטיינזלץ]. Because of this equal standing, the animal must be slaughtered on the northern side of the altar, which serves as an absolute requirement for the offering to be valid [תורה תמימה, ביאור יש"ר].

The slaughter itself is not a general preparation of meat or a festive butchering, but requires a highly specific, precise cut to the animal's neck using a knife [מלבי"ם, פרדס יוסף]. While the surrounding instructions are directed at a single individual, the command to slaughter broadens to address multiple people. The primary approach among commentators is that this shift expands the circle of those permitted to perform the act. It teaches that the slaughtering of the animal is not restricted to priests; it remains entirely valid if performed by non-priests, women, or slaves [תורה תמימה, מלבי"ם]. This also highlights a practical reality: the number of ordinary people available to slaughter the animal is much larger than the specific group of priests required to handle its blood [העמק דבר].

This broad permission is detailed specifically within the laws of the guilt offering because it is exclusively brought by individuals. If a plural instruction were used for other types of sacrifices, it might be mistakenly understood as a reference to communal offerings. Here, however, it clearly points to the diverse variety of people permitted to hold the knife [מלבי"ם].

This exclusivity of the guilt offering as an individual sacrifice sparked a significant debate following a comment by [רש"י], who referenced a "communal guilt offering." Since Jewish law dictates that a guilt offering is strictly an individual obligation, many commentators conclude that this was a scribal error that crept into the text over the generations and should be deleted [תורה תמימה, פרדס יוסף, ברכת אשר על התורה]. Conversely, others attempt to resolve the contradiction by suggesting it refers to an individual's leftover guilt offering that is later repurposed as a communal freewill donation [צפנת פענח]. Another perspective argues that it simply describes a rare, one-time historical event that took place during the era of Ezra the Scribe [פרדס יוסף].

Immediately following the slaughter, the focus shifts to the handling of the blood. Just as the animal is slaughtered in the north, the priest receiving the blood into a vessel must also stand on the northern side of the altar [תורה תמימה, אדרת אליהו]. The priest throws the blood directly from the vessel onto the altar, mirroring the procedure of the burnt offering and differing from the sin offering, where blood is applied precisely with a finger [ביאור יש"ר, ביאור שטיינזלץ]. The blood is thrown against two opposite corners of the altar, ensuring it splashes and spreads across all four sides. This entire procedure must be carefully directed at the lower half of the altar, remaining entirely below the red line that encircles it [ביאור יש"ר].