THOUGHTS ON THE DAILY DAF
brought to you by Kollel Iyun Hadaf of Har Nof
Rosh Kollel: Rav Mordecai Kornfeld
Ask A Question about the Daf
CHAGIGAH 9 & 10 - anonymously dedicated by an Ohev Torah and Marbitz Torah in
Ramat Beit Shemesh, Israel.
1) "TASHLUMIN L'RISHON"
QUESTION: The Mishnah states that if one did not bring the Korban Chagigah on
the first day of Yom Tov, he may bring it during the rest of the days of the
festival. This making-up of the Korban is called "Tashlumin."
Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Oshiya argue about how Tashlumin works. Rebbi
Yochanan says "Tashlumin l'Rishon" -- only if one was obligated to bring the
Korban on the first day of the festival (but was unable to bring it for some
reason), does he then have to make it up during the remaining days of the
festival. But if he was exempt from bringing the Korban the first day, he is
exempt on all the other days as well.
Rav Oshiyah argues and says "Tashlumin Zeh la'Zeh" -- each day of the
festival is fit to be the primary obligation for bringing the Korban. If, on
the first day of the festival, one was exempt, then the obligation takes
effect on whichever day of the festival he becomes fit.
An example of a difference between these two opinions is a person who was
lame on the first day (and was thus exempt from the Korban on that day), but
then became healed on any of the subsequent days of the festival. According
to Rebbi Yochanan, he remains exempt even when he is healed, and according to
Rebbi Oshiya, he is Chayav when he becomes healed.
The Gemara asks that Rebbi Yochanan apparently contradicts himself. Here, he
says that the first day of the festival is when the primary Chiyuv takes
effect, and if someone was exempt on the first day, then he remains exempt
throughout the festival. However, in the case of a Nazir who became Tamei,
counted seven days of Taharah, and then became Tamei again at the end of his
Taharah process, Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan argue whether he must bring a
Korban for his first Tum'ah. Everyone agrees that if he becomes Tamei on the
*eighth day* after he began his Taharah process, he must bring two Korbanos
when he becomes Tahor from his second Tum'ah -- one for his first Tum'ah, and
one for his second. Since he could have brought a Korban earlier in the day
of the eighth day (before he became Tamei with the second Tum'ah), the
obligation to bring that Korban took effect, and thus he must bring it along
with the Korban he brings for the second Tum'ah when he becomes Tahor.
If the Nazir becomes Tamei again on the *night* after the seventh day of his
Taharah process, then, according to Chizkiyah, he does *not* bring a Korban
for his first Tum'ah when he becomes Tahor (from his second Tum'ah), because
he was never fit to bring a Korban for the first Tum'ah. Therefore, he brings
only one Korban (for his second Tum'ah) when he becomes Tahor. Rebbi Yochanan
argues and says that even if he becomes Tamei at night, he still brings two
Korbanos later when he becomes Tahor -- one for the first Tum'ah and one for
We see from here, says the Gemara, that according to Rebbi Yochanan, even if
one was never fit to bring a Korban on the day on which it was supposed to be
brought, he still has an obligation of Tashlumin whenever he becomes fit.
Hence, Rebbi Yochanan holds that the first day is *not* the primary Chiyuv,
but the primary Chiyuv occurs on whichever day he becomes fit, contradicting
his opinion here with regard to the Korban Chagigah!
The Gemara's question is difficult to understand. What does the Korban
brought by a Nazir when he becomes Tahor have to do with the subject of
Tashlumin altogether? In the case of a Nazir who became Tamei on the time
after the seventh day of his Taharah process, the reason he brings only one
Korban (according to Chizkiyah) is because his second Tum'ah is considered an
extension of his first Tum'ah. It is all one long Tum'ah. Since he could not
bring a Korban for the first Tum'ah before he became Tamei a second time
(since he never entered a time period which was fit for bringing the Korban),
it is all considered one long Tum'ah. RASHI himself (9b, DH v'Iy Salka
Da'atach) gives this logic with regard to a Zav who had a flow on the night
after the seventh day of his Taharah process. Rashi says that if we hold that
the nighttime is not fit for bringing the Korban, then the Zav brings only
one Korban when he becomes Tahor from his second Tum'ah, *because the second
Tum'ah is considered a continuation of the first* ("Zivah Arichta Hi").
Rebbi Yochanan, though, who says that the Nazir brings two Korbanos even in a
case where he became Tamei at night, holds that the Tum'os are two separate
Tum'os and not one long Tum'ah. That is the Machlokes between Chizkiyah and
Rebbi Yochanan, and it obviously has nothing to do with Tashlumin!
(a) The TUREI EVEN points out that in the case of a Nazir who became Tamei,
the Torah gives a specific day on which he is to bring his Korbanos -- the
*eighth* day of his Taharah process. Accordingly, the primary time for his
obligation to take effect is on the eighth day. If he does not bring the
Korban on the eighth day, then he brings it afterwards to make up for not
bringing it on the eighth day, and thus it is considered to be Tashlumin when
he brings the Korban on a later day.
The Turei Even supports this assertion with a proof from the Toras Kohanim
(Naso #29). The Toras Kohanim cites a verse to prove that the Nazir may bring
his Korbanos on a day after the eighth in case he missed the eighth. This
shows that the Chiyuv to bring the Korban is not simply "any time that he
becomes Tahor," but rather it is *on the eighth day*, and his right to bring
it any day after that is because of Tashlumin. Hence, the Gemara's comparison
of Nazir to the Korbanos of the festival is indeed accurate, since both have
Tashlumin once the primary day has passed.
According to this understanding of the obligation of a Nazir to bring his
Korban, a Nazir who became Tamei on the night after the seventh day and was
never able to bring the Korban, only brings one Korban after the second
Tum'ah has passed, *not* because it is all considered to be one long Tum'ah,
but rather because he was not fit to bring a Korban on the eighth day, so he
has no requirement of Tashlumin to make it up on a later day (according to
Chizkiyah). Rebbi Yochanan, though -- who says that even one who was not fit
to bring the Korban on the eighth day may still make up for it -- must hold
that whichever day on which he becomes fit be becomes the primary day of
bringing that Korban (i.e. "Tashlumin Zeh la'Zeh")! That is why the Gemara
asks a contradiction on Rebbi Yochanan.
(The logic of "one long Tum'ah" that Rashi applies to a Zav does not apply in
the case of a Nazir. If a Zav sees more Zivah, it can show that his nature
never changed from that of a Zav. But if a Nazir touches another Mes on the
eighth day after his first Tum'ah, the second Tum'ah is clearly a separate
event. As for why Rashi did not apply the logic of Tashlumin to explain the
Halachos of a Zav just as he applies it to the Halachos of a Nazir, see next
(b) The RAMBAM and ME'IRI here offer an entirely different explanation for
this Gemara. They learn that when the Gemara quotes the Machlokes between
Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan, it is not discussing a Nazir at all. Rather, it
is discussing the Korban Chagigah: If a person is Tahor on the morning of the
first day of the festival, then if he becomes Tamei, he must make up the
Korban on another day of the festival, since he was fit to bring the Korban
on the first day (before he became Tamei). However, if he became Tamei at
night (going into the festival), then he was never fit to bring a Korban on
the first day of the festival, and therefore Chizkiyah holds that he does not
bring a Korban Chagigah on any of the rest of the days of the festival, since
he was exempt on the main day of the Chiyuv. Rebbi Yochanan, though, says
that if he became Tamei at night, he nevertheless brings a Korban on another
day of the festival! This contradicts Rebbi Yochanan's own view that if one
was exempt on the first day of the festival, then he is exempt for the entire
The Gemara answers first that being exempt because of Tum'ah is different
than being exempt because of infirmity. If he was lame on the first day of
the festival, then he was not obligated at all to bring the Korban. In
contrast, if he was Tamei on the first day of the festival, then he *was*
obligated to bring the Korban, but there was an external factor prohibiting
him from doing so (i.e. his Tum'ah). The Gemara gives another answer and says
that nighttime is not "Mechusar Zman;" if he was fit to bring the Korban at
any time during the night of Yom Tov, then he becomes obligated to bring it,
even if he becomes lame that night. (CHIDUSHIM U'VI'URIM)
2) "TASHLUMIN" FOR THE KORBAN OF A "ZAV"
QUESTION: The Gemara proves that according to Rebbi Yochanan, nighttime is
"Mechusar Zman" and is not considered a time fit to bring a Korban. The
Gemara proves this from Rebbi Yochanan's statement regarding a Zav. Rebbi
Yochanan says that if a Zav experiences two flows during the night following
the seventh day of his Taharah from a previous Zivah and one flow on the
eighth day (or all three flows at night), then he brings only one Korban
after he becomes Tahor from the second Zivah. RASHI (DH v'Iy Salka Da'atach)
explains that the reason he brings only one Korban is because we view the two
Zivos as one long Zivah.
3) LEARNING SOMETHING 101 TIMES
From here we see that Rebbi Yochanan considers nighttime to be unfit for
bringing a Korban, because if the night is fit for bringing a Korban, then
the two Zivos cannot be viewed as one long Zivah, since a time fit for
bringing a Korban would serve to separate the Zivos from each other.
Why does Rashi give this explanation for why the Zav brings only one Korban?
He should have explained it the same way that he explained the previous
Sugya: If the night is not fit for bringing a Korban, then no Chiyuv took
effect and thus he does not have to make up the Korban. The reason is not
because his two Zivos are considered one long Zivah, but because there is no
Tashlumin for the Korban of the first Zivah when he never entered a time
period that was fit for bringing the Korban!
ANSWER: The TUREI EVEN points out that the Gemara says that if the Zav
experiences only one flow on the night after the seventh day of his Taharah
and two flows on the next day (the eighth), he *does* bring two separate
Korbanos -- one for the first Zivah and one for the second. If it is true
that whenever one is not fit to bring a Korban then no Chiyuv takes effect on
that day to require Tashlumin for the Korban, then even if he experienced
only *one* flow (and not three), making him into a Ba'al Keri (and not a
Zav), he also was not fit to bring a Korban (for his first Zivah) that day,
because he has to wait until sundown in order to become Tahor from his Keri
(even though he is not a Zav)! Why does the Gemara say that he does not have
to bring a Korban for his first Zivah only when he experienced *three* flows
and became a Zav, when the same is true when he experienced only *one* flow
and became a Ba'al Keri!
The TUREI EVEN answers that a Ba'al Keri *is* obligated to bring a Korban.
Even though he cannot bring a Korban to the Azarah himself, nevertheless he
may send it with someone else.
RASHI perhaps was bothered by the question of the Turei Even but did not
accept his answer. If it is true that a Ba'al Keri may send his Korban with
someone else (since only one who is Tamei with Tum'as Mes or Tzara'as may not
send a Korban, as the Gemara in Moed Katan (15b-16a) teaches), then a Zav
should also be able to send his Korban! Even if the Zav experiences three
flows at night, Rebbi Yochanan should still consider him fit to bring a
Korban since he could send it with someone else, and therefore there should
still be Tashlumin for the Korban and the Zav should have to bring two
Korbanos when he becomes Tahor! On the other hand, if he is indeed unfit to
bring a Korban (and thus there is no Tashlumin) because he could not bring it
himself to the Azarah, then even if he had only one flow on the night after
the seventh, he should also not have to bring a Korban for his first Zivah,
because a Ba'al Keri is also unable to bring the Korban to the Azarah himself
(and thus there is no Tashlumin)!
That is why Rashi explained that the case of a Zav has nothing to do with
Tashlumin at all. There is no specifically-established day on which a Zav
must bring his Korban. He brings it whenever he becomes Tahor after the
seventh day, with no requirement to bring it specifically on the eighth day
(whereas a Nazir is commanded to bring his Korban specifically on the eighth
day, and if he brings it afterwards, it is considered Tashlumin for the
eighth day). Therefore, when the Zav brings his Korban on a later day, it is
not considered to be Tashlumin for the eighth day.
Hence, the only reason he is exempt from bringing the Korban for his first
Zivah when he sees a flow on the night after the seventh is because it is all
considered to be one long Zivah (and not because Zivah has no Tashlumin). (M.
AGADAH: The Gemara says that when the verse refers to the "one who serves his
Creator" and the "one who does not serve Him," it means that "both are fully
righteous people; however, one who learns Torah and reviews it 100 times
cannot be compared to one who reviews 101 times." The difference between one
who reviews 100 times and one who reviews 101 times, is the difference
between not serving Hashem and serving Hashem.
The Gemara asks if it is really appropriate to call a person who reviews 100
times "one who does not serve Hashem," simply for the lack of a single
review. The Gemara answers that it is appropriate. It is comparable to the
donkey-driver market. A donkey-driver will agree to travel a distance of 10
Parsa'os for a single coin, but if he is asked to travel 11 Parsa'os, he
charges two coins.
How can the Gemara assert that one who reviews only 100 times is, at the same
time, "one who does not serve Hashem," and is also a "fully righteous
person?" If it is improper to review what one learns less than 101 times,
then the one who reviews only 100 times is *not* "fully righteous!"
ANSWER: In order to gain a proper understanding of this Gemara, it is first
necessary for us to analyze the meaning of "serving Hashem."
The expression, "servant of Hashem," appears only in a few occasions in
Tanach, and it is used as a description of individuals of unique spiritual
stature. For example, Hashem calls Kalev, "My servant" (Bamidbar 14:24), when
he refused to join the conspiracy of the other spies who attempted to
discourage the Jews from entering Eretz Yisrael. The OR HA'CHAIM there gives
a deeper explanation of the phrase.
Kalev, explains the Or ha'Chaim, experienced deep inner conflict when making
his decision whether or not to join the other spies, as his Yetzer ha'Ra and
Yetzer ha'Tov fought it out. Kalev prayed that Hashem guide him towards the
proper course of action, and indeed his Yetzer ha'Tov emerged victorious. As
reward for the fact that he had "another spirit about him" (Bamidbar 14:24)
whose advances Kalev resisted, Hashem called him, "My servant, Kalev," the
same title by which Hashem referred to Moshe Rabeinu (Bamidbar 12:7).
A servant is one who curbs his own will in order to perform the will of his
master. Only one who defies his natural tendency in the service of Hashem can
be called a "servant of Hashem." In other words, what a person *does* is only
part of who he is. The unseen part is what the person *went through* in order
to do what he did. Eternal reward is commensurate to a combination of the
This is the meaning of the Gemara here. Both the "one who serves Hashem" and
the "one who does not serve Him" are fully righteous. Each has performed the
same amount of righteous deeds. Nevertheless, only one of them has *served*
Hashem. The one who bends his will in order to follow Hashem's instructions
is a true "servant" of Hashem, as the Or ha'Chaim explains. The other
righteous person, who follows his natural tendency towards righteousness, has
not "served Hashem" in the fullest sense.
This analysis of the Gemara's words is complemented by the explanation
offered by the BA'AL HA'TANYA (end of ch. 15) for the Gemara's parable. Why
do donkey-drivers take an entire extra coin for the single Parsah added to
their route? -Because the normal donkey journey is 10 Parsa'os. When a person
asks the driver to make an 11-Parsah trip, he is making a "special order."
Even a small shift from the norm warrants a significant fee. Similarly, if
students normally review their lessons 100 times and retain them, but one of
them puts in an extra review in order to retain the lesson, the one that made
the extra effort is remarkable and will be rewarded in kind.
This is what will the Pasuk is saying will be revealed on the Day of Final
Reckoning -- that two scholars who seemed of equal stature can be judged
entirely differently in heaven. (M. Kornfeld)