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 form of compensating for the Korban is called "Tashlumin."

Rebbi Yochanan and Rebbi Oshiya disagree about how Tashlumin works. Rebbi Yochanan says "Tashlumin l'Rishon": Only when one was obligated to bring the Korban on the first day of the festival (but was unable to bring it for some reason) is he able (and required) to make it up during the remaining days of the festival. If, however, he was exempt from bringing the Korban on the first day, he is exempt on the remaining days as well.

Rebbi Oshiyah says "Tashlumin Zeh la'Zeh": Each day of the festival is fit to be the day of the primary obligation for bringing the Korban. If one was exempt on the first day of the festival, the obligation takes effect on whichever day of the festival he becomes fit.

A practical example of the difference between these two opinions is the case of a person who was lame on the first day (and was thus exempt from the Korban on that day) but becomes healed on one of the subsequent days of the festival. According to Rebbi Yochanan, he remains exempt even when he is healed, since he was exempt on the first day. According to Rebbi Oshiya, he is obligated when he becomes healed at any time during the festival, since each day his its own, independent obligation.

The Gemara asks that Rebbi Yochanan apparently contradicts himself. Here, Rebbi Yochanan says that the primary obligation to bring a Korban on the festival is on the first day, and one who was exempt on the first day remains exempt throughout the festival. However, in the case of a Nazir who becomes Tamei, counts seven days of Taharah, and then becomes Tamei again at the end of his Taharah process, Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan argue about whether he must bring a Korban for his first Tum'ah. Both agree that if he becomes Tamei on the eighth day after his Taharah process began, 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 already took effect, and thus when he becomes Tahor he must bring it along with the Korban he brings for the second Tum'ah.

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. 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 the second.

The Gemara understands that according to Rebbi Yochanan, even if one was not 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. This implies that Rebbi Yochanan maintains that the first day is not the day of the primary obligation; rather, the primary obligation is on whichever day he becomes fit. This is in clear contradiction to Rebbi Yochanan's opinion with regard to the Korban Chagigah.

The Gemara's question is difficult to understand. The obligation of Tashlumin is not comparable to the Korban of a Nazir who becomes Tahor. In the case of a Nazir who becomes Tamei 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. Since he was unable to bring a Korban for the first Tum'ah before he became Tamei a second time (because he never entered a time period which was fit for bringing the Korban), his Tum'os are considered one long Tum'ah. RASHI himself (9b, DH v'Iy Salka Da'atach) mentions this logic with regard to a Zav who experienced a flow on the night after the seventh day of his Taharah process. Rashi says that according to the opinion that nighttime is not fit for bringing a Korban, 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, however, says that the Nazir brings two Korbanos even when he became Tamei at night. He maintains that the Tum'os are considered two separate Tum'os and not one long Tum'ah. It is in this regard that he argues with Chizkiyah in the case of a Nazir. Their argument there has nothing to do with their argument with regard to Tashlumin.

(a) The TUREI EVEN points out that in the case of a Nazir who becomes Tamei, the Torah prescribes a specific day on which he must bring his Korbanos -- the eighth day of his Taharah process. Hence, the eighth day is the primary day on which his obligation takes effect. If he does not bring the Korban on the eighth day, he must bring it afterwards to make up for not bringing it on the eighth day. Consequently, bringing the Korban on a later day is considered Tashlumin for not bringing it on the first day.

The Turei Even proves this assertion from the words of the Toras Kohanim (Naso 29). The Toras Kohanim cites a verse to prove that a Nazir may bring his Korbanos on another day if he missed the eighth day. The Toras Kohanim implies that the obligation to bring the Korban is not merely "any time he becomes Tahor," but rather it applies specifically on the eighth day; his right to bring it any day after the eighth is because of Tashlumin. Hence, the Gemara's comparison of Nazir to the Korbanos of the festival indeed is accurate, since both have Tashlumin once the primary day has passed.

According to this understanding of a Nazir's obligation to bring his Korban, a Nazir who becomes Tamei on the night after the seventh day (and thus never was able to bring the Korban) brings only one Korban after the second Tum'ah passes -- not because his two bouts of Tum'ah are considered one long Tum'ah, but rather because he has no requirement of Tashlumin to make up for the Korban on a later day (according to Chizkiyah) since he was not fit to bring a Korban on the eighth day. According to Rebbi Yochanan (who maintains that even when one was not fit to bring the Korban on the eighth day, he may still make up for it), the day on which the person becomes fit to bring a Korban becomes the primary day of the obligation to bring the Korban (i.e. "Tashlumin Zeh la'Zeh"). This is the basis for the Gemara's question on Rebbi Yochanan.

(The logic of "one long Tum'ah" which Rashi applies in the case of a Zav does not apply in the case of a Nazir. If a Zav sees an additional flow, it may indicate that his nature never changed from that of a Zav. In contrast, 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 does not apply the logic of Tashlumin to explain the laws of a Zav just as he applies it to explain the laws of a Nazir, see following Insight.)

(b) The RAMBAM and ME'IRI offer an entirely different explanation for the Gemara. They explain that when the Gemara records the dispute between Chizkiyah and Rebbi Yochanan, it is not discussing a Nazir at all. Rather, it is discussing the Korban Chagigah of a person who was Tahor on the morning of the first day of the festival: 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 (the first night of the festival), he was never fit to bring a Korban on the first day of the festival. Chizkiyah maintains that since he was exempt on the primary day of the obligation, he does not bring a Korban Chagigah on any of the remaining days of the festival. In contrast, Rebbi Yochanan says that if he became Tamei at night, he nevertheless brings a Korban on another day of the festival. Accordingly, Rebbi Yochanan contradicts his own view that one who was exempt on the first day of the festival is exempt for the entire festival.

In the first answer to its question, the Gemara says that an exemption (from the obligation to bring a Korban) due to Tum'ah differs from an exemption due to infirmity. One who was lame on the first day of the festival was not obligated at all to bring the Korban. In contrast, one who was Tamei on the first day of the festival was obligated to bring the Korban, but there was an external factor which prohibited him from doing so (i.e. his Tum'ah).

In its second answer, the Gemara says that nighttime is not considered "Mechusar Zeman." If one was fit to bring the Korban at any time during the first night of the festival, then he remains obligated to bring it even if he becomes lame that night. (CHIDUSHIM U'VI'URIM)

QUESTION: The Gemara proves that according to Rebbi Yochanan, nighttime is considered "Mechusar Zeman" and is a time unfit for bringing a Korban. Rebbi Yochanan states 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), he brings only one Korban when he becomes Tahor from the second Zivah. RASHI (DH v'Iy Salka Da'atach) explains that the reason why he brings only one Korban is that the second Tum'ah is considered a continuation of the first ("Zivah Arichta Hi").

From this statement it is evident that Rebbi Yochanan considers nighttime to be a time unfit for bringing a Korban. If nighttime would be fit for bringing a Korban, then the two Zivos could not be viewed as one long Zivah because the two Zivos would be separated from each other by a time period fit for bringing a Korban.

Rashi's reason for why the Zav brings only one Korban is inconsistent with the reason he gives earlier. In the previous Sugya, Rashi explains that if nighttime is unfit for bringing a Korban, then no obligation takes effect at night and thus the Zav does not need 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 the Zav never entered a time period that was fit for bringing the Korban. Why does Rashi here not give the same reason for why the Zav brings only one 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 on a day on which one is not fit to bring a Korban no obligation takes effect to require Tashlumin later, then even if the Zav experiences only one flow (and not three), rendering him a Ba'al Keri (and not a Zav), he also is not fit to bring a Korban (for his earlier Zivah) on that day because he must wait until sundown 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 experiences three flows and becomes a Zav again? He is also exempt from bringing a Korban for his first Zivah even if he experiences only one flow and becomes 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. (Only one who is Tamei with Tum'as Mes or Tzara'as may not send a Korban with someone else, as the Gemara in Moed Katan (15b-16a) teaches.)

Perhaps Rashi 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, then a Zav should also be able to send his Korban. Even when the Zav experiences three flows at night, Rebbi Yochanan still should consider him fit to bring a Korban since he could send it with someone else. Accordingly, the Zav should have an obligation of Tashlumin for the Korban, and he should have to bring two Korbanos when he becomes Tahor.

On the other hand, if a person is considered unfit to bring a Korban whenever he cannot bring it himself (and thus there is no Tashlumin), then even if the Zav has only one flow on the night after the seventh day, he should not be obligated to bring a Korban for his first Zivah (since a Ba'al Keri is unable to bring a Korban himself).

Rashi therefore explains that the case of a Zav is unrelated to Tashlumin. There is no specifically-established day on which a Zav must bring his Korban. Rather, he brings it whenever he becomes Tahor after the seventh day, and there is no requirement to bring it specifically on the eighth day. (In contrast, 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 Tashlumin for the eighth day.

Since a Zav is not required to bring his Korban specifically on the eighth day, the only reason why he is exempt from bringing the Korban for his first Zivah when he sees a flow on the night after the seventh is that it is considered to be one long Zivah (and not because Zivah has no Tashlumin). (M. Kornfeld)

QUESTION: The Gemara explains the verse, "You will return and see the difference between... one who serves Hash-m and one who does not serve Him" (Malachi 3:18). The Gemara says 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 one who serves Hash-m and one who does not serve Him.

The Gemara asks why a person who reviews 100 times is called "one who does not serve Him" simply because he lacks a single review. The Gemara answers that such an epithet is appropriate. It is comparable to the hiring of a donkey-driver: a donkey-driver can be hired to travel a distance of ten Parsa'os for a single coin, but he charges two coins to travel eleven Parsa'os.

What does the Gemara mean when it says that one who reviews what he learns only 100 times is "one who does not serve Him" while at the same time he is "fully righteous"? If one who reviews less than 101 times is acting improperly, then how can he be called "fully righteous"?

ANSWER: In order to understand the Gemara, it is necessary to define the words, "One who serves Hash-m." What does it mean to serve Hash-m?

The expression, "servant of Hash-m," is used sparingly in Tanach. When it is used, it describes individuals of unique spiritual stature. Hash-m called 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 explains the phrase, "My servant," in depth. When Kalev was faced with the decision whether or not to join the other spies, he experienced a profound inner conflict as his Yetzer ha'Ra and Yetzer ha'Tov battled in their attempt to persuade him. Kalev prayed that Hash-m guide him towards the proper course of action, and his Yetzer ha'Tov emerged victorious. As reward for resisting the advances of the spies and for having "a different spirit with him" (Bamidbar 14:24), Hash-m called Kalev, "My servant, Kalev," the same title by which Hash-m 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 order to serve Hash-m can be called a "servant of Hash-m." This means that the virtuous acts which a person performs is only part of who he is. There is another part which is unseen, and that is what the person endured in order to be able to perform those virtuous acts. A person is judged, and eternal reward granted, based on both elements of the person.

This is the meaning of the Gemara here. Both the "one who serves Hash-m" and the "one who does not serve Him" are fully righteous. Each one has performed the same amount of righteous deeds. However, only one of them has truly served Hash-m. The one who bends his will in order to follow Hash-m's will is a genuine servant of Hash-m, as the Or ha'Chaim explains. The other righteous person, who follows his natural tendency towards righteousness, has not "served Hash-m" in the fullest sense.

This analysis of the Gemara's words is complemented by the explanation of the BA'AL HA'TANYA (end of chapter 15) for the Gemara's parable. Why do donkey-drivers take an entire extra coin for the single Parsah added to their route? The reason is because the normal donkey journey is ten Parsa'os. When a person asks the driver to make an eleven-Parsah trip, his request is a "special order." Any small variation from the norm warrants a significant fee. Similarly, if students normally review their lessons 100 times and retain them, but one student puts forth extra effort to review in order to retain the lesson, he has varied from the norm and thus he will be rewarded in kind.

This is what the verse in Malachi means when it says that in the future, two scholars who seem to be of equal stature will be judged differently by Hash-m. (M. Kornfeld)