WE TAKE A SECURITY TO MAKE PEOPLE BRING KORBANOS [Korbanos: coercion: security]
(Mishnah): If one is obligated to bring a Chatas or Asham, we do not take a security from him. If he must bring an Olah or Shelamim, we take a security from him.
Even though "li'Rtzono" teaches that he does not get atonement until he consents to offer it, we force him until he consents.
(Rav Papa): Sometimes we take a security from one obligated to bring a Chatas or Asham. Sometimes, we do not take a security from one who must bring an Olah or Shelamim;
We take a security from one who must bring Chatas Nazir;
If a Nazir shaved after bringing any of his three Korbanos, he was Yotzei. Once the blood of one of them is thrown, he may drink wine and become Tamei.
Since the Chatas is not necessary for atonement, we are concerned lest he delay bringing it.
We do not take a security for Olas Metzora;
(Beraisa - R. Yishmael, son of R. Yochanan ben Berokah): Just like the Chatas and Asham of a Metzora are Me'akev Taharah, also the Olah.
(Shmuel): His consent is required for an Olah.
Question: The Mishnah already teaches that we force him until he consents!
Answer: Shmuel teaches about when Reuven supplies an Olah on behalf of Shimon. One might have thought that we need Shimon's consent only to take an animal of Shimon, but not to take another's animal (Shimon does not lose);
Shmuel teaches that this is not so. Perhaps Shimon prefers to get atonement from his own money.
Question (Beraisa #1): If Reuven said "it is Alai (incumbent on me) to bring Ploni's Chatas or Asham" (and brought it), Ploni was Yotzei only if he consented.
Regarding Olah and Shelamim, Ploni is Yotzei whether or not he consented.
Answer (Shmuel): The Beraisa refers to offering a Korban without consent. I taught that consent is required to be Makdish an Olah on behalf of Ploni.
Shmuel argues with Ula;
(Ula): Consent is required to be Makdish a Chatas, but not to be Makdish an Olah. Both of them require consent to offer it.
Kidushin 41b (R. Yehoshua ben Korchah) Question: Why does it say "All of Yisrael will slaughter (Korban Pesach)"? Only one person slaughters (each Korban)!
Answer: This teaches that we attribute a Shali'ach's actions to the one who appointed him.
Rambam (Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 14:10): If Reuven said 'it is Alai the Chatas (or Asham or Olah or Shelamim) of Ploni, and Ploni agreed, Reuven offers it and Ploni gets Kaparah. If one willingly was Makdish a Korban but later retracted and does not want to offer it:
If it is a Olah or Shelamim, we offer it even if he does not want to offer it now, since he wanted when he was Makdish it;
If it is a Chatas or Asham, it atones only if he wanted from the beginning to the end.
Ri Korkus: Rashi says that the question is whether or not we need Da'as, i.e. to inform him. The Rambam explains that it means consent.
Or Some'ach (Mikva'os 1:8, Os 11 DH Ulam): The Or Zaru'a (Teshuvah 114 after Hilchos Tefilah) says that if a Yisrael separated an obligatory Korban and a Kohen offered it, if the Yisrael did not want him to offer it, surely it did not atone. The Yerushalmi says that one may slaughter another's Pesach Lo mi'Daito, i.e. without his knowledge. (Lo mi'Daito can also mean against his will.) In Hilchos Pesachim (224) he explained that this is due to Zechiyah, which is stronger than Shelichus. One cannot separate the Korban without his knowledge, for Zechiyah can remove something from a person's Reshus. In Erchin we say that one is Yotzei if Olah or Shelamim were offered Lo mi'Daito, i.e. without his knowledge. If he did not want, it did not atone. This is unlike the Rambam.
Rambam (16): Even though it says "li'Rtzono", we force one until he says 'I want'. Whether he vowed and did not separate a Korban, or separated but did not offer it, we force him until he offers it.
Rambam (17): We take a security from anyone obligated to bring an Olah or Shelamim. Even though it is not Mechaper until he wants, we force him until he says that he wants to offer it. We do not take a security from someone obligated to bring a Chatas or Asham. Since it is for Kaparah, we are not concerned lest he be negligent and delay bringing it. The exception is Chatas Nazir. Since he may drink wine even before bringing it, perhaps he will delay it.
Kesef Mishneh: Even though Rav Papa said that sometimes we do not take a security for an Olah, i.e. Olas Metzora, the Rambam holds that this is not the Halachah. Only R. Yishmael says so. Rav Papa himself holds like Chachamim. He taught this only to teach that the Kelal is not unanimous.
R. Gershom (21b DH b'Sha'as): Shmuel holds that we do not need Da'as to offer an Olah. Since he desired to be Makdish it, surely he wants to offer it!
Question (Chidushei R. Shmuel, Kidushin Siman 13:1): Regarding Chatas, we require Da'as to offer it. Surely, the same reasoning teaches that he still wants to offer it. We must say this does not suffice; he must explicitly say that he wants. The Rambam (10) does not require consent to offer an Olah. We learned from "li'Rtzono" that he must consent!
Answer #1 (Griz, brought in Chidushei R. Shmuel): The Rambam requires consent to offer an Olah. He holds that the consent to be Makdish it suffices for Hakravah, also.
Answer #2 (Chidushei R. Shmuel 4): In Halachah 10 the Rambam discusses consent of the Miskaper (the one for whom the Korban atones). This is needed for Hekdesh of all Korbanos, and for Hakravah of Chatas or Asham, but not Olah or Shelamim. Consent of the owner is needed for Hekdesh and Hakravah of all Korbanos.
Question: We do not take a security from someone obligated to bring a Chatas or Asham. Since it is for Kaparah, he will not delay bringing it. Also, an Olah atones for Chayavei Aseh!
Answer (Tosfos Rosh Hashanah 6a DH Yakriv): One who repents after transgressing an Aseh is immediately pardoned. (Even though the Korban is needed for Kaparah, he is not so zealous to bring it.)
Milchamos Hash-m (Bava Kama 18a): We take a security from one who must bring an Olah or Shelamim. We say that "v'Asisa" commands Beis Din to force people, i.e. to take a security. Even though it is written regarding Chatas and Asham, for which we do not take a security, this is because they are for the person's Kaparah, so they do not require a security. He is already forced, in order to get a Kaparah! Some say that we distinguish between different kinds of Korbanos only before the time (for Bal Te'acher). Then we are concerned (for Olah and Shelamim) for negligence. After three festivals, we force with words and sticks. V'Asisa refers to all Korbanos. Regarding other Mitzvos Aseh, we force one until he fulfills or dies. This is correct.
Mishneh l'Melech (Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 14:17): Tosfos (Kerisus 12a DH Oh) says that we do not take a security for Chatas or Asham if the person says that he does not want to bring it, but if he thinks that he is exempt, we take a security. Even though R. Meir taught this and the Halachah does not follow him, regarding this Chachamim agree.
Question: Why do we need a verse to teach that Shelichus works for Korbanos? A verse teaches that the Kohen Gadol must slaughter his Par Chatas on Yom Kipur. This implies that Shelichus normally works!
Answer (Tosfos Kidushin 41b DH Nafka): Regarding Chatas it says "Oso", to teach that we may offer it b'Al Korcho (against the owner's will). This is a reason why Shelichus should work. One might have thought that Shelichus does not work for other Korbanos.
Maharsha (DH b'Emtza Devarav): The opposite is true! We take security from people to force them to bring Olah and Shelamim, but not for Chatas and Asham! Rather, the text of Tosfos should say 'since regarding Chatas it does not say 'Oso' to teach that we may offer it b'Al Korcho, it is reasonable that Shelichus should work. We cannot learn to other Korbanos that can be brought b'Al Korcho.
Rebuttal (Chasam Sofer OC 176 DH v'Al): If so, why can we learn from Pesach? Also regarding Pesach it does not say 'Oso' to teach that we may offer it b'Al Korcho! Also, the Gemara said that we cannot learn Shelichus from Gerushin because Gerushin works against her will. This shows that b'Al Korcho is a reason why Shelichus should work! Also, "Yakriv" (which is extra) teaches that Olah may be offered b'Al Korcho, and not "Oso"!
Igros Moshe (Kodshim 9, OC 1 p.360 DH Ach): Surely, we can force people to bring a Chatas, just like for Olah and Shelamim. Tosfos (6a DH Yakriv and Yevamos 87b DH Rebbi) says that we take security even for Chatas. Tosfos (in Kidushin) must explain that Pesach (from which we do learn Shelichus) is different; one is not Yotzei Pesach through coercion, because full Ratzon is required. There are differences that prevent us from learning Pesach from Olah and Chatas.
R. Shimshon (on Toras Kohanim Emor Parshesa 10:5): Regarding a Korban Yachid it says "li'Rtzono", but it also says "Yakriv", therefore we force. About a Korban Tzibur it says only "li'Rtzonchem", so we do not force. We take security from people to give Shekalim not to force them, rather, to encourage them to give quickly.
Minchas Chinuch (Sof Mitzvah 302 DH u'Midei): It is not clear why the Rambam did not bring this Beraisa. He often brings Beraisos that are not brought in the Gemara! Zayis Ra'anan (on Yalkut Shimoni 643) says that even though we force for Temidim and Musafim, we do not force for the Omer. Since in any case Yisrael are eager to bring it to permit Chodosh, it is like a Chatas Yachid (for which we do not take a security). This is not clear, for in any case Chodosh will be permitted the next day.