QUESTION: The Mishnah (2:5) teaches that when one brings an offering of two
birds, they must both be either two Benei Yonah or two Torim ("Ein Mevi'in
Torin k'Neged Benei Yonah"). The MEFARESH explains that one must bring the
two obligatory Korbanos from the same species of bird. The Toras Kohanim
(Vayikra 12:8) derives this from the verse, "One for an Olah and one for a
Chatas," which implies that the Olah must be of the same species as the
Chatas.
The principle of the Mishnah that "Ein Mevi'in Torin k'Neged Benei Yonah" is
mentioned again later in the Mishnah (3:6, 24b). The Mishnah there teaches
that if a woman, before giving birth, pledged to bring two birds as a Korban
if she gives birth to a boy, when she gives birth to a boy she is obligated
to bring two pairs of bird offerings -- two Olos ha'Of for her vow, in
addition to the standard Chatas ha'Of and Olas ha'Of that every woman brings
after giving birth. The Mishnah there says that if the Kohen to whom she
gave the birds mistakenly thought that each pair of birds was comprised of a
Chatas and Olah (and not one pair comprising a Chatas and Olah, and the
other pair comprising two Olos) and offered them accordingly, she must offer
another bird as a replacement Korban for an Olas ha'Of, of the same species
as the one offered incorrectly, if all of the birds that she brought were of
the same species.
If two of the birds were Torim and two were Benei Yonah, then she must bring
both a Tor and a Ben Yonah as replacement Olos, because we are unsure which
kind of bird was the one that became Pasul (i.e. that was brought as a
Chatas instead of as an Olah). The Mefaresh there (24b, end of DH mi'Min
Echad; see also RASHI to Zevachim 67b, end of DH Tzericha) explains that
this is because of the rule mentioned in the Mishnah here (2:5) that "Ein
Mevi'in Torin k'Neged Benei Yonah" -- a bird which is being brought as a
replacement must be of the same species as the bird that it is replacing.
This Halachah is difficult to understand. It is clear that when a Yoledes
brings the pair of birds that the Torah obligates her to bring, she must
bring either two Torim or two Benei Yonah, because the verse states, "One
for an Olah and one for a Chatas," implying that the two must be from the
same species. However, when she voluntarily pledges to bring a pair of
birds, why should she have to bring them from the same species? In this
case, she should be obligated to bring only what she pledged -- two Olos
ha'Of. Why should there by any connection between the two birds, such that
they must be from the same species? (See RASHASH to 3:6, and CHIDUSHEI
HA'GRIZ, Hilchos Ma'aseh ha'Korbanos 14:2, DH v'Hineh.)
ANSWER: The BRISKER RAV in Chidushei ha'Griz answers based on the Gemara in
Kerisus (9a). The Gemara there cites a Beraisa that quotes the verse,
"v'Hikrivo" -- "and he shall bring it" (Vayikra 1:15), which refers to the
voluntary Olah offering (see Rashi there, DH v'Hikrivo). The Gemara explains
that because the previous verse -- which refers to Torim -- says,
"v'Hikriv," we might have thought that one who declares, "I pledge to bring
an Olas ha'Of," must bring at least two birds. The verse therefore repeats
"v'Hikrivo" to teach that even one bird is acceptable to fulfill his vow
("v'Hikrivo" means that "he shall bring *it*," in the singular). Rashi (DH
v'Hikriv) writes that the first verse, which does not stress that even a
single bird may be offered, implies that one must bring a "complete Korban."
We see from Rashi that a "complete" bird offering is not less than two Torim
or two Benei Yonah.
Consequently, there was reason to think that when one makes a vow to bring a
free-will bird offering, one must bring two birds. Even though the verse of
"v'Hikrivo" teaches that one bird suffices, nevertheless the principle that
a "complete Korban" is comprised of two birds remains true.
The Brisker Rav explains that Rashi derives the law that a complete bird
offering is comprised of two birds from the law taught there in Kerisus (8b)
that when a Ger converts, he must bring two bird offerings. The Gemara there
(9a) says that it is impossible for him to bring only one, because "we never
find anywhere in the Torah that one bird is sufficient." The Gemara then
questions this from the verse, "v'Hikrivo," which teaches that one bird *is*
sufficient, and it answers that one is sufficient only for voluntary
offerings, but not for obligatory offerings.
Based on this, we understand the source for the statement of Rashi in
Zevachim (67b) that one who vowed to bring a "Ken" must bring two birds of
the same specifies, and may not bring one Tor together with one Ben Yonah,
even though this Ken is not a Korban that the Torah obligates her to bring.
Even though she may bring only one bird if this was her vow (as we derive
from "v'Hikrivo"), nevertheless if she made a vow to bring a Ken, then she
has committed herself to bring a "complete bird-offering," which is a
minimum of two birds. Moreover, the two birds that she brings must be either
two Torim or two Benei Yonah, because she did not merely commit herself to
bring "two birds" (that have no connection with each other), but rather she
committed herself to bring a "Ken." Even though the law of "Ein Mevi'in
Torin k'Neged Benei Yonah" is derived from a verse which discusses
obligatory Korbanos, nevertheless Rashi maintains that because she called it
a "Ken" in her vow (as in the Mishnah later, 3:6), she must bring a Ken that
has the same laws as the Torah gives for normal Kinim that a Yoledes is
obligated to bring. Therefore, as fulfillment of her vow she must bring
either two Torim or two Benei Yonah. (D. Bloom)