QUESTION: Rav Huna says in the name of Rav that when one slaughters, with no specific intent, a Korban Asham that was sent out to graze because its owner died, it may be offered as a Korban Olah. As RASHI explains, this is based on the Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai that states that in any situation in which a Korban Chatas must die, a Korban Asham is sent out to graze ("Kol sheb'Chatas Mesah, b'Asham Ro'eh"). When it gets a blemish it is sold and its value is used to buy a Korban Olah.

TOSFOS questions this understanding of the Gemara. If, as the Gemara says, the Korban Asham itself may be offered as a Korban Olah when it is slaughtered with no specific intent, then why should it be sent out to graze in the first place? It must be that sending the animal to graze changes the status of the animal from a Korban Asham to a Korban Olah, enabling it to be offered as an Olah. How, though, does sending it out to graze effect such a change?

Tosfos prefers a different Girsa for the Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai that Rashi cites. Instead of "Kol sheb'Chatas Mesah, b'Asham Ro'eh," the Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai states, "Kol sheb'Chatas Mesah, b'Asham Karev Olah" -- in any situation in which a Korban Chatas must die, a Korban Asham may be offered as an Olah. The requirement to send it to graze, explains Tosfos, is merely a Gezeirah d'Rabanan.

How does Rashi answer the questions of Tosfos? Why must one send the Korban Asham to graze, if it may be offered as a Korban Olah? How does sending the animal to graze effect a change in the status of the Korban?

ANSWER: The BRISKER RAV (cited by the MINCHAS AVRAHAM) explains that according to Rashi, the requirement to send the Korban Asham to graze does not change the Asham directly into an Olah. Rather, the change of status comes about indirectly. The Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai states that the Korban Asham that originally was to be offered on the Mizbe'ach and now cannot be offered (since its owner died) is able to acquire Kedushas Damim; the value of the animal may be used for a Korban (in contrast to Kedushas ha'Guf, where the animal itself must be offered as a Korban). However, the Torah requires that this transition, from having Kedushas ha'Guf to having Kedushas Damim, be effected through an action. One must send the animal to pasture and wait for it to get a blemish and be redeemed, and that is what gives the animal its Kedushas Damim.

However, a second step is necessary. Once the animal acquires the status of being Kadosh with Kedushas Damim, it changes from a Korban Asham to an animal whose value is intended to be used for an Olah. This is based on a second Halachah l'Moshe mi'Sinai that teaches that the money received for the redemption of any animal which is Kadosh with Kedushas Damim and gets a blemish is to be used for a Korban Olah. (See RABEINU CHANANEL to Pesachim 97b, and RAMBAM in Perush ha'Mishnayos.) Once the animal's value is meant to be used for an Olah, the animal itself may also be used for an Olah and it may be offered on the Mizbe'ach.

This is how Rashi explains the two Halachos that the Gemara cites. The Gemara begins with the Halachah that states that a Korban Asham must be sent out to graze if its owner dies. If it is not sent out to graze, the animal does not become Kadosh with Kedushas Damim; it remains Kadosh with Kedushas ha'Guf as a Korban Asham which is unfit to be offered. The second step is that once the animal is sent out to graze and it becomes Kadosh with Kedushas Damim, it may be offered as a Korban Olah, because of the additional Halachah that states that the value of anything that is Kadosh with Kedushas Damim is used for a Korban Olah. Once the animal's value is waiting to be used as an Olah (once it gets a blemish and is redeemed), the animal itself may be used as an Olah as well (before it gets a blemish). (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)

QUESTION: The Gemara (end of 4a) quotes Rav who says that when the Kemitzah of a Minchas ha'Omer is performed she'Lo Lishmah (not with intent that it is a Minchas ha'Omer), the Korban Minchah is invalid and may not be offered, since it did not serve its purpose of permitting the Chadash, the new grain. Similarly, an Asham Nazir and an Asham Metzora slaughtered she'Lo Lishmah are invalid, since they did not serve their respective purposes to make their owners fit (the Asham Nazir that was slaughtered she'Lo Lishmah cannot enable the Nazir Tamei to become Tahor and begin counting his Nezirus again, and the Asham Metzora that was slaughtered she'Lo Lishmah cannot enable the Metzora to re-enter the city (RASHI) or to eat Kodshim (SHITAH MEKUBETZES)). Since the owner of the Korban does not fulfill his obligation with a Korban slaughtered she'Lo Lishmah, the Korban does not serve its purpose to make him fit and thus it is Pasul.

The Gemara later discusses the Chatas Yoledes, another type of Korban which is a "Machshir," a Korban brought for the purpose of making a person fit. The Gemara explains that the Olah that a woman brings after giving birth attains atonement for her, and the Chatas that she brings makes her fit to eat Kodshim. According to Rav's understanding, if the Chatas Yoledes is brought she'Lo Lishmah, it is Pasul since it cannot fulfill its purpose. The Acharonim question this from the Mishnah in Kerisus (1:7), which teaches that if a woman owes five Chata'os for five previous births, she may bring a single Chatas which will allow her to eat Kodshim. The rest of the Chata'os remain an obligation upon her which she may fulfill later. This is because a Korban that is a Machshir works like a Mikvah; regardless of how many times one came in contact with something Tamei, he must immerse in the Mikvah only once. Similarly, regardless of how many births the woman had, one Korban is enough to make her fit to eat Kodshim.

How can the woman bring the remaining Chata'os at a later date? The woman became fit to eat Kodshim by bringing the first Chatas, which made her Tahor from all of her births, just as a Mikvah makes a person Tahor from all of the Tum'os with which he came into contact. Consequently, the other Chata'os will be Korbanos that are supposed to make her fit for something but they will not be accomplishing their purpose, since she already became fit to eat Kodshim due to the first Chatas. According to Rav, a Korban which is a Machshir but which does not fulfill its purpose is Pasul! Why, then, may the woman bring the remaining Chata'os?

(a) The BRISKER RAV answers that although it is true that a Korban which is a Machshir must always serve its purpose of making the person fit for something, a Chatas Yoledes is different. As long as the Chatas Yoledes is valid (all of its Avodos are done properly, and it is offered in the proper manner at the proper time) and the woman is ready to become Tahor, it is considered to be Machshir her. Even if there is no tangible effect (such as a Heter to eat Kodshim), it still serves its purpose. Only when it is offered she'Lo Lishmah, as in the case of the Gemara here, does it not serve its purpose at all and is Pasul.

(b) The ZECHER YITZCHAK (#30) answers that a Korban that is a Machshir does not actually need to make the person fit for something. Rav means that the Korban may not be brought unless its owner has become fit, either through the bringing of this Korban or through a Korban that was already brought. Therefore, a Chatas Yoledes may be brought even though it does not actually serve to be Machshir the woman, since she already became fit because of the previous Chatas Yoledes that she brought. Only when a Machshir is brought she'Lo Lishmah, and the owner did not became fit beforehand, is the Machshir invalid, because the owner is bringing it now without being, or becoming, fit.

(c) RAV SHACH zt'l in AVI EZRI (Revi'a, Hilchos Pesulei ha'Mukdashin) explains that a Korban that is a Machshir does not need to be Machshir the owner in an active way. As long as it has the potential ability to be Machshir the owner, it is valid. Therefore, a woman may bring the rest of her Chata'os Yoledes after she has already become fit to eat Kodshim as a result of bringing her first Chatas Yoledes. Had she not become fit already, the Chatas that she is bringing now would have been Machshir her, since it was offered in the proper manner at the proper time. In contrast, when a Machshir is brought she'Lo Lishmah, it does not have the ability to be Machshir the owner under any circumstance and, therefore, it is Pasul.

The MINCHAS AVRAHAM points out that a practical difference between these answers is that according to the Zecher Yitzchak, the woman may bring her remaining Chata'os even when she has become Tamei because of a new birth. Although the Chata'os that she brings now will not be Machshir her (since she is Tamei), they are valid because she already became Tahor from the previous births. According to the Brisker Rav and Rav Shach, she may not bring the Chatas unless she is able to become fit now (either in practice or in theory). Since she is now Tamei, bringing the Chatas Yoledes that she owes from a previous birth cannot make her Tahor even potentially (because she is like one who is "Tovel v'Sheretz b'Yado"), and thus she may not bring the Chatas Yoledes. (Mordechai Zvi Dicker)