Dreaming of Dvinsk

So, one of the predominant topics of the beginning of Mesachet Shavuos is the carbon oil of the Yoledes. The Torah says in the beginning of Parshas Vayikra that there are three types of aveiros that if a person violates them, he is going to have to bring a carbon known as the carbon oil of the Yoledes. Now, the carbon oil of the Yoledes was a carbon chatas. Don't let the word oil fool you. It was inherently a carbon chatas. The reason it was called an oil of the Yoledes is because in contrast to an ordinary carbon chatas, which was a fixed animal that the person had to bring, when it came to the oil of the Yoledes, the type of animal or the type of carbon that was brought varied. It was oil of the Yoledes and really it depended on the financial status of the person that was bringing the carbon. The Torah says that if a person was a man of means, so he brought a beheima as his carbon. Most carbonos were beheimos. This person would bring a beheima. In the event that he couldn't afford to bring a beheima, so the Torah says in lieu of a beheima, you could bring two birds. What type of birds? Either benei yonah or torim. In the event that the person was such a dull that he couldn't even afford to bring birds, so the Torah said there's an option C and that is he was able to bring a a carbon mincha. So, inherently the oil of the Yoledes was a chatas, but being that the type of carbon varied and dependent on the person's financial status, it's for that reason it gets this unique name. It's known as the carbon oil of the Yoledes. Now, who brought the carbon oil of the Yoledes? So, we mentioned three chatoyos. What were those chatoyos? So, it's all delineated very, very clearly in the beginning of Parshas Vayikra. Number one, if somebody violated shvuos bitoi. Number two, if somebody violated shvuos ha'eidus. Number three, if somebody violated tumas mikdash v'kodashav. The reason we're discussing the oileh v'yoired in the beginning of Maseches Shvuos is because two out of the three people that brought the korban oileh v'yoired were people that violated shvuos, specifically shvuos bitoi, which is really the way the maseches begins. The reason we've also been discussing tumas mikdash v'kodashav. It's really the topic of the first 20 or so dafin of the maseches. It's ID the knock out shvuos shtein chain arba. We mentioned also yetzias hatuma shtein chain arba. And it's not just an ID that they're both shtein chain arba, but like the Gemara said in Daf Gimel Amud Aleph, they both have the korban oileh v'yoired. That's their common denominator. And it's for that reason we talk about one shtein chain arba that has the korban oileh v'yoired. We mention another shtein chain arba that has a korban oileh v'yoired as well. The Ramban, in his Pirush al ha'Torah, makes two observations as it relates to this parsha of oileh v'yoired. The first observation that he makes is that why is it, the obvious question, kan ha'ben shoyel, that these three chata'im, which are inherently chata'os, have the cooler of oileh v'yoired as opposed to every other chatas that a person may have to bring, we it did not have with it the cooler of oileh v'yoired. Meaning, it's psukim in the Torah, and obviously on some level everything in Toras Kohanim is above our pay grade. But the Ramban asks the obvious question, and that is man nishtana these three korbanos from all the other different types of chatam for which a person ordinarily would have to bring a korban chatas, he could afford it, he can't afford it, figure it out. You have to bring a beheima. Yet when it comes to these three chata'im, it's going to be different. So, the Ramban says, I think the pshat is as follows. As it relates to the two shvuos, the shvuos bituy and the shvuos eidus, where there's a parsha of korban oleh veyored, there the question is easy. The reason it's easy is because really who brought a korban chatas? Someone that didn't have aveira, that had he done it bemeizid, he would have been chayiv kares. If he does it beshogeg, he brings a korban chatas. Shvuos bituy and shvuos eidus, if somebody violates these aveiros bemeizid, he gets malkus, but he's not going to be chayiv kares. So, really al lo rishonim um mitstarim says the Ramban that they're even chayiv to bring a korban chatas. Nu, the Torah was mechadesh, they bring a korban chatas. Aba homeier, they don't have to have the chumra that regardless of whether they could or can't afford it, they're going to have to bring the beheima. The Torah said that I'll be mechadesh a chatas, but at the same time it's going to come along with a kulla. The kulla is that it's going to be an oleh veyored. But says the Ramban, that's good as it relates to the two shvuos who bring the oleh veyored. What about tumas mikdash vekodeshav? We're deep in the sugyas right now, and we know that for tumas mikdash vekodeshav bemeizid, there's kares. So, that's your classic dovish doinei kares veshogeg osei chatas. So, why would you have the kulla of oleh veyored? So, the Ramban says something beautiful. He says, "Ubetumas mikdash vekodeshav mipnei shehu to'ev barmitzva." Because at the end of the day, if a person violated mikdash vekodeshav, let's be honest, at the reitzach in the beis hamikdash, at the reitzach mikotzeh, he did something bad. It's so bad that he's chayiv kares. Kares is the worst of the worst, but at the same time, he's to'ev barmitzva. Ki akoyein oichel bekotzeh, vahaboleh mikdash lehishtachavos, ovel hagrid korban oiseh kubemitzva vidai to'ev beshamayim. For the fiqo says the Ramban, "Af al pi shechotah ba'al hamasa tumah, ribui akos of kaparos, the Torah gave So, says the Rambam, the reason it's these three chatoyim that have the cool of over the yard, right? As it relates to the two shvuois, it's because it's not a double shvuois in a chorus. And the emes of the reason I'm going to explain them, why they're even shiyach to chados, new chados, with the cool of over the yard, as it relates to the tumas mikdash v'kodesh of, the reason is mipnei shehu toyev b'dvar mitzvah, he's oisek b'mitzvah with daas Torah l'shamayim on some level. And it's for that reason, even though it's true what he did is very very chomer, and he needs kaparah, and the maysid would have been chayiv kores, but l'maaseh we throw him a bone and we say that in the event that it was done b'shogeig, you have the cool of over the yard. This is the first observation and the first discussion in pshutei shmuel mikra in the parshas over the yard that the Rambam talks about. The second observation that the Rambam makes is so, if somebody was able to afford to bring a proper chatos, then he brought a proper chatos. And the fact that it's over the yard is really neither here nor there. If, however, the person couldn't afford to bring a carbon chatos, so then the Torah says he brings shnei toyrim or shnei bnei yonah. What's the cheshbon of shnei toyrim or shnei bnei yonah? So, pashut you would say being that the bird is an inferior product versus the animal, so even though we give you the cool of to bring a bird, but you have to bring two. And by the way, two birds are probably still cheaper than one animal. But, the point is, being that you're doing something inferior, it's for that reason you have to bring two. But, the truth is, the pasuk says that the reason there was shnei toyrim or shnei bnei yonah is echad l'olah v'echad l'chatos. One of them was brought as a carbon olah, and the other one was brought as a carbon chatos. In other words, when the ashir brought his carbon, he brought one animal and it was a chatos. We said the over the yard is b'cheftz of a chatos. >> [laughter] >> However, when the arman brought the shnei toyrim or shnei bnei yonah, so then the two animals were one which makes sense cuz that's what the but the other one was going to be and the asks the obvious question. He says if the person that is over the has to bring in addition to also then the should also have to bring and if he doesn't have to bring carbon so why is the man bringing Now you want to tell me you have to bring two together. You want to tell me I hear but they should both be Why is it that one of them is a and the other one is an So the quotes what says I says the that said of the other connected the two should be says the So the says that the says that the other made this observation and the said a and the somewhat surely says as it relates to what the said the other I think he's saying a very nice and I agree with him 100% So the other he says that we know that the other was cool So in the world of the that were brought as a for the most part a carbon had a that went like or even sometimes to the and the that went like The one exception to the rule was the carbon The carbon was cool which means that all of the of the carbon was brought as a there was no of the carbon that was as it relates to the there the had that same unique quality as the Behrman, is that it was cool like Carlo. But interestingly, as it relates to the other it was cool like Now Behrman, just to be clear, had a that went to the at a that went a was cool like So the was cool like Carlo just like the was cool like Carlo. The was cool like So said Evan Ezra that in the event that the right now is going to bring only one whether it's one or whether it's two. And they're going to be What's going to emerge is that his entire carbon is going to be and there's going to be no of the this animal that's going to be brought That's going to be brought as a because the was cool like and that's a problem. The reason it's a problem is because the Behrman, which is what the are being brought in lieu of, have a that was and also had a that was and now that you're bringing is you're only going to have the you're not going to have the So what we need to do now is we need to supplement that piece. The way we supplement that piece is by saying that in addition to your also bring it The is cool like the So to this the which goes to the and the which goes to what you have is your proverbial and that's why although the did not have to bring an the had to bring an oil. The reason he's bringing an oil is because not that he needs an oil. What he needs is a of a carbon that's going to go He can't get that from the because the is cool like It's for that reason he had to bring the It's a that that says and brings it and is He says The truth is that if you look around in the other said the same exact thing that Rambam brings the shame of an Ezra. I'll just mention one. That is in the Pan Roza. The Pan Roza says it by Rixos. He asks this kasha. Why is it that the other man in addition to bringing you also had to bring his lotion is came the says right? But why would the Torah throw upon him on and the kasha is the of the boat toys. Okay, so you'll tell me you need two to make up for the one that the others bringing. But you see that's not what it is. What it is is that in addition to this he also needs an well if the ocean doesn't need an then why should the other man need an then came and says the I'm skipping a little bit. The ocean was able to bring one carbon. And that's why he has to have both. Says it very very even when the Rambam quotes the he quotes it very but the Pan says it like an >> [laughter] >> he says because at the end of the day a carbon has to have a look that's a look that's not look at the way if you bring the you're going to have it. If you're going to bring the you're not going to have it. So the of the as it relates to the carbon was really to fill the role of the and it's for that reason it's for that reason whereas the other only brought a the other man had to bring a the other it's your doer that remains in her. said a dober in this parsha of Peter 7 Ezra. The Gemara in Maseches Chullin daf kuf aleph, again this is very relevant to what we're learning right now cuz we're holding teeth in the sugias of the korban olah v'yored. So the Gemara in Chullin daf kuf aleph amud aleph darshens one of the pesukim in the parsha of the korban olah v'yored. The pasuk says regarding the state to have a mishneh b'yom the es ha shaini yasah olah kamishpat v'chiper alav hakochen. Mechatos yashar kotev in this parsha. So again, the omer just brings the omer. Brings the two birds. One is chatos v'es ha shaini and the second one is yasah olah. And he should bring it kamishpat. So the Gemara says, what does it mean kamishpat? You should bring the second of the birds, which is going to be an olah, kamishpat. So says the Gemara, kamishpat means that the olah should be brought with the same Shulchan Aruch as the chatos. May nafka mina? Says the Gemara, three things. Mach chatos b'heima in a b'heima chullin, just like a chatos b'heima has to be brought min a chullin, ub'yom, not just that, has to be brought during the day, ub'yom hayemani, and when you do the avodah you have to do it with the right hand. Af olah sa'if, so too when it comes to this olah sa'if in a b'heima chullin, has to be brought min a chullin, ub'yom, it has to be brought during the day, ub'yom hayemani, and with the right hand. That's the only way you do the avodah. So the Torah in the parsha of the korban olah v'yored, when it's talking about which slot the olah sa'if says the word kamishpat, to teach me three halachos. The olah sa'if had to be brought min a chullin, the olah sa'if had to be brought during the day, and the avodah of the olah sa'if had to be dafka b'yom hayemani. So I'm skipping a whole daf. The Gemara in daf kuf beis amud aleph dissects this braisa. And the Gemara says like this, b'yom. One of the things that we learn from the word kamishpat in the parsha of olah sa'if is that the olah sa'if had to be brought during the day. Frankly Gemara, I need a limud of kamishpat that it's like the chatos to tell me it has to be brought during the day. Me beyond so enough the positive says beyond as been a hacker with carbon and from that positive we learned that all of all different carbonas had to be brought after doing the day even which the says love of had to be done during the day. It's very why do I need a of Kamishbat to tell me that had to be brought during the day. Isn't there a general thing that all carbonas had to be brought during the day and the says you're right we don't need a to tell me that had to be brought during the day. Why then what's mentioned? You mentioned two we threw in a three. But the whole thing is one big the in a and this is an and I involved was asked the question by a where a manuscript of a school and right this is before the and the and when the way the was circulated was in manuscript. And this had a manuscript and his was was a little bit different. In his when the says me why do I need a limit of to tell me that had to be brought during the day it's had to be brought during the day. So this is what it said in that so I could have not cuz I would have thought I need that when is there a that's but this is the smallest in the world somewhere to tell me that maybe not THE WHOLE THE WHOLE thing is and the asked the what's what would be the the all the in the world that somehow is not included in is the not and the wrote back to me YOU'RE 100% RIGHT THIS is a don't even pay attention to this So, it's a mistake you put it in the Cairo Genizah. Don't pay any attention to it. This is one big mistake this girsa. Some say simple and also may have and this is very much talked away. It's in Hilchos Maaser Sheni perek zayin. He brings this girsa that the Shulchan Aruch told the Rashba about in the Gemara in Chullin daf kuf bet amud aleph. And he brings the fact that the Rashba said be moicheh the girsa, it's one big mistake. But [laughter] Nedavah Me'ah Simcha lulei demistafina, I think you could be meyashev the girsa. Because the emes is that the Bella, right? We're dealing here with the olah oif in the parsha of Vayikra. And the Ben Azzai already asked the greatest kasha that the Ramban brings. And that is that why does this olah even have to bring a korban olah? The osher doesn't bring a korban olah. So why would he have to bring a korban olah? And the Ben Azzai and the Ben Azzai and others have said that the reason is because being that a chatas has to have a chelek that goes like the olah. And the chatas olah was olah so there's no chelek that goes like the olah. So we're bringing now the olah OIF BEMOKEM EMURIM. SO LIKE THIS THERE SHOULD BE A CHELEK that's going to go on the mizbeach. So said Reb Meir Simcha lulei demistafina, we know that even though the Torah says be yom tzavoi said that all the avodahs had to be done during the day. But there's one avodah that was able to be done at night and that's the ketores bemokem emurim. First Mishnah in Shas, Berachos daf kuf bet amud aleph. >> [laughter] >> Right? We know hekteir chalav u'veaim is kasher kalalailah. So we know the ketores was able to be done the entire night. And being that the whole cheftza of the olah oif is bemokem emurim. So said Reb Meir Simcha yesh leima, that's why there would have been al kol panim minah. That [laughter] maybe the olah oif hakrovah could be done at night. Maybe it doesn't have to be done during the day. Kamashma lon kamish patel me that even though the olah OIF HAD GONE THE CHEFTZA OF THE OLAH OIF IS MEN NEED bemokem emurim. Afilu hachi, it's included in the din that avodah has to be done during the day. But there's an interesting postscript to this chof digger or some may have. And that is in a sefer called Mekor Baruch. And this sefer Mekor Baruch was written by a Yid whose name was Reb Nachman Baruch Ginsberg. so the more popular Maccabi was written by the this was written by whose name is Ginsburg so you together is a great and he wants went to visit brings this in the he wants went to the he walks into his study and he saw was beaming he was so happy he never saw him like this and he said explain the WHY ARE YOU SO EXCITED IS THERE something you want to share with me that something happened and he said you know what I'm going to share with you a said I was sitting and learning right now who and I came across the by maybe and with the based on a different which sounds like it was a in the matter that relates to the maybe that's that would be a lot that there's no in this being the and I HAD THIS MAYBE BASED ON THE THAT IS THAT AND MAYBE YOU COULD BRING THIS but I as well and as I thought of this so I fell asleep I fell asleep all of a sudden I had a and in my sleep I had a dream and in the dream I was standing in and there was a big kitchen going on in the world and the kitchen was that the prosecution was saying that there's such a in the right now that there's no one in this that can be this is what he sees in his dream and as this was happening and they're trying to figure out what do we do about this all of a sudden the he walks into and he said it's not he said because there's a in Lithuania and a >> [clears throat] >> who just now set up shop in the who he was that years ago I said had no shot. And he was mechaven to teirus emes l'amito. And you can't be mekachesh on the dor because there is a yeed in this dor right now that has the ability to be mechaven to teirus emes. So, Maysemcha looked at this yeed, Rav Nachman Boruch Ginsburg, and he said, "That's why I'm so besimcha, because of this cholem that I just had." And the truth is, if you take a look at the Or Sameach in the Reining in Hilchos Maaser Sheni perek zayin, after Maysemcha says this vart, he very mysteriously says the following. He says, "L'fi mashma pashut, based on our shot, he nusach daf komes." Maysemcha sprach, "The nusach is a miduyakdige nusach, because it's a real girsah. This somach dim'oyid she'ein chani Hashem bederech emes." He said, "I was so besimcha that the Eibishter led me bederech emes." What it's what's brought down in the hakdomah to that sefer, the Korban Aharon, is what we like to say is the rest of the story.