MAY WE OFFER KORBANOS NOWADAYS? [Korbanos :nowadays]
15b - Question: What is the source that if a Zar did Avodah, it is Pasul?
16a: We cannot learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah of a Ba'al Mum and a Tamei. Both of them are forbidden to serve on a Bamah, but a Zar is not!
112b (Mishnah): Semichah applies only on a Bamas Tzibur (and all the more so, in the Mikdash), but not on a Bamas Yachid.
119b: We learn from "Lifnei Hash-m v'Somach."
120a (Mishnah): The following apply equally to a Bamas Tzibur and a Bamas Yachid: a time limit, Nosar and Tamei.
Megilah 10a (Gemara - R. Yitzchak): I heard that we may offer Korbanos in Beis Chonyo (a place of Avodah in Mitzrayim) nowadays.
Question (Rav Mari - Mishnah): Once the Mikdash was built in Yerushalayim, Bamos were prohibited and were never permitted again.
Answer: Tana'im argue about whether or not Kedushas Yerushalayim still applies;
Zevachim 107b (Mishnah - R. Eliezer): I have a tradition that when building the Heichal and the walls of the Azaros, they set up curtains;
R. Yehoshua: I have a tradition that we may bring Korbanos even though the Mikdash is not standing.
This is because Shlomo's Kedushah was permanent.
Suggestion: R. Eliezer argues. He holds that Shlomo's Kedushah ceased! (Therefore, curtains were needed in order to offer Korbanos until the building was finished.)
Rejection (Ravina): Perhaps all agree that Shlomo's Kedushah was permanent. Each Tana said what he heard!
(R. Yochanan): If one offers Korbanos outside the Mikdash nowadays he is liable, because the first Kedushah was permanent.
(Reish Lakish): He is exempt. The first Kedushah was temporary.
Menachos 49a (Mishnah): The outer Mizbe'ach must be inaugurated with a morning Tamid.
Ta'anis 27a (Rav Yehudah, and a Beraisa): Kohanim, Leviyim and Yisraelim, are Me'akev Korbanos.
Rambam (Hilchos Beis ha'Bechirah 6:14,15): Shlomo gave permanent Kedushah to the Azarah and Yerushalayim. Therefore, we may offer Korbanos even when the Bayis is not built, and we may eat Kodshei Kodoshim in the entire Azarah without a surrounding wall. We may eat Kodshim Kalim in Yerushalayim without a wall.
Rebuttal (Ra'avad): There is no source for this. Many Gemaros says that without a Mikdash, we must leave Kodshim to rot. Bava Metzi'a 53b proved that if the Mechitzos fell, one may not eat Ma'aser Sheni.
Kesef Mishneh: The Halachah follows R. Yehoshua against R. Eliezer, and R. Yochanan against Reish Lakish. They hold that the Kedushah is permanent. Also, we follow R. Yochanan against Reish Lakish.
Rambam (Hilchos Klei ha'Mikdash 5:16): A Kohen may not serve until he is inaugurated with Asiris ha'Eifah (Chavitei Kohen Gadol, i.e. the Minchah that a Kohen Gadol brings every day).
R. Baruch (cited in Kaftor v'Ferach 6): Nowadays, we are Tamei Mes. One who enters the place of the Mikdash is Chayav Kares. However, R. Yechiel (some versions - R. Chaim) of Paris intended to come to Yerushalayim in 5017 (1257 CE) and offer Korbanos nowadays. Tum'ah is not a problem, for Korbanos Tzibur override Tum'as Mes. A Mikveh is Metaher from other Tum'os. The Kedushah of the wall around the city is permanent, to permit eating Ma'aser Sheni inside if the Mizbe'ach is built.
Tosfos (Zevachim 28b DH Mistabra): There is no Heter for a Tamei to serve on a Bamah. This is why we could not learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah of a Ba'al Mum and a Tamei, for both of them are forbidden to serve on a Bamah.
Shitah Mekubetzes (Erchin 11a:6, citing Tosfos ha'Rosh): Even though it says in Ta'anis that Kohanim, Leviyim and Yisraelim, are Me'akev Korbanos, presumably Yisre'elim are not Me'akev. It is only l'Chatchilah that they be present. B'Di'eved it is not Me'akev Kaparah.
She'alas Ya'avetz (1:89): How did R. Chaim of Paris intend to offer Korbanos Tzibur? The Tzibur must pay for them! It is difficult to say that he could have collected Shekalim from all tribes of Yisrael scattered in exile. Perhaps he relied on R. Yosi, who says that one may volunteer (more than the required Chetzi Shekel for Korbanos Tzibur), and we are not concerned lest he (retain ownership, and) not properly give it to the Tzibur. This is even though he argues only about things used for the Avodah (but not actual) Korbanos, like the Kohen whose mother made for him a white robe (Yoma 68b), and only for Avodah of individuals, but not for Avodas Tzibur. Also, how can one's Korban be offered, and he is not there?! (This is why there are Ma'amados, i.e. Sheluchim of the Tzibur to be present when their Korbanos are offered - Ta'anis 26a). R. Chaim did not have Ma'amados! We can say that he wanted to offer only Korban Pesach.
Mishpat Kohen (Inyanei Eretz Yisrael 91): She'elas David said that there is a problem that we do not know exactly where the Mizbe'ach should be. Yaskil Avdi (YD 18) said that perhaps this is not a problem, for it is a Mitzvah for the Mizbe'ach to be in the proper place, but not Me'akev. I disagree. Since we cannot fulfill it due to our ignorance, it is Me'akev, just like a Minchah that is too big and cannot be mixed due to human weakness, so mixing it is Me'akev.
Har Tzvi (1:2, cited in Minchas Shlomo 2:140): R. Akiva Eiger asked Rav Tzvi Kalishar that the Ra'avad, who says that nowadays there is no Kedushas Mikdash, is an impediment to offering Korbanos nowadays. Rav Tzvi answered that even according to the opinion that the Kedushah is not permanent, one may offer outside the Mikdash, e.g, in Beis Chonyo. R. Akiva Eiger did not respond. This is astounding. How can we offer, and say that according to the Rambam it is due to Kedushas ha'Mikdash, and according to the Ra'avad we offer on a Bamah?! The laws of offering in the Mikdash and on a Banah are totally different! We may not offer Korbanos Tzibur on a Bamah. Nowadays one may not offer even a Korban Yachid, for we are Temei'im, and Tum'ah is permitted only for Korbanos Tzibur. Do not say that Rav Tzvi meant that the Ra'avad holds that we could make a Bamas Tzibur for Korbanos Tzibur. A Bamas Tzibur requires an Ohel Mo'ed! We can say that R. Chaim of Paris wanted to offer because he holds like the Rambam, so he had no Safek. We received from our Gedolei ha'Doros that it is a Safek whether we rule like the Rambam or Ra'avad.
Minchas Shlomo: A Mishnah teaches that the outer Mizbe'ach must be inaugurated with a morning Tamid. The Rambam (Hilchos Temidim u'Musafim 1:12) rules like this. One can be Makdish an Olah on Tanai that if the Halachah follows the Rambam, it is a Tamid, which overrides Tum'ah. If the Halachah follows the Ra'avad, it is an Olas Yachid which may be offered on a Bamas Yachid. Even though Korbanos Tzibur must come from Shekalim of the Tzibur, one may give on behalf of them with this stipulation. Tosfos (Rosh Hashanah 30b) says that one can offer a lamb on condition that if witness of the new moon will come, it is a Korban Musaf for Rosh Chodesh, and if not, it is a Tamid. All the more so, here one may stipulate (based on whom the Halachah follows)! The argument about Breirah is not relevant, for all agree that one may make an Eruv on condition that a Chacham already came, because this does not depend on a future event. Even though a Korban Yachid requires Semichah (but Olas Tamid does not), and l'Chatchilah one may not offer without Semichah, a Korban Yachid on a Bamas Yachid does not require Semichah. In any case one could make it an Olah of a woman, who is exempt from Semichah. The Gaon of Karlin said similarly, that one can be Makdish a Korban Pesach on condition that if the place is Kodesh, like the Rambam, it is Korban Pesach. If not, Zerikah and Haktarah are like mere throwing of water and burning Chelev. However, he retracted, for if the Rambam is correct, there are several Sefekos, and if one errs he is Chayav Kares for entering the Mikdash.
Minchas Shlomo: The Ya'avetz says that R. Chaim wanted to offer only Korban Pesach, and R. Akiva Eiger and the Chasam Sofer agreed. We must say that he would stipulate that if it is not a Pesach, it is a Shelamim. Perhaps one may not do so l'Chatchilah, since blood of Pesach should be spilled (on the Yesod), and that of Shelamim should be thrown (on two opposite edges of the Mizbe'ach), even though b'Di'eved it is not Me'akev. However, perhaps we do not distinguish spilling and throwing on a Bamah, and it is l'Chatchilah to spill (blood of Shelamim) on a Bamah. However, how would they inaugurate the Mizbe'ach for Pesach? Also, what was the Ya'avetz' question from Ma'amados? Just like offering Pesach overrides Tum'ah, it permits also Ma'amados (to enter the Mikdash)! Rather, he holds that Ma'amados are Me'akev, nowadays we could not organize them. However, the Rosh says that they are not Me'akev, therefore, we could offer a Tamid on condition that if the Halachah follows the Ra'avad, it is an Olas Yachid. Actually, we cannot, for a Tamei may not offer on a Bamah, like Tosfos proved.
Minchas Shlomo: The Rambam rules that a Kohen may not serve until he is inaugurated with Asiris ha'Eifah. We cannot offer this nowadays, for it is a Korban Yachid and it does not override Tum'ah! Perhaps we can prove like the Mishneh l'Melech says, that it is not Me'akev, for Tosfos (117b DH v'Rabanan) says that R. Yehudah holds that Menachos were not offered even on a Bamas Tzibur. If so, how was a Kohen inaugurated? We must say that the Minchah is not Me'akev, and he may serve l'Chatchilah if it cannot be offered.