This post was elicited by an experience I had while saying my Halacha Shiur. We are learning Siman 70. Two members of the shiur commented, and each was a very strong stimulus for deeper analysis.
The mechaber begins Siman 70 by saying, from the Mishna in Brachos 20a, that women are not obligated to say Krias Shema, and adds that it is correct and proper for them to do so.
Hachaver Michoel (Mike) Nussbaum questioned the application of Mitzvas Asei shehazman gerama to krias shema. He said that Shofar is a clearly time-bound mitzvah, and, as such, it is not obligatory for women. But Shema is an application, or a parallel, of the universal mitzva of Kabalas Yichud Hashem, and as such, it should apply to women despite the general rule of zeman gerama.
So we spent a day going through the Chinuch, who says that the mitzva of achdus (417) is derived from the word "shema," and the mitzva of kerias shema (420) is derived from vedibarta bam; and the Rambam, that the mitzva of achdus (2) is from Hashem echad, and the mitzva of Shema is from vedibarta, and the Ramban that achdus is from Anochi. In any case, the two mitzvos are clearly separated, and as such, although achdus is universal, its rules are entirely different. For example, we do not know how often one is obligated to be meyached Hashem. Only when faced with a life or death decision? Once a year like mechiyas amalek? Once a day, like Tefillin? But Shema has specific times and specific words, albeit in any language.
Still, his sevara is shared by the Sefer Ohel Moed, brought in the Beis Yosef.
כתוב באהל מועד נראה דעבד ואשה חייבים הם בקבלת הייחוד דהיינו פסוק ראשון:
According to him, the Mishna that says that women are pattur is only if you hold the mitzva requires the whole parsha or two parshios. But if you hold the mitzva is only the first passuk, then women are equally chayav.
(Who, you ask, is the Sefer Ohel Moed? It was written by Harav שמואל ירונדי, who was born a few years before the petirah of the Baal HaTurim, and was highly respected, but overshadowed by the Tur. It is brought down only a few times in the Beis Yosef.)
As for Korbanos; Should women say the parshios of korbanos?
Because the mechaber says women have no obligation to say Shema, the Mishna Berura reviews what he had said in other places about what parts of tefilla women are required to say. A glimpse at the Aruch Hashulchan here and in Siman 106 will illustrate the many differences of opinion on this topic, and indeed there is a wide range of opinion in women's mosdos hachinuch today regarding the practical requirements and priorities of tefilla for women. But I mentioned that back in the end of Siman 47, the Biur Halacha brings that women have to make birkas hatorah because, among other reasons, they have to say the parshios of korbanos. He holds that once a person has an obligation to read a parsha in the Torah, reading that parsha requires Birkas HaTorah.
This halachic opinion is well founded; it is brought in the Beis Yosef from the Agur quoting the Maharil, and reaffirmed by the Magen Avraham and the Taz and the Shulchan Aruch Harav ((וְעוֹד שֶׁבִּרְכַּת הַתּוֹרָה מְבָרְכִין קֹדֶם "פָּרָשַׁת הַתָּמִיד" וּבִקְרִיאַת "פָּרָשַׁת הַתָּמִיד" הֵן שָׁווֹת לָאֲנָשִׁים, שֶׁהֲרֵי תְּפִלָּה בִּמְקוֹם תָּמִיד תִּקְּנוּהָ) and the aforementioned Biur Halacha. This is an authoritative and impeccable list of poskim.
And now that the new teshuvos of the Maharil have been published, we find the original teshuva quoted by the Agur. He is talking about women's obligation to say birkas hatorah, and says
ועוד נראה דעדיף משאר מצות שפטורות מהן, דרבנן תקנו פרשת וידבר משום נגד התמיד כדאמר מר כל העוסק בפרשת עולה וכו', ואטו נשים מי לא מחייבי בתמיד וקרבנות כמו אנשים, הא חייבות בתפילות וכנגד תמידין תקנו, וא"כ מחייבי נמי לסדר ענייני קרבנות, קראי, ושמא נמי מתני' דאיזהו מקומן. ותפלות אין שייך דאינן מבינות, ומ"מ הוי כאילו הקריבו קרבן משום עקימת שפתים, דליגרוס איניש אע"ג דלא ידע [מאי קאמר], ופשיטא דאיש חייב לברך אע"ג דאין מבין קריאתו וגרסתו וכו'.
Please note the circuitous three part reasoning: Are women not chayav in the Tamid and Korbanos like men? 1. They are obligated to say Shemoneh Esrei. 2. Shemoneh Esrei corresponds to the korbanos. 3. Therefore, they are chayav to say the Korbanos.
The question is often asked, why don't women say the parsha of korban Yoledes from the beginning of Tazria. In fact, this question was asked by the Cheshek Shlomo in his Teshuvos Binyan Shlomo:
Why don't our siddurim have the parsha of zava and yoledes? He says that they are wrong, and that it is a mistake to not have it in the siddur, because women are absolutely obligated to say these parshios. Or, perhaps, their husbands are obligated to say it for them.
Similarly, many ask on that parsha, why does it describe the korban ashir of yoledes, then say Zos Toras hayoledes to bring a korban, and only then say that if she can't afford it she should bring a pair of birds, the korban dalus. It should have said korban ashir, korban ani, then Zos Toras.
וּבִמְלֹ֣את יְמֵ֣י טׇהֳרָ֗הּ לְבֵן֮ א֣וֹ לְבַת֒ תָּבִ֞יא כֶּ֤בֶשׂ בֶּן־שְׁנָתוֹ֙ לְעֹלָ֔ה וּבֶן־יוֹנָ֥ה אוֹ־תֹ֖ר לְחַטָּ֑את אֶל־פֶּ֥תַח אֹֽהֶל־מוֹעֵ֖ד אֶל־הַכֹּהֵֽן׃
וְהִקְרִיב֞וֹ לִפְנֵ֤י יְהֹוָה֙ וְכִפֶּ֣ר עָלֶ֔יהָ וְטָהֲרָ֖הֿ מִמְּקֹ֣ר דָּמֶ֑יהָ זֹ֤את תּוֹרַת֙ הַיֹּלֶ֔דֶת לַזָּכָ֖ר א֥וֹ לַנְּקֵבָֽה׃
וְאִם־לֹ֨א תִמְצָ֣א יָדָהּ֮ דֵּ֣י שֶׂה֒ וְלָקְחָ֣ה שְׁתֵּֽי־תֹרִ֗ים א֤וֹ שְׁנֵי֙ בְּנֵ֣י יוֹנָ֔ה אֶחָ֥ד לְעֹלָ֖ה וְאֶחָ֣ד לְחַטָּ֑את וְכִפֶּ֥ר עָלֶ֛יהָ הַכֹּהֵ֖ן וְטָהֵֽרָה׃
Several achronim answer that the words Toras by korbanos is used elsewhere to teach that if there is no Beis Hamikdash, you can fulfil your chiyuv korban by saying the parsha. If that is what Toras alludes to, it doesn't make sense to say it after the korban dal. If all you're doing is saying the parsha, you should say the parsha of the korban ashir! That is why it says zos toras after ashir and before ani. This answer also assumes that a yoledes can fulfil her obligation by reading the parsha. (Unless you say it refers to her husband.)
So you have a sterling list of poskim who say that that women are obligated in Tamid no less than men, and also that they have the din of saying korbanos to fulfil their korban obligation, whether it be Tamid or Musaf or yoledes or zava or chatas or asham or todah.
But there are three strong questions on this idea.
1. Women are pattur from Machatzis hashekel so they should be pattur from all korbanos tzibur
2. The rule that learning is in place of hakrava makes sense when you have a mitzva of talmud torah, because then the limud is an equal part of the etzem mitzvah. But if you have no mitzva of talmud torah, who says the rule in Menachos 110 that כל העוסק בתורת חטאת כאילו הקריב חטאת וכל העוסק בתורת אשם כאילו הקריב אשם applies? They have no mitzva of La'asok.
3. Just as Musaf is zman grama, the Tamid is also Zman Grama. Bishlema tefilla is Rachami. But Musaf is not, and the Tamid is no more Rachami than the Musaf.
The first question was stated by Reb Akiva Eiger, the second by the Chasam Sofer, and the third by the Noda Biyehuda in the Tzlach. All directly contradict the Maharil/Beis Yosef/MA/TAZ/ShAHarav/Biyur Halacha.
RAE in Tshuvos 9 (and there's a nice piece in the Kehilas Yaakov in Zevachim siman daled on this)
דלכאורה נראה דנשים פטורות מתפלת מוסף כיון דנשים לא היו שוקלות אין להם חלק בקרבנות ציבור
The second point is made by the Chasam Sofer in in the new version al hatorah in Tazria, which I don't have, and the Kli Chemda in Tazria is mechavein.
(The Chasam Sofer says as follows: What does Rashi/the Gemara mean that chatas comes first except "למקראה"? But when you read it, you are yotzei, so it should have the same order as hakrava! He answers that this may be true by other korbanos, but not here, because it's a women's korban, and she doesn't have a mitzva of Talmud Torah, so her reading the parsha is indeed mikra b'alma, not k'ilu hikriv.
שבכל התורה כל העוסק בפרשת הקרבנות כאילו הקריב אותו קרבן, וא"כ לעולם צריך להקדים החטאת לעולה, משא"כ פרשת יולדת דלא שייך בהו כאילו הקריב, שהרי ת"ת אינו אלא לזכרים, ובהו לא שייך יולדת, ואינו כאילו הקריב רק מצות קריאה בעלמא, ומשום הכי ראוי להקדים עולה דחשיב טפי מחטאת.)
The third point is from the Tzlach in Brachos 26a
But most importantly, nobody does this. So if someone says, let's make a campaign, tell him it is not a good idea. Saying korbanos is not a chiyuv even for men, and certainly not for women. And their time is better spent saying Tehillim. When it says that all the yeshuos of Jewish history were in the zechus of nashim tzidkaniyos, I guarantee that their tzidkus was not expressed in saying איזהו מקומן.
This sounds like a lot of effort to explain the self evident, but it's not. When I said the shiur, I said that technically, women have the same mitzva as men to say korbanos, but not one women in ten thousand actually does it. One guy (Howie Borenstein) in the shiur said "My wife says korbanos." I said no she doesn't, bring her to the computer (the shiur was one Zoom.) She came and said she heard it from Rabbi Eliezer Krohn, Rav Pesach's son. My reaction was not positive. She then wrote him, asking if he indeed told his family members to say the parshios of korbanos, and he answered "Thank you for listening and for your email. I did not tell my family members to say tamid. But that's great that you do." I suspect that he was so surprised by the Maharil that he did encourage people to do it, but later realized that it was not normative practice, so he backed off, which is perfectly fine. I don't have the patience to search for his shiur, and there's no benefit in doing so. And anyway, Howie's wife is a tzadeikes, so she's no raya.
