More Discussions for this daf
1. Yibum she'Lo k'Darkah 2. Rashi's quotation of the verse 3. Ha'ara'ah
4. Ha'arah Min ha'Torah 5. Bi'ah Shelo k'Darkah 6. Intent for Yibum
7. למה לי למכתבא באחות אב למה לי למכתבא באחות אם 8. אחות אביו מן האם או דוקא מן האב
DAF DISCUSSIONS - YEVAMOS 54

Joshua Danziger asks:

Hello kollel!

Three questions on kavanah and yibum. On the daf we see a variety of cases where the gemara is trying to determine if there is sufficient intent for the yavam to be koneh the yevamah. It seems to emerge that he needs to have intent to perform a maaseh biah, but not a specific intent to do the mitzvah. Even stronger there are some cases where it's very clear he definitely doesnt have the intent to do the mitzvah, but because he has intent for biah he's koneh.

My three questions are:

1) In general I thought for mitzvot de'oraisa we hold that "mitzvos tzrichos kavanah". For other actions like tefillin, my understanding was that doing the action was sufficient to demonstrate intent, but here the gemara seems to cover scenarios where he's definitely not intending the mitzvah but even so he does the mitzvah. how is this possible? Is yibum not a mitzvah de'oraisa according to some opinions?

2) To make the question stronger, if a man intentionally has biah with a yevamah but has "negative daas" to not do the mitzvah, has he done yibum or not? It would seem like so long as he has intent for the biah she's koneh unless his negative daas can stop it?

3)Nowadays I thought that we prefer chalitza over yibum bc the person's intent may not be properly l'shem mitzvah, and therefore the act may be close to the issur of aishes ach....but according to this daf people with far worse intents (or none at all) are koneh properly. Is our stance today more of a "hashkafic" approach than a halachic problem?

Thanks!

Josh

The Kollel replies:

1) The Minchas Chinuch (Mitzvah 598:6) writes that it is possible that there is a distinction between the acquiring of the Yevamah and the Mitzvah of Yibum. One acquires the Yevamah as one's wife even through a forced Bi'ah, but one does not perform the Mitzvah of Yibum this way, since the Halachah follows the opinion that Mitzvos Tzerichos Kavanah. The Nafka Minah would be that if the first Bi'ah was done without Kavanah, the second Bi'ah should be done with the intention of performing the Mitzvah of Yibum.

2) The Minchas Chinuch writes that every student knows that if one has negative Da'as (specific intent not to fulfill the Mitzvah), he has not performed the Mitzvah even though there was physical enjoyment involved (as we find with the Mitzvah of eating Matzah on Pesach). This would apply also to Yibum.

3) The Nimukei Yosef, at the very beginning of the sixth chapter of Yevamos, writes that Aba Shaul (above 39b) -- who says that one who does Yibum only because the Yevamah is beautiful is considered to be close to transgressing the Isur of Eshes Ach -- is referring only to how one should behave l'Chatchilah mid'Rabanan. In contrast, the Gemara here, where Yibum is done with the intention of Z'nus, is referring to what the Din is b'D'eved -- namely that the Yevamah is acquired as a wife.

4) I found, bs'd, that Rav Shimon Shkop zt'l has a different approach to this Inyan. He writes (in Chidushei Rebbi Shimon Yehudah ha'Kohen, Yevamos, end of siman 38) that there are some Mitzvos where the purpose of the Torah is to achieve a goal for someone other than the person actually doing the Mitzvah. The purpose of the Mitzvah of Yibum is to perpetuate the name of the deceased brother. If so, it does not matter how the Mitzvah was done by the Yavam, as long as it is possible that the Yevamah might have a child from this Bi'ah in order to achieve "Hakamat Shem" for her deceased husband.

5) The Ayeles ha'Shachar (by Rav Aharon Leib Shteineman zt'l, who I believe was a Talmid of Rav Shimon Shkop) on Yevamos 20a (on the Tosfos at the beginning of 20b, page 179, DH Amnam) also writes that since the aim of Yibum is to perpetuate the memory of the brother, one fulfills this Mitzvah even without Kavanah. He compares this to the Mitzvah of Peru u'Revu which one fulfills by bearing children even if one did not intend to do the Mitzvah. The proof for this is the fact that the Halachah follows Rebbi Yochanan in Yevamos 62a who says that if a Ger already had children before he converted, then he has already fulfilled the Mitzvah of Peru u'Revu.

Kol Tuv,

Dovid Bloom

Josh Danziger asks:

Thank you rav bloom! I saw something a few daf later that may also resolve things. Rav says that for biah "shogeg ke-meizid" (daf 56). This seems to indicate that in cases where he has intent for biah, and is shogeg re:mitzvah of yibum that the mitzvah is accomplished. With actual negative kavana I'd think he's no longer shogeg and wouldn't accomplish the mitzvah...and maybe this even works according to aba Shaul, Bc there he's not shogeg either he actually has the wrong intent, Bc he intends for her beauty. The cases of the gemara I asked on all seem to be where he has intent just for a biah of some sort and no intent re his Yevama at all. What do you think?

The Kollel replies:

1) First of all, I should point out that Tosfos in Yevamos 39b (DH ul'Shum) writes that the "Shogeg k'Mezid" mentioned on 56a by Rav means a very different kind of Mezid. On 56a it means that he has Kavanah for the Mitzvah of Yibum. It means he deliberately wants to do the Mitzvah. The Mezid mentioned by the Mishnah on 53b means he is interested only in Z'nus and does not want to do the Mitzvah, as Rashi (53b, DH Mezid) writes.

2) As I wrote above, there is a big Machlokes between the Minchas Chinuch and Rav Shimon Shkop. According to the Minchas Chinuch, one never fulfils the Mitzvah of Yibum without having Kavanah for the Mitzvah. With all the different kinds of Bi'ah mentioned in the Sugya where he did not have Kavanah for the Mitzvah of Yibum, he was not Mekayem the Mitzvah but what these different kinds of Bi'ah achieve is that she does become his wife that way. In order to do the Mitzvah of Yibum he would have to do a second Bi'ah with the intention of doing the Mitzvah.

3) I think that the Minchas Chinuch would say that the Sugya on 56a has nothing to do with whether he did the Mitzvah. The Mishnah cited there states "Kanah" -- acquired -- and we have a dispute between Rav and Shmuel for what purposes she is acquired. The Minchas Chinuch agrees that she is acquired without Kavanah for the Mitzvah but nowhere on 56a does it say anything about doing the Mitzvah. If he had negative Kavanah, he certainly did not fulfill the Mitzvah according to the Minchas Chinuch.

4) According to Rav Shimon Shkop, it is totally different. If the Yevamah could have a child through this Bi'ah then he has fulfilled the Mitzvah, since the Mitzvah of Yibum is to provide a child to continue the name of the dead brother, and it makes no difference how this baby is born. Even if he had negative Kavanah, that does not matter since the name has been perpetuated.

Yasher Ko'ach Gadol!

Dovid Bloom