- This topic has 27 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 1 month ago by .
-
Posts
-
When does a lack of kavanah invalidate the mitzvah or avodah – and when does it not?
A sofer must have proper kavanah when writing a Sefer Torah, Mezuzos, etc.
To be yotzei someone else with a bracha you need to have such kavanah.
Kavanah for what?
its a complicated question
kavanah that you are aware of the act that you are doing?
kavanah that you are doing a mitzva?
kavanah that you are doing a particular mitzvah?
kavanah that you intend to be yoitzei the mitzvah?
particular kavanah associated with that mitzvah?
when does the kavanah have to be present?
im sure there are lots more variables i cant think of right now, and more that im not aware of at all.
all of the above ones are subject to complex disagreements among the Rishonim
all of the above ones are subject to complex disagreements among the Rishonim
But don’t we pasken one way or the other on whatever complex disagreements there are?
im not talking only about paskening
im basically asking the op: “what are you referring to when you say Kavanah?”
We generally say that Mitvos d’Oraissa need kavana to be yotze and mitvos d’Rabanan do not. HOWEVER, there are exceptions, such as when your actions show you had kavana, or you had kavana when you started the mitzva. You would almost need to discuss this on a mitva by mitzva basis.
Shein: Not really. The Mishnah Berurah appears to contradict himself and no one really comes out with a clear L’ma’aseh Maskana on whether Mitzvos Tzrichos Kavanah or not. The closest compromise we have that is assumed most often is that we say that D’Oraisas need Kavana and D’Rabannans don’t. And once again, there are different definitions of what Kavana means and no real clear P’sak.
The Mishna Brura seems to hold while doing a mitzvah that is the kavana.Extreme kavana see Nefesh Hachaim.
Sam4: In one place he seems to assume like that Chayei Adam. He seems to assume otherwise in other places though.
The Chayei Adam says that any mitzva that would not be done casually if it weren’t a mitzva (e.g. tefillin) has implicit kavanna even if the person doing the mitzva isn’t thinking anything in particular b’shaas mayseh.
What does the Nefesh HaChaim say?
Sam – how does the M”B appear to contradict himself?
Shein: Hakdamah l’shar daled perek 4,5,6.I can’t go through all of it but to sum it up he says that the ikir of the mitzvah is the masseh and kavanah comes second.He goes further and says this can be a ploy of the yetzer hara to get someone to miss the zmanim for kavanah.
Shein: I don’t remember the M”B by heart. I apologize. He seems to say it in Siman 60 I believe which is (theoretically) the main discussion for this concept but I feel like he contradicts himself a bit in the details of a few Mitzvos. I don’t remember where and how off the top of my head.
Which shittas say that if you lack kavana for something it didn’t count?
Sam2:Mishna Brura 8:19 he brings the Bach that tefflin suka and tzitzs need special intent,but other mitzvos is to do them for Hashem.He ends off saying after the fact even by these mitzvos one is yotzei if he did the mitzvah lshem Hashem.
sam4321: Even if the kavanah must come second, per the Nefesh Hachaim (?), the kavanah still must be present for the mitzvah to be chal.
Obaminator: It’s a huge Machlokes throughout the Gemara.
Think if someone goes to a restaurant and washes on Motzei Shabbos without ever intending to have a Melave Malka, did he fulfill having a Melave Malka even though there was no kavanah.
Melava Malka is not a Mitzvah (see my rant a week or so ago about properly using terms). It’s a Metzius that comes from meals eaten on Motza’ei Shabbos. You are Yotzei that even if you had no intention whatsoever.
Sam2:Melava Malka is defiantly a Mitzvah(b’alma), but it is not a chov the nafka minah is if one only has enough money for the shabbas meals(Mishna Brura 300:2) With regards to intention there is an idea of bringing out shabbas with kavod,and an idea that the one bone that does not disintegrate eats from the melavah malka.
definitely*
Sam4: What is the “Mitzvah” of Melava Malka? It’s ridiculous to say that. People misuse the word “Mitzvah” whenever a Halacha is brought down in the S”A. Now we actually have someone asking if the Machlokes of Mitzvos Tzrichos Kavanah applies to Melava Malka. It’s ridiculous. It’s not a Mitzvah in that sense.
Sam2: The Misnah Brura himself uses the lashon of mitzvah b’alma in regards to melavah malka.To say it is not a mitzvah I find that ridiculous.If you want to explain that it is not a chov that fine but don’t make it less important.
Sam4: I think I made my reason very clear why we should, in general, be much more careful about using more precise terms. You have to agree with me that it’s absurd to consider that the discussion of Mitzvos Tzrichos Kavana would ever pertain to Melava Malka, right? It’s a “Mitzvah” the same way following everything in the Shulchan Aruch is a “Mitzvah”. But we need to be much more precise as to what type of “Mitzvah” something is so that we can understand exactly what doing it entails.
Sam2:That is exactly why I quoted the Mishna Brura and did not say anything from myself.He says it is a mitzvah b’alma as opposed to saying a nice thing or a minhag.Being precise in what mitzvah is what is important but saying it is not a mitzvah is plain wrong because that is not being precise what is said about it.You would agree that after reading the Mishna Brura there is an idea of setting the table and eating something l’kavod (motzei)shabbas and there is a thought process of having kavod.(this however is not tzrichas kavana)
Sam4: I agree with everything you said. Unfortunately, when someone earlier mentioned it as a “Mitzvah” they did not mean to say it in the same way as the Mishnah Berurah did. I am in no way finding any fault with the MB here, I am just saying that he was not perfectly Medakdek with his phraseology, probably because he didn’t need to be. At some point the word “Mitzvah” has become so blurred to the general populace that it has lost all meaning and can actually imply far too many, sometimes contradictory, things.
Thank you for explaining.The Mishna Brura was careful to say that melava malka is not learned from pesukim and the other three are more importent,so he was careful in making a nafka minah between the mitzvos like you said should be done.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.