3

According to the understanding of many commentators "pru u'revu" (be fruitful and multiply) is a positive commandment which is not fulfilled unless a man has both a son and daughter as offspring. Based on this understanding it would seem that Yitzchak did not fulfill this commandment. Is this correct? Are there any sources that indicate that either:

  • He had a daughter
  • He was exempt from this mitzvah
HodofHod
  • 21,056
  • 5
  • 91
  • 156
  • 2
    Can't we ask the same of Avraham, Yehuda, Yosef, Moshe, and Aharon (among others that have no explicit daughters but have explicit sons in Tanach)? – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 16:56
  • In fact, of all of Yaakov's twelve sons I think only two are known to have had any daughters (Yocheved to Levi, and Serach to Asher) but we have multiple lists of all their sons. – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 17:02
  • 1
    chazal say that avraham had a daughter. as far as the rest, you can certainly ask; I thought yitzchak was more interesting specifically because of the chazal about Avraham having a daughter (an it's topical) http://rchaimqoton.blogspot.com/2006/11/daughter-of-abraham.html –  Nov 13 '12 at 17:10
  • 1
    Of what import is it whether one of the Avoth fulfilled the technical requirements of a Mitzvah that is beyond his control? – Seth J Nov 13 '12 at 18:29
  • 1
    [tag:noachide-laws]? Since when is Pru uRvu one of those? || @SethJ We don't know that it was beyond his control; perhaps he should have found a new wife. And I don't see what "technical requirements" have to do with anything. As to why we should inquire if the Avot kept mitzvot deoraita, see http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/4078/ and the various opinions thereof. – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 18:33
  • @DoubleAA, but this is not asking whether he kept the Mitzvah, but whether he fulfilled it. Like, did he have enough Matzah at his Seder, or did he not meet the Hazon Ish's minimum? As in my comment on Gershon's answer implies, there's a difference between fulfilling and being exempted from any ongoing obligation. I think R' Moshe is arguing that the Mishnah is discussing the latter, not the former, and that, so long as is possible, each time a husband sleeps with his wife in a way that could lead to procreation, he fulfills the Mitzvah. – Seth J Nov 13 '12 at 18:39
  • (@DoubleAA, I'm also arguing with myself above on the use of "fulfill", because I hadn't read the Teshuvah yet when I wrote my first comment.) – Seth J Nov 13 '12 at 18:43
  • @SethJ re Chazon Ish: depends what you think here http://judaism.stackexchange.com/q/18735/759. Are you still questioning the import of the question, or have we moved to discussing the value of the answer? It seems to me that you have shifted to the latter so we should shift are comments to the answer. – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 18:44
  • PM since your question seemingly centers on a specific understanding of the mitzva, can you please edit it a source for this understanding to help clarify exactly which understanding you are referring to? – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 18:46
  • germane http://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=21817&st=&pgnum=36 –  Nov 13 '12 at 20:05
  • @DoubleAA, re "noachide-laws? Since when is Pru uRvu one of those?": well, we don't have an adamite-laws tag. :-) – msh210 Nov 15 '12 at 04:05

2 Answers2

4

Per Igros Moshe Even HoEzer2 18 the Mitzva of Peru U'revu is Tashmish - since it is not in a persons control whether a child will be born. There is a Chiyuv of Tashmish in regard to Peru U'revu so long as a person does not have a boy and a girl. Based on this Yitzchok was Mekayem the Mitzva of Peru U'Revu with Tashmish, and as to not having a girl that was beyond his control.

Gershon Gold
  • 139,471
  • 12
  • 231
  • 553
  • "Yitzchok was Mekayem the Mitzva of Peru U'Revu with Tashmish": source? or is this an assumption? – msh210 Nov 13 '12 at 18:20
  • 1
    Doesn't the question specifically ask according to the other more standard understandings? – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 18:21
  • @DoubleAA, I think Ig"M is explaining the shita that one must have a son and a daughter, and the question is precluding other shitos. Not sure about either of those, though. – msh210 Nov 13 '12 at 18:25
  • @msh210 I don't mean son+daughter as opposed to two sons, but rather the question openly assumes that the mitzva is accomplished once "a man has both a son and daughter as offspring". That is apparently not the way Ig"M is learning. – Double AA Nov 13 '12 at 18:30
  • I"M is clearly arguing on those who assume that the Mitzvah itself is to have one male and one female child. He says clearly that the Mishnah is discussing not when one is "MeKayem" the Mitzvah, but when one is "Niftar" from the Mitzvah. – Seth J Nov 13 '12 at 18:33
  • 1
    I"M is not the non-standard explanation. It is very standard. You can't have an obligation to do something that is not within your control. The mitzvah is the act that brings about the resulting peiros. That act is also the fulfillment of the mitzvah of Ona. Once one has had a boy and a girl, the obligation to do that act has been mitigated to a degree by the fact that one goal of that act has been accomplished. – Yahu Nov 14 '12 at 06:09
  • 3
    @Yahu Good to see you around! I'm not sure, though, why you can't have an obligation to do something that isn't within your control. We generally call such a person Oneis and exempt him from the obligation. – Double AA Nov 14 '12 at 07:01
  • 1
    @DoubleAA , You proved the point exactly: The Torah would not give an obligation to someone to do something not within his control to accomplish: Oneis Rachmana Patrei. Patrei=no obligation. – Yahu Jan 22 '14 at 05:14
1

Gemarah (Taanis 11a) states a person cannot be intimate with his spouse during an "eis tzorah" like drought, unless he "lacks children". The Gemara learns this out from Yosef who had his kids "before" the famine (Bereishis 41:50). Rashi there explains this to mean that he fulfilled the mitzva of p'ru u'rivu. There is no indication that Yosef fathered a girl. Thus there is a precedent for a different interpretation of the obligation of p'ru u'rivu before matan torah. So we can assume this would extend to Yitzchak as well.

not-allowed to change my name
  • 12,380
  • 1
  • 35
  • 90