Tosafos seems to understand that according to the first version of the gemara, the only difference between one who has children or not, is regarding the mitzvah of p'ru ur'vu; but regarding the mitzvah to get married, he must marry someone who is capable of having children even though he already has children (it is only in the second version where we say that if he has children he can marry one who is not bas banim). This seems very strange. Since we do not require him to have children (he can be batul from pru u'rvu), whey would we demand that he marry a women who is capable of having children? The same question can be asked on the R"I in Tosafos, even on the second version of the gemara. Is there an advantage in marrying a woman who can have children even when we do not require him to have more children? How can we say in the same sentence "you may be batul from pru u'rvu", BUT "you must marry a woman who can have children"?
3 comments:
the simple answer would be the din of בבקר זרע את זרעך וכו' but later the gemara seems to say that this mishna argues on that din.
also the din of שבת, which is a mitzvah to populate the world.
my question is that if the mishna says that you may be batul from pru u'rvu, it is saying that you don't need to have more children. What then would be the purpose of marrying a woman who can still bear children?
having children can be a קיום of more the one mitzvah
Post a Comment