IS IT ENOUGH TO THINK THAT ONE DOES LISHMAH? [Lishmah: intent]
(Reish Lakish): The Beraisa is Machshir when he was silent. The Mishnah discusses when he said that he intends Chutz li'Zmano.
Bava Metzia 44a (Beraisa - Beis Shamai): "Al Kol Devar Pesha" obligates for intent (for Shlichus Yad, i.e. unauthorized use of acquire deposit) like for action;
Beis Hillel say, he is liable only if he actually took it - "Im Lo Shalach Yado."
Gitin 45b: There was a Nochri in Tzidan who used to write Sefarim. R. Shimon ben Gamliel permitted buying from him.
Question: R. Shimon requires tanning the hide l'Shem Sefarim. Surely the writing must be Lishmah!
Answer (Rabah bar Shmuel and Rav Ashi): R. Shimon permitted buying from a convert who reverted to being a Nochri because he feared for his life.
Menachos 42b (Rav): If Tzitzis were made from Sisin (a certain plant), they are Kosher (even though they were not spun Lishmah);
(Shmuel): They are Pasul. Tzitzis must be spun Lishmah.
Rav and Shmuel argue like the following Tana'im;
(Beraisa): If Tefilin were covered with hide of a Tahor animal, they are Kosher, even if it was not tanned Lishmah.
R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, they are Pasul. The leather must be tanned Lishmah.
Kidushin 41b: Terumah can be separated through thought alone.
Rosh (Hilchos Sefer Torah (after Menachos) 3,4): R. Baruch was unsure whether one must say with his lips that he tans the leather l'Shem Sefer Torah or Tefilin, or if intent suffices. Regarding Pigul it says "Lo Yeratzeh", and speech is required (Zevachim 27a). Terumah is taken without speech, through mere intent. Regarding Shlichus Yad, it says "Al Kol Devar Pesha", and one who intends to make unauthorized use of the deposit is liable. Therefore, it is good to say at the beginning that he tans Lishmah.
Drishah (YD 271 DH veha'Rav): How can R. Baruch bring a proof from Shlichus Yad? Beis Hillel do not obligate until he does an action! Also, Beis Shamai obligate only when he said (that he will be Shole'ach Yad), like Rashi and Tosfos explain! I saw inside (Sefer ha'Terumah 192) that R. Baruch merely was unsure if Shlichus Yad is like Pigul or like Terumah. Perhaps one may prove oppositely, that the Mishnah was able to say 'thought', when it really means speech, because one cannot err about this. It is clear that mere thought is nothing! It is better to say that the Rosh holds that Beis Shamai obligate for mere thought, unlike Rashi and Tosfos, and Beis Hillel disagree only because they expound "Im Lo Shalach". If not, they would agree that thought that is like speech, and he is liable for it. Really, I think that R. Baruch and the Rosh did not write this. A Talmid wrote it in the margin, and it became incorporated in the text.
Mordechai (Hilchos Tzitzis 949): When something is not Stam (automatically) Lishmah, such as a Get, one must say with his lips that he does it Lishmah. One must say at the beginning of spinning threads for Tzitzis that he does so Lishmah. Alternatively, he tells a woman 'spin for me Tzitzis for a Talis', even though Stam it is not Lishmah.
Shulchan Aruch (YD 271:1): When one begins to tan leather for a Sefer Torah, he must say when putting the hides in the lime 'I tan these hides l'Shem Sefer Torah.'
Beis Yosef (DH u'Mah she'Chosav b'Shem): R. Baruch was unsure whether one must say this. The Rosh and Tur say that he should, and Hagahos Maimoniyos says in the name of Semag that he must.
Taz (3): We can say that R. Baruch disagrees with Rashi and Tosfos. He is unsure whether we learn from Pigul or from Shole'ach Yad.
Pischei Teshuvah (6): A case occurred in which a scribe said that he tans l'Shem Sefer Torah, and later he intended to write a Sefer Pasul. In the end, he wrote a Sefer Torah. The Noda b'Yehudah (2 YD 168) says that his (second) intent does nothing. However, if he said that he will write a Sefer Pasul, these words nullify his initial words. The tanning itself is not considered an action, for in any case (no matter what kind of Sefer he will write) one must tan the hide. However, if he gave the hide to a Nochri to tan and the Yisrael helped, this is an action that proves that it is l'Shem Sefer Torah. Later, he wrote that even if he tanned it himself, even if he explicitly said that he will write a Sefer Pasul, it is Kosher, for he did not say that he tans it for a Pasul Sefer Torah, so he did not nullify his initial words.
Pischei Teshuvah (7): The Beis Yosef brings from Rama mi'Pi'ano that b'Di'eved, intent suffices.
Shulchan Aruch (OC 11:1): When one begins to spin threads for Tzitzis, he must say that he does so l'Shem Tzitzis, or he tells a woman 'spin for me Tzitzis for a Talis.'
Gra: Even though intent suffices for Terumah (Kidushin 41b) and Shlichus Yad, even though it says "Devar", we find that Pigul requires speech, even though it says "Yechashev". One must say at the beginning, for it is a Safek whether the end proves about the beginning (Chulin 39b). When he says 'spin for me Tzitzis for a Talis', Stam it is l'Shem Tzitzis.
R. Akiva Eiger (citing Devar Shmuel or Divrei Shalom): The verse hints that it suffices to tell a woman - "Daber El Bnei Yisrael v'Amarta Lahem v'Asu Lahem Tzitzis." Dibur is harsh; it applies to men. Amirah is soft; it applies to women (Rashi Shemos 19:3). The Mitzvah is primarily for Bnei Yisrael, and not women, but the Asiyah (doing), i.e. the spinning, which is the normal Melachah of women, one may tell a woman to do it.
Mishnah Berurah (4): If he only thought that he spins Lishmah, this requires investigation whether this suffices b'Di'eved.
Kaf ha'Chayim (2): If he only thought that he spins Lishmah, b'Di'eved this is Kosher, for Menachos 42b equates this to tanning for a Sefer Torah.
Kaf ha'Chayim (3): Some say that b'Di'eved is if the strings were already spun. Some say that b'Di'eved is if the strings were already attached to the Talis. Therefore, one who is careful will take such strings only in pressed circumstances.
Shulchan Aruch (OC 32:8): One must tan leather for the parchments of Tefilin Lishmah. It is good to say with his lips at the beginning of the tanning that he tans l'Shem Tefilin or l'Shem Sefer Torah.
Beis Yosef (DH v'Da): The Tur did not say here that one should say with his lips at the beginning of the tanning that he tans l'Shem Tefilin. He relied on what he wrote in Hilchos Sefer Torah (YD 271).
R. Akiva Eiger: The Shulchan Aruch connotes that l'Chatchilah one should be concerned for the Safek or R. Baruch, but b'Di'eved not. In Sa'if 19, the Rema brings an opinion that it suffices to intend that he writes names of Hash-m Lishmah, since he said with his lips at the beginning that he writes l'Shem Kedushas Tefilin. If not, intent would not suffice! Also in YD (271:1, 274:1) the Shulchan Aruch says that one must say with his lips, and does not say that it is only l'Chatchilah! This requires investigation.
Mishnah Berurah (24): B'Di'eved, it suffices if he intended.
Mishnah Berurah (25): It suffices to say so at the beginning even if the tanning extended over several days. Everything he does is according to his initial intent.