- ✍️ Bystanders – Must a person other than a child’s father stop a child from sinning?[1]
A bystander who is neither the father [nor legal guardian] observing a child under the age of Bar or Bas Mitzva violating a prohibition is not obligated to intervene or issue a reprimand, provided the child’s actions are for their own benefit, such as consuming non-kosher food or desecrating Shabbat for personal needs. They are however required to reprimand the child if the child is transgressing a prohibition for the sake of another Jew or if the transgression will become public knowledge as will be explained later on. [However, if the child is acting for his own sake, then even though an adult Jew also derives benefit from his actions, there is nevertheless no obligation to protest those actions.[2]]
✍️ From The Rav’s Desk
Question:
I saw someone’s child washing a stain off their pants on Shabbos. I did not say anything to them, although am wondering if I have a responsibility to educate them in matters that are forbidden on Shabbos, or is this only upon the father of the child? The child was certainly above the age of Chinuch.
Answer:
According to some Poskim, including Admur, you are not required to inform him or stop him, as this obligation is only on the father, until the age of Bar Mitzvah. Nonetheless, it is proper to tell him anyways.
Sources: See Admur 343:1; Michaber and Rama 343:1; M”B 343:7; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:2
[1] Admur 343:1 regarding a Beis Din, and 343:2 that this applies to all bystanders; 167:23; 362:17; 596:2; Admur 616:4 “All of this applies to a minor who has not yet reached the age of education for the mitzvah of affliction. However, if he has reached the age of education, it is permitted to feed him, give him drink, anoint him, and wash him directly, in the manner explained above. If the minor performs any of these acts on his own, there is no need to protest, except for his father, who is required to protest and to educate his son in the mitzvot. His mother, however, is not obligated in this. Nevertheless, it is forbidden for her to place food before him, since doing so is considered as if she were feeding him directly.”; Michaber 343:1; 2nd opinion in Rama 343:1; Rambam Hilchos Machalos Assuros 17:28; Tosafus Nazir 28b; Tosafus Yesheinim Yuma 82a; Besi Yosef end of 343; Ketzos Hashulchan 147:1; See Toras Hakatan [Rubinovitch] Chapter 8:1-16
Background: In the Talmud Yevamos 114a and Shulchan Aruch 343 the entire discussion is with regards to a Beis Din reprimanding the child and not regarding an ordinary bystander. The Ketzos Hashulchan 147:1 writes that if even a Beis Din is not obligated to reprimand a child, then certainly other people are not obligated. Perhaps the reason for why no mention of this was made in Shulchan Aruch is because there is not even an inkling of a thought that a bystander is obligated to educate someone else’s child. However, a Beis Din which is responsible for the education of all the towns folk, including the child’s father, perhaps one would think is obligated to reprimand the child, hence the ruling that they too have no obligation.
Other Opinions: Some Poskim rule that anyone who sees a child who has reached the age of education transgressing a prohibition, then he must reprimand and stop the child. [Chayeh Adam 66:3; Bikurei Yaakov 640:5; Kaf Hachaim 343:28; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 16 p. 196 footnote 528; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:2 footnote 19 in opinion of Rama ibid, based on Yevamos 114a that Beis Din is Lav Davka and the same applies to any person; So rule regarding a Beis Din: 1st opinion in Rama 343:1; M”A 640:3; Elya Raba 640:4; P”M 640 A”A 4; Tosafus Nazir 28b; Tosafus Yesheinim Yuma 82a in name of Yereim; Terumas Hadeshen 94; Rashi Eruvin 96b;] Some Poskim conclude based on this opinion that by a Biblical transgression one is to be stringent and reprimand a child which has reached the age of education even if the child is not his son. However, by Rabbinical prohibitions there is no need to be stringent. [Chayeh Adam ibid; Mishneh Berura 343:7] Other Poskim rule that if the father is not present, then even by Rabbinical prohibitions one is obligated to reprimand the child. [Kaf Hachaim 343:28] Some Poskim learn that by the three prohibitions of blood insects and impurity, not only is it forbidden for an adult to cause a child to transgress them, but furthermore if he sees a child transgressing them then he must reprimand the child. [Beis Yosef 343; Bach 343; See Likkutei Sichos Vol. 7 Sicha 1]
[2] Chanoch Lanar 7:3 based on Rama and M”B 362:7; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:2