Chapter 15: Kashrus – Katan & Chinuch Laws

Chapter 15: Kashrus – Katan & Chinuch Laws

 

Introduction: The Importance of Kashrus in Chinuch

One of the most important foundations of a child’s future spiritual development is the purity with which he is raised. A child’s character, sensitivity to holiness, attachment to Torah and mitzvos, and even many of the spiritual struggles and challenges he may face later in life are influenced by the environment and standards that surround him from his earliest years.

 

Among the matters that have the greatest impact on a child’s spiritual makeup is the area of kashrus. Chazal and the poskim place unique emphasis on protecting children from consuming forbidden foods, not only because of the prohibition itself, but because non-kosher foods are understood to have a negative effect on a person’s spiritual sensitivity and character. The concept of timtum halev teaches that forbidden foods can dull a person’s spiritual perception and impede his ability to connect to holiness and fear of Heaven. This concern applies with particular force to children, whose personalities and spiritual identities are still being formed.

 

For this reason, the poskim repeatedly stress that parents should be especially careful regarding the kashrus standards of foods given to children. Indeed, many authorities write that one should not merely ensure that the food is technically kosher, but should strive to provide children with the highest standards of kashrus reasonably available. This applies not only to regular meals, but even to snacks, treats, candies, and other foods commonly consumed by children.

 

The importance of this matter begins from infancy. The poskim discuss the effects of a nursing mother’s diet, the importance of preventing children from consuming forbidden foods even before they reach the age of chinuch, and the need to avoid exposing children unnecessarily to influences that may negatively affect their spiritual growth. The guiding principle is that the formation of a pure and holy Jewish soul begins from the earliest stages of life.

 

Accordingly, the laws of kashrus as they relate to children are not merely technical dietary regulations. They form a central component of chinuch, helping ensure that a child grows up with a refined character, a sensitive heart, and a strong foundation for a lifetime of Torah and mitzvah observance.

 

Kashrus Trauma – Avoid Turning Kashrus into a Source of Conflict or Control

One common complaint voiced by children after they grow older and leave home is that the kashrus standards they were raised with felt overly rigid and unrealistic. While parents may be motivated by the purest intentions and a sincere desire to maintain the highest level of mehadrin kashrus, children can sometimes experience these standards very differently. When a child feels that outside the home there is “nothing to eat,” that every kitchen is suspect, and that every social event creates a food crisis, kashrus can become associated with frustration, embarrassment, isolation, and anxiety rather than holiness, refinement, and joy.

The goal of chinuch in kashrus is to create lifelong commitment, not quiet resentment. A home should certainly maintain clear and principled standards, and it is proper to strive for the highest level of kashrus within the home. However, standards must be taught with warmth, sensitivity, and practical guidance. If kashrus becomes a tool of control or a constant battleground, children may later respond by rejecting or bypassing the very values their parents worked so hard to instill.

For this reason, parents must distinguish between the ideal standard kept at home and the halachically acceptable options available outside the home. This does not, G-d forbid, mean permitting anything non-kosher. It means teaching children that when they are away from home, visiting others, attending camp, traveling, or participating in communal events, they may sometimes rely on recognized and halachically valid hechsherim that the family does not ordinarily use at home. For example, a family may eat only a particular Badatz at home, while allowing children to rely on other reputable mehadrin certifications when no other practical option is available.

When taught properly, kashrus becomes not a burden, but a badge of holiness. Children learn that halachah is firm yet livable, principled yet compassionate, and demanding yet realistic. This balance is far more likely to produce children who cherish kashrus for life than an atmosphere of restriction, pressure, and conflict.

 

1. The Chinuch obligation of a Child Eating Kosher Food
2. Above age of Chinuch^[1]

As explained in Chapter 1 in detail, once a child has reached the age of chinuch, it becomes obligatory upon the father to educate him or her in the observance of mitzvot, including the laws of Kashrus. From that point onward, the father is likewise obligated to protest and prevent his son—or daughter—from transgressing prohibitions such as if he sees the child eating non-Kosher food, as explained at length in Chapter One. This obligation applies specifically to the father of the child, and not to the mother or to other individuals. Nevertheless, as discussed extensively in Chapter One, there are circumstances in which others are also obligated, or at least encouraged, to protest a child’s transgression, as explained there. This applies in particular to non-Kosher foods. If one sees a child eating forbidden foods, it is fitting for anyone to intervene and separate the child from wrongdoing.^[2]

Age of Chinuch:^[3] With regard to negative commandments, once a child has reached the age of understanding—meaning that he comprehends when he is told that a certain act is forbidden^[4]—the father is obligated to prevent him from transgressing, whether the prohibition is biblical or rabbinic. Thus, from this age and onwards the father must protest his child from eating non-Kosher foods.

 

1. Below age of Chinuch

Letter of Law: A child who is below the age of chinuch is not subject to the ordinary obligation of education in mitzvos, and a parent is not formally required to prevent such a child from transgressing a prohibition, including that of eating Kosher.^[5] Thus, a child which has not yet reached the age of understanding, meaning that he does not understand at all when he is told that something is forbidden to be done, then the father is not obligated to reprimand him or stop him from eating not Kosher food.^[6]

Proper Conduct – Not relying on Heterim for Kids to eat non-Kosher:: Although one is not obligated to forcibly prevent a child who is below the age of Chinuch from eating forbidden foods, one should nevertheless refrain the child from doing so whenever possible, irrelevant of the child’s age. This is because forbidden foods are understood to have a negative effect on a child’s nature, even when the child is a mere infant.^[7] Accordingly, not only should the father endeavor to prevent the child from eating forbidden foods, but even other bystanders should do so when possible, despite not being obligated to do so according to the strict letter of the law.^[8] [Even when a child requires food for medical reasons, every possible effort must be made to provide a kosher alternative. This is because consuming non-kosher food can nevertheless have a negative impact on the child’s character. This principle is evident from the ruling that even a pregnant^[9] or nursing^[10] mother who must eat non-kosher food for medical reasons should avoid doing so whenever possible, and if she does partake of non-kosher food, she should refrain from nursing the child.^[11]]

 

1. Issur Sefiyah – Assisting a child in eating non-kosher:^[12]

It is Biblically^[13] prohibited for any^[14] individual [including his mother^[15]] to actively feed a child with his hands a [Biblically] forbidden matter.^[16] This applies even if the child is completely below the age of comprehension, [including even a one-day old child^[17]].^[18] Furthermore, it is [Rabbinically^[19]] forbidden to even give the child food which contains merely a Rabbinical prohibition. [Thus, although we explained above that there is no obligation upon a father to stop or reprimand a child who is below the age of chinuch from eating non Kosher food, and there is no obligation for any individual other than the father to protest a child even above the age of Chinuch from eating non-kosher food, nonetheless it remains absolutely forbidden for any person to actively feed a child of any age non-kosher food. Thus, an adult may not place non-kosher food directly into a child’s mouth or feed it to the child with a spoon, even if the child is an infant who has no awareness whatsoever. This applies equally to Biblical prohibitions (e.g., pork or milk and meat together) and Rabbinic prohibitions (e.g., food cooked by a non-Jew where prohibited).

Telling a child to eat a non-Kosher food:^[20] Based on the above prohibition, it is [Biblically^[21]] forbidden for any person to instruct any child to eat non-Kosher food, even if the child is completely below the age of understanding, [such as a mere one-day old infant]. It is [Rabbinically^[22]] forbidden to even ask a child to eat a Rabbinically forbidden food, with exception to the cases to be explained in Halacha 3.^[23]

Providing a child with Non-Kosher food:^[24] Based on the above prohibition, it is forbidden to provide any child of any age non-Kosher food. if there is a chance that he may come to eat.^[25] [This applies even to food forbidden merely due to Rabbinic decree.^[26]] Moreover, even food that is prohibited only during a specific time period^[27] may not be given to a child [when it is forbidden for him to consume it at that time] if there is a chance that he may come to eat it.^[28] [Thus, it is forbidden for an adult to give a child forbidden food to eat on their own, even if the adult does not literally feed the child. Handing the food to the child constitutes “actively causing” the transgression and falls under the Biblical prohibition of lesafos lo issur.]

Foods which are forbidden to be eaten due to their repulsiveness:^[29] Even foods which are merely forbidden due to their repulsiveness, and thus contain the prohibition of Baal Teshaktzu, are forbidden to be given to a child if there is suspicion that the child may come to eat it.

Giving the child a live creature:^[30] It is forbidden to give an infant a live non‑kosher locust to play with, as it may die and the child may come to eat it, in which case it is considered as though one actively fed the child non‑kosher food. However, one may give a child a live treif^[31] bird to play with, since even if it dies, it is not fit for consumption in its present state. [Furthermore, in modern times being that it is no longer customary to eat locusts, a live non-Kosher locust may be given to children to play with, as there is no concern that they will eat it.^[32]]

 

Example

Reuven has a young nephew named Daniel, the son of his brother Shimon. Shimon and his family are not observant, and Daniel regularly eats non‑kosher food in his parents’ home. One day, Daniel, who is only three years old, visits Reuven. During the visit, Reuven is holding a sandwich containing cheese with meat. Even though Daniel is accustomed to eating such food and has no understanding of mitzvot, it is strictly prohibited for Reuven to place the sandwich into Daniel’s mouth or to feed him with his own hands, whether directly or with a spoon. It is even forbidden for him to make the sandwich available for him. This prohibition applies despite the fact that Daniel is not frum, is below the age of comprehension, and would otherwise eat this food on his own. Feeding him constitutes lesafos lo issur—actively causing a child to transgress—which is Biblically forbidden.

 

1. Amirah Lenachri – Asking a gentile to feed a child non-Kosher food or have him perform another prohibition:^[33]

It is prohibited for any individual to instruct a non-Jew to provide a child with non-Kosher food [even if the prohibition is only Rabbinical^[34]] or to transgress any other prohibition, even if the child is below the age of understanding.^[35]

If the child needs to eat the food, such as for medical necessity:^[36] If a child requires non-Kosher food for medical reasons, such as mild illness, it is permissible to request that a non-Jew administer the forbidden food to the child, [even if the food is Biblically prohibited^[37]].^[38] This allowance, however, applies only when no Kosher alternative is available for the child. ^[39]

 

2. Rabbinically Forbidden Foods – May Rabbinical prohibitions be fed or given to a child?^[40]
3. If there is no reason or necessity:^[41]

If there is no necessity for the child to eat the forbidden food, or be provided with the prohibition, then it is forbidden [according to all opinions] to feed [or provide] him even Rabbinical prohibitions [as stated above in Halacha 1]. This applies even if the child is a mere infant.^[42]

 

1. If there is a necessity:^[43]

If there is some necessity for a child to eat Rabbinically forbidden foods for his own benefit^[44], then it is disputed amongst Poskim whether one may or may not feed him the food. The following are the opinions brought in Admur: Some Poskim^[45] rule that it is forbidden for any person to give even a Rabbinically forbidden item to a child with his hands, even if the child is completely below the age of comprehension, and even if the child is in need for it. This applies even if the child is sick, so long as he is not in danger. Thus, regarding feeding a child a prohibition they have the same status as an adult irrelevant of the child’s age. Other Poskim^[46], however, rule that it is permitted to feed a child, even above the age of education, any Rabbinical prohibition so long as it is being done for the need of the child, such as for the child to eat and drink if he wants to, and there are not other foods available.^[47] Practically, one may^[48] rely on the lenient opinion to feed a child a Rabbinical prohibition [even if the child is above the age of education^[49]] if the child needs it and no gentile is available to feed the child himself.^[50] However, if a gentile is available to feed the child the rabbinic prohibition, it is forbidden for a Jew to do so—even when it is for the child’s need, and even if the child is ill [and rather it is to be fed to him  by the gentile]. In all circumstances, it is prohibited to feed a child a biblical prohibition.^[51] [Furthermore, even when a child requires food for medical reasons, every possible effort must be made to provide a kosher alternative. This is because consuming non-kosher food can nevertheless have a negative impact on the child’s character.^[52] This principle is evident from the ruling that even a pregnant^[53] or nursing^[54] mother who must eat non-kosher food for medical reasons should avoid doing so whenever possible, and if she does partake of non-kosher food, she should refrain from nursing the child.^[55]]

Definition of necessity:^[56] A child’s need which can justify feeding him Rabbinical prohibitions in a time of need is defined as a situation in which the food is required for the child’s physical development, [as opposed to for the purpose of fulfilling a mitzvah^[57]], and no alternative food is available.^[58] A child’s mere desire to eat the food because it tastes good is certainly not a sufficient justification.^[59] [Accordingly, one should not rely on this ruling without first consulting a competent rav to determine whether the circumstances genuinely constitute a necessity for the child.^[60]]

 

Summary

It is forbidden to feed a child any prohibition—biblical or rabbinic—when there is no genuine need, regardless of the child’s age. When there is a true necessity for the child’s own physical development, poskim dispute whether rabbinic prohibitions may be fed to him, and in practice one may rely on the lenient view only when no gentile is available to do so. Under all circumstances, a biblical prohibition may never be given to a child.

 

1. Mitzvah purpose – May one feed a child a Rabbinical Issur for the sake of educating him for a Mitzva?^[61]

A Mitzvah that the child will fulfill as an adult: Any matter that serves the purpose of chinuch— for the purpose of educating a child to perform a mitzvah when he reaches bar mitzvah—may be given to a child even if it involves a prohibition. For example, one may feed a child from the Pesach offering even though the child was not included in the original registration at the time of the slaughter, in which case an adult would be prohibited from eating it. Nevertheless, since the intent is to educate the child in the performance of the mitzvah, it is permitted in the case of a minor.

A Mitzvah that the child will not fulfill as an adult:^[62] The above allowance only applies if the mitzvah is one that the child will be able to fulfill upon reaching bar mitzvah. However, if the mitzvah is one that the child will be unable to fulfill upon reaching bar mitzvah, then the prohibition may not be given to him, due to concern that he may become accustomed to the act and continue it improperly later.^[63] Accordingly, a child may not be given the wine of a brit milah on Yom Kippur so that the blessing should not appear to have been said in vain, since this practice would be prohibited to him as an adult.^[64]

 

3. Mehadrin foods:

The Poskim^[65] rule that although from the strict letter of the law it is permitted for a child to consume mothers’ milk that derive from the breasts of a non‑Jewish woman, one should nevertheless refrain from doing so, as such nourishment can negatively affect a person’s character traits. From here we learn a fundamental principle: beyond the technical rules of what is halachically permitted or forbidden, there exists a broader and more encompassing responsibility—to raise children who are spiritually healthy. Just as parents strive to provide their children with the highest standard of physical nutrition and health, so too must they ensure the highest level of spiritual nourishment. This concern is especially critical in early childhood, when spiritual influences are absorbed deeply and can leave a lasting imprint. Spiritual harm incurred at a young age may have serious long‑term consequences later in life. In our generation, where the challenges of the secular world are far greater than in previous generations, this responsibility is more pressing than ever. Parents must therefore be meticulous not only to avoid feeding their children non‑kosher food, but even among kosher foods, to choose those that meet the highest standards and avoid relying on leniencies accepted by some organizations. Without entering into the broader discussion of whether hiddur mitzvah formally applies to children, it is clear that with respect to kashrut there is an overriding concern for the child’s spiritual wellbeing. For this reason, great care is warranted—an approach strongly emphasized in the Rebbe’s teachings, as expressed vividly in his letters on this subject.

From a letter of the Rebbe

Regarding the question of how to conduct oneself with respect to foods that are not fully mehudar in kashrut, when such foods may seemingly increase a child’s appetite: The concept of hiddur in food, as explained in many places, relates not only to the fulfillment of the mitzvah itself. Rather, since all food eventually becomes blood and flesh within the body, which is bound to the soul, the level of kashrut and refinement of food directly affects the character traits and moral qualities of the person who consumes it.

Accordingly, any additional level of hiddur, refinement, and purity in one’s food should be viewed as an enhancement in the formation, improvement, and refinement of one’s character and middos. If this principle applies to adults, it applies all the more so to children, whose characters are still in the process of being formed. For this reason, there is great significance to the direction in which children are guided in this matter.

In light of the above, it is clear to me that since this does not involve, G‑d forbid, a situation upon which health is truly dependent, but rather concerns an enhancement of taste or appetite, one should not compromise on the hiddur of food. Certainly, other methods and alternatives can be found to strengthen a child’s appetite and health, without doing so at the expense of kashrut and its standards.

 

(Igrot Kodesh, Vol. 18, p. 109 – free translation from Yiddish)

 

Chalav Akum and Pas Akum[66]

Parents must be careful that their children avoid foods that contain a worry of chalav akum and pas akum.

 

4. Exceptions to Children eating Non-Kosher
5. Foods that are intrinsically kosher but temporarily prohibited:^[67]

Foods that are intrinsically kosher yet prohibited at a given time [whether by biblical^[68] or rabbinic law], such as eating before Kiddush or eating on Yom Kippur—may be hand‑fed to a child if the child desires [or requires^[69]] food or drink.^[70] In such circumstances, it is forbidden to cause the child distress by withholding the food. [If, however, the child does not need to eat or drink the food, it is forbidden to feed it to him, even when the prohibition is merely time‑dependent.^[71]]

 

1. Exceptions for A sick or young Child^[72]

With regard to a sick child, various leniencies apply in the mitzvah of parents educating their child that would not normally be extended to an adult. For example, it is permitted for a child who is ill to eat even foods that are biblically prohibited when necessary for his health, and the father is not obligated to protest his actions, although in certain cases he may not actually feed him the foods, as will be explained. [Based on this principle, the Poskim rule that a child who requires chametz-based foods on Pesach for his physical development and health is permitted to eat them. In such a case, the father may arrange for the child to be fed through a gentile.] This same rule applies for any prohibition which the child may need due to his illness.

How ill?^[73] The above allowance applies even if the illness does not rise to the level of pikuach nefesh and even if he is only slightly ill to the point that he is not defined as even a Choleh Sheiyn Bo Sakana [i.e. not bedridden].^[74]

Having a gentile feed the Issur food to the child: In the event of even slight illness, a father may instruct a gentile to feed the forbidden food to the child, as explained in Halacha 8f.

Directly feeding the child the forbidden food: All the above allowance is with respect to the adult or father making the non-Kosher food available for the ill child, instructing a gentile to feed it to him, or simply not protesting the ill child if he is seen eating it. However, unless the situation involves pikuach nefesh [or the matter is needed as part of the general development of the child as explained next], it is forbidden for any Jew to directly feed the child Biblically prohibited food, even if the child is sick as explained in halacha 8a.^[75] This restriction however applies specifically when the prohibition is biblical. If, however, the food is forbidden only by rabbinic law, it is permitted for a Jew to hand‑feed the child when he needs it, in cases where a gentile is not available to do so, as explained in Halacha 8C.

Child needs the Issur food for general development: A child who requires certain foods or supplements for the sake of his physical development—such as young children who medically need specific nutrients or foods to support their growth and overall health—may be given those foods even if he is not presently classified as slightly ill. In such cases, it is permitted to even directly feed the child these foods, as they are necessary for his development and wellbeing. Thus, it is permitted to feed a child food on Yom Kippur.^[76] [However, if the foods involved are prohibited by biblical law, then ideally a Jew may not feed the child directly. Rather, the food may only be made available to him indirectly, such as by instructing a gentile to feed him, or through similar means. However, some Poskim^[77] rule that all general necessities may be fed even directly to the child, even if they involve a Biblical prohibition, and so seems to be the plausible ruling. Accordingly, if a child is in need of a certain non-Kosher baby formula for his general health and development, from the letter of the law, it may be even directly fed to the child. However, see next regarding the custom.]

Feeding Yayin Nesech to a child who medically requires wine to drink:^[78] If a child requires wine and only gentile wine is available—and it cannot be rendered permissible through dilution^[79]—it is permitted to instruct a non‑Jew to give it to him.

Important Note Regarding Non‑Kosher Foods: All of the above leniencies of non-kosher foods apply only when there is no suitable alternative available and when the food in question is genuinely necessary for the child’s health. Otherwise, the accepted custom is to be extremely stringent with regard to feeding a child non‑kosher food, even in situations where it may be technically permitted for health reasons. This is because non‑kosher food is understood to cause a blockage in the child’s spiritual soul (timtum halev) and to negatively affect character development, as explained in Halacha 8C and Chapter 2 Halacha 3.

 

1. Institution without kosher food:^[80]

With respect to placing such an individual in an institution for the mentally impaired that does not provide kosher food, the Poskim rule that it is permitted to send a child with severe intellectual disability to a non‑kosher facility.^[81] This leniency applies only where the individual is deemed completely incompetent (shoteh gamur). However, if the individual is not fully incompetent and possesses some capacity for understanding and education in matters of Torah and mitzvot—such as individuals with Down syndrome or similar conditions, or a cheresh (deaf individual) who is capable of speech and comprehension—then one should refrain from sending them to such institutions, as they are amenable to at least partial religious instruction and observance.

 

 

5. Practical Guidelines for Educating Children in Kashrus and Mehadrin Hashgachas
6. Teaching Children Which Kashrut Standards the Home Relies Upon

Parents should explicitly teach their children which kashrus organizations, standards, and certifications are accepted in their home. This helps the child develop clarity, consistency, and personal responsibility in kashrus, and prevents confusion or accidental transgression when eating outside the home.

 

1. Teaching Kashrut Sensitivity When Eating by Others

It is essential for parents to educate children which kashrus organizations they may rely upon when eating as guests, and which they may not. This guidance should be given with emphasis on sensitivity and derech eretz, so that children learn to uphold their family’s standards without embarrassing or judging others who follow different standards. Such education trains the child to combine fidelity to halacha with respect for other Jews, preventing shame, conflict, or arrogance, and fostering mature and compassionate observance.

 

1. Treat Kashrut as Spiritual Nutrition, Not Only Law

Help children understand—by tone and attitude more than words—that kosher food nourishes the soul just as healthy food nourishes the body.

 

1. Maintain a Consistently Mehudar Home Environment

Children absorb norms through exposure. A home that consistently uses reliable, mehudar supervision sets a natural standard, reducing confusion and avoiding the need for frequent explanations or exceptions. Thus, it is best to keep to set Kashrus Hashgachas permitted within the home.

 

1. Explain When Relying on Leniencies

When halachic leniencies may apply (e.g., young age or necessary food), parents should explain the matter to their children as otherwise it may weaken their sensitivity to kashrut.

 

1. Model Kashrut Integrity through Parental Behavior

Children learn more from what parents eat than what parents say. Consistent adult behavior—especially outside the home—teaches that kashrut standards are principled, not situational.

 

1. Avoid Turning Kashrut into a Source of Conflict or Control

The goal is sensitivity, not resistance. Firm standards should be paired with warmth, patience, and alternatives, so that kashrut is associated with care—not frustration. Unfortunately, there are situations in which kashrut is experienced by children not as a value, but as a means of control—where food becomes a battleground over what they may or may not eat. Children are often sensitive to this dynamic, and when kashrut is presented as rigid or restrictive without flexibility, it can breed resentment. In such cases, when children grow older and gain independence, they may react by rejecting or circumventing the very values their parents sought to instill. For this reason, sound chinuch requires balance. It is both proper and necessary for a home to be conducted on a high standard of mehadrin kashrut, establishing a clear and principled baseline. At the same time, when children are outside the home—such as when eating by others or traveling—it is important to provide them with acceptable halachic options that remain fully kosher, even if they are not the family’s preferred standard. This approach prevents kashrut from being experienced as oppressive and instead presents it as thoughtful and livable. For example, in Eretz Yisrael, many families eat exclusively under the supervision of Badatz Yerushalayim at home, yet nevertheless allow their children to rely on other recognized and halachically valid hechsherim when visiting others or when only such options are available. When guided properly and sensitively, this teaches children loyalty to halacha together with derech eretz, realism, and inner commitment—rather than rebellion.

 

🌿Example 1 – The Klein Family (High Standard at Home, Flexibility Outside):

The Klein family maintains a home that eats exclusively Badatz‑supervised food, without exceptions. Their children grow up knowing that this is the family’s preferred standard and that at home they do not compromise. However, from a young age, Mr. and Mrs. Klein calmly explain to their children that when they are guests—at a simcha, at relatives’ homes, or when traveling—they may eat food that is under other reliable and fully kosher hashgachos, even though these are not what the family uses at home. The children are taught which hechsherim they may rely upon and to do so respectfully and discreetly, without questioning or embarrassing their hosts. As a result, the children grow up valuing high kashrus standards while also developing derech eretz, flexibility, and healthy ownership of Yiddishkeit—without resentment.

 

🌿Example 2 – The Weiss Family (Preventing Kashrus from Becoming Control):

Mrs. Weiss noticed that her teenage son was beginning to feel frustrated when he could not find food outside the home that met the family’s very stringent standards. Rather than insisting on an all‑or‑nothing approach, the Weiss parents sat down with him and explained the difference between their home Kashrus levels and what is halachically acceptable when eating elsewhere. They clarified which leniencies he could rely on when necessary and emphasized that the goal of kashrus is kedushah, not control. At the same time, they taught him to be sensitive and respectful toward Jews who follow different standards. This conversation helped the child feel trusted and respected, and instead of rebelling, he internalized kashrus as a thoughtful and meaningful part of avodas Hashem.

 

6. May children be entrusted with the Kashrus Supervision of an item?
7. The General Rule

Children below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah may not be entrusted with any Biblical matter of Kashrus.^[82] Children who have reached an age of understanding and responsibility may be trusted for all Rabbinical Kashrus matters.^[83] They may be trusted even initially.^[84] If the matter does not involve any trouble, and there is no worry that they will be too lazy to do a proper job, there is not even a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar involved in having an adult do it.^[85] They may be trusted even initially as an emissary, to do the Mitzvah on another’s behalf.^[86]

 

B. Sending a Child to Shecht or Purchase Meat [87]

Although a child is generally not trusted regarding matters that require halachic testimony, this does not mean that one must suspect every child of mishandling tasks entrusted to him. Accordingly, the longstanding custom is to send a responsible child or young girl to bring an animal or poultry to a qualified shochet and return with it after the slaughter, and we do not suspect that the child performed the shechitah himself. The reason is that children who are presumed to be upright are not assumed to intentionally cause others to stumble, and there exists a presumption that they carry out the task as instructed.

Likewise, it is customary to send a bright and responsible child to purchase meat from a kosher butcher, even where many butchers in the marketplace are non-Jews. We do not assume that the child will deliberately purchase from an improper source, as the child’s reliability in this context is based not on formal testimony, but on the presumption that he will not intentionally alter the assignment or cause a mishap.

This leniency applies only to a child who is mature enough to understand instructions and is careful in his conduct. A child known to be irresponsible, reckless, or prone to misconduct should not be entrusted with such tasks. Likewise, the child must be sufficiently mature to avoid being misled or manipulated by others and to complete the assignment properly.

Accordingly, while a child is generally not accepted as a witness regarding whether a slaughter was performed correctly, a trustworthy and responsible child may be relied upon to deliver items for slaughter, purchase kosher meat, as these matters are based upon presumptions of proper conduct rather than formal testimony.

 

C. Relying on a Child to Convey a Halachic Ruling [88]

It is customary to send a child to ask a Rav a question in matters of issur v’heter and to rely on the child’s report of the Rav’s ruling. The reason is that the child is afraid to lie, knowing that the Rav who issued the ruling is available and may later be asked what he said. Accordingly, there is a presumption that the child will accurately convey the Rav’s instructions and will not fabricate an answer. This, however, applies specifically to a child who is presumed to be honest and trustworthy. In such a case, even in matters involving Torah prohibitions, one may rely on the child’s report of the Rav’s ruling. This reliance is not due to the child’s independent halachic credibility as a witness, but because he is deterred from altering the ruling, knowing that the truth can easily be verified.

 

1. Chalav Yisrael – May a child supervise the milking of the cow?^[89]

A child, whether male or female [that has reached 9 years of age^[90]] are eligible to supervise the milking being that they too enter fear into the gentile.

 

1. May a child be trusted to immerse vessels?

One may not send a child below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah to immerse one’s vessels. It is best to abstain from doing so even with vessels of non-metal materials, such as glass. See Halacha ??

 

1. May a child check eggs for blood?

Any child who has reached the age of Chinuch  and knows how to check eggs for blood, may be trusted to check an egg for blood even if they are below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah. See Halacha ??

 

7. Shechita – Shechitah and Kisuy Hadam for Children^[91]
8. A Child Serving as a Shochet^[92]

A child who is not yet capable of properly controlling and directing his hands may not be entrusted with shechitah, even if an adult is supervising him. If he nevertheless slaughtered while under proper adult supervision, the shechitah is valid after the fact. If the child is skilled, trained, and capable of performing shechitah correctly, then from the letter of the law he may slaughter when an adult is standing over him and supervising the process.^[93] However, without adult supervision, even if the child is skilled, the shechitah is invalid. Some authorities further rule that one should not grant authorization to slaughter until the individual reaches eighteen years of age.^[94]

 

1. Kisuy Hadam^[95]

If a child performed a slaughter in a manner that renders the shechitah invalid, there is no obligation to perform kisuy hadam. If, however, the shechitah was valid, an adult should perform the kisuy hadam. Nevertheless, if a child covered the blood, the mitzvah has been fulfilled. Likewise, if an adult performed the shechitah and a child performed the kisuy hadam, the mitzvah is considered fulfilled.

 

8. Seeing Non-Kosher animals:^[96]

One is to be careful not to show a child any non-Kosher imagery, such as impure, Non-Kosher, animals.^[97] Accordingly upon giving or purchasing a toy for a child, it should not be in the shape or figure of a non-Kosher animal, bird, fish etc, but is rather to be of only a pure species. Likewise, when the child gets older and is taught the alphabet using the figure of animals, he is to only be taught using pictures of pure species. The one exception to this is regarding pictures of figures that are written about in Tanach, in which the children may be shown the impure species described in Scripture in order to understand the material. Likewise, the above does not negate those synagogues which are accustomed to have paintings and inscriptions of various animal such as a lion and the like, being that the purpose of this is for a spiritual message.^[98]

Zoo:^[99] Likewise, it does not negate a child visiting a zoo in order to see what animals look like and contemplate the great creations of God.

 

9. Instilling fear in a child through non-Kosher animals:^[100]

A father and mother is not to instill fear into a child with an impure item, such as to say “a cat or dog will take you”, being that there are Mazikim which have the same names as these impure animals which can injure the child in his body or soul, being that a pact is made with the lips. The same applies with all similar cases one needs to be very careful from what he says.

 

 

10. Eggs – May a child check eggs for blood?
11. Background:

May children be entrusted with the Kashrus of an item? Children below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah may not be entrusted with any Biblical matter.^[101] Children who have reached an age of understanding and responsibility may be trusted for all Rabbinical matters.^[102] They may be trusted even initially.^[103] If the matter does not involve any trouble, and there is no worry that they will be too lazy to do a proper job, there is not even a Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar involved in having an adult do it.^[104] They may be trusted even initially as an emissary, to do the Mitzvah on another’s behalf.^[105]

Is the blood found in eggs Biblical or Rabbinical? This depends on the type of egg [fertilized versus unfertilized] and the area of the egg in which the blood was found.^[106] Unfertilized eggs, which is the majority of eggs on the market today, do not contain Biblically forbidden blood.^[107]

Is one obligated to check eggs for blood? From the letter of the law, one is not required to check eggs for blood as we follow the majority of eggs which do not contain blood.^[108] Nevertheless, the custom is to check all eggs that are placed into foods during the day, to see if they have blood.^[109]

 

1. The law:^[110]

Any child who [has reached the age of Chinuch^[111] and] knows how to check eggs for blood, may be trusted to check an egg for blood even if they are below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah.^[112] This applies to both fertilized and unfertilized eggs.^[113] This applies whether the child is checking the eggs for himself, or on behalf of others.^[114] A child who is not yet old enough to know how to properly check eggs for blood, may not be entrusted to do so.^[115]

 

11. Basar Bechalav
12. Basar Bechalav and Children: Building Kashrus Without Trauma

One of the most important and practical areas of chinuch in kashrus is the observance of the laws of Basar Bechalav. More than almost any other area of kashrus, children encounter these laws on a daily basis. Children do not witness the slaughtering of animals, the salting process, the supervision of factories, or the other technical aspects of kashrus. Meat simply arrives home from the store already kosher. By contrast, the separation of meat and dairy is something children see constantly in the kitchen, at meals, and in everyday family life. Accordingly, the kitchen becomes one of the primary classrooms for teaching kashrus. The manner in which parents present and implement these laws will often shape a child’s lifelong attitude towards kosher observance.

 

1. Keep the System Simple

The guiding principle for a family kitchen should be: Simple is successful. While the laws of Basar Bechalav contain many nuances and leniencies that may apply in certain situations, a family’s regular kitchen routine should be straightforward and easy for children to understand. For example, although many situations may be permissible after the fact, and certain uses of clean utensils may be allowed under specific circumstances, these are not the standards upon which one should educate children. Rather, children should be taught clear and consistent rules that prevent confusion and mistakes. For this reason, the accepted custom in Jewish homes is to maintain clearly separate meat and dairy systems, including separate dishes, silverware, pots, pans, cutting boards, and utensils. Ideally, these should be visually distinct and readily identifiable so that even young children can easily recognize which items are meat and which are dairy.

Teaching Practical Kitchen Habits: Children should be educated from a young age regarding:

• Which utensils belong to meat and which belong to dairy.
• Which sinks, counters, and storage areas are designated for meat and dairy use.
• The proper waiting periods between meat and milk.
• The special status of davar charif (onions, garlic, radishes, and similar foods).
• The importance of using pareve utensils when preparing foods that may later be used with either meat or dairy.

In many homes, it is beneficial to develop the habit that foods such as onions and garlic that will be stored for future use are cut with pareve knives and on pareve cutting boards whenever possible. While there are certainly situations in which using a meat knife is entirely appropriate, teaching children to use pareve utensils in such cases often avoids many future complications.

Likewise, children should be taught practical habits that prevent accidental problems. For example:

• Hot water should generally be poured only into an empty cup and not directly onto milk or meat products.
• Separate condiment containers, such as ketchup, mustard, mayonnaise, spices, and salt shakers, should be designated for meat and dairy use, as these items often travel between tables and can easily become contaminated.
• Food should not be moved casually between meat and dairy areas without awareness of the relevant halachos.

The simpler the system, the fewer the mistakes.

 

1. When Mistakes Happen

No matter how well children are educated, mistakes will happen. Children spill milk in the sink. They use the wrong spoon. They place dairy on a meat plate. They forget which knife was used. Such incidents are not exceptions to childhood; they are part of childhood. How parents react to these mistakes is one of the most important aspects of chinuch. A parent who explodes in anger whenever a kashrus mistake occurs is not teaching kashrus. He is teaching fear. A parent who screams, shames, or humiliates a child over kitchen errors may succeed in making the child afraid of making mistakes, but he may also create lasting negative associations with kashrus itself.

Avoiding Kashrus Trauma: Many adults who struggle with kashrus later in life do not remember complex halachic discussions. They remember the emotional atmosphere that surrounded kashrus in their home. They remember whether kashrus was associated with holiness and responsibility, or with panic and anger. Parents should recognize that mistakes are part of maintaining a kosher kitchen. Just as keeping a clean home inevitably involves occasional messes, maintaining a kosher kitchen inevitably involves occasional mix-ups. Children must know that while kashrus is important, a mistake does not mean the world has come to an end.

Most Mistakes Are Fixable: Parents should also remember that many kitchen mishaps are completely repairable. Quite often:

• The food remains permissible.
• The utensil merely requires kashering.
• The matter involves only a rabbinic concern.
• There was no problem at all once the details are reviewed with a competent Rav.

Many times, a family discovers after consulting a Rav that the feared problem never actually existed. In such situations, all of the anger, anxiety, and emotional upheaval accomplished nothing except creating unnecessary stress and negative memories.

 

1. The Goal of Chinuch

The purpose of educating children in Basar Bechalav is not merely to produce a child who knows which spoon belongs where. The purpose is to raise a Jew who loves kashrus, appreciates kashrus, and willingly maintains a kosher home of his own. Children who grow up in a kitchen that combines clear halachic standards with patience, warmth, and common sense are far more likely to carry those values into adulthood. They will see kashrus not as a burden, but as a privilege; not as a source of fear, but as a daily expression of holiness within the Jewish home.

 

 

 

 

1. How long are children to wait between eating meat and milk?^[116]

Introduction: The accustomed six-hour wait between meat and dairy is not a Biblical requirement and is even debated as to if it is a Rabbinical requirement or a mere custom.^[117] Either way, whether it is Rabbinical or a mere custom, the question is asked regarding to its implementation regarding children. Did the Sages decree this delay also upon children? Was the custom accepted also upon children? Although, in general, all matters of Kashrus, whether Biblical or Rabbinical, apply equally to children, from the day that the child is born, and it is the responsibility of the parent to prevent a child from eating non-Kosher^[118], nevertheless, in regard to waiting six hours between meat and milk, it is possible that the Sages never implemented their decree upon children, being that a) in general, decrees that involve fasting from food were not placed onto children; and b) The decree was not placed onto people who are sick^[119], and in Halacha, children are viewed in the same status as one who is sick^[120]; and c) Children eat their meals in closer proximity than adults and have a faster metabolism.^[121] The following is the law regarding this matter as discussed in Poskim:

The law: Some Poskim^[122] rule that a child is not required to wait six hours between meat and dairy, and rather may eat dairy after meat so long as his mouth has been cleaned. Other Poskim^[123], however, rule that the accepted custom is for children to gradually wait sometime between meat and milk, depending on their age, and so is the final ruling. The following suggested practice is recorded in Poskim:

• Below age three:^[124] Children who are below the age of three do not need to wait at all, although should have their mouths rinsed out prior to eating dairy.^[125]
• From age three to six:^[126] Children who are above the age of three begin waiting 1 hour between meat and dairy and then gradually wait 2/3 hours as the child gets older, until the age of six.
• From 6 to Bar/Bas Mitzvah: Some^[127] write that all children who are above the age of six are ideally to wait 6 hours. If, however, the child is hungry and is below the age of 9, then if he has waited three hours and refuses to eat other foods, one may be lenient to give him dairy. If, however, the child is above age nine, then he must wait six hours.^[128] Others^[129] state that from age 5-10 the child is to wait up to 3 hours, while from age 10 he is to wait 6 hours. Others^[130] write that all children who are under Bar and Bas Mitzvah are ideally to wait six hours, although if there is difficulty for them to wait 6 hours, can be lenient to wait 3-4 hours.^[131] Others^[132] write that in a time of need, all children may be lenient to wait one hour between poultry and dairy.
• A weak or sick child:^[133] All children of all ages who are weak or sick, and need to eat dairy foods, may be lenient to wait one hour and clean out their mouths between meat and dairy.

 

1. For Further Study

The laws of Basar Bechalav and the proper maintenance of a kosher kitchen are extensive and contain many details regarding the separation of meat and dairy utensils, dishes, foods, cooking procedures, davar charif, waiting periods, accidental mix-ups, kashering, and many other practical areas of daily observance. For a comprehensive review of all the practical laws of Basar Bechalav and the kosher kitchen, including their halachic foundations and day-to-day application, the reader is referred to our corresponding sefer, The Practical Laws of Basar Bechalav, where these topics are addressed in detail.

 

https://amzn.to/4qrCjSa

 

 

 

 

12. Sakana related restrictions:
13. Introduction

The obligation to protect oneself from danger is among the most important responsibilities in Torah life. Chazal taught that one must be exceedingly careful in matters of danger, often even more so than in matters of ritual prohibition. Accordingly, the education of children in the area of safety and danger is a fundamental component of chinuch.

This obligation encompasses both ordinary physical safety and the various dangers discussed by Chazal and the poskim. Children must be taught from a young age to act responsibly and cautiously, whether when crossing a street, riding a bicycle, using tools, interacting with electricity, swimming, traveling in a vehicle, or engaging in any activity that involves potential risk. Parents should not assume that these matters are self-evident, but rather should actively educate their children in proper safety habits and model responsible behavior themselves.

Likewise, children should be educated regarding the various matters of danger discussed in halachic and traditional sources. Just as a child is taught to distinguish between what is kosher and non-kosher, permitted and forbidden, so too he should be taught to distinguish between what is safe and unsafe, prudent and imprudent.

The importance of this subject cannot be overstated. A child’s attitude towards safety is often formed in the home and accompanies him throughout life. Children who are taught to value their health and wellbeing as a Torah obligation are far more likely to act responsibly as adults.

For an extensive treatment of the many halachic laws, customs, and practices relating to danger and safety, the reader is referred to our two-volume work, The Shemiras Hanefesh Encyclopedia, which comprehensively analyzes the various physical and spiritual dangers from which a Jew is obligated to protect himself and his family. The present work focuses only on those aspects of sakana that are particularly relevant to the education and upbringing of children.

 

https://amzn.to/4gm50Lu

 

 

1. Safety Rules Education

It is beyond the scope of this volume to catalogue the hundreds of safety‑related halachos that apply equally to adults and children. These have already been addressed extensively in our multi‑volume Shemiras HaNefesh Encyclopedia, Volumes One and Two, where thousands of physical and Halachic hazards are discussed in detail based on halacha. The focus of this section, therefore, is not to repeat those discussions, but rather to highlight a number of common and practical safety areas that parents must always be mindful of and actively educate their children about, as part of their ongoing responsibility of chinuch and basic human decency.

 

➜ Road and Traffic Safety

Crossing streets, obeying traffic signals, visibility at night, bicycle safety, and awareness of vehicles.

 

➜ Water Safety

Swimming safety, supervision near pools, lakes, bathtubs, and the absolute danger of swimming alone.

 

➜ Fire and Heat Hazards

Matches, lighters, stovetops, kettles, candles, hot surfaces, and emergency behavior in case of fire.

 

➜ Electrical Safety

Outlets, exposed wires, appliances, extension cords, and water near electricity.

 

➜ Stranger and Personal Safety

Recognizing unsafe situations, not going with strangers, appropriate boundaries, and seeking help.

 

➜ Digital and Online Safety

Internet use, devices, inappropriate content, online strangers, and responsible screen behavior.

 

➜ Home Safety

Windows, balconies, stairs, furniture tipping, sharp objects, and household tools.

 

➜ Health and Hygiene Awareness

Medication safety, not ingesting unknown substances, cleanliness, and disease prevention.

 

➜ Outdoor and Environmental Hazards

Construction sites, animals, extreme weather, poisonous plants, and unsafe areas.

 

➜ School, Camp, and Public Space Safety

Following rules, knowing emergency procedures, reporting unsafe behavior, and situational awareness.

 

Chinuch Takeaway

Teaching safety is not instilling fear—it is teaching responsibility, awareness, and respect for life. When parents consistently educate their children in safe behavior, they are fulfilling both their parental role and a core Torah value: guarding the precious gift of life entrusted to us.

Practical Safety Chinuch Examples

📌 Example 1 – Road Safety (Early Habit Formation)

The Berman family taught their young son Moishe from the age of four that he never crosses the street without holding an adult’s hand. Even on quiet streets, his parents calmly repeated the rule and explained that cars cannot always stop quickly. Over time, Moishe internalized that street safety is not negotiable, and as he grew older, he naturally checked both directions before crossing.

 

📌 Example 2 – Water Safety (Preventive Education)
When the Levin family planned a summer getaway that included a swimming pool, they sat down with their children beforehand. They explained to Chaya (age seven) and Yossi (age nine) that no swimming is ever allowed without parental permission and supervision. This conversation—held calmly and clearly—prevented risky behavior and taught the children that water safety is part of guarding life, not a restriction.

 

📌 Example 3 – Fire and Heat Hazards (Clear Boundaries)

Mrs. Katz noticed her five‑year‑old daughter Rivky reaching toward the stovetop while she was cooking. Instead of yelling, she firmly removed Rivky’s hand and explained that fire and hot surfaces can severely hurt a person. She then created a designated “safe zone” line near the kitchen entrance. Rivky quickly learned where she may and may not stand, preventing future danger.

 

📌 Example 4 – Stranger Awareness (Personal Safety)

The Weiss parents taught their children that although most people are good, they may never go anywhere with someone without explicit parental permission. When seven‑year‑old Mendy was once offered candy by a stranger outside a grocery store, he immediately stepped back and informed his parents—demonstrating that early safety chinuch can prevent serious harm.

 

📌 Example 5 – Medication and Household Hazards

In the Rosenfeld home, all medications and cleaning supplies were kept locked away. The parents repeatedly taught their children that medicine is only taken when given by a parent. When three‑year‑old Sarah once found a pill that had fallen on the floor, she brought it directly to her mother rather than putting it in her mouth—showing effective, age‑appropriate safety instruction.

📌 Example 6 – Digital Safety (Modern Hazards)

The Greenwald family established rules that screens are only used in common areas and with a filter. They explained to their son Avi that some images and messages online are dangerous and that he should inform his parents immediately if he sees anything uncomfortable. This proactive guidance helped Avi develop responsibility and trust rather than secrecy.

General Safety Chinuch – Key Areas Parents Must Teach

Safety Area	Parental Chinuch Responsibility	Core Message to the Child
Road & Traffic Safety	Teach children how to cross streets, obey signals, and never assume vehicles will stop	Life is precious; always be cautious around cars
Water Safety	Supervise near all water; teach swimming and strict water rules	Water is dangerous without permission and supervision
Fire & Heat Hazards	Educate about stoves, candles, heaters, matches, and burns	Fire helps when controlled and harms when misused
Electrical Safety	Teach children not to touch outlets, wires, or appliances	Electricity can seriously injure or kill
Stranger & Personal Safety	Teach clear boundaries and when to seek help	Your body is yours, and safety comes first
Home Safety	Windows, balconies, stairs, sharp objects, furniture	The home must be used carefully
Medication & Substances	Teach never to ingest unknown items	Only parents give medicine
Internet & Digital Safety	Supervise devices; explain online dangers	Not everything online is safe or appropriate
Outdoor & Environmental Hazards	Construction sites, animals, weather dangers	Avoid unsafe areas and situations
School, Camp & Public Areas	Teach rules, awareness, and emergency steps	Follow rules and speak up when unsafe

 

1. Matters that cause memory loss?^[134]

It is questionable whether memory loss hazards are applicable to children, who do not have the same level of obligation in Torah learning. Regarding children, some Poskim^[135] write that even children are to be careful to avoid matters that cause memory loss, while other Poskim^[136] write that there is no need for them to be careful in this as they have not learned anything that they can forget.

 

1. Belittling or destroying crumbs of bread:^[137]

[Having] crumbs of bread in a house can lead to poverty (if they are placed in an area where people step^[138]).^[139] Thus, one may not throw crumbs onto the floor in an area that people walk. [Accordingly, bakers are to be careful to sweep the crumbs from the floor each day after that days sales. The same applies for homeowners, that they are to be careful to sweep the crumbs from the floor at the end of the day.^[140] One must warn the workers at the home, as well as the children, of this issue.^[141]]

 

1. Food Under the Bed

May food be placed under a crib or bed of a child?^[142] Some Poskim^[143] rule it is permitted to do so.^[144] Other Poskim^[145] rule one is not to do so.

May food be placed under the stroller or baby carriage?^[146] Yes. One may place food in the basket that is on bottom of the stroller even if the child is sleeping.

By a bunk bed may one place food on top of the lower bed which is under the upper bed? This matter is disputed in Poskim, as explained in the first Q&A above regarding food that is not directly on the ground. Practically, one is to initially avoid doing so although Bedieved the food is permitted.^[147] If a child sleeps in the upper bed, then certainly there is great room to allow one to do so, as brought in Q&A below.

 

 

 

13. Tevilas Keilim
14. May a child be trusted to immerse a vessel?^[148]

A child [who is below Bar/Bas Mitzvah] may not be trusted [alone] to immerse a vessel in the Mikveh.^[149] However, if the child immerses the vessel in the presence [and under the supervision] of an adult [male or female above Bar/Bas Mitzvah], then the immersion is valid.^[150] This applies even if the child is not educated in the purpose or meaning behind the immersion, and simply performs the act of entering the vessel into the Mikveh.^[151] [In such a case that a child immersed the vessel under supervision, the adult supervisor must inform the person for whom the vessel was immersed, that the child immersed the vessel properly. Whenever a child immerses under adult supervision, he is to recite a blessing over the immersion.^[152]]

Glass vessels, and all vessels which require Rabbinical immersion: Some Poskim^[153] rule that the above invalidation of a child immersing a vessel without supervision, only applies if the vessel requires Biblical immersion, such as if it is made of metal. However, if the vessel only requires Rabbinical immersion, such as if it is made of glass^[154] [or plastic] then a child who has reached an age of mental understanding^[155] may be trusted to immerse it even without adult supervision. Other Poskim^[156], however, rule that a child may never be trusted without supervision even if the vessel is made of glass.^[157]

 

Summary: One may not send a child below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah to immerse one’s vessels. It is best to abstain from doing so even with vessels of non-metal materials, such as glass. It is, however, permitted for the child to immerse the vessel under adult supervision, and have the child say the blessing. Thus, one may take his child with him to the Mikveh Keilim and have him immerse the vessels in the Mikveh while one is watching. Likewise, one may send the child to immerse the vessels if he prearranges for an adult to supervise him and report that the immersion was done correctly.   Q&A May a child who is Bar/Bas Mitzvah be trusted even if one does not know if he has grown the signs of puberty?[158] Some Poskim[159] rule a child who is above Bar/Bas Mitzvah may be trusted even if one does not know that they have grown signs of adulthood [i.e. two pubic hairs].[160] Other Poskim[161], however, rule that the child may only be trusted to immerse Rabbinical vessels, such as glass, but not by metal.   May one trust a child to give the vessel to an adult and have the adult immerse it?[162] Yes. A trustworthy child may be entrusted to do so if he returns and testifies that he did as asked, and an adult immersed the vessel.[163]

 

1. May a child immerse his thermos vessel in a Mikveh?

Question:

My 10-year-old daughter won a raffle in her class for a very good quality metal thermos. There is a Keilim Mikveh right next door to her school building and she would like to know if she can Toivel it herself, or if she must give it to an adult to do for her.

 

Answer:              

Technically, she may immerse it herself, however, it should only be immersed in the presence of an adult which is defined as a boy or girl who is above the age of Bar or Bas mitzvah. In such a case, the adult supervisor is to inform you that the vessel was immersed properly by your child. The same would apply if your child gives the vessel to the adult for the adult to immerse, that the adult must inform you that they immersed it. If your child is the one doing the immersing, which he may, then he is to recite a blessing over the immersion. If your child claims that he immersed it properly but there is no adult to testify that he did so, then you should re-immerse it without a blessing, if you or anyone else desires to use the thermos. However, your child may personally continue to use it on the basis of his claim that he immersed it. He may continue using the thermos even after he becomes Bar/Bas Mitzvah, on the basis of his acclaimed immersion while he was a child.

 

Explanation: Technically, if a vessel was immersed in a Mikveh by a child then it is valid, as the Torah did not require for it to be immersed with any intent of Lishma, and it is hence unlike the invalidation of a child to make Tzitzis or Tefillin due to them not being a Bar Daas who can do so Lishma. Nonetheless, it is debated amongst the Poskim as to whether one may trust a child [who is below Bar/Bas Mitzvah] who claims to have immersed a vessel in the Mikveh. Ideally, by biblical commands we do not believe a child testimony, and hence the above debate of whether a child testimony of immersion may be believed is dependent on the question of whether the mitzvah to immerse a vessel’s is of Biblical or Rabbinical origin. Practically, we rule that a child is not believed to have immersed the vessel if it required biblical immersion [i.e. metal] unless an adult who was there can testify to having supervised the child do the immersion. Based on all this, it seems clear that in our case in which we are dealing with a metal thermos the child cannot be trusted to immerse the thermos by himself and it must be done with an adult present who can then testify to you that it was properly immersed. However, in truth in the case above the matter is not so simple, as a) the thermos belongs to the child and why should the child not be believed about his own immersion if he knows for a fact that he immersed it. [In other words, perhaps the entire invalidation of trusting a child to immerse a vessel is only when the vessel belongs to an adult, however, when the vessel belongs to that actual child, then certainly the child may trust himself to have done it.] b) perhaps since the vessel belongs to the child it is not even obligated in immersion being that a child is not yet obligated in Mitzvos and hence his vessels would at most only be obligated to be immersed due to the mitzvah of Chinuch which is rabbinical and for which a child may be trusted. So in truth, seemingly certainly the child may trust himself to have immersed it, and the parent may allow the child to use the vessel if he claims to have immersed it properly. Furthermore, he may even continue using it after he becomes bar/bas mitzvah on the basis of his knowledge that he immersed that when he was a child. We find a similar ruling regarding a child who tied Tzitzis to his Tallis Katan, in which some Poskim rule that he may continue wearing it as an adult if he claims to have done it Lishma. A similar ruling is also found regarding allowing a child to eat meat from an animal that he personally slaughtered in an acclaimed valid method. Nonetheless, we did not conclude with this option of allowing the child to immerse their thermos being that a) in truth the vessel belongs to the parents, as anything a child acquires Halachically belongs to his parents being that the child is supported by them and is part of their household, and they are hence Zocheh [hold the legal ownership rights] to his findings [Metzia] and income earned. Accordingly, since it is possible that adults will come to use the thermos, and an adult may not rely on the testimony of the child, therefore it is proper for to be immersed in a way that anyone can use it, and hence have it immersed under the supervision of an adult, and have that adult inform the parent of is proper immersion. [Accordingly, even though the found objects and income of a child only belong to his parents on a rabbinical level, while biblically they are truly the property of the child, and hence once again we can argue that the mitzvah to immerse this vessel which was given to the child is only rabbinical, for which he can be trusted, nonetheless, since the vessel will require biblical immersion when he becomes an adult, and its immersion as a child cannot be accepted by adults, therefore, it is best to immerse it under adult supervision already now so it does not become a problem later.]

 

Sources: See regarding that a child may not be trusted to immerse a vessel: Michaber Yoreh Deah 120:14; Terumos Hadeshen 257; Taz 120:16; Darkei Teshuvah 120:105; Kitzur SHU”A 37:12; Admur 432:10; 437:6 regarding trusting a child to perform a Rabbinical Bedikas Chametz See regarding that the child may personally use the vessel on the basis of his own immersion both as a child and afterwards when he becomes an adult: Habayis Bekashrusos p. 164 footnote 74; Tevilas Keilim Kehilchasa 16:7 footnote 13; Chanoch Lanaar 41 footnote 6; Pesakim Uteshuvos 120 footnote 453See regarding that even after bar mitzvah a child may continue to wear Tzitzis that he tied as a child: Biur Halacha 14:1 “Lehatzrich”; Piskeiy Teshuvos 14:3; Mishneh Halachos 3:229; See regarding that a child may eat meat from an animal that he personally slaughtered in an acclaimed valid method: Darkei Teshuvah 28:116;   See regarding if the vessel of a child is obligated in Tevilas Keilim: I have not found this matter discussed in the Poskim. VeHashem Yair Eiyneinu. See regarding parents acquiring children’s found objects and income: Admur Hefker Vehasagas Gevul 9 and O.C. 366:13; Michaber and Rama C.M. 270:2; Rambam Gezeila Veaveida 17:13; Mishneh Bava Metzia 12a;

 

 

 

14. Nursing Kashrus Laws:
15. Until what age to nurse – Minimum:^[164]

A woman is not to stop nursing prior to 24 months unless there are mitigating circumstances to justify doing so, such as if she is pregnant.

 

1. Until what age may one nurse a child – Maximum:^[165]

A Healthy Child: A healthy child may continue to nurse until the age of four years old.

A Sick or Weak Child: If the child is sick or physically weak, he may continue nursing until the age of five years old.

The Requirement of Continuous Nursing: The above allowance applies only if the child has maintained a continuous nursing relationship and has never gone three consecutive full days (72 hours) without nursing from the time of birth. Accordingly, if at any point after reaching the age of twenty-four months the child ceased nursing for three consecutive days for reasons unrelated to illness, he may no longer resume nursing, unless it is a case of danger. However, during the first twenty-four months of life, a child may continue nursing even if he did not nurse for many consecutive days.

Interruption Due to Illness: The above restriction applies only when the interruption was voluntary or due to ordinary circumstances. If the child ceased nursing because of illness or a similar circumstance beyond his control, the interruption does not terminate his ability to continue nursing thereafter.

 

1. A Gentile wetnurse:

Danger:^[166] Due to reasons of danger, one is not to give their child to a Gentile mother to nurse in her home even if there are other people found there. However, she may nurse the child in the home of the Jew, if there are other Jews that are there or that will constantly enter and leave.

Kashrus:^[167] Due to that Gentile milk can create bad character in a child, therefore a woman should never give her child to a Gentile wet nurse for breastfeeding. [This applies to both a boy and girl.^[168] However, in a scenario in which there is no other option available and if the child does not nurse then it will be dangerous for his or her health, then a Gentile woman may be hired to nurse the child.^[169]]

 

1. Avoiding Non-Kosher foods:^[170]

A nursing mother is to especially avoid eating non-Kosher foods.^[171] Thus, one is not to give their child to be nursed by a woman who does not keep Kosher, even if she is a Jew. Even if a woman has a Halachic allowance to eat non-Kosher food due to medical reasons, nevertheless, she should not nurse her child after eating such foods. Rather, she should hire a wet nurse who keeps Kosher to nurse her child.^[172]

The child:^[173] Certainly, the child himself is not to be given non-Kosher food to eat, as such food will damage the child when he gets older. [This applies even to food that is only Rabbinically forbidden, and hence permitted from the letter of the law to be fed to a child according to some opinions^[174], nonetheless, one should not do so, and should protest his child from eating such food, due to the spiritual damage that it can cause his mind and heart, creating bad traits within him.^[175] Furthermore, due to this reason, one should only feed their child the most Mehadrin of foods, and not rely on various Halachic leniencies for permitting the food even if the food contains a nutritional benefit for the child, so long as it is not absolutely necessary for his general health.^[176] Thus even snacks and treats, such as candies and cookies and chips should be of the highest levels of Kashrus.^[177]]

 

1. If one did not nurse for 24 hours:^[178]

If a woman did not nurse her child for 24-hour period, then she should no longer nurse her child. [Rather, she is to first squeeze some of the milk from her breasts having it go to waste and only afterwards nurse him.^[179]]

 

 

 

1. Nursing after intercourse:^[180]

One who has a nursing child is not to nurse the child after marital relations for approximately two Milin, which is close to an hour [i.e. 36-48 minutes^[181]]. [Lack of waiting this amount is dangerous for the child.^[182]] At the very least [such as in a time of need^[183]] one is to wait the length of one mil [i.e. 18-24 minutes, or according to some Poskim^[184] even half a Mil, which is 9 or 12 minutes]. If the child is really crying, then some Poskim^[185] rule that one is not to adhere to this matter at all, and may nurse the child right away without fear. Other Poskim,^[186] however, are stringent even in such a case that one should always wait one Mil. Practically, one should try to calm the child in other ways, and if one is unable to do so, then one may be lenient to nurse him even prior to the passing of the above amount of time.^[187]

 

1. May one nurse a child if she is bleeding in that area?

Some Poskim^[188] rule it is permitted as the blood is considered covered.

 

 

 

15. Hafrashas Challah
16. Praying for one’s children:^[189]

It is a great Segula to pray for one’s children upon separating Challah. One is to pray that one’s children be Tzaddikim, and G-d fearing Jews.^[190]

 

1. Hafrashas Challah by Children^[191]

The question of whether a child may perform hafrashas challah touches on two fundamental halachic issues. Does a Child Have the Ability to Effect a Separation? Can a Child Serve as an Agent for the Owner of the Dough?  The first question is whether a child who has not yet reached Bar or Bas Mitzvah possesses the halachic capacity to transform the separated piece of dough into challah. In other words, does the child’s act of separation have the legal effect of designating the removed portion as challah and thereby permitting the remainder of the dough? The second question is whether a child may serve as a shaliach (agent) on behalf of the owner of the dough. Thus, even if one were to assume that a child has some capacity to perform hafrashas challah on his own dough, an additional issue remains as to whether he may separate challah on behalf of another person, such as when a mother asks her daughter who is below Bas Mitzvah to separate challah from dough that belongs to the mother. As will be discussed below, these two questions form the basis of much of the halachic discussion regarding hafrashas challah performed by children, and may lead to different conclusions depending on whether the dough belongs to the child himself or to another individual.

Children Below the Age Eleven for a girl and Twelve for a boy:^[192] A child who is younger than the year preceding Bar or Bas Mitzvah may not separate challah. Accordingly, if a ten year old child separated challah, the separation is ineffective and another valid separation must be performed with a blessing.

Children in the Year Prior to Bar or Bas Mitzvah – Eleven for a girl and 12 for a boy:^[193] During the year immediately preceding halachic adulthood, a child attains the status of a mufla hasamuch l’ish (one approaching maturity), whose separation of Challah is valid. [Accordingly, a girl from the age of eleven and a boy from the age of twelve who understand the significance of the separation may validly separate challah.^[194] Their separation is effective, at least after the fact, if they are the ones who own the dough. Nevertheless, even in such cases, it is preferable that hafrashas challah be performed by an adult who is already Bar or Bas Mitzvah.^[195] Accordingly, while challah-baking events involving girls prior to Bas Mitzvah may rely on their separation under the proper conditions, the preferred practice is to have a woman who is already Bas Mitzvah perform the actual separation.]

Dough Owned by an Adult: All of the above discussion applies when the dough belongs to the child himself. However, when the dough belongs to someone else, the matter is more complex. Thus, if a mother is preparing challah for Shabbos and asks her daughter who is below Bas Mitzvah to separate the challah on her behalf, some poskim^[196] rule that the separation is ineffective even after the fact. The reason is that a child cannot serve as a halachic agent (shaliach), and therefore lacks the ability to separate challah on behalf of another person’s dough. Accordingly, although there are authorities^[197] who validate a child’s separation of challah once the child has reached the age of mufla hasamuch l’ish even if the Challah is owned by others, that hafrashas challah should be performed by an adult who is already Bar or Bas Mitzvah whenever the dough belongs to another person. Even Bedieved, if it was already performed by a child, it is best for an adult to return and perform Hafrashas Challah without a blessing.

 

1. Chinuch Lessons

Despite the above halachic limitations, involving children in challah baking remains a valuable aspect of chinuch. Children should be encouraged to participate in the kneading, baking, and learning of the laws and significance of hafrashas challah. Through this experience they become familiar with the mitzvah and develop an appreciation for its importance, even when the actual separation is ideally performed by an adult.

 

1. Child Separating Challah on Shabbos or Yiom Tov Through a Child in a Time of Need^[198]

In a pressing circumstance, such as when one forgot to separate challah before Shabbos, it is permitted to have a child who is a mufla hasamuch l’ish (a child approaching halachic maturity who understands the significance of the mitzvah) perform the separation on Shabbos.

 

16. Teruma Umaaser
17. Hafrashas Trumos Umaasros by Children^[199]

The question of whether a child may perform hafrashas Teruma Umaaser touches on two fundamental halachic issues. Does a Child Have the Ability to Effect a Separation? Can a Child Serve as an Agent for the Owner of the food?  The first question is whether a child who has not yet reached Bar or Bas Mitzvah possesses the halachic capacity to transform the separated piece of food into Teruma Umaaser. In other words, does the child’s act of separation have the legal effect of designating the removed portion as Teruma Umaaser and thereby permitting the remainder of the food? The second question is whether a child may serve as a shaliach (agent) on behalf of the owner of the food. Thus, even if one were to assume that a child has some capacity to perform Teruma Umaaser on his own fruits and vegetables, an additional issue remains as to whether he may separate Teruma Umaaser on behalf of another person, such as when a parent asks their son who is below Bar Mitzvah to separate Teruma Umaaser from the fruits that were removed from their tree. As will be discussed below, these two questions form the basis of much of the halachic discussion regarding Teruma Umaaser performed by children, and may lead to different conclusions depending on whether the dough belongs to the child himself or to another individual.

Children Below the Age Eleven for a girl and Twelve for a boy:^[200] A child who is younger than the year preceding Bar or Bas Mitzvah may not separate Teruma Umaaser. Accordingly, if a ten year old child separated Teruma Umaaser, the separation is ineffective and another valid separation must be performed with a blessing.

Children in the Year Prior to Bar or Bas Mitzvah – Eleven for a girl and 12 for a boy:^[201] During the year immediately preceding halachic adulthood, a child attains the status of a mufla hasamuch l’ish (one approaching maturity), whose separation of Challah is valid. [Accordingly, a girl from the age of eleven and a boy from the age of twelve who understand the significance of the separation may validly separate Teruma Umaaser.^[202] Their separation is effective, at least after the fact, if they are the ones who own the dough. Nevertheless, even in such cases, it is preferable that Teruma Umaaser be performed by an adult who is already Bar or Bas Mitzvah.^[203]]

Food Owned by an Adult: All of the above discussion applies when the food belongs to the child himself. However, when the food belongs to someone else, the matter is more complex. Some poskim^[204] rule that the separation is ineffective even after the fact. The reason is that a child cannot serve as a halachic agent (shaliach), and therefore lacks the ability to separate challah on behalf of another person’s dough. Accordingly, although there are authorities^[205] who validate a child’s separation of challah once the child has reached the age of mufla hasamuch l’ish even if the food is owned by others, Teruma Umaaser should be performed by an adult who is already Bar or Bas Mitzvah whenever the food belongs to another person. Even Bedieved, if it was already performed by a child, it is best for an adult to return and perform Teruma Umaaser without a blessing.

 

B. Child Separating Terumos U’maasros on Shabbos or Yiom Tov Through a Child in a Time of Need [206]

In a pressing circumstance, such as when one forgot to separate terumos u’maasros before Shabbos, it is permitted to have a child who is a mufla hasamuch l’ish (a child approaching halachic maturity who understands the significance of the mitzvah) perform the separation on Shabbos.

 

[1] Admur 343:2; Admur Hilchos Talmud Torah 1:1; Basra 4:2; Admur 39:1; 266:10; Shut Admur 41; Rambam Machalos Assuros 17:28; Tzitzis 3:9; Chagiga 4a; Nazir 29b; Sukkah 28b; Chayeh Adam 66:1; See Likkutei Sichos 35 p. 61; Igros Kodesh 8:92; 95; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 162; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:1; See Toras Hakatan [Rubinovitch] Chapter 1:1-6

[2] Chanoch Lanaar 7 footnote 5 in name of Malei Haroim; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:2; See Shach Y.D. 81:26

[3] Admur 343:3 “However, education regarding prohibitions—whether Torah prohibitions or rabbinic ones—applies to any child who has sufficient understanding to comprehend when one tells him that something is forbidden to do or to eat But a child who has no understanding at all: his father is not obligated to prevent him…”; M”A 343:2; Chayeh Adam 66:2; M”B 343:3; Issur Viheter Shaar 48:8; Kaf Hachaim 343:18; See Tosafus Erechin 3a; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 3; See Toras Hakatan [Rubinovitch] Chapter 5:14-23

[4] Must the child reach the Stage at Which he Will Not Repeat the Behavior to be reprimanded: Some Poskim rule that it is not sufficient that a child merely have the basic understanding that when one scolds him or tells him “no” or “it is forbidden,” he refrains at that moment and does not act accordingly—something that is already found even in a one‑year‑old infant. Rather, what is required is that the child internalize the lesson to the extent that even on another occasion, without being warned again, he remembers it and refrains from acting, whether out of fear, embarrassment, maturity, or any other reason. [Chikrei Lev 61; Az Nidbaru 6:57; Chut Shani 95:12; Chidushim Ubiurim O.C. 18; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:7] Generally, this level of internal understanding develops at approximately three years of age, and sometimes it is delayed until around the age of four. However, Tzaruch Iyun from Admur who writes the word “does not understand at all at all” which can imply that once a child has begun to grasp the concept of being told “no,” he is already to be prevented from transgressing even if he will repeat it in the future.

[5] Admur 343:2; 343:3 “But a child who has no understanding at all: his father is not obligated to forcibly prevent him from eating forbidden foods.”; Admur 616:2-4; M”A 343:2; Issur Viheter Shaar 48:8; Tosefes Shabbos 343:2; M”B 343:3; Kaf Hachaim 343:11; See Tosafus Erechin 3a; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:2 and 12

[6] Admur 343:3; M”A 343:2; Chayeh Adam 66:2; M”B 343:3; Issur Viheter Shaar 48:8; Kaf Hachaim 343:18; See Tosafus Erechin 3a; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 3; See Toras Hakatan [Rubinovitch] Chapter 5:14-23

[7] Rama Yoreh Deah 81:7 regarding an infant eating milk from a gentile, as explained in Shach 81:26; M”A 343:2; Tosefes Shabbos 343:2; Kaf Hachaim 343:11; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:9; See Pri Chadash (Yoreh De’ah, siman 81, se’if katan 26) who already protested and cried out sharply about this matter, stating as follows: Since in our times people are not careful with these matters of forbidden foods, most children go astray, and most of the insolent individuals of our generation lack any fear of Heaven that penetrates their hearts. Even when they are rebuked directly, they are not receptive to moral instruction. And who is greater for us than Elisha ben Avuyah? For he did not come to that path because of any later deed of his own, but rather because his mother, who was pregnant with him, passed by a place where food was being cooked for idolatry. She smelled it and felt a need to eat from it, and that substance permeated him like the venom of a snake.”

Time‑Dependent Prohibitions: The Achronim have discussed whether this negative effect applies also to permitted foods that become prohibited due to time-related restrictions, such as chametz on Passover, eating on Yom Kippur, and eating matzah on the day before Passover. [See Darkei Teshuvah 81:90; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 4] From the words of the Gemara in Yoma (82b), which discusses a pregnant woman who smelled food on Yom Kippur, it is evident that this category is also included. [Arugas Habosem O.C. 138] Nevertheless, it is certainly forbidden to be stringent in a situation involving even a possible danger to life, and the ruling must be determined according to the judgment of the halachic authority in each case. However, allowing a minor to eat before kiddush or havdalah is clearly more lenient according to all opinions, since this prohibition is merely a rabbinic safeguard enacted out of respect for the sanctity of the day. [Piskeiy Teshvuos 343:9]

[8] Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 4; Chanoch Lanaar 7 footnote 5 in name of Malei Haroim; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:2; See Shach Y.D. 81:26

 

[9] Darkei Moshe O.C. 617:1 “One must be careful that a pregnant woman guard herself as much as possible that she does not eat pork and non-kosher meats as this will cause that her child will be God fearing”; Or Zarua 279; Yerushalmi Chagiga 9b regarding the mother of Acher that she had once eaten a non-Kosher food during her pregnancy due to having smelled it and lusted after it, and this is what caused her son to become a heretic; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 142:1; Shevach Habris 1:24; Nitei Gavriel 3 56:5

[10] Rama Y.D. 81:7; Taz Y.D. 81:12; Shach Y.D. 81:24; Arugas Habosem O.C. 138; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 142:1; 147:2;

[11] Shach Y.D. 81:24; P”M 81 M”Z 12; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 147:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:9

[12] Admur 343:5 “All of the above applies only with regard to the obligation to separate a child from a transgression. However, to actively feed a child a prohibited item with one’s own hands is Biblically forbidden for every person, even if the child is not at all capable of understanding, as it is stated: “Do not eat them”—which the Sages expounded to mean: “Do not feed them to minors.” This prohibition applies even to matters prohibited only by Rabbinic law. It is forbidden to feed a child such items even if the child needs them, and even if the child is ill, so long as there is no danger to life, just as it is forbidden to do so for an adult. Similarly, it is forbidden to accustom a child to desecration of Shabbat or Festivals, even through acts prohibited only due to shevut (Rabbinic prohibitions).”; Admur 266:10; Admur 616:1-2; Shut Rabbeinu 41; Michaber 343:1; Rambam Machalos Assuros 17:27; Yevamos 114a; Terumos Hadeshen 62; M”A 343:2; M”A 616:2; M”B 343:4 Kaf Hachaim 343:19; Kaf Hachaim 343:6; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 194 and 187; Likkutei Sichos Vol. 7 Sicha 1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:4 and 7; Toras Hakatan 15:1-14; 21; Likkutei Sichos Vol. 7 Sicha 1; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 509; See M”B  343 Shaareiy Tziyon 6

[13] Admur ibid; 262:10; Shut Rabbeinu 41 in end; Bach 343 and Taz 343 that so applies according to Tur; Rashba Shabbos 153, brought in Tehila Ledavid 343:7; Achiezer 3:1 in name of Noda Beyehuda; M”B ibid; Kaf Hachaim 343:19; Likkutei Sichos Vol. 7 Sicha 1; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 195 footnote 506; Toras Hakatan 15

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the prohibition to cause a child to eat non-Kosher food is merely Rabbinical. [P”M 343 M”Z 2 in opinion of Tur and possibly Rambam]

[14] Admur ibid; Shut Rabbeinu 41 “However, to feed a minor a prohibition directly is forbidden according to all opinions—not because of chinuch, but rather because it is written “You shall not eat them,” which is expounded as “You shall not feed them,” as stated in the chapter Cheresh. For the obligation of chinuch is not imposed upon the father alone, as the Rambam writes—see Orach Chaim, siman 343.”; M”A 616:2; Levush 343:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:4; See Yevamos ibid; Rashi Yevamos 90a; Toras Hakatan 17

[15] See Admur 616:4; 640:4

[16] The source: This is learned from the verse regarding creeping creatures [Vayikra 11:42] “Do not feed them” which the Sages learned to mean that one may not feed a prohibited food to Ketanim, Lehazhir Gedolim Al Haketanim. [Admur ibid; Yevamos 112a] And likewise regarding blood it is written: “Any soul among you shall not eat blood,” and the Sages received this as an exposition to mean: “Do not feed [blood] to minors.” And likewise regarding the impurity of priests it is written: “Say and you shall say,” and the Sages said: “Say”—to the adults, that they should say [it] to the minors. And behold, from these three commandments we learn for the entire Torah that with respect to all Torah prohibitions, it is forbidden to feed them [to minors] or to command them to transgress. [M”B ibid; Yevamos ibid] See also Toras Kohanim end of Shemini; and beginning of Parshas Emor; See Likkutei Sichos ibid that every Jew—regardless of age—possesses the same essential G‑dly soul. From the perspective of the soul’s essence, there is no difference between a newborn child and an adult; all share an equal and identical level of essential G‑dliness. Differences between individuals exist only in the revelation and expression of the soul’s faculties, such as intellect and emotion, which are far more developed in adults than in children. This distinction is comparable to physical life‑force: the same life energy animates all bodies equally, regardless of size, while other faculties vary. Accordingly, the true difference between Jews lies only in external soul faculties, not in the soul’s essence. This principle explains why the Torah holds adults responsible not to cause a child to transgress—since, at their core, a child and an adult share the same essential sanctity. [Likkutei Sichos ibid] Alternatively, the reason for this prohibition is because the child may become used to performing the prohibition even when an adult. [Terumos Hadeshen 62; See Chasam Sofer O.C. 83; Achiezer 3:81]

[17] See M”B 343:4; Tehila Ledavid 343:1; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:4

[18] Admur ibid and 266:10; M”A 343:2; M”B 343:4; Kaf Hachaim 343:19; Likkutei Sichos Vol. 7 Sicha 1; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 509; See M”B  343 Shaareiy Tziyon 6; Toras Hakatan 16

[19] Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:3

[20] Admur 343:5 “It is forbidden for any Jew to instruct a non‑Jew to feed the child prohibited items, since instructing a non‑Jew (amira lenochri) is forbidden with regard to all Torah prohibitions—and certainly one may not instruct the child himself to do so.”; Admur 343:7 “And all this applies when one feeds a prohibited item to an infant for our own needs; likewise, if one tells him to do for us some act that is prohibited even if only by rabbinic law.”; Rashbatz in Piskeiy Nida ; Kisei Eliyahu 343:2; Kaf Hachaim 343:6; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:4; So rule regarding even Amirah Lenachri, and certainly this would apply even more so to instructing the child directly: M”A 343:2; Rashi Yevamos 114a; Rabbeinu Yerucham Nesiv 1 p. 13; Rashba Shabbos 153; Ran Shabbos 153; Tehila Ledavid 343:7; P”M 343 M”Z 1; Mishneh Berura 343:4; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:3; Kovetz Iyunim Tiferes Shimshon 3 p. 150; Toras Hakatan 18

[21] Rashba Shabbos 153; Ran Shabbos 153; Shiltei Giborim Tehila Ledavid 343:7; P”M ibid; M”B 343:4 “And this matter is prohibited by the Torah…And behold, from these three commandments we learn for the entire Torah that with respect to all Torah prohibitions, it is forbidden to feed them [to minors] or to command them to transgress.”; Piskeiy Teshvuos 343:2; See Kovetz Iyunim Tiferes Shimshon 3 p. 150

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that this prohibition is only Rabbinical. [Mishneh Lemelech in name of Rashba, brought and negated in Tehila Ledavid ibid; Toras Hakatan 18:1]

Opinion of Admur: It is not clear from Admur whether the prohibition he mentions against instructing a child to perform a prohibited act is biblical or rabbinic. On the one hand, Admur discusses this prohibition toward the end of the halakhah in the context of Amirah Lenachri [and in 343:6], which suggests that instructing a child may itself be only rabbinically prohibited. This would imply that the biblical prohibition applies specifically to actively feeding a child a forbidden substance. This reading is further supported by siman 265:10, where Admur does not indicate that a biblical prohibition is involved in simply telling a child to carry a wallet or money from place to place and refers consistently to a case in which the wallet was placed onto the child. This approach appears to follow those authorities who maintain that instructing a child is prohibited only on a rabbinic level, whereas the biblical prohibition is limited to directly causing the child to consume or perform the prohibited matter. Vetzarcuh Iyun! See Kovetz Iyunim Tiferes Shimshon 3 p. 150

[22] Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:3

[23] Admur 343:7-8

[24] Admur 343:9 “It is forbidden to give a child a live non‑kosher locust to play with, lest it die and the child eat it, in which case one would be actively feeding him a prohibited item, since he himself gave him the prohibition. All the more so is it forbidden to give him any prohibited item that is fit to be eaten as is. Even something that is prohibited only because of bal teshaktzu (repulsiveness) may not be given to him if there is concern that he might eat it. However, it is permitted to give him a non‑kosher bird to play with, since even if it dies it is not fit for consumption.” Admur 343:10 “(All of the above applies to prohibitions related to food, even when the prohibition is time‑dependent.) However, on Shabbat it is permitted to give a child objects with which he can perform a prohibited labor for his own benefit, even if it is known that he will do so. For example, one may give a child a cake with letters written on it, which is forbidden to eat on Shabbat, as explained in siman ש״מ. Even though the child will certainly eat it, since his intent is for his own enjoyment, there is no obligation to prevent him, as explained above—provided that an adult does not place the food directly into the child’s mouth.” 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.”; Kaf Hachaim 343:13; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:4

[25] Admur 343:9 “All the more so is it forbidden to give him any prohibited item that is fit to be eaten as is… if there is concern that he might eat it.” and 10 in parentheses “All of the above applies to prohibitions related to food”; M”A 343:3; Hagahos Ashri Shabbos end of chapter 9; Shabbos 90b; Kaf Hachaim 343:13; Toras Hakatan 19:1-29

The reason: As this is considered as if he is actively feeding him a prohibited item. [Admur ibid; M”A ibid; rashi ibid]

[26] As rules Admur next regarding Bal Tishaktzu

[27] Such as Matzah on Erev Pesach for a child who has reached the age of understanding, or a child on Yom Kippur which has reached the age of Chinuch for fasts.

[28] Admur 343:10 in parentheses; 616:4

[29] Admur 343:9; M”A 343:3; Implication of Shabbos ibid; Tosefes Shabbos 343:3; Kaf Hachaim 343:13; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 10; See Admur Basra 3:11

[30] Admur 343:9; M”A 343:3; Hagahos Ashri Shabbos end of chapter 9; Shabbos 90b; Kaf Hachaim 343:13

[31] Vetzaruch Iyun why Admur mentions a Treif bird, as even by a kosher bird it is forbidden to be eaten without slaughtering and thus the same suspicion applies.

[32] Chidushei Rashal on Hagahos Ashri of Shabbos; Pischei Olam 343:2; Kaf Hachaim 343:13

[33] Admur 343:5 “If a gentile feeds a prohibited item to a child who is not yet capable of understanding, the child’s father is not required to protest. However, it is forbidden for any Jew to tell a gentile to feed the child, since instructing a gentile is prohibited with regard to all prohibitions of the Torah. All the more so is it forbidden to tell the child himself to do so.”; M”A 343:3; Rabbeinu Yerucham Nesiv 1 in name of Rameh; M”B 343:5; Kaf Hachaim 343:15; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:4 and 12; Toras Hakatan 20:1-17

[34] So is implied from Setimas Admur here; however, see the continuation where he writes “since instructing a gentile is prohibited with regard to all prohibitions of the Torah.” Vetzaruch Iyun as Halachically, asking a non-Jew to instruct a child to perform a rabbinic prohibition constitutes a threefold rabbinic prohibition (shevut de‑shevut de‑shevut): instructing a non-Jew is itself rabbinically prohibited; a minor performing a prohibited act involves a separate rabbinic concern; and the underlying prohibition itself is rabbinic. This stands in contrast to instructing a child directly to perform a rabbinic prohibition, which constitutes a double rabbinic prohibition (shevut de‑shevut) and remains prohibited, as explained above.

[35] The reason: This is because asking a non-Jew to perform a prohibited act on one’s behalf is forbidden with respect to all biblical prohibitions. [Admur 343:5; 243:1]

[36] Admur 343:5 “If, however, the child requires it—such as when he is somewhat ill—it is permitted to tell a gentile to feed him, for the needs of a minor are treated as those of a sick person who is not in danger. In such a case, the Sages permitted instructing a gentile even regarding biblical prohibitions, as explained in siman 328. Similarly, if the child requires wine to drink and no Jewish wine is available, but only ordinary wine of gentiles, and the wine is not strong enough to be rendered permissible through dilution of six parts water to one part wine (as explained in Yoreh De’ah siman 134), it is permitted to tell a gentile to give him to drink.”; M”A 343:3; M”B 343:5; See also Admur 328:19; 22; 450:24-25 regarding Chametz; Tehila Ledavid 343:4; Kaf Hachaim 343:15-16; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:12

[37] Admur 450:24-26 regarding Chametz; So is also evident from the reason of Admur, brought in next footnote; Mishneh Berura 343:5

[38] The reason: Since the needs of a child are halachically equated with those of a non‑dangerously ill person, by which the Sages permitted instructing a non‑Jew to transgress on his behalf even by a biblical prohibition. [Admur ibid; 328:19; 22; 450:24-25; Tehila Ledavid 343:4] As for why Admur limits this leniency here to a case where the child is slightly ill—despite the general principle that even the needs of a healthy child carry the status of one who is ill—this is because there is no necessity for a healthy child to consume specifically non‑kosher food, absent medical need. Accordingly, such a case would not arise with respect to a healthy child. [Ketzos HaShulchan 147, footnote 5]

[39] This is evident from the fact that if possible Admur [ibid] requires one to dilute non-Kosher wine of a gentile with water in a way that it no longer retains its prohibition, rather than ask a gentile to feed it to the child in its current state.

[40] See Admur 343:5-8; See also Admur 615:1; 616:4; 640:4; 10; Tiferes Yisarel Pesicha Miseches Eiruvin; Ketzos Hashulchan 147:11 in great length; Biur Halacha 343:1 “Midivrei Sofrim”; Kaf Hachaim 343:16 and 27; Beir Moshe 6:18; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 16 p. 197; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:13 footnote 145; Toras Hakatan Chapters 21-24

[41] Admur 343:5 “This prohibition applies even to matters prohibited only by Rabbinic law….. Similarly, it is forbidden to accustom a child to desecration of Shabbat or Festivals, even through acts prohibited only due to shevut (Rabbinic prohibitions).”; Admur 343:6 “But if he does not need it, it is forbidden to feed him even if he is not yet capable of understanding (and his father must protest if he is capable of understanding), even with regard to a rabbinic prohibition. For it is forbidden to nurse him with his mother’s milk after twenty‑four months, even though the prohibition of a woman’s milk is only rabbinic, since he no longer needs it after twenty‑four months.”; Admur 343:7 “And all this applies when one feeds a prohibited item to an infant for our own needs; likewise, if one tells him to do for us some act that is prohibited even if only by rabbinic law.”; Admur 615:1; 616:4; 640:4; 10; Michaber 343:1; Y.D. 81:7; Rambam Machalos Assuros 17:27; Tosafus Rosh Hashanah 32a; Mordechai Shabbos 369; M”A 343:3; Shach Y.D. 81:21; Hagahos Ashri Rosh Hashanah 4:7; Ran Shabbos 153b; Yuma 2a; Rashba 1:92; Chidushei Rashba Yevamos 114a; Rebbe Eliezer in Braisa Kesubos 60a; Kaf Hachaim 343:16 and 27; Encyclopedia Talmudit footnote 544

The source: This law is learned from the ruling in Michaber Yoreh Deah 81:7 in which it states that it is forbidden for a toddler past 24 months to restart nursing, even though nursing is a mere rabbinical prohibition, being that the child no longer needs the milk. [Admur 343:6]

[42] Admur ibid; 266:10; M”A 343:2

[43] See Admur 343:5-6 and 8; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 16 p. 198 footnotes 5244-549

[44] Meaning that he is hungry or thirsty and there is nothing else available to eat, or he needs to eat for medical reasons.

[45] Stam opinion in Admur 343:5 “This prohibition applies even to matters prohibited only by Rabbinic law. It is forbidden to feed a child such items even if the child needs them, and even if the child is ill, so long as there is no danger to life, just as it is forbidden to do so for an adult.”; Setimas Admur in 269:3; 362:17; 471:10; Shach Y.D. 81:21; Beis Yosef 343 in opinion of Rambam; Rivash; Ritva Yevamos 114 in name of Maharam; Mordechai Shabbos 369, brought in M”A 343:5 and Machatzis Hashekel ibid; Shaar Hamelech Shevisas Assur 1:3; Stam opinion in Michaber; Rama; Rambam ibid; M”B 362:44; Biur Halacha 343:1 “Midivrei Sofrim” that so is Setimas Hamichaber ibid like this stringent opinion; Encyclopedia Talmudit footnote 549

[46] Yeish Omrim in Admur 343:6 “And there are those who say that anything which is for the need of an infant—such as eating and drinking—the Sages did not decree against it at all, and it is permitted to feed him by hand any matter whose prohibition is only rabbinic, if he needs it, even if he has reached the age of education (Chinuch).” Stam ruling in Admur 343:7 “But anything that is for the infant’s own need and benefit, the Sages were not concerned that he might become accustomed to it and do the same when he grows up. This is because it is known to him that they permit his needs only because he is small, and he will not be misled by this to do so when he grows up. Therefore, it is permitted to feed him before Kiddush if he wishes to eat, and likewise to give him to drink, and it is forbidden to afflict him. And so too with all similar cases regarding all other rabbinic prohibitions.” [See Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 7 that this Halacha in Admur is a continuation of the lenient opinion in 343:6]; Beis Yosef end of 343 in name of Rashba; Rashba 1:92 [however writes Lehalacha, Velo Lemaaseh]; Chidushei Rashba Yevamos 114a and Shabbos 153b; Ran Shabbos 153b; Yuma beginning of chapter 8; M”A 556:1; Opinion in Biur Halacha 343:1 “Midivrei Sofrim”; Kaf Hachaim 343:16; Shut Ranach O.C. 112; Encyclopedia Talmudit footnote 548

[47] The reason we don’t suspect the child will do so also when older: When an action serves the child’s own needs and benefit, the Sages were not concerned that he would become habituated to it and continue the practice as an adult. Since it is understood that such permission is granted only because he is a minor, there is no risk that he will be misled to act similarly when he matures. [Admur 343:7; M”A 556:1; Rashba 1:92; Chidushei Rashba Yevamos 114a; Ran 57a]

[48] May one be stringent like the first opinion if he so chooses? If one chooses to however he may be stringent like the first opinion, and on this it was not stated that one may not oppress a child. [Tzemach Tzedek Miluim 13]

[49] As the lenient opinion does not differentiate in this matter between a child who is above or beneath the age of Chinuch

[50] Admur 343:6 “One may rely on their words to be lenient with rabbinic prohibitions when the child needs it and there is no non‑Jew available to feed him.”; Stam ruling in Admur 343:7 follows the lenient opinion, although without depending it on a gentile not being available – see below for the explanation on this contradiction; [Vetzaruch Iyun from all the following areas where Admur makes no mention of this lenient opinion: Admur 269:3; 362:17; 471:10; See Tzemach Tzedek O.C. Safek Lemi 4; Hearos Ubiurim 829 p. 64]; Taz 346:6 [regarding child brining key through a Karmalis]; P”M 346 M”Z 6; Rav Akiva Eiger Kama 15; Kesav Sofer 47 [not to protest against one who is lenient]; Maharam Shick O.C. 173 is  Milameid Zecgus on the Makilim; Shoel Umeishiv Mahdurah Gimel 117; Kaf Hachaim 343:16 and 27 records the lenient opinion Lehalacha; Implication of Biur Halacha 343:1 “Midivrei Sofrim” that he is lenient (unlike M”B 362:44); Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 145 concludes that there is no final arbitration on this matter although writes that Ashkenazim are accustomed to be lenient in this while Sephardim are stringent

Other opinions – Sephardim: Some Poskim rule that one must be stringent like the former opinion which prohibits a Jew from directly feeding a child even a Rabbinically forbidden food even in a time of need. [M”B 362:44 (unlike Biur Halacha ibid); Kesav Sofer 47 that initially we do not rule Lekula; Mahariy Asad 84; Levushei Mordechai 1:51; Arugas Habosem 1:69; Maharshag 2:24; Maharam Shick O.C. 173; Livyas Chen 128 and Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid that so rule Sephardim as is Setimas Maran]

Ruling of Ketzos Hashulchan: Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol on the Ketzos Hashulchan 147 who omits this final conclusion of Admur. However, indeed, in Badei HaShulchan 11:11 he addresses this omission, explaining that he intentionally refrained from publicizing this lenient ruling of Admur, since there are Rishonim who maintain that one should not rely on the lenient view. Nevertheless, this itself requires further iyun: if the Alter Rebbe himself ruled leniently, then who are we—who follow his rulings—to diverge from his pesak?

Contradiction from Admur 343:7: Regarding that which the Alter Rebbe rules explicitly in 343:7, which appears to imply that one must never withhold a rabbinic prohibition from a child: There the Alter Rebbe writes that a child may be fed any rabbinic prohibition for his need, and that it is forbidden to oppress him, and he concludes that the same applies to all rabbinic prohibitions. The Tzemach Tzedek (Miluim 13) raises several difficulties with this ruling:

1. In the previous halachah, the Alter Rebbe merely rules that one may be lenient in accordance with the second opinion—and only under specific conditions, such as when no gentile is available—whereas here he appears to rule that one must be lenient.
2. In truth, the specific case discussed in Halacha 7 (tasting before Kiddush) is permitted even according to the first opinion, as the Alter Rebbe explicitly rules in 269:3, since this is not an intrinsic prohibition. Why, then, is this distinction not mentioned here?
3. Moreover, with regard to these matters, one may be lenient even with a biblical prohibition, as is evident from the allowance to feed a minor on Yom Kippur.

The Ketzos HaShulchan (147, footnote 7) resolves these questions by explaining that Halacha 7 is not an independent ruling, but rather a continuation and clarification of the second opinion. The Alter Rebbe’s intent is to explain that, according to this opinion, any rabbinic prohibition may be given to a child for his own need—this in contrast to actions performed for the needs of adults, which were prohibited in the previous halachah even according to the second opinion. See there for his resolution of the remaining difficulty raised by the Tzemach Tzedek.

In conclusion: The ruling of 343:7 does not represent the Alter Rebbe’s final and absolute position regarding all rabbinic prohibitions. Rather, it is stated within the framework of the second opinion, and the practical ruling therefore remains as stated above: this leniency applies only under specific circumstances, such as when no gentile is available.

[51] Pashut from all Poskim ibid! Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid

[52] Rama Yoreh Deah 81:7 regarding an infant eating milk from a gentile, as explained in Shach 81:26; M”A 343:2; Tosefes Shabbos 343:2; Kaf Hachaim 343:11; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 4; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:9; See Pri Chadash (Yoreh De’ah, siman 81, se’if katan 26) who already protested and cried out sharply about this matter, stating as follows: Since in our times people are not careful with these matters of forbidden foods, most children go astray, and most of the insolent individuals of our generation lack any fear of Heaven that penetrates their hearts. Even when they are rebuked directly, they are not receptive to moral instruction. And who is greater for us than Elisha ben Avuyah? For he did not come to that path because of any later deed of his own, but rather because his mother, who was pregnant with him, passed by a place where food was being cooked for idolatry. She smelled it and felt a need to eat from it, and that substance permeated him like the venom of a snake.”

Time‑Dependent Prohibitions: The Achronim have discussed whether this negative effect applies also to permitted foods that become prohibited due to time-related restrictions, such as chametz on Passover, eating on Yom Kippur, and eating matzah on the day before Passover. [See Darkei Teshuvah 81:90; Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 4] From the words of the Gemara in Yoma (82b), which discusses a pregnant woman who smelled food on Yom Kippur, it is evident that this category is also included. [Arugas Habosem O.C. 138] Nevertheless, it is certainly forbidden to be stringent in a situation involving even a possible danger to life, and the ruling must be determined according to the judgment of the halachic authority in each case. However, allowing a minor to eat before kiddush or havdalah is clearly more lenient according to all opinions, since this prohibition is merely a rabbinic safeguard enacted out of respect for the sanctity of the day. [Piskeiy Teshvuos 343:9]

[53] Darkei Moshe O.C. 617:1 “One must be careful that a pregnant woman guard herself as much as possible that she does not eat pork and non-kosher meats as this will cause that her child will be God fearing”; Or Zarua 279; Yerushalmi Chagiga 9b regarding the mother of Acher that she had once eaten a non-Kosher food during her pregnancy due to having smelled it and lusted after it, and this is what caused her son to become a heretic; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 142:1; Shevach Habris 1:24; Nitei Gavriel 3 56:5

[54] Rama Y.D. 81:7; Taz Y.D. 81:12; Shach Y.D. 81:24; Arugas Habosem O.C. 138; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 142:1; 147:2;

[55] Shach Y.D. 81:24; P”M 81 M”Z 12; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 147:3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:9

[56] See Admur 343:5 “If, however, the child requires it—such as when he is somewhat ill”; 343:7 “Whatever is for the need of the child and for his Takanaso – development and benefit”

[57] Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 11:11

[58] So is evident from the source of the ruling regarding nursing a toddler pass 24 months which is forbidden. Thus one must conclude that even when the child needs to eat, if other Kosher foods are available it is forbidden for him to eat it.

[59] See Admur 343:9-10 [This is demonstrated by Admur 343:9-10, who rules that even rabbinically prohibited foods may not be given to a child and the only allowance to feed him cake with lettering is because the Melacha is not the main purpose of the item. This makes clear that a child’s mere desire to eat a food because it tastes good is not considered a legitimate justification. Furthermore, he explicitly rules there that even by cake with lettering it may not be placed into the child’s mouth directly.

[60] Ketzos Hashulchan 147 footnote 11:11

[61] Admur 343:8 “Anything that falls under the category of chinuch (educational training for mitzvot), it is permitted to actively give a child a prohibited item—for example, to feed the Paschal offering to a minor who has reached the age of chinuch, even though he was not formally registered for it. Although the Paschal offering may be eaten only by those registered for it, nevertheless, since one’s intent is to educate him in the mitzvah, it is permitted. However, a mitzvah for which chinuch does not apply—meaning a mitzvah that he will not be able to perform when he grows up, which is the fundamental rationale of chinuch—such as giving him a taste from the cup of wine of a circumcision on Yom Kippur so that the blessing should not appear to have been said in vain: even though this is a mitzvah-related need, nevertheless, since when he grows up it will be forbidden to him, it is also forbidden now, due to concern that he may become accustomed to it and drink from it even when he is older, as will be explained in סימן תרכ״א. Therefore, any rabbinic prohibition (shevut) that is permitted to be performed by a non-Jew for the sake of a mitzvah is forbidden to be performed by means of a minor, due to concern that he may become habituated to it—unless it is only on an occasional, incidental basis, as explained above.”; M”A 343:3; Rabbeinu Yerucham 1:13; Hagahos Ashri Rosh Hashanah 4:7; Tosafus Pesachim 88a; Terumas Hadeshen 94; Elya Raba 343:3; Tosefes Shabbos 343:3; Kaf Hachaim 343:17; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 16 p. 198 footnote 550-555; Likkutei Sichos 26:69-74; Toras Hakatan 21:1-44

[62] Admur ibid; See also Admur 186:3; Shut Admur Hazakein 41 in end; Rashi Sukkah 20b; Chagiga 6a; Eruvin 40b

[63] Admur ibid; Mordechai Yuma Remez 727

[64] Admur ibid; 2^nd opinion in Admur 190:4; 621:4 and 5-6; Rashi Eruvin 40b

[65] Rama Yoreh Deah 81:7

[66] Heichal Menachem 1:227; SHaareiy Chinuch p. 146

[67] Admur 269:3 “It is permitted to feed a minor before Kiddush, whether at night or during the day. One may not cause affliction to a minor, for the prohibition against actively feeding a child applies only when the food itself is intrinsically forbidden, such as non‑kosher food and the like. However, when the food is intrinsically permitted but the time is one during which eating is prohibited, it is permitted to feed it to a minor. Thus, minors are fed on Yom Kippur, even one for whom there is no concern of danger were he to fast.”; 471:10; 616:1 “Accordingly, it is permitted for an adult to feed a minor, give him drink, apply ointment to him, and wash him with cold water.”; Rama 612:10; 616; Magen Avraham 269:1; Tur 616; Sefer Hayashar Rabbeinu Tam Chidushei Hateshuvos 52; Rashba and Meiri Eiruvin 40b and Yevamos 114a; Mishneh Berura 269:1; Encyclopedia Talmudit Vol. 16 p. 187; This ruling applies even according to the stringent opinion cited by the Alter Rebbe, which prohibits feeding a child even a rabbinic prohibition as that stringency is limited to foods that are intrinsically prohibited in and of themselves, such as a piece of neveilah.

[68] As is proven from that a child may eat on Yom Kippur. Vetzaruch Iyun regarding Chameitz.

[69] Ketzos Hashulchan 147

[70] The reason: As the [Sages] only prohibited feeding [Rabbinically] forbidden foods [to a child] when the food is forbidden in it of itself, such as a piece of Treifa [Niveila] and the like. However, if the food is Kosher in it of itself and it is just forbidden to be eaten within a certain time slot, then it is permitted to be fed to a child. A proof for this is the ruling regarding feeding a child on Yom Kippur in which case one may do so even if there is no danger involved for the child to fast. [Admur 269:3; M”A 269:1; Yevamos 114b; Machatzis Hashekel on M”A 106:3]

[71] This implication emerges from the Alter Rebbe’s wording here, and is further supported by 621:4, which indicates that a child may not be given wine from a bris on Yom Kippur, despite this too being only a temporary prohibition—whereas for this very reason a child may otherwise be fed on Yom Kippur. See the footnote in the Questions and Answers section regarding eating before Kiddush for a more detailed analysis of this distinction.

[72] See Admur 343:5 regarding asking a gentile to feed him an issur if he is in need of it; 343:5-6 and 8 regarding directly feeding him an Issur Derabanon for a need; Admur 450:24-26 regarding the allowance by Chametz; M”A 343:3; Tosefes Shabbos 343:3; Kaf Hachaim 343:16; M”B 343:5; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:12; 450:5

[73] Admur 343:5; M”A ibid; M”B ibid

[74] The reason we permit even if not bedridden: In cases where a child is classified as choleh sheiyn bo sakana—for example, if he is bedridden—significant leniencies apply, even with respect to an adult, and certainly with respect to a child. Accordingly, there is nothing novel in permitting such leniencies in that situation. The novelty here is that even when a child does not reach this level of illness, many of the leniencies normally afforded to one who is ill may nevertheless still apply to him.

The reason we only permit by slight illness: As for why the child must nonetheless be at least slightly ill, and why it does not suffice to rely on the established rule that a child is treated like one who is non-dangerously ill with respect to the laws of Shabbat: this is because, absent any actual need, there is no allowance to permit a child to be given even foods prohibited by rabbinic law as explained in Halacha 8c, and all the more so with regard to foods that are biblically prohibited. [Ketzos HaShulchan 147, footnote 5] Accordingly, the only circumstance in which it is permitted to allow a child to eat forbidden foods is when the child is at least slightly ill and the food is necessary for his health, or even if he is not currently ill, when the food is required for his physical development. Furthermore, the concept that a child is considered “like one who is ill” applies only until a certain age and does not extend all the way until bar mitzvah. By contrast, the leniency afforded to one who is slightly ill applies until adulthood. [See Piskeiy Teshuvos 343 footnote 141]

[75] Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 143

[76] M”B 343:3

[77] See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 143 based on M”B 343:3 who permits feeding eating and bathing child on Yom Kippur

[78] Admur 343:5 “Similarly, if the child requires wine to drink and no Jewish wine is available, but only ordinary wine of gentiles, and the wine is not strong enough to be rendered permissible through dilution of six parts water to one part wine (as explained in Yoreh De’ah siman 134), it is permitted to tell a gentile to give him to drink.”; M”A 343:3; See Michaber Y.D. 134:5; Kaf Hachaim 343:14

[79] See Michaber Y.D. 134:5

[80] Chasam Sofer O.C. 83 and in Hagahos 343:11; Kaf Hachaim 343:22; Igros Moshe 2:88; Shevet Halevi 9:4; Minchas Asher 2:47; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:10

[81] The rationale is that this is considered indirect consumption of non‑kosher food rather than direct feeding, which is prohibited.

[82] Admur 437:10; Michaber 437:4; Y.D. 120:14

[83] Admur 432:10; Michaber 437:4; Pesachim 4a; Rav Akiva Eiger Y.D. 120

[84] Admur 432:10; Chok Yaakov 43:10; Elya Raba 432:6; Maharil Bedikas Chameitz 12:43

[85] Implication of Admur 432:10

[86] Admur and Poskim ibid, unlike Rav Akiva Eiger ibid

[87] Admur Y.D. 1:42

[88] Admur Y.D. 1:42

^[89] Rama 115:1

^[90] Shach 115:12

[91] Toras Hakatan Chapter 35; Chanoch Lanar 28:1-2

[92] Michaber Y.D. 1:5; Admur 1:37-42 Kuntrus Achron 12; Chanoch Lanar 28:1

[93] Michaber ibid

[94] Rama ibid

[95] Michaber Y.D. 28:17; Chanoch Lanar 28:2

[96] See Kav Hayashar 2; Shevet Hamussar 24; Maagol Tov p. 56; Yeshuos Chochmah 33:11; Sefer Zechira; Sichos Kodesh 5736 Parshas Kedoshim 2:170; Hisvadyus 1984 20^th Marchesvan 37 1:487; Likkutei Sichos 25:309; Toras Menachem 5750 3:179 “It has been spoken a number of times on the need to be careful not to look at toys and pictures of non-Kosher  animals in order so children only see pure and holy things. This is so important that this adherence begins as soon as the child is born and comes out to the air the world, in which case we immediately hang around the child matters of holiness and purity. Furthermore, this adherence begins even before the child is born during the pregnancy. As it is known that the custom of women while they are pregnant to be very careful not to see impure items but rather only pure and holy items”; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 237:2; See Megillah 28a; Shulchan Menachem 6:31; Shevach Habris 1:11; Shaareiy Chinuch pp. 142-144

[97] The reason: As everything a child sees, even from a young age, is encrypted in his mind, and hence it is proper to abstain them from seeing anything which can ignite their Yetzer Hara when they are older. [see Kav Hayashar 2; Hisvadyus 1984 20^th Marchesvan 37]

[98] Likkutei Sichos 25:309

[99] Hisvadyus 5744 20^th MarCheshvan

^[100] Admur Halacha 12

[101] Admur 437:10; Michaber 437:4; Y.D. 120:14

[102] Admur 432:10; Michaber 437:4; Pesachim 4a; Rav Akiva Eiger Y.D. 120

[103] Admur 432:10; Chok Yaakov 43:10; Elya Raba 432:6; Maharil Bedikas Chametz 12:43

[104] Implication of Admur 432:10

[105] Admur and Poskim ibid, unlike Rav Akiva Eiger ibid

[106] See Michaber Y.D. 66:4-7

[107] Michaber Y.D. 66:7; See Yabia Omer 3:2; Yechaveh Daas 3:57; Igros Moshe 36; Minchas Yitzchak 4:56

[108] Michaber and Rama Y.D. 66:8; Hagahos Maimanis; Aruch

[109] Rama ibid

[110] See Admur 432:10 [Child may be trusted with Rabbinical matter even initially and even no Mitzvah Min Hamuvchar to not trust him if does not involve any trouble] and so rules: Chok Yaakov 43:10; Elya Raba 432:6; Maharil Bedikas Chametz 12:43; Michaber 437:4 and Pesachim 4a [If a child checked home is trusted]; Michaber and Rama Y.D. 66:8 [There is no obligation to check eggs for blood, and is just a Minhag]; Michaber Y.D. 66:4-7 [All bloods of Mufaros [unfertilized eggs] are only Rabbinical due to Maaras Ayin, and the vast majority of eggs today are Muzaros]; See Hakashrus 13:26

[111] M”B 437:19

[112] The reason: As children may be trusted with all Rabbinical matters, and the blood found in today’s eggs which are unfertilized is only Rabbinically forbidden due to Maaras Ayin. This in addition to the fact that from the letter of the law there is no need to check even fertilized eggs for blood, and it is a mere custom.

[113] The reason: As even by fertilized eggs which may contain Biblical blood, from the letter of the law there is no need to check the eggs for blood, as majority of eggs do not have blood. [Michaber and Rama Y.D. 66:8]

[114] Admur 432:10; Chok Yaakov 43:10; Elya Raba 432:6; Maharil Bedikas Chametz 12:43

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule a child may not initially be entrusted to fulfill a Rabbinical command on behalf of another. [See Rebbe Akiva Eiger Y.D. 120]

[115] Admur 432:10; Michaber 437:4

[116] See Beir Moshe 8:36; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84; Hakashrus 10:44; See Yabia Omer 3 Y.D. 3; Piskeiy Teshuvos 343 :7 footnote 95 and Pesakim Uteshuvos

The ruling of Rav Zalman Shimon Dworkin [Koveitz Zalman Shimon p. 62]: Those who are very young and weak may be lenient to wait one hour after cleaning and washing the mouth. Those which are a bit older, but are under Bar and Bas Mitzvah can wait 3-4 hours if there is difficulty for them to wait 6 hours. The reason for this leniency is because there are opinions which hold that in the winter when the days are short the number of hours between meals is 3-4 hours. Now although we do not rule like this opinion, nevertheless for children one may be lenient.

[117] See Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 89:1 for a dispute between the Rambam:Michaber [Rabbinical] and Tosfos:Rama [Custom].

[118] See Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 343

[119] Aruch Hashulchan 89:6; Chochmas Adam 40:11; Igros Kodesh Rashab Halacha 35; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84

[120] See Admur 328:22

[121] Meiri Chulin 105

[122] Opinion in Meiri Chulin 105 regarding all meat, and in his conclusion at least regarding poultry; Chelkas Yaakov 2:88 until age 12 there is no need to wait; Poskim brought in Bier Moshe 8:36 that there is no need to wait until age nine

[123] Beir Moshe 8:36; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84; Rav Zalman Shimon Dworkin in Koveitz Zalman Shimon p. 62

[124] Beir Moshe 8:36; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84 that by very young children there is no need at all to be Machmir; Rav Zalman Shimon ibid writes that the very young may be lenient to wait one hour after Kinuach and Hadacha. It is unclear if he refers here even to a child below age three.

[125] The reason: As below age three the custom was not to be particular in this matter, even regarding giving the child dairy immediately after eating meat. Nevertheless, the mouth is to be rinsed out, at the very least to follow the opinion of Tosfos in this matter. [Beir Moshe ibid]

[126] Beir Moshe 8:36; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84 that all children who still receive the status of Choleh Sheiyn Bo Sakana may be lenient after a short amount of time; Rav Zalman Shimon ibid writes that the very young may be lenient to wait one hour after Kinuach and Hadacha. It is unclear until what age a child is considered “very young”

[127] Beir Moshe 8:36; Rav Zalman Shimon Dworkin ibid that all children who are somewhat older are ideally to wait six hours; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84 writes that all children who still receive the status of Choleh Sheiyn Bo Sakana may be lenient after a short amount of time. There are various opinions in Poskim in this matter and some say that until age nine a child has a status of a Choleh Sheiyn Bo Sakana; Accordingly, some state that from 5-10 the child is to wait up to 3 hours, while from 10 he is to wait 6 hours.

[128] Beir Moshe 8:36

[129] Hakashrus 10:44 partially based on Sheivet Haleivi 4:84 that all children which are still considered a Choleh Sheiyn Bo Sakana regarding Shabbos are likewise able to be lenient to not wait 6 hours.

[130] Rav Zalman Shimon ibid

[131] The reason for this leniency is because there are opinions which hold that in the winter when the days are short the number of hours between meals is 3-4 hours. Now, although we do not rule like this opinion, nevertheless for children one may be lenient.

[132] Meiri ibid; Sheivet Haleivi 4:84

[133] Rav Zalman Shimon ibid; Poskim ibid

[134] See Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] Hakdama 19

[135] Sefer Zikaron; See Hakashrus page 423.

[136] Eineiy Kol Chaiy Horiyos 13; Vayitzbor Yosef 42

[137] See Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 30

[138] Admur ibid in parentheses; 180:5 “When one steps on the crumbs of bread”; M”A 180:3; Rashi Chulin ibid; Rashi and Rashbam Pesachim ibid;

[139] Admur ibid; Admur O.C. 180:5 “Although it is permitted to destroy crumbs of bread that are less than a Kezayis using ones hands, nonetheless, one is not to throw them away in an area that people walk, as it can lead to poverty when they are stepped on, as they were only permitted to be destroyed, such as to throw them into water and the like.”; Michaber 180:4; Pesachim 111a; Chulin 105b; Brachos 52b; Tosafus Brachos 52b; P”M 180 A”A 3; Zohar Parshas Pinchas p. 244; Ben Ish Chaiy Parshas Pinchas 12; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 180:4 and Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 30 footnote 1 in length

[140] Ben Ish Chaiy Pinchas 2:12; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 30:4

[141] Kaf Hachaim Falagi 24:48; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 30:3=5

[142] See Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 14:10

^[143] Shearim Hametzuyanim Behalacha 33 Kuntrus Achron 5; Levushei Mordechai Y.D. Tinyana 19; Minchas Yitzchak 4:117; Az Nidbaru 7:72; Hakashrus 18:29 [p. 436]; All Poskim that are lenient by gentile seemingly would be lenient also by a child

[144] The reason: As Admur Basra 4:2 rules that a child does not carry the evil spirit on his hands in the morning.

[145] Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh p. 62; All Poskim that are stringent by gentile seemingly would be stringent also by a child

[146] Minchas Yitzchak 4:117; Hakashrus 18:29; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 14:10; All Poskim that rule the issue is only with a real bed, and only with an adult

[147] Az Nidbaru 6:73 [39]; Hakashrus 18:30; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 14:12

[148] Yoreh Deah 120:14

[149] Michaber ibid; Terumos Hadeshen 257; Kitzur SHU”A 37:12

The reason: As the Mitzvah of immersion is a Biblical obligation, and by all Biblical obligations, a child may never be trusted. [Taz 120:16; Terumos Hadeshen ibid; Beir Hagoleh ibid; Admur 432:10; 437:6 regarding trusting a child to perform a Biblical Bedikas Chametz and Admur Y.D. 1:42 regarding trusting a child to slaughter] The following Poskim rule that Tevilas Keilim is a Biblical obligation: Stam opinion in Admur 159:21; 2^nd opinion in Admur 323:8 and final ruling there; Implication of Michaber 320:9 and 14 and 17 who rules a Katan is not believed; Taz 120:16; Peri Chadash 120:1 [see there in length]; Rashba in Teshuvah; Raavad; Ramban; Rashi Avoda Zara 75b; Tosafus Avoda Zara ibid; Rabbeinu Tam Yuma 78; Semak 199; Issur Viheter 58:91; Aruch Hashulchan 120:4 that so agree majority of Poskim

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule the Mitzvah of immersing vessels is a Rabbinical obligation. [1^st opinion in Admur 323:8; Rambam Machalos Assuros 17:5, as understood by Rashba in Toras Habayis p. 155 and Peri Chadash ibid [however see Rashba in Teshuvah ibid and Aruch Hashulchan 120:1-3 for alternative understanding in Rambam]; Ran; Ritva; Or Zarua 1:359; Radbaz 34 that so rule majority of Poskim; Yeshuos Yaakov O.C. 509:4] Accordingly, a child who has reached the age of Chinuch, may be trusted to immerse the vessel. [Implication of Taz ibid; Terumos Hadeshen ibid; Admur 432:10; 437:6 regarding trusting a child to perform a Rabbinical Bedikas Chametz]]

[150] Rama ibid; Terumos Hadeshen 257; Misgeres Hashulchan 37:9

[151] Implication of Michaber and Rama 120:15 who validate the immersion of a gentile; Shach 120:28 and Taz ibid that so is implied to be the final ruling of Rama who does not make this condition, and so is their final ruling; Levush, brought in Shach ibid; 2^nd answer in Terumos Hadeshen ibid and so is his conclusion

The reason: As Tevila from impurity to purity does not require intent at all. [Poskim ibid; Teshuvas HaRashba and Ramban 151, brought in Bach 120]

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule, one is to educate the child in the purpose of the immersion, that it is done to purify the vessel, otherwise, the immersion is invalid even under supervision. [Bach 120, brought in Shach 120:28; 1^st answer in Terumos Hadeshen ibid; Biur Hagra 120 based on Rama 198]

[152] Darkei Teshuvah 120:105

[153] 1^st approach in gloss of Rav Akiva Eiger 120:14 and that so holds Shagas Aryeh; Panim Meiros 2:96; Aruch Hashulchan 121:13; Chochmas Adam permits to be lenient for the sake of Shabbos, brought in Misgeres Hashulchan 37:9; Implication of Shach 127:31 in name of Rivash that a child is trusted even if there is Chezkas Issur if it is Beyado; Implication of Erech Hashulchan 115 in name of Radbaz Implication of Admur 432:10 in parentheses and M”A 437:8 regarding trusting a child to perform a Rabbinical Bedikas Chametz even though it is Ischazeik Issur and concludes “And anything which a child can do, he is believed to say he did it as explained in Yoreh Deah 120 see there” , however see Admur Y.D. 1:42 that a child is only believed by matters that have no Biblical root.

Opinion of Admur: Admur Admur 432:10 in parentheses rules that we always believe a child by a Rabbinical matter that is within his hands to perform, even if there is a Chezkas Issur. This would imply that Admur rules like the Poskim ibid that a child can be trusted to immerse a glass vessel. However, Admur Y.D. 1:42 states that this only applies if the obligation does not have a root in the Biblical law. Hence, a child would not be trusted to immerse a glass vessel, as the concept of Tevilas Keilim is Biblical. Vetzaruch Iyun!

[154] Peri Chadash 120:3 and 26; Gloss of Rav Akiva Eiger 120:14; Shagas Aryeh; Panim Meiros 2:96; Chochmas Adam 73:19, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 120:3; Aruch Hashulchan 120:24; Rashi, brought in Aruch Hashulchan 120:1 “Specifically metal”; See Taz 120:1 “It is only common to use for a meal vessel made of metal.”

[155] See Admur ibid and Michaber 437:4 that we only trust a Katan “Sheyeish Bio Daas”

[156] Peri Megadim 451 M.Z. 7, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 120:14; 2^nd approach in gloss of Rav Akiva Eiger 120:14; Ben Ish Chaiy Matos 2:9; See Rama Y.D. 127:3 that we only believe a child by Bedikas Chametz because there is no Chezkas Issur.

[157] The reason: As a vessel contains a Chezkas Issur, and a child is never believed to testify by a chezkas Issur, even if it is Rabbinical. [P”M ibid; See Rama ibid] Alternatively, as even by Rabbinical matters, a child is only believed by actions that he has responsibility to do for himself, such as to immerse a vessel that he owns, as opposed to matters which he performs as a Shliach, on behalf of others. [Rav Akiva Eiger ibid based on Tosafus Eiruvin 31b] These two reasonings are negated by Admur and M”A ibid regarding Bedikas Chametz, as they hold that whenever one has ability to fix it himself, a child is believed even by Chezkas Issur

[158] Pischeiy Tehsuvah 120:14; This is known as Chazaka Derava. A child is not Halachiclly considered obligated in Mitzvos until they have grown two pubic hairs. Rava held that by Rabbinical matters one may assume that they have grown it, and they may thus be trusted to be Bar/Bas Mitzvah, however, by Biblical matters they are not trusted. See Rava Nida 46a; Admur 39:1; 53:9; 55:6; 128:49; 199:9; 271:7

[159] Pischeiy Teshuvah 120:14; Rav Yitzchak Elchonon in Zecher Simcha; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 3:405; See Hakashrus 4 footnote 108

[160] The reason: As since using a vessel prior to immersion does noty prohibit the food, therefore, it is given a lesser severity than a  regular Biblical obligation, and one may adapt the Chazaka of Rava. [Poskim ibid]

[161] P”M 451 M”Z 6, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid

[162] See Admur Y.D. 1:42 regarding Shechita “Nonetheless, the custom is to send a child to give the animal to a Shochet to slaughter, and we do not suspect that he will do so himself.”; Chanoch Lanaar 30 footnote 2, brought in Hakashrus 4 footnote 39

[163] The reason: As a) There is a Chazaka that a child will not do things to stumble others. b) He fears telling a lie. [See Admur ibid]

[164] Adnei Paz 17; Pischeiy Teshuvah 81:16; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 147:9; See Pela Yoeitz Erech Yonkei Shadayim

[165] Michaber Y.D. 81:7; Shach Y.D. 81:19-22; Darkei Teshuvah 81:82; Chanoch Lana’ar 29:2

[166] Michaber Y.D. 154:1; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 143:1; 147:1; Shevach Habris 3:1

[167] Rama Y.D. 81:7; Levush 81:7; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 147:1 footnotes 1-3; Chanoch Lana’ar 29:6

[168] Arugas Habosem O.C. 138

[169] P”M 81 M”Z 12

[170] See Shevach Habris 3:2; Toras Hayoledes 46

[171] Rama Y.D. 81:7; Taz Y.D. 81:12; Shach Y.D. 81:24; Arugas Habosem O.C. 138; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 142:1; 147:2

[172] Shach Y.D. 81:24; P”M 81 M”Z 12; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 147:3

[173] Rama Y.D. 81:7; Levush 81:7; Shevach Habris 3:3

[174] See Shach 81:26; Admur 343:5-6;

Background: If there is a necessity for the child, for his behalf, to eat Rabbinically forbidden foods then it is disputed amongst Poskim whether one may or may not feed him the food. Some Poskim rule that it is forbidden for any person to give even a Rabbinically forbidden item to a child with his hands, even if the child is completely below the age of comprehension, and even if the child is in need for it. This applies even if the child is sick, so long as he is not in danger. Thus regarding feeding a child a prohibition they have the same status as an adult irrelevant of the child’s age. [First Stam Opinion in Admur and only opinion in Michaber/Rama 343; Rambam] Other Poskim rule it is permitted to feed a child, even above the age of education, any Rabbinical prohibition so long as it is being done for the need of the child, such as for the child to eat and drink, and there are not other foods available. [Second Opinion in Admur ibid; Ran; Rashba; Shach 81:26] Practically, one may rely on the lenient opinion to feed a child a Rabbinical prohibition [even if the child is above the age of education] if the child needs it and no gentile is available to feed the child himself.  However if a gentile is available to feed the child the prohibition then it is forbidden for a Jew to feed it to him, even for the need of the child, even if the child is sick. It is always forbidden to feed the child a Biblical prohibition. [Admur ibid]

[175] Shach Y.D. 81:26

[176] Igros Kodesh 18:109; Shulchan Menachem 4:8

[177] See Koveitz Likkutei Dinim [Greenglass] p. 67; Shevach Habris footnote 3

[178] Sefer Zechira; Shemiras Hanefesh 248; Kaf Hachaim 116:195; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 147:10

[179] Kaf Hachaim ibid

[180] M”A 240:29; Bedek Habayis; Zohar Parshas Vayikra p. 119a; Kav Hayashar 17:5; Siddur Yaavetz Mosach Hashabbos Mitos Kesef 7 Chulya Beis 12 [rules that even initially one only needs to wait a Mil]; Kitzur SHU”A 150:16; M”B 240:54; See Yad Ephraim ibid; Kaf Hachaim 240:91; Sheyikadesh Atzmo 25:2

[181] How much is a Mil? Some Poskim rule that a Mil is 18 minutes [1^st opinion in Admur 459:10; Michaber ibid and in Yoreh Deah 69:6; Rama 261:1; Maryu 193; Terumos Hadeshen 123], and hence the total time to wait prior to nursing is 36 minutes [See Misgeres Hashulchan 150:16] Other Poskim rule that a Mil is 24 minutes [2^nd opinion in Admur 459:10; Rambam in Pirush Hamishnayos Pesachim 3:2], and hence the total time to wait prior to nursing is 48 minutes [See Shulchan Hatahor 241:5; Kitzur SHU”A ibid; See Taharas Yisrael 240:20; Misgeres Hashulchan 150:16 concludes to wait 9 and at best 112 minutes] Practically, Admur mainly rules like the opinion of 24 minutes. [Admur ibid; See Ketzos Hashulchan 3 Seder Hachnasas Shabbos 5; Piskeiy Teshuvos 240:29]

[182] Or Yakar Vayikra 16; Toras Nassan Ramak p. 149; Shulchan Hatahor 241:5 that it can lead to the Nichfeh illness.

[183] Taharas Yisrael 240:88

[184] Possible understanding of Yad Efraim on M”A ibid; Taharas Yisrael 240:88; See however Sheyikadesh Atzmo 25:3 footnote 2

[185] M”A ibid according to some prints; Siddur Yaavetz Leil Shabbos 3:12; Divrei Yatziv 1:104-2

Other opinions in M”A ibid: Some have a different Girsa in the M”A ibid which makes it read that if the child is crying one may be lenient like the opinion of one Mil, thus removing the source from the M”A above which claims that one may be completely lenient. [Girsa of Machon Yerushalayim; See Sheyikadesh Atzmo 25:3 footnote 2 that so is implied from wording of the Zohar.]

[186] M”A ibid according to some prints [see previous footnote]; Or Tzadikim 27:18; Elya Raba 240:24; Olas Tamid 240:7; Siddur Yaavetz Mosach Hashabbos Mitos Kesef 7 Chulya Beis 12

[187] Siddur Yaavetz ibid that on this the verse states, “And the child [i.e. Moshe] cried and she had mercy on him”

[188] Hakashrus 9 footnote 113 in name of Sheivet Hakehasi 5:125

[189] Hagahos Maimanis ibid

[190] The acronym of the name Chana stands for Challah; Nida and Hadlakas Neiros. In merit of her fulfilling these three Mitzvos properly she had her prayers answered and had a son Shmuel which was a prophet and leader onto Israel. Thus, each woman should Daven upon separating Challah to have children that are proper and G-d fearing. [ibid]

[191] Michaber Y.D. 331:30 and 33 [Valid from year before Bar Mitzvah]; Rambam Terumos Umaasros 4:5; Bikkurim 5:14; Biur Hagra 331:78 [Not valid even Bedieved]; Chalas Lechem 10:7; Derech Emunah Terumos 4:5 -51; Rivivos Efraim 4:211; Ko Somar Libeis Yaakov p. 118; Yalkut Yosef Dinei Chinuch Katan p. 332; Halichos Bas Yisrael 12 footnote 4; Otzer Piskeiy Challah 1:13-14

[192] Michaber Y.D. 331:30

[193] Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid

Other Opinions: See Biur Hagr”a ibid who rules that a childs Hafrasha is always invalid even if he or she is of age of Mufla Samuch Laish.

[194] Michaber Y.D. 233:1

[195] Implication of Michaber and Rambam ibid; Shut Harambam Peir Hador 72

[196] Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 507

[197] See Maharsha Gittin 65a; Maharit Algazi Bechoros 4:51; Minchas Yitzchak 7:28; Chazon ovadia Terumos Umaasros p. 148

[198] Chanoch Lanaar 37:2 footnote 3 in name of Maharil Diskin; Choveres Torah Metziyon 4:21

[199] Michaber Y.D. 331:30-33 [Valid from year before Bar Mitzvah]; Rambam Terumos Umaasros 4:5; Bikkurim 5:14; Biur Hagra 331:78 [Not valid even Bedieved]; Chanoch Lanar 37:1-2Chalas Lechem 10:7; Derech Emunah Terumos 4:5 -51; Rivivos Efraim 4:211; Ko Somar Libeis Yaakov p. 118; Yalkut Yosef Dinei Chinuch Katan p. 332; Halichos Bas Yisrael 12 footnote 4; Otzer Piskeiy Challah 1:13-14

[200] Michaber Y.D. 331:30

[201] Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid

Other Opinions: See Biur Hagr”a ibid who rules that a childs Hafrasha is always invalid even if he or she is of age of Mufla Samuch Laish.

[202] Michaber Y.D. 233:1

[203] Implication of Michaber and Rambam ibid; Shut Harambam Peir Hador 72

[204] Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 507

[205] See Maharsha Gittin 65a; Maharit Algazi Bechoros 4:51; Minchas Yitzchak 7:28; Chazon ovadia Terumos Umaasros p. 148

[206] Chanoch Lanaar 37:2 footnote 3 in name of Maharil Diskin; Choveres Torah Metziyon 4:21