Chapter 4: The Mitzvah to Fear one’s Parents and its included obligations[1]

1. The Mitzvah:[2]

Fearing one’s father and mother is a positive command in the Torah.[3] The command of fearing one’s parents is listed by the Rambam as the 211th Command of the Torah. The intent of the command to fear one’s parents is that one should act towards them as you would act with someone who fears getting punished by such as a king. He should walk with them as he would walk together with one whom he fears that can give him retribution.[4] [Likewise, included in this mitzvah is to establish in one’s heart a fear of one’s parents.[5]]

Not in front of parents:[6] Certain matters which are obligated due to the mitzvah to fear one’s parents only apply when one is in one’s parents presence. Others apply even when not in their presence and others are under debate as to whether they apply when not in the parents presence. Practically, the relevant ruling will be clarified by each specific law brought in the chapter.

Equal obligations towards father and mother:[7] The Torah preceded the mother to the father regarding the command to fear in order to teach us that they’re both to be equally feared. Hence, one must fear his mother just as one must fear his father and they are equal in all matters regarding this mitzvah. Fearing one’s father and mother is listed as the same single mitzvah within the 613 Mitzvos, and is not listed as two separate commands.[8]

Is weighed by Scripture equal to the Mitzvah to fear G-d:[9] The sages teach us that this command to honor and fear one’s parents is weighed by Scripture equal to the Mitzvah to honor and fear G-d. This is learned from the following similar words used in the verses. Regarding fear, the verse states, “a man shall fear his father and mother” and in another verse it states that “and Hashem your G-d you shall fear him and Him you shall serve.” Hence, we see that Scripture has equated the fear of one’s father and mother to the fear of G-d. The reason for this is because there are three partners in the creation of man.

The punishment for transgressing-Is cursed by G-d:[10] Whoever shames his father and mother is considered cursed by the mouth of G-d [i.e., Gevura], as the verse[11] states “cursed should be one who shames [i.e., Makleh] his father and mother.” This applies even if one only shamed them with words. [Some Poskim[12] rule that even a person who transgresses those matters included within fearing the parents, such as sitting in their set place or contradicting their words, is included within the scriptural curse. However, from other sources[13] it is clear that the scriptural curse is reserved for only for those who actually shame their parents and not simply transgress fulfilling the mitzvah of honor and fear. The punishment for shaming a parent is explicitly written in Scripture[14] “his eyes will be gouged by ravens of the river and his flesh will be eaten by the children of the Eagles,” and as has been testified to have occurred in the past to a child who shamed his parents.[15]]

2. Matters of fear that one is obligated towards his parents:[16]

The basic difference between the command of honor versus fear:[17] The basic difference between the command to honor one’s parents versus the command to fear one’s parents is that the command to honor one’s parents involves the performance of certain activities out of respect for one’s parents [i.e. Kum Vasei], while the command to fear one’s parents involves the abstaining from performing certain activities being that they are considered disrespectful to one’s parents [i.e. Sheiv Veal Taaseh]. Some Poskim[18] write that the mitzvah of honoring one’s parents is mainly fulfilled through action while the mitzvah of fearing one’s parents is mainly in the heart. Some Poskim[19] write that the mitzvah of fearing one’s parents is more severe than that of honoring them. Others however argue that they carry the same weight of severity.[20]

The following matters are included within the command to fear one’s parents:

1. Not to stand in one’s parents designated area for standing.
2. Not to sit in one’s parents designated area for sitting.
3. One may not contradict their words
4. One may not arbitrate their words.
5. To establish in one’s heart a fear of one’s parents.[21]
6. Not to curse or shame one’s parents-See Chapter 7!
7. Some Poskim[22] learn that the prohibition against causing pain to one’s parents is included within the mitzvah to fear one’s parents. See Chapter 5 Halacha 6!

[The above are only some of the examples of matters that one must beware due to his fear for his parents, and in truth there are many more matters that can be included.[23] This mitzvah of fearing one’s parents does not have any limitation, and whoever is more careful in it is praised.[24] The general rule is then any manner that can be viewed as disrespectful to a prestigious person, is prohibited to be done to one’s parents due to the obligation to fear one’s parents. Certainly, one may not say or do things that will get them angry.[25] One should not view himself as an equal to his parent, but rather like a servant before his master.[26]]

Getting dressed in similar prestige garments as parents: Some Poskim[27] rule one may not dress in a garment that one’s parents are accustomed to wear as a sign of prestige by special occasions.

May one remove his Tefillin in front of one’s father?[28] Yes.

3. Standing or sitting in their designated area:[29]

A. Standing in one’s parents designated place for standing:[30]

One may not stand in the area that is designated for his father [or mother[31]] to stand when having discussions with friends [i.e. Sod Zikeinim][32], or in the designated area that he stands when praying.[33] [This applies even if the parent is not present.[34] This applies even if the child plans to stand there alone, without any company.[35] However, one may stand in the area at home that his father (or mother) usually sits in, as this does not contain any belittlement.[36] However, even at home, one may not stand in the area designated for his father to stand in at home.[37] Some Poskim[38], however, rule that the entire limitation against standing in a designated standing area for a parent to stand when in discussion with friends only applies if his father is a respected individual, and not if his father is a mere simple person.]

After death:[39] After the passing of a parent r”l, it becomes permitted for one to stand in their designated area of standing at home or in the synagogue. [Nonetheless, regarding a great Torah sage and leader, many communities are accustomed to cover their Shtender in the synagogue for the entire 12-month period of mourning, and do not allow anyone to use it.[40]]

B. Sitting in one’s parents’ designated place for sitting:[41]

One may not sit in the designated area that his father [or mother[42]] lay [or sit] at home [or in Shul, or at work[43], or a club, or any other area[44]].[45] [This applies even if the child plans to sit there alone, without any company, and without eating anything, as the sitting in it of itself is intrinsically forbidden in the area that his parent usually sits.[46] This prohibition applies even when one’s parent is not present.[47] However, one may stand in the area at home that his father (or mother) usually sits in, as this does not contain any belittlement.[48] Some learn that the above restriction only applies if there is more than one seating area available, however, if there is only one sitting area available, then there is no issue with one sitting there when the parent isn’t there.[49] Certainly, a child may sit in his parents sitting area if the parent gives him permission to do so.]

After death:[50] After the passing of a parent r”l, it becomes permitted for one to sit in their designated area of sitting at home or in the synagogue. [Nonetheless, regarding a great Torah sage and leader, many communities are accustomed to cover their seat in the synagogue for the entire 12-month period of mourning, and do not allow anyone to sit in its place.[51]]

 

Q&A May a child sit in a temporary designated area for his parents to sit, such as in a vacation  rental home or hotel?[52] Seemingly, one may not do so. May a child sit in the driver’s seat of his father’s car?[53] Some write that it is permitted to do so whether the purpose of sitting there is to drive a car, or simply to rest.[54]   May a child sit in his father’s office seat? No, unless the parent gives them permission to do so. May a child sit in his father’s designated seat on the couch? No, unless the parent gives them permission to do so. May a child sit in his father’s designated loveseat? No, unless the parent gives them permission to do so. May a child stand on the chair where his father usually sits in order to get something?[55] Yes.   May a child lie on his parents’ bed?[56] Seemingly this is forbidden to be done, although some write that one may be lenient in this matter. Practically, one should ask permission from one’s parent before doing so.

C. Sitting in one’s parents designated seat in synagogue:[57]

Based on the above Halacha it is understood that it is forbidden for a son to sit in his father’s seat in Shul synagogue even if his father is not present. The same likewise applies regarding a daughter, that she may not sit in her mother’s designated seat in the woman’s section.

If one’s father only prays there some of the prayers:[58] Even if one’s father only prays one of the daily prayers in that designated seat, nonetheless, the son may not sit in that seat during the prayers that he is not there. Thus, for example, if one’s Father Davens Shacharis in that seat, the son may not sit there even for Shacharis and Mincha. [However, if he only sits in the seat on rare occasion, then there is no prohibition for the son to sit there by other times.[59]]

If one’s father does not mind or gives permission: If one receives permission from his father to sit in his seat in synagogue, then he may do so. Likewise, if one knows that his father does not mind, then he may do so. Accordingly, many today are accustomed to sit in the father’s seat in synagogue when their father isn’t present, as it is assumed that their fathers do not mind.[60] However, some Poskim[61] rule that even if he receives permission from his father he should not sit in his seat in the synagogue being that other people are not aware of this permission. Practically, one may be lenient in a time of need.[62]

One’s father changed seats or changed synagogues:[63] If a father changed seats in the synagogue or has left his previous synagogue and started to pray in a new synagogue, then his son may sit in his previously designated seat from now on, [so long as people in the congregation are aware that the father no longer sits there].

4. Sitting next to one’s parent by the table:[64]

Some Poskim[65] rule that a son may not sit next to his father without a person in between. Nonetheless, practically we rule that one may be lenient in this and so is the custom, especially when in private, as the parents forgive their honor in this matter.[66] [Certainly, one may sit next to his father Shul, or by the wedding celebration, and any other occasion of the like.[67]]

Sitting in an honorable manner:[68] One is required to sit next to his parent in an honorable manner [and hence should not lean while sitting in front of him, unless one knows that his father does not mind[69]]. Thus, some Poskim[70] rule that it is forbidden to lean or lie down in the presence of one’s father and mother. Other Poskim[71], however, will that it is permitted for a son to lean in front of his parents. See next regarding the Seder table.         

Leaning by the Seder table:[72] A son who is eating by his father’s Seder table must nevertheless lean. This applies even if his father is his main Rebbe.[73] This applies even if one did not receive from his father explicit permission to lean.[74] [If, however, the father explicitly states that he does not forgive his honor to allow his son to lean, then some Poskim[75] rule he may not lean. A son may lean even if he is sitting adjacent to his father.[76]]

5. Davening next to one’s father [front, behind, or side]:[77]

Some Poskim[78] rule that it is forbidden for one to pray directly in front of or behind or to the side of his father within four cubits just as it is forbidden for one to pray behind his Rebbe. Other Poskim[79], however rule that it is permitted to do so, and that this prohibition only applies to ones Rebbe. Even according to the former opinion, a child may certainly sit next to his father for the sake of his education, and as requested by the father.[80]

6. Leaving one’s father’s presence:[81]

Some Poskim[82] write that one should not get up to leave his father’s presence without asking his permission to do so. Practically, however, the custom is not to be particular in this.[83]

7. Saying the name of one’s parent:[84]

A. Calling them, or referring to them, by their name:[85]

It is [Biblically[86]] forbidden to call one’s parent [father or mother[87]] by their name.[88] [This applies even not in their presence, and even if they have a common name.[89]]

After death: This prohibition of mentioning one’s father or mothers name applies whether they are alive, and even after their death.

Avi Mori-Saying one’s parent’s name with an honorary title:[90] Rather than calling them by their name one is to call them by saying “Avi Mori/My father my teacher” [or Imi Morasi/My mother my teacher[91]]. [Despite this ruling, we find in scripture and Talmud instances where sons called their father by their first name, although adding the term Aba to the name.[92] Accordingly, some Poskim[93] conclude that it is permitted to mention the name of one’s father so long as he adds an honorable title to the name. Likewise, it is only an obligation to mention the term Aba Mori when saying a Torah teaching in the name of the parent, however, regarding mundane matters, it is permitted to say the name of the father so long as one mentions the term “Aba,” “my father.”[94] It makes no difference whether one first says the term Aba and then says the name, or first says the name and then the term Aba.[95] Some Poskim[96] learn that this allowance applies even in one’s fathers presence. Other Poskim[97], however, rule that it is forbidden to ever mention one’s father’s name, even with an honorary title [unless it is a time of need, as will be explained]. In addition, from some Poskim[98] it is evident that even according to the lenient opinion above, one may never call his father by his name in the presence of his father, even if an honorary title is added. Practically, the custom is to avoid mentioning one’s parents name even with an honorary title, even not in his presence, unless one is asked his name, and the like, as explained in the Q&A.[99]]

Summary: It is forbidden to call a parent by their name, even when one is not in their presence, and even after their death. It is discussed in Poskim as to whether one may mention the parents name if he adds an honorary title, such as my father or my teacher, and in what circumstances this is allowed. Practically, the custom is to avoid mentioning one’s parents name even in the above methods, even not in his presence, unless one is asked his name, and the like, as explained in the Q&A,   Q&A May a parent forgive their rights and allow their child to call them by their name? Some Poskim[100] rule that a parent cannot forgive his honor regarding this matter, and hence a child is prohibited from calling his parent by their name even if the parent does not mind.[101] Other Poskim[102], however, rule that a parent has the right to forgive their honor in this matter, and hence a child may be lenient to do so if you prefaces their name with an honorary title.   May a child call their parent by their family name?[103] Some right that there is no prohibition in doing so. [Practically, however, most people view this as disrespectful, and it should not be done and certainly not to a parent. However, when not in reference to the parent one may say his parents last name.] May one call his father “Aba” if that is his father’s first name?[104] Yes.   May one wish his mother a Mazal Tov if his mother’s name is Mazal Tov?[105] Yes.    May one greet his father with the word Shalom, such as to say “Shalom Aba,” if his father’s name is Shalom? Yes.   May one say his parents name upon being asked, such as by an Aliyah or Mi Shebeirach?[106] One who is asked his father’s [or mother’s] name, may answer the name of his father [or mother], although he must add an honorary title to the name, such as “I am the son of Harav Ploni.”[107] Alternatively, he may say my mother Ploni, or my father Ploni, or Ploni my mother or father.[108] Some Poskim[109] rule that even saying “the son of Ploni” suffices. [Accordingly, when saying a Mi Shebeirach for one’s father one is to say “Ploni Ben Reb Ploni” and when being called up for an Aliya one is to say Ploni Ben Reb Ploni.”] May the Gabbai of a Shul call up his father for an Aliyah by name?[110] Yes. He may say his father’s name and the name of his grandfather to call him up for the Aliyah, and thus is to say “Yaamod Avi Mori Ploni, Ben Ploni.” There is no need for another person to call him up. How is the MC to an event to call up his father or mother to receive an honor?[111] He is to call him/her up as “Avi Mori Shlita” or “Imi Morasi” and not say his or her name. May one say his parents name for the sake of praying on their behalf?[112] One who is praying and arousing mercy on behalf of another, needs to mention that person’s name in the prayer, if he is not making the request in front of the person.[113]  Thus, even one who is praying for his father or mother, or asking others to pray for his father or mother, is to mention his father’s/mothers name rather than simply say “pray on  behalf of my father.”[114] Prefacing the name with an honorary title: There is no need to mention the term “my father” when saying one’s parents name in prayer.[115] Some Poskim[116], however, rule that one should preface the name with the word “my father” or “my mother”, although he is not to mention any honorary title to his parents name, such as “my master or teacher” and the like, as there is no prestige before G-d. [This, however, only applies when mentioning their name in prayer, such as if they are sick and the like. However, one may mention their name with an honorary title when mentioning it for the sake of Iluiy Nishmas, and so is the custom to precede their name with the title “Avi Mori or Imi Morasi.”[117]]   Writing one’s parents’ name:[118] It is permitted to write the name of one’s parent, so long as one prefaces it, or concludes it, with an honorary title, such as my Rebbe, or my father or mother. [Some Poskim[119], however, write that one should avoid writing his father’s name if his father is a person of great prestige, as one should not express heartiness in his lineage. Practically, however, the custom is not to adhere to this opinion and on the contrary, people specifically write their father’s name for lineage.[120]] When writing your signature: When signing one’s name [on a Kesuba or other document in which we write the first name and the name of the father], there is no need to write any preface to his father’s name, and one may simply write Ploni Ben Ploni. Nonetheless, some are meticulous and write Ploni Ben Leadoni Avi Ploni.”[121]

 

B. Calling another person who shares the same name:[122]

Calling someone else that has the same name in the presence of the parent:[123] If there is a person who shares the same name as one’s parent in the same room as one’s parent, then one may not call that person by his name. This applies whether the name is a common name or a rare name.[124] [However, most Poskim[125] rule that by a common name, it is permitted to call another person by a common name even in the presence of a parent who has the same name. Practically, the Poskim[126] conclude that the custom today is to be lenient in this matter, as one’s parent forgives his honor. Nonetheless, it is initially proper for one to be stringent in this matter.[127] Likewise, Sephardim are to be stringent in this matter.[128]]

Calling someone else that has the same name not in the presence of the parent:[129] If there is a person who shares the same name as one’s parent, then when one is not in the presence of the parent[130], one may call that person by their name, if the name is a common name.[131] However, if one’s fathers name is a very rare name which people are not accustomed to [i.e. Sheim Piliy][132], then one may not call someone else by that name, and is rather to change their name.[133] [This applies even when not in the presence of the parent.[134] However, some Poskim[135] rule it is permitted to call a person by even an uncommon name, when he is not in the presence of the parent who shares the same name. Practically, the Poskim[136] conclude that the custom today is to be lenient in this matter, as one’s parent forgives his honor. Nonetheless, it is initially proper for one to be stringent in this matter.[137] Likewise, Sephardim are to be stringent in this matter.[138] Practically, one is to be stringent in this matter. However, some Poskim[139] rule that it is permitted to mention an even uncommon name if it is evident to all that one is not referring to his father, such as during a Devar Torah in was a sage with that name is being mentioned. Likewise, when telling over a story to his father about an individual who has the same name as him, it is permitted to mention the name being that it is evident to all that he is not referring to his father. Likewise, if he also mentions the last name or second name or nickname of the individual, then it is permitted to say his name even if it is an uncommon name which is also shared by his father.[140]]

Summary: The Dispute: Some Poskim rule that the only time it is permitted for one to call a person by the same name as his parent is by a common name and not in the presence of his parent, however by uncommon name or in the presence of the parent it is never allowed. Other Poskim, however, rule that the only time that there is a prohibition against calling another person by the same name as one’s parent is by an uncommon name in the presence of the parent, however, it is always permitted by a common name or when not in the presence of the parent. The ruling: The custom today is to be lenient in this matter. Nonetheless, it is initially proper for one to be stringent in this matter. Likewise, Sephardim are to be stringent in this matter.   Q&A After death-May one mention the name of his parent after their death when in reference to another person?[141] This prohibition against mentioning the name of another person that is similar to one’s father or mothers name only applies when they are alive, however, after their death, there is no prohibition against calling another person by the same name as one’s parent. This applies whether the name is common or rare. This applies even according to the stringent opinion mentioned above. Accordingly, there is no issue with naming one’s son or daughter after his father or mother, and it is permitted for this name to be used freely. [Nonetheless, there are some who were stringent in this matter and would not say the name of their parent in reference to another person even after their death.[142]]                       Naming one’s son or daughter after one’s father or mother while they’re still alive:[143] The Ashkenazi custom is not to name a child after the father or mother of the parents [i.e., grandparents] while they are still alive.[144] However, the Sephardic custom is to name their children after the grandparents even during the life of the grandparents. This raises the question as to how this child is to be called by his parents, being that he shares the same name as their father or mother. Practically, based on the lenient opinion mentioned above, if it is a common name, then the child may be called by that name even in the presence of the grandparent. If, however, it is an uncommon name then the child should not be called by that name while in the presence of the grandparent, and according to the stringent opinion above should not be called by the name even not in the presence of the grandparent. Accordingly, it is best for the child to be called by a nickname, such as Yossi instead of Yosef, in which case it is permitted according to all.   Saying one’s wife’s name if she shares the same name as one’s mother 1.       Question: [Sunday, 14th 5783] My son recently got engaged to a girl whose name is Rachel. Now, my wife, the Chasan’s mother, is also called Rachel. [She has two names but is only called by her first name Rachel.] What should my son, and other children, do regarding saying her name in the presence of my wife, who is their mother. I heard that there is a prohibition against saying the name of one’s mother in her presence even if one is referring to someone else. Answer: The custom today is to be lenient in this matter and hence from the letter of the law your children may call your future daughter-in-law by her name even in the presence of your wife. Nonetheless, in order to follow all approaches, it is suggested for your wife, who is their mother, to explicitly forgive her honor in this matter, and allow for her son and other children to say her name in her presence. Another alternative, in order to suspect of all opinions, is for a nickname to be used when mentioning her in your wife’s presence, such as to call her Racheli, instead of Rachel. Discuss this over with your wife and come to an agreeable solution.   Explanation: Included in the command to fear one’s parents, is a prohibition against calling one’s parent by their name. Now, regarding saying the name of another person who has the same name as one’s parent, the Poskim debate the status of differentiation between a common name versus an uncommon name, and one who is in the presence of the parent versus one who is not in their presence. Practically, the Rama and Taz take the stringent approach and rule that in the presence of one’s parent one may never call another person by the same name as one’s parents, whether the name is common or rare, and hence according to this approach, your children may not call your future daughter in-law by her name in the presence of your wife. However, most Poskim are lenient in this matter and rule that by a common name, such as Rachel, it is permitted to call another person by a common name even in the presence of a parent who has the same name, and so is the custom. Practically, the suggestive approach in order to follow all opinions is for the parent to explicitly forgive their honor in this matter, or for the children to change their name when calling for her in their mother’s presence. To note, that we have not entered here into the discussion of the regulation of Rav Yehuda Hachasid against marrying a girl who has the same name as his mother, as in this case the mother has two names while the soon to be daughter-in-law only has one, and hence the Poskim conclude that there is no issue in him marrying her. Nonetheless, this only applies if your wife truly also goes by her second name, such as she is called by this name on occasion or uses it to sign, however, if the name has become forgotten [i.e. Nishtakeia], then a new name should be added to either your wife or future daughter in-law.   Sources: Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:10-12 See regarding the general prohibition against calling one’s parent by their name: Michaber Y.D. 240:2; Tur 240; Rambam Mamarim 6; Kiddushin 31b; Taz 240:4; Aruch Hashulchan 240:14; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4; See regarding if this prohibition applies when referring to another person and in the presence of the parent: Michaber Y.D. 240:2; Stringent: Rama 240:2 “However a common name may be called not in front of him”; Taz 240:5; Tur 240; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5; Yalkut Meiam Loez Shemos 20:12; Lenient: Shach 240:3; Derisha 240; Beir Sheva Horiyos, brought in Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger; Chayeh Adam 67:8; Shut Haravaz E.H. 20; Yad Shaul 240:4; Zekan Aaron 2:60; Chakal Yitzchak 62; Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:133; Taz ibid negates this opinion; See regarding the warning of Rav Yehuda Hachasid against marrying a person who has the same name as one’s parent: Tzavaas Rebbe Yehuda Hachasid 26, 27; Mishnas Chassidim Miseches Chasuna 1:8; Pischeiy Teshuvah Y.D. 116:6; E.H. 2:7; 50:14; Chochmas Adam 123:13; Tzemach Tzedek E.H. 143 and Piskeiy Dinim  Y.D. 116 that the Alter Rebbe was very stringent with this Tzavah; Kitzur SHU”A 145:8; Yosef Ometz 37:3; Zechor Leavraham 3:190; Hieshiv Moshe 69; Avnei Tzedek E.H. 4; Yifei Laleiv 4 E.H. 62:11; Peri Sadeh 1:69; Divrei Chaim E.H. 8; Shemiras Hanefesh 86; Kaf Hachaim Y.D. 116:125; Imreiy Yaakov 10 Likutim 8; Sefer Shemiras Haguf Vihanefesh [Lerner] 169:1-21; Nitei Gavriel Shidduchim 13-19; Shulchan Menachem 6:133-141

8. Contradicting the words, statements, and opinions, of one’s parents:[145]

One may not contradict the words of one’s parents [father or mother, on any subject]. [This applies whether one outright argues on his parents by saying something like “Not true” or “Nonsense,” or sides with an individual who is arguing on his parents, such as by saying “I agree with your opinion,” either way it is considered that he is contradicting his parents.[146] This applies whether the father states his opinion on a certain matter, or relates a story, nonetheless, a child may not contradict his father even if the child knows it to not be true or knows that his father is exaggerating its details.[147] Nonetheless, it is permitted for a child to make a statement which can be implied to be contrary to his father’s statement, so long as he does not explicitly contradict his father, and does not make the statement in an assured way, and says it in a respectful manner.[148]]

Not in their presence: Some Poskim[149] rule that the above prohibition to contradict the opinion of one’s parent applies even not in the presence of his parent. The majority of Poskim[150], however, rule that it is permitted to contradict their words when not in their presence. However, some opinions limit this to only Torah related matters.[151]

Torah related matters:[152] Some Poskim[153] rule that the above prohibition applies to even Torah related matters, when one is in front of the parent. Furthermore, even when one is not in front of his father, such as when writing a Halachic responsa or Halachic rulings, he should not mention his father by name if he plans to argue on his opinion, and is rather to mention the name of another rabbi who holds similar to his father.[154] Other Poskim[155], however, rule that this prohibition only applies to mundane matters and not to Torah related matters, of which it is permitted for a son to argue on his father. According to all, it is permitted to have an open Halachic discussion and debate with one’s father on a certain topic in order to come to a final conclusion.[156] Likewise, it is permitted for a son who is qualified to give a halachic ruling on an actual case in order to prevent a mistake from being made, even if it contradicts his father’s opinion who is present .[157]

Parent asks one’s opinion:[158] If one’s parent asks them as to their opinion on a certain topic, they may express it even if it is opposite of the parent’s opinion.

Q&A May a child voice his opinion in a non-argumentative and noncontradictory manner, if it opposes the opinion of his father?[159] Some Poskim rule that it is permitted for a child to make a statement which can be implied to be contrary to his father’s statement, so long as he does not explicitly contradict his father and does not make the statement in an assured way, and says it in a respectful manner.   May a child correct his parents for his parents’ own benefit?[160] It is permitted for a child to correct his parent in a situation where lack of doing so can cause pain or monetary damage to the parent. Nonetheless, the correction must be made in an honorable manner. May one contradict his parents in writing, such as in an article ?[161] So long as the contradicting statement will not reach the eyes of his father, it is permitted to do so according to those who permit contradicting one’s father when not in their presence. May one contradict his parents after their death?[162] Yes.

9. Reprimanding a parent for transgressing Jewish law:[163]

One who witnesses his parent transgressing words of the Torah should not explicitly tell him, “You have transgressed the words of the Torah.” Rather, one is to say, “Father, is it not written in the Torah such and such?” making it as if one is asking the parent a question, rather than warning him [and accusing him of transgression]. In this way one can have the parents understand on their own [that they are doing a transgression], without needing to embarrass them in the process. [Alternatively, one can respectfully ask his parent as to the source of the allowance for him to do such and such.[164] However, if this respectful tone does not work, then one may use a stronger tone to separate his parents from doing a prohibition.[165] However, if one knows that his parent will not listen to him, and it is not a matter that is explicit in Scripture or that is a known prohibition, then it is forbidden for him to reprimand his parents actions, as it is better that the parent be a negligent sinner then an advertent sinner.[166] Likewise, if the parent is transgressing only a matter of custom or stringency, or matter that is disputed amongst the Poskim, that he may not reprimand them.[167] However, if one assesses that the parent is simply making an innocent error in his judgment, then it is obvious that one may respectfully mention it to one’s parent. Certainly, if one knows that one’s parent will rejoice in being told the correct law, such as if the mistake will lead him to be shamed, then one may inform him even regarding mundane matters that do not relate to Torah and Mitzvos. Thus, if one’s parent wore his shirt backwards, it is a mitzvah to inform him in order so he not be shamed in public. All in all, regarding such matters one is to act with common sense and judge the matter appropriately.[168]]

 

Influencing one’s parents to become more Torah observant:[169] Influencing one’s parents to become more Torah observant and assisting them in their fulfillment of mitzvah’s is included within the mitzvah of honoring them.

10. Correcting a parent for a mistaken Torah statement:[170]

If one heard his parent say an incorrect and inaccurate Torah statement, he is not to tell the parent “Do not make this statement/Lo Tisni Hachi.” [Rather, he should simply say the accurate teaching in a respectful manner.[171]]

11. Commending their words and agreeing with their opinion:[172]

One may not arbitrate like his parents’ opinion in their presence, such as to say, “My father’s opinion seems correct.” [However, one may do so when not in front of his parents.[173] Likewise, one may bring proofs to their opinion.[174]]

12. Waking a parent up from sleep:[175]

It is forbidden for one to wake up his parents from their sleep [unless the parent has requested to be woken up, or the matter is urgent or involves a monetary loss or possible monetary gain in which one knows that the parent would want to be wakened for, then it is a mitzvah to awaken the parent[176]]. Accordingly, it is forbidden for one to talk or perform an activity which will prevent one’s parents from falling asleep or wake them up from their sleep. [On the other hand, it is permitted for one to wake up his parent if an important guest or relative has arrived and one knows that his parent would want to be woken up.[177] Likewise, if the matter is very important for the child to the point that he knows that his parent would be most upset if he is not wakened for it, then one may awaken his parent even for his own personal benefit and not the direct benefit of his parent.[178] However, some Poskim[179] rule that in all the above cases one is to waken his parent through another person rather than doing so himself, and that so is the custom.]

Q&A May a child wake up his father in order so he recite the morning Shema, or pray on time, or perform another time sensitive mitzvah?[180] Yes. [However, he may only wake him up close to the end time and therefore may not wake him up prior to the end time of Zeman Magen Avraham unless he knows that his father is particular to follow this opinion.] However, some Poskim[181] rule that one is to waken his parent through another person, and that so is the custom.   May a child wake up his father or mother to donate charity to a person who is by the door?[182] No, unless one’s father instructed him to do so, or who knows that his parents would be most happy to do so.

The story of Dama Ben Nesina:[183] Ula taught: The extent that one must go to honor one’s parents can be learned from a certain idol worshiper from the city of Ashkelon by the name of Dama the son of Nesina. The sages came to him with a business offer to purchase an item of his that would give him 600,000 gold coins as profit. However, since the key to retrieve the item was under the head of his father who was sleeping, he could not sell the item, as he did not want to awaken his father and cause him pain. Rebbe Eliezer taught the same story, however adding that the item that the sages desire to purchase was a precious stone for the Eiphod, and that the next year G-d rewarded the Gentile by having a red cow born to his herd. When the sages approached him regarding the sale of the red cow, he replied that although he could request any money in the world, he only requested the amount of money that he lost from not selling the precious stone the previous year due to his desire to honor his parent. Rav Chanina stated that if someone who is not even commanded in the mitzvah receives such a reward all the more so will be the reward of one who is commanded and does so.

13. Having parent serve you or do an errand on your behalf:[184]

*See Chapter 9 Halacha 4 for the full details of this matter!

If a father desires to serve his son, it is permitted for the son to accept the service. [Thus, if a father or mother desires to serve a meal to their son, they may do so, and the son does not have to protest this.]

If the father is a Torah scholar: If the father is a Ben Torah, then he may not serve his son.

 

14. Father and son bathing together:[185]

The Talmud[186] prohibits one from bathing together with his father or stepfather[187], or father in-law[188], or sister’s husband [i.e., brother in-law].[189] [This applies even when the father needs the sone to help him bathe, such as if he is old and sick.[190]]

One was already in the bathhouse when relative arrived:[191] If one was already in the bathhouse and one of these above relatives arrive, he is to leave the bathhouse due to the above prohibition.[192]

Age of prohibition by child: It is permitted for a son to bathe with his father/brother until the child reaches the age or signs of adulthood.[193] The age of adulthood is defined either by age [i.e. 11 years old for a girl], puberty [i.e. pubic hair], or maturity [i.e. the child reaches an age that he is ashamed to be unclothed in from of the parent].[194]

The custom today:[195] In today’s times, it is customary to permit bathing together, being that their private areas are covered in the bathhouse with a bathing suit and there is thus no worry of it leading to forbidden thoughts. [If however they are unclothed in the bathhouse, then from the letter of the law it is forbidden to bathe with the above relatives.[196] Nonetheless, even today the widespread custom is to permit immersing in a Mikveh together with the above relatives, even though the private areas are not covered.[197] This is accustomed even amongst G-d fearing Jews.[198] Nevertheless, it is best to distance oneself from the above situation.[199]]  

Summary: According to the letter of the law it is forbidden to bathe together with your father, father in-law, stepfather, brother in-law and some add even with your brother. Practically, the widespread custom today is to be lenient in all the above.

Q&A May a father bathe with his young son? It is questionable whether the above prohibition applies towards a young son.[200] [Practically, the custom is to be lenient, as stated above.]

15. Accepting abuse from parent with silence:[201]

A. Tearing child’s clothing and shaming him in public:[202]

One’s fear of his parents must extend to the point that even if he was wearing elegant clothing and sitting at the head of the congregation, and his father or mother came and tore his clothing, and hit him over the head, and spat at him, nonetheless, he may not [retaliate and] shame them in return, and is rather to remain quiet and fear the king of all kings which commanded him to do so [as certainly if a king of flesh and blood decreed upon him something even worse than this he would not be able to protest, and hence even more so by Hashem the creator of the world [203]]. [Thus, even if one’s parents were to publicly shame him in the presence of all his peers, he may not retaliate and is rather to remain quiet, fearing the G-d which commanded him to do so.]

Civil claim-Din Torah:[204] Although one may not retaliate against his parent and shame them back, nonetheless, one may make a monetary claim against them in court if they caused him monetary damage, such as if they tore his clothing.

B. Throwing away his money:[205]

One’s honor of his father and mother must extend to the point that even if they were to take his[206] wallet of gold from his possession and throw it in front of him to the sea, nonetheless, he should restrain himself from embarrassing them, and he should not express any pain while in their presence, and he should not get angry at them, and is rather to accept the decree of Scripture, and remain silent.

The law by the sons wallet-May one stop his parents from throwing away his money: Some Poskim[207] [i.e. Michaber/Sephardim] rule that the above law applies even to the sons wallet, and hence it is forbidden for the son to even try to prevent his parent, and stand in their way, from throwing the money in the sea [and rather if they do so he should simply take them to court and have the court force him to reimburse him for the loss].[208] However, other Poskim[209] [Rama/Ashkenazim] rule [that the above law only applies to the fathers wallet[210], and] that if the son wishes, he may prevent his parent from throwing his money into the sea, as one is not obligated to respect his parent using his own money and is only obligated to do so using the money of his father, and there is no difference between honoring him or causing him pain.[211] Nonetheless, this allowance to confront the parent only applies prior to the parent throwing the money away, as in such a case one is able to prevent the loss. However, once the money has already been thrown into the sea, then it is forbidden for one to [confront his parent and] shame him.[212] [Furthermore, even according to the lenient opinion, if one is able to stop the father in a peaceful and pleasant manner or through an emissary, then he must do so rather than to use force.[213] On the other hand, some Poskim[214] rule that this prohibition to prevent the parent from throwing away the money according to the first opinion, only applies if the parent receive some benefit from throwing away the money, including extinguishing his wrath, otherwise it is permitted for his son to stop him from throwing it out for no reason.]

Taking his parents to court to reimburse him of his loss:[215] Although one may not confront and shame his parent for destroying his money [and according to some opinions, even initially one may not stop them from throwing the money into the sea] nonetheless, one may take his parents to court to reimburse him of his monetary loss.

Protesting one’s parents from spending too much of one’s money: Example: May one protest his father or mother from spending too much of one’s money while they are living in one’s home or staying as a guest, such as for example if they are eating too much of one’s expensive food, or using up a lot of hot water or heater or air conditioner? This matter is dependent on the dispute recorded above regarding if a son may protest against his father throwing away his money. Practically, Ashkenazim may be lenient in this matter although are to mention the matter to their parents in a gentle way, and if necessary, through an emissary. Similarly, even Sephardim may have a calm discussion with their parents about their spending habits to try to influence them to cut down on their expenditure, if this will not cause the parent to be embarrassed or ashamed.

C. Loss of profit:[216]

Even according to the opinion who permits a son to confront his parents in order to stop them from throwing his money into the sea, it is only permitted in this case in which a loss will occur to the current possessions of the son. However, even according to this opinion it is forbidden for the son to confront his father and stop them from causing him a loss of profit.

D. The law on the parent:[217]

It is forbidden for a parent to overburden his children with demands and to be overparticular with their respect towards him, in order so he does not cause them to stumble. [According to the above, a parent should not make a request from his child if he knows that it will be most difficult for his child to fulfill it and will cause him much pain. A parent who knows or assesses[218] that his child will not listen to his instructions and instructs him anyways to fulfill his wishes, transgresses the prohibition of Lifnei Iver the moment that he gives his instructions.[219] This applies even if the child does in the end comply with the request.[220]]

16. Taking one’s father to court:[221]

It is permitted to take one’s father [or mother[222], or Rebbe[223]] to court to file a monetary claim against them. For example, if one’s father damaged one’s item, one may take him to court to force him to pay for the damages. [However, some Poskim[224] learn it is a Midas Chassidus not to take one’s father to court, in order not to cause him pain. This especially applies to one’s mother. Other Poskim[225] however omit this act of piety. Practically, a child should do all in his power to resolve the issue with his parents without resolving to taking them to court especially regarding one’s mother.[226]]

Swearing in court:[227] If in litigation against their son, a father [or mother] has been found liable by the court to swear to the son regarding a statement they made, then the oath taken may not contain a curse, as this is considered as if the son is cursing his father. Rather, the oath taken shall not contain any curse.

17. Father taking son to court:[228]

Who gets to choose the location of the court proceedings: When a father and son are involved in a dispute that needs to be settled in court, and the father is the plaintiff [i.e. Toveia] who is making a claim against the son [i.e. the Nitva], [then although in general the rule is that the Nitva gets to choose the jurisdiction of the court proceedings, nonetheless by a father-son relationship] the son must go to the jurisdiction chosen by the father for the court proceedings to take place. This applies even if the son lives in another city and will need to travel to the jurisdiction chosen by his father, as all this is included in respecting one’s father.

Reimbursing the son first traveling expenses:[229] Despite the above, the father is obligated to reimburse his son for all of his expenses involved in the travels to the father’s jurisdiction that he chose to have the court proceedings in, as one is not obligated to honor his father with his own money, as already explained.

18. Son executing a courts order against the parents:

A. Giving lashes to one’s parents as an emissary of the court:[230]

If a person’s father or mother transgressed a sin for which they are liable to receive lashes, then the son cannot be the one to administer the lashes to his parents even if the son is the appointed executioner of the court.

 

B. Excommunicating one’s parents as an emissary of the court:[231]

If a person’s father or mother transgressed a sin for which they are liable to receive excommunication, then the son cannot be the one to administer the excommunication to his parents even if the son is the appointed executioner of the court.

C. Harassing and hitting one’s parents as an emissary of the court:[232]

A son cannot harass or hit his parents even if the son is the appointed executioner of the court. This applies even if the parents are befitting of receiving this harassment from the court and have not repented.

D. Punishing Heretic parents as an emissary of the court:[233]

A son may not be an emissary of the court to hit or harass his parents no matter what his parent’s sin is, with the exception to parents who are a Meisis and Madiach, a missionary for idolatry.

 

________________________________________________________

[1] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 559-619

[2] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 559-562

[3] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos Mitzvah 211; Chinuch Mitzvah 212; Yireim Hashaleim 221; Semak Mitzvah 7; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibbud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 372 footnote 16 for opinions who write that fearing one’s parent is similar to a Lo Sasei [i.e., an Issur Asei]; See Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 559-560 in length for the different approaches

[4] Rambam Sefer Hamitzvos Mitzvah 211; Chinuch Mitzvah 212; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 577 footnote 172-174

[5] Chareidim Asei 1:27; Semak Hakdama and Mitzvah 7; Aruch Hashulchan 240:8; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 559 and footnote 6 and p. 577-558 footnotes 167-174; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 577 footnote 167-174

[6] See Rambam Mamarim 6:4 “A person is obligated to honor his parents during his business dealings and the like, as a rule you should always show that he suspects for his parents honor and that he fears them.”; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 388-390; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 615 footnote 509-533

[7] Rambam Mamarim 6:2; Kiddushin 31a “It is revealed and known before whom that said and created the world that a son fears his father more than his mother being that his father teaches him Torah. Therefore, G-d preceded the fearing of the mother to the fearing of the father.”; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 15-22; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 417 footnotes 608-615

[8] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 561 footnote 23-24

[9] Rambam Mamarim 6:1; Kiddushin 30b; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 9-14

[10] Michaber 241:6; Tur 241; Rambam Mamrim 5:15; Pesakim Uteshuvos 241:6; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibbud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 372

[11] Devarim 27:16

[12] Shaareiy Teshuvah of Rabbeinu Yona 3:21; Chareidim 9:35

[13] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibbud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 372 footnote 30

[14] Mishlei 30:17

[15] Sefer Chareidim Asei 1:35

[16] Michaber 240:2-3; Kiddushin 31b “The following matters are included within the command to fear one’s parents: Not to stand in one’s parents designated area for standing. Not to sit in one’s parents designated area for sitting. One may not contradict their words. One may not arbitrate their words.”; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 562, 575 footnotes 147-166

[17] See Korban Aaron on Toras Kohanim Kedoshim 1; Michtam Ledavid Y.D. 32; Tosafos Reim on Yireim 222; Malbim on Toras Kohanim ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibbud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 372 footnote 14; p. 384 footnotes 186-190; Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 562 footnote 28-34

[18] Semak Hakdama 7; 50 Kala Rabasi 3; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 577 footnote 167-174

[19] Mayan Hachochma 50a; Hamakneh Kiddushin 31b; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 563 footnote 35-37

[20] Terumas Hadeshen 40

[21] Chareidim Asei 1:27

[22] See Terumas Hadeshen 40; Darkei Moshe Y.D. 240:3; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 197

[23] See Rambam Pirush Hamishnayos Kiddushin 1:7.

[24] Yireim Hashaleim 221; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 560

[25] Sefer Hamitzvos Rambam Asei 211; Chinuch Mitzvah 212; Chareidim Asei 1:26; Meiah Shearim Shaar 16; Aruch Hashulchan 240:8; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 576

[26] Levush Y.D. 240:2; Chayeh Adam 67:8

[27] See Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 610 footnote 465

[28] Aruch Hashulchan Y.D. 242:39; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 611 footnote 470-472

[29] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 578-583

[30] Michaber 240:2; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Kiddushin 31b; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 579-580; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 579 footnote 183-197

[31] Rabbeinu Yonah in Sefer Hayirah 186; Shut Maharil 24; Chareidim Asei 1:26; Aruch Hashulchan 240:9

[32] Michaber ibid; Rashi Kiddushin ibid; Tur 240

[33] Michaber ibid; Rabbeinu Yerucham Nesiv 1 4:15-3 in name of Ramah

[34] Ravan Kiddushin 31b; Rishon Letziyon 240:2; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:2; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 615 footnote 509

[35] Taz 240:2; Beir Heiytiv 240:2; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:2

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is permitted to do so when not in the presence of others. [Rishon Letziyon 240:2]

[36] Shach 240:1; Taz 240:2; Beis Yosef 240

[37] Implication of Poskim ibid in previous footnote; Aruch Hashulchan 240:9

Other opinions: See Perisha 240:2 in explanation of Beis Yosef that there is no designated standing area at home, and from here the Pesakim Uteshuvos 240 footnote 32 understands the above Poskim to rule that at home, one may even stand in the area designated for standing. Vetzaruch Iyun Gadol, on his ruling, as all the Poskim ibid explicitly emphasize the word “to stand in the designated sitting area” which implies that by the designated standing area, it would be forbidden even at home, and so explicitly rules Aruch Hashulchan 240:9.

[38] Aruch Hashulchan 240:9

[39] Teshuvos Harosh 5:3; Sefer Chassidim 811; Radbaz 2:628; Chaim Bayad 125:48; Shemos Chaim on Rabbeinu Yerucham 1:4-14; Zecher Simcha 132; Yerech Yaakov Y.D. 10; Az Nidbaru 8:60; Tzitz Eliezer 15:41-2; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 582 footnotes 207-211

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is forbidden to do so even after the death. [Yifei Laleiv 5 Y.D. 240:5; Betzel Hachochmah 3:95]

[40] Hakdamas Devar Shmuel; Chaim Bayad ibid; Yerech Yaakov ibid

[41] Michaber 240:2; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Kiddushin 31b; Tur 240 in name of Ramah; See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:3-6; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 578 footnote 175-182

[42] Rabbeinu Yonah in Sefer Hayirah 186; Shut Maharil 24; Chareidim Asei 1:26; Aruch Hashulchan 240:9; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:4

[43] In a store with room for only one seat: See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:4 footnote 42 that in a store where there is only one place to sit, the son may sit in the same area as his father, as this is not considered a disrespect to the father.

[44] See Bach 240; Aruch Hashulchan 240:9; Otzer Kibbud Av Vaeim p. 111; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:4 footnote 41

[45] The reason: As this makes it appear that one is making himself equal to his parent. [Levush 240]

[46] Taz 240:2; Beir Heiytiv 240:2; Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 1:65; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:2

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is permitted to do so when not in the presence of others. [Rishon Letziyon 240:2]

[47] Implication of Taz ibid and Michaber ibid; Aruch Hashulchan 240; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:2 that one is to suspect of this opinion; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:3

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is permitted to sit in one’s parents designated area if there is no one present, including the parent. [Rishon Letziyon 240; Yaskil Avdi Y.D. 21:8]

[48] Shach 240:1; Taz 240:2; Beis Yosef 240

[49] Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:4 footnote 42

[50] Teshuvos Harosh 5:3; Sefer Chassidim 811; Radbaz 2:628; Chaim Bayad 125:48; Shenos Chaim on Rabbeinu Yerucham 1:4-14; Zecher Simcha 132; Yerech Yaakov Y.D. 10; Az Nidbaru 8:60; Tzitz Eliezer 15:41-2; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 582 footnotes 207-211

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is forbidden to do so even after the death. [Yifei Laleiv 5 Y.D. 240:5; Betzel Hachochmah 3:95]

[51] Hakdamas Devar Shmuel; Chaim Bayad ibid; Yerech Yaakov ibid

[52] See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:4 footnote 40

[53] Chayeh Halevi  4:76-12

[54] The reason: As the driver seat of a car is not viewed as a seat of honor and respect.

[55] Shach 240:1; Taz 240:2; Beis Yosef 240

[56] See Meim Loez  Shemos 20:12-23; Sefer Morah Horim 2:19; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:4 footnote 45

[57] See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:6

[58] Mivaksheiy Torah 21 p. 271; Rivivos Efraim 48:58

[59] See Piskeiy Teshuvos 90:31; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:6 footnote 54

[60] Aruch Hashulchan 240:9; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 580 footnote 196

[61] Makor Chaim 16

[62] Minchas Yechiel 3:107

[63] Az Nidbaru 8:60; Olas Yitzchak Ratzabi 2:291

[64] See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:5; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 582-583

[65] Beis Yosef 240 in name of Orchos Chaim based on Shmuel 1:20; Shiyurei Kneses Hagedola 240:2; Hagahos Maharikash 240; Binyan Olam Y.D. 47; Daas Torah 240 based on Eiruvin 54b proves that this only applies by the right side of the father

[66] Taz 244:9; Beis Lechem Yehuda 240; Yifei Laleiv 3 240:5; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:20 [only applies in front of others]; Aruch Hashulchan 240:10; Yad Shaul 240

[67] Binyan Olam ibid; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 218-219

[68] Pela Yoetz Erech Bizayon; So is clearly understood from the Halacha brought next, that it is only by the Seder table when there is an obligation to lean that we assume that the father does not mind.

[69] So is clearly understood from the Halacha brought next, that it is only by the Seder table when there is an obligation to lean that we assume that the father does not mind.

[70] See Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 610 footnote 459-460

[71] See Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 461-463

[72] Admur 472:11; Michaber 472:5; Pesachim 108a; Tosafus Pesachim ibid; Kol Bo 50; Abudarham Seder Haggadah; Sheilasos of Rav Achai Parshas Tzav; See Peri Chadash 472:5; Kaf Hachaim 472:32

[73] The reason: As one can assume that a father forgives his honor for the sake of his son. [Admur ibid; M”A 472:6; Levush 472:5; Chok Yaakov 472:9; Abudarham ibid; Kol Bo ibid; Peri Chadash ibid; Derech Hachaim 6; M”B 472:14]

[74] Admur and all Poskim in previous footnote that we assume he is Mochel

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that one is to be stringent to only lean if his father gives him explicit permission to do so [even if he is not his main Rebbe]. [Bach 472, brought in Beir Heiytiv 472:5, Chok Yaakov 472:9; Maharal of Prague in Gevuros Hashem 48; Elya Raba 472:8; Chok Yosef 472:5; Pnei Meivin 93; Korban Nesanel on Rosh Arvei Pesachim 20; P”M 472 M”Z 4; Kaf Hachaim 472:32; Piskeiy Teshuvos 472:4 regarding main Rebbe]

[75] P”M 472 M”Z 4 as the Mitzvah of Kibbud Av is Biblical while leaning is Rabbinical; Kaf Hachaim 472:33

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that he may lean even in such a case. [Chok Yaakov ibid]

[76] Setimas Haposkim

Other opinions: Some Poskim write that a son is not to lean near his father unless there is another person separating between them. [Vayaged Moshe 8:6 based on Rashi Shmuel 1 20:25]

[77] See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:6; 242:23; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 583 footnotes 227-228

[78] Chayeh Adam 22:6; M”B 90:73; See Admur 90:23

[79] Binyan Olam Y.D. 47

[80] Ishei Yisrael 9 footnote 68

[81] See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:5 See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 584

[82] Shevet Halevi 2:111 based on Meiri Kiddushin 31b

[83] See Aruch Hashulchan 240:44

[84] Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 240:4; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:10-12; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 595-609

[85] Michaber Y.D. 240:2; Tur 240; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Kiddushin 31b “A Sage is to change the name of his father and teacher. However, a translator is not required to change the name of his father or his teacher. Rava taught: The above allowance for a translator only refers to the father and teacher of the Sage, however, the translator may not say the name of his own father and his own teacher.”

Talmudic contradiction: See Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger who questions this ruling from the Gemara Brachos 18b and Shabbos 115a in which the Amora mentions his father’s name. However, see footnotes below for explanations

[86] See Sdei Chemed Mareches Chaf Kelal 104

[87] Chayeh Adam 67:7; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:3-4

[88] The reason: This is due to the obligation to fear one’s parents. [Michaber ibid; See however Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 33] As it is disparaging and disrespectful to call one’s father or mother by their name. [Radbaz Hilchos Mamrim 6; Tiferes  Yisrael Kiddushin 1:55] Alternatively, just as one may not mention the name of G-d so too one may not mention his parents’ name. [Devash Lefi Mareches Ayin 12]

[89] Taz 240:4 and 242:4; Aruch Hashulchan 240:14

[90] Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 607 footnote 430-439

[91] Nussach in Birchas Hamazon

[92] In scripture we find that Yaakov said “Visheim Avosaiy Avraham, ViYitzchak” [ Bereishis 48:16] and Shlomo said “Dovid my father”; Gittin 14b: Reb Dustaiy said “If the Nehardean would have killed Dustaiy, who would leave Yanai my father a person like me?; Pesachim 112a: Rashbi said “I say to Yochai my father”; Bava Basra 56a: Rebbe Yossi said “Even if my father Chalafta is amongst them”

[93] Rama 242:14 regarding one’s Rebbe; Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 65; Biur Hagr”a 242:36; Pischeiy Teshuvah 240:2; Yad Avraham 242; Beis Meir 242; Yosef Ometz 87; Aruch Hashulchan 240:14-15; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:3-5; Yosef Ometz 87; Yabia Omer Y.D. 2:15

[94] Aruch Hashulchan 240:15; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5 concludes that from the letter of the law it is permitted to mention the name of the father with the addition of Aba, and there is no obligation to say Mori. However, since this has become the widespread custom, it is therefore proper to be careful in this and say Reb Ploni or Mori Ploni.

The reason: As also the term Aba is an honorary title. [Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5]

[95] Yosef Ometz ibid; Ben Ish Chaiy ibid in name of Chida

[96] Pischeiy Teshuvah 242:10 in name of Regel Yeshara and Likkutei Peri Chadash who permits even in front of him; So also writes Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 242; Birkeiy Yosef 240:17 based on Kesef Mishneh Talmud Torah 5:5 based on that Yehoshua said Adoni Moshe Kelaeim in front of Moshe

[97] Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 65; Pischeiy Teshuvah 240:2; Peri Hadama Talmud Torah 5:5; Emek Sheila Y.D. 67

[98] Shach 242:24 regarding a Rebbe; Teshuvah Meahavah 3:375 in name of Noda Beyehuda; See however Pischeiy Teshuvah 242:10 in name of Regel Yeshara and Likkutei Peri Chadash who permits even in front of him; So also writes Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 242

[99] Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:133 that one is to be stringent in this

[100] Zera Emes 2 p.199

[101] The reason: As the prohibition against calling a parent by their name is due to it being disrespectful, and by matters of disrespect a parent cannot forgive their honor. [See Radbaz Mamrim 6]

[102] Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:133

[103] Chut Shani 240:4

[104] Tosafus Riy Hachasid Brachos 60a; Torah Lishma 264; Bris Avraham 2:29; Chut Shani 240:4; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:10

Other opinions: Some Poskim leave this matter in question. [Shem Hagedolim 1]

[105] Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:10

[106] Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 65; Pischeiy Teshuvah 240:2; Yad Avraham 242:15; Hagahos Mitzpei Eisan Brachos 5a; Divrei Chaim 2 Hashmatos 43 based on Rambam who signed Moshe Ben Maimon; Aruch Hashulchan 240:14; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:11; See Bereishis 29 that Yaakov told Rachel that he is the son of Rivkah

[107] Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid; Ben Ish Chaiy ibid “Aba Mari Ploni or Mor Avi Ploni”; Koveitz Mevakshei Torah 24:294

[108] Aruch Hashulchan 240:14 based on many sources in Talmud ibid; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5 concludes that from the letter of the law it is permitted to mention the name of the father with the addition of Aba, and there is no obligation to say Mori. However, since this has become the widespread custom, it is therefore proper to be careful in this.

[109] Yifei Laeiv 3:10 in name of Peas Hayam based on Shmuel 1:17 that dovid said to Shaul that he is “Ben Yishaiy Halachmi” ; Yabia Omer Y.D. 2:15; However, see Ben Ish Chaiy ibid 2:5 from whom it is evident that only in writing may one say Ben Ploni and not in speech

[110] Eretz Tzevi 1:97; Sheiris Yehuda Y.D. 28; Shearim Metzuyanim 143; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:11

[111] Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:11 footnote 94

[112] Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:11

[113] Admur 119:3; M”A 119:1; See Brachos 34a

[114] Kneses Hagedola Y.D. 240 in name of Sefer Chassidim 800; Birkeiy Yosef 240:4; Rav Akiva Eiger; Kaf Hachaim 119:6; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5; Tzafichis Bedevash 55; Mikadshei Hashem 50

[115] Ben Ish Chaiy ibid

[116] Sefer Chassidim 800; Maavor Yabok Mamar Sifsei Tzedek 8, brought in Chida Shiyurei Bracha Y.D. 335, as seen that even Uriyah was liable for death because he said Adoni Yoav in the presence of Dovid; Birkeiy Yosef 240:4 in name of his grandfather the Chesed Leavraham; Minchas Chinuch end of Mitzvah 257; Likkutei Maharich O.C. 116; Tosefes Chaim on Chayeh Adam 66:9; Salmas Chaim 97; Avnei Yashpei 1:185

[117] Zechor Asos Maareches Chaf 3; Afrasakta Deanya 1:104

[118] Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 65; Yosef Ometz 87; Ruach Chaim Y.D. 240:2; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5; Divrei Chaim 2 Hashmatos 43 based on Rambam who signed Moshe Ben Maimon and Raavad who signed Avraham Ben Dovid; Tzafichis Bedevash 55; Sdei Chemed Mareches Chaf  Kelal 104; Hisorerus Teshuvah 4:121; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:10

[119] Sefer Chassidim 522 based on Mishleiy 27:2; Avodas Hakodesh in Moreh Baetzba 10:313; Nefesh Hachaim; Implication of Zohar

[120] Divrei Torah [Munktach] Mahadurah 8 62; Sdei Chemed Mareches Yud Kelal 5:4; Likkutei Shoshanim; See Pirush Hamishnayos Uktzin

[121] Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:5; However, from Rashal ibid and Ruach Chaim ibid it is implied that one must write an honorary title

[122] See Rama 240:2; Rambam Mamrim 6:3 and Talmud Torah 5:5; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:12 and Miluim p. 636

Background: The first source to mention this restriction against calling another person by a name if his parent has that same name is the Rambam. The Poskim question this ruling of the Rambam and as to his source from the Talmud. [See Tur and Beis Yosef 240] The Rashal indeed concludes that it is a mere stringency which has no proof from the Talmud. [Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 1:65] It is likewise omitted from the Rif and Rosh. [See Pesakim Uteshuvos Miluim p. 636]

[123] Rama 240:2 “However a common name may be called not in front of him”; Taz 240:5 and 242:4; Tur 240; Rambam Mamrim 6:3 [See Beir Hagoleh 240:11]; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4-5; Yalkut Meiam Loez Shemos 20:12

[124] The reason: This applies whether the father’s name is rare or common, as one’s parent and the other person may think that the child is calling on the parent. [Taz ibid]

[125] Shach 240:3; Derisha 240:4 [negated by Taz ibid]; Beir Sheva Horiyos, brought in Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger; Chayeh Adam 67:8; Shut Haravaz E.H. 20; Yad Shaul 240:4; Zekan Aaron 2:60; Chakal Yitzchak 62; Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:133; Taz ibid negates this opinion

[126] Chayeh Adam 67:8; Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:133; Poskim ibid; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid; Kibbud Horim 9 footnote 52 in name of Rav Elyashiv

[127] Yad Shaul ibid; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid

[128] Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4 that according to Maran it is forbidden and hence those who accepted his opinion must be stringent.

[129] Michaber and Rama ibid; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4

The law by one’s Rebbe: Some Poskim rule that there is no prohibition to say the name of another individual when not in front of one’s Rebbe who shares the same name, although nonetheless one is to beware due to reasons of respect. [Bach 240, brought in Shach 240:3; See Michaber 242:15 that by a Sheim Piliy its forbidden, See Shach 24]

[130] Rama ibid; Taz ibid, unlike Shach and Derisha ibid

[131] Rama ibid; Rambam ibid

[132] Sefer Peri Hadama on Rambam Talmud Torah 5:5; An example of such names would be, Noach, Tanchum, Simcha, Shemaryahu, Zundal. [Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid]

If there are other people in the city who also share this name: Even if there are other people in the city who share the same rare name as one’s father, it is still considered a rare name, so long as it is not very common amongst people, as people who hear the son saying the name will think that he is calling his father by the name. [Sefer Peri Hadama on Rambam Talmud Torah 5:5] However, if many people in the same congregation share the same name, then even if it is a rarity amongst other communities, it seemingly is considered a common name within that community. [Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid]

[133] Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; See Beir Hagoleh 240:10 that the Tur 240 as well as the Kesef Mishneh on Rambam Talmud Torah 5:5 and Hilchos Mamrim ibid wondered as to the source of the Rambam for this law; See Beir Sheva end of Horiyos [14a], brought in Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 240:2; Rashi Gittin 34b, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 240:3

[134] Implication of Rama ibid; Taz ibid

[135] Derisha 240; Shach 240:3; Taz ibid negates this opinion

[136] Chayeh Adam 67:8; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid; Kibbud Horim 9 footnote 52 in name of Rav Elyashiv

[137] Yad Shaul ibid; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid

[138] Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4 that according to Maran it is forbidden and hence those who accepted his opinion must be stringent.

[139] Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:4; Sdei Chemed Mareches Chasan Ukallah 7; Chut Shani 240:6; Vayivarech Dovid 205; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid

[140] Ben Ish Chaiy ibid; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid

[141] Sheilas Shalom Tinyana 243; Sdei Chemed Mareches Chaf end of Kelal 104; Rabban Gamliel called his son by his father’s name, and so too there are many examples of like in the Talmud

[142] Merkavas Hamishneh rules that even after death that is forbidden; Alef Kesav 2:724 in name of Chasam Sofer would not call his son by his name Shmuel being that that was his father’s name; Orchos Rabbeinu 4:180 that the Chazon Ish was particular not to call someone by the name Shemaryahu even after his father’s death; See Pesakim Uteshuvos footnote 107

[143] Sheilas Shalom Tinyana 243; Sdei Chemed Mareches Chaf end of Kelal 104; Yabia Omer E.H. 7:7; Rashbash 291 in name of his grandfather the Ramban; Mahariy Asad Y.D. 247; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:33

[144] Sefer Chassidim 408; Meishiv Devarim Y.D. 139; Darkei Teshuvah 669:1; Devar Eliyahu 37; Zekan Aaron 2:60; Yad Shaul 240:4; Mahariy Asad Y.D. 247

The reason: Some write that this is in order to avoid the above-mentioned prohibition against calling another person by the same name as that of his father or mother. [See Poskim ibid] Others however negate this reason. [See Mahariy Asad ibid]

[145] Michaber 240:2; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Kiddushin 31b; See Hagahos Rebbe Akiva Eiger 240:2; Beir Sheva Perek Chelek; See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:7-9; 14; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 585-589

[146] Shach 240:2; Beir Heiytiv 240:3

[147] Sefer Hamussar 5

[148] See Q&A!

[149] Shach 240:2; Derisha 240:3; Perisha 242:20; Beir Heiytiv 240:3; Shulchan Gavoa 242:41; Yalkut Meiam Loez Parshas Yisro

[150] Taz 240:3 that so is implied from Michaber ibid regarding Machria Devarav Befanav; Biur Hagr”a 240:3; Chayeh Adam 67:8; See Rambam Shechita 11:10 who argues on his father; Tur who argues many times on Rosh; Shut Rav Akiva Eiger 1:68; Aruch Hashulchan 240:12; Yifei Laleiv 3:9; Tiferes Yisrael Kiddushin 1:54; Chazon Ish Y.D. 149; Yad Sofer 22; Minchas Elazar 4:6

[151] Misgeres Hashulchan 143:2; Tiferes Yisrael ibid

[152] See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 587-589

[153] Implication of Taz 240:3; Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 1:67; Chayeh Adam 67:8; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:3; Shevet Halevi 2:111-2See Rashi Kiddushin 31b; Tur 240 in name of Ramah; Aruch Hashulchan 240:12

[154] Taz 240:3 based on Tur C.M. 107 who argues on the opinion of his father regarding a certain matter although rather than mentioning his father’s opinion by name mentions a different opinion who held similar to his father. By doing so, he was able to honor and respect his father by not directly arguing on him.

[155] Beir Sheva Sanhedrin 110, brought in Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 240; Tzeida Laderech Parshas Kedoshim; Emek Hasheila Sheilasa 56:5 in opinion of Sheilasos; See Aruch Hashulchan 240:12

[156] Atzmos Yosef Kiddushin 30; Pischeiy Teshuvah 240:1; Aruch Hashulchan 240:12; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:3; See Kiddushin 30b “a father and son who study Torah in the beginning become enemies of each other, although later become friends.”; Meiri Kiddushin ibid; See Chut Shani 240:4

[157] Rama 242:3 regarding a student with his teacher, and the same applies for a son with his father; Perisha 240:3; Taz 243; Gr”a 243; Sheilas Yaavetz 1:5; Cheker Halacha 243; Minchas Elazar 4:6; Nofes Tzufim Y.D.  137; Pachad Yitzchak Mareches Kibbud Ava Vaeim 42:2; Torah Temima Vayikra 19:3

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that a son may not give a Halachic ruling which contradicts that of his fathers, in the presence of his father, even if it applies to a current case at hand. [Shach 243:3 in name of Maharik Shoresh 140]

[158] Aruch Hashulchan 240:13

[159] See Rash Mishantz Toras Kohanim Kedoshim 1; Rabbeinu Hillel Toras Kohanim ibid; Moshav Zikeinim Shemos 20:12; Beir Sheva Sanhedrin 110a; Chazon Ish Y.D. 149:1; Shevet Halevi 2:111-2; Chut Shani 240:4; See Encyclopedia Talmudit p. 586-587 footnotes 252-259

[160] Vayivarech David 3:10

[161] Sdei Chemed Mareches Vav end of Kelal 31

[162] All Poskim who rule that one may contradict their parents when not in their presence; See Riy Kiddushin 31a; Shut Maharsham 1:52; 2:224; Minchas Elazar 4:6

[163] Michaber 240:11; Rambam Mamarim 6:11; Kiddushin 32a [that if one’s father was seen to be transgressing words of Torah one should not tell his father that he has transgressed Torah but rather is the tell him that there is a verse in the Torah which states such and such. He should not even say the Torah says such and such as doing so would embarrass him.]; Sanhedrin 81a; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:38; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 589-591

[164] Betzel Hachochmah 3:21-4

[165] Rishon Letziyon 240:11; Chidrei Deiah 240:8; Chofetz Chaim Kelalei 10 Halacha 4; Betzel Hachochmah 3:21-4

[166] See Rama 608:2; Admur 608: M”B 608:4; M”B 303:82

[167] See Sefer Hamakneh Kiddushin 32a; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:38 footnote 341

[168] Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid

[169] Likkutei Sichos 22:214, printed in Shulchan Menachem 4:176

[170] Michaber 240:11; Kiddushin 32a [Rebbe Yechezkal was in the midst of teaching his son Rami a certain law and his son Rav Yehuda corrected his father telling him “You should not teach it this way”, and they went back and forth regarding the correct law. Shmuel who was present at the exchange of opinions and argument between father and son chastised Rav Yehuda for speaking in such a manner to his father.]; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 587

[171] See Ramah Kiddushin ibid; Beir Sheva Sanhedrin 110a; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 258

[172] Michaber 240:2; Rambam Mamrim 6:3; Rambam Hilchos Talmud Torah 5:6 [regarding Rebbe]; Ramah, brought in Tur 240; Kiddushin 31b; Taz 240:3; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 pp. 594

[173] Taz 240:3; Implication of Michaber ibid; Levush 240; Chayeh Adam 67:8; See Shach 252:1; C.M. 292:4

[174] Taz 240:3; Tur ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 334

[175] See Kiddushin 31a regarding story of Dama Ben Nesina who lost a profit of 600,000 in a possible sale of his precious stones to the sages who wanted to purchase it for the Eiphod, and the keys were under his father’s pillow and he chose to lose the sale in order not to wake up his father; Kiddushin 31b for story with Avimi “One time Avimi was asked by his father Rebbe Avahu to bring him a cup of water. By the time he brought in the waters father had fallen asleep, and he waited next to him with the water ready to serve him until his father woke up. In the meantime, G-d gave them divine assistance to understand a certain chapter in Psalms [and reward for his waiting].”; See Ramban, Ritva, Nimukeiy Yosef, Ran, Tosafus Harosh on Kiddushin 31b; Maharam Mintz 32; Chasam Sofer Bava Metzia 62a; Rabbeinu Yerucham; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:31; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 385; p. 402

[176] Beir Heiytiv 240:16; Sefer Chassidim 337; Chayeh Adam 67:11; Ruach Chaim 240:15; Aruch Hashulchan 240:40; Dibros Moshe Kiddushin 50 footnote 17; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 203

[177] Shaar Shimon Echad 4:13; Minchas Dovid 3:8

[178] Dibros Moshe Kiddushin 50 footnote 17

[179] Aruch Hashulchan 240:40

[180] Sefer Chassidim ibid; Chayeh Adam 67:11; Bris Olam on Sefer Chassidim 337; Aruch Hashulchan 240:40; Menuchas Emes 8:22; Keren Ledavid 18; Sefer Yisrael Vehazmanim 1:9-6; Halichos Shlomo Tefila Miluim 12; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 204

[181] Aruch Hashulchan 240:40

[182] Shevet Hakehasi 5:176; See Aruch Hashulchan 240:40

[183] Kiddushin 31a; Yerushalmi Kiddushin 20b

[184] Michaber 240:25; Kiddushin 31b

[185] Rama E.H. 23:6 and Y.D. 242:16; Rambam Issurei Biyah 21:16; Omitted from Tur and Michaber both in Yoreh Deah and Even Haezer; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 440 footnotes 911-921; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 611

[186] Pesachim 51a

[187] Our Girsa of Rama ibid and Rama Y.D. 242:16; Gemara ibid; Mordechai; Gemara ibid, brought in Chelkas Mechokeik 23:5; Beis Shmuel 23:5

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule it is permitted to bathe with one’s stepfather and that this is the correct Nussach in the Rama ibid. [Chelkas Mechokeik 23:5; Rif; Rosh Rashi; Ran; Aguda]

[188] Girsa of Rama Y.D. 242:16; Gemara ibid; Beis Shmuel 23:5 and Chelkas Mechokeik 23:5 Rif; Rosh Rashi; Ran; Aguda; Gr”a

Other Girsas of Rama: In our Girsa of Rama E.H. ibid he does not mention a father in-law.

[189] Rama ibid; Pesachim ibid

The reason: This is forbidden due to that it leads to forbidden thoughts. [Rama ibid] As one thinks of how he was born from his father, and how his wife was born from her father. [Rashi Pesachim ibid]

[190] See

[191] Beis Shmuel 23:5; Toldas Adam 6 in a story with Rebbe Zalman of Vilna and his father in-law, that as soon as he saw his father in-law in the bathhouse he left and did not return until his father in-law exited

[192] The reason: As since the reason behind the prohibition is due to Hirhur, it is irrelevant as to whether he was there first. [ibid]

[193] This law is not mentioned explicitly in Poskim although is derived from the following other law mentioned: Prohibition to sleep together unclothed once the child reaches signs of adulthood. [Michaber Even Haezer 21:7; Michaber 73:3-4 and Admur 73:3 regarding Shema; See M”A 73:2 regarding seeming contradiction from Shema source; For possible answers of contradiction: See Perisha E.H. 21; Elya Raba 73:5, explained in previous footnotes] From the above source it can be understood that it is permitted for a child to see his parent of even opposite gender unclothed until he reaches the age/signs of adulthood. See however Aruch Hashulchan 23:8 that it is questionable whether the above prohibition applies towards a young son.

[194] See Poskim ibid in previous footnote.

[195] Rama ibid and Y.D. 242:16; Aguda Pesachim ibid

[196] Pischeiy Teshuvah 23:5; Toldas Adam 6 in a story with Rebbe Zalman of Vilna and his father in-law, that as soon as he saw his father in-law in the bathhouse he left and did not return until his father in-law exited, as the Heter of the Rama and Aguda no longer apply; Taharas Yisrael 23:24

[197] Pischeiy Teshuvah ibid; Aruch Hashulchan 23:8

The reason: Perhaps this is due to that the entire prohibition applies only against lounging around in the bath together with the relative and not towards simply being unclothed with the relative in the same building. [Aruch Hashulchan ibid; suggested answer in Mordechai, now although the Mordechai negates this approach, nonetheless perhaps this approach is accepted by the world.]

[198] Aruch Hashulchan ibid

[199] Aruch Hashulchan ibid

[200] Aruch Hashulchan ibid

[201] See Michaber 240:3 and 8

[202] Michaber 240:3; Rambam Mamarim 6:7; Kiddushin 31a regarding story that happened with Dama the son of Nesina “Rav Dimi taught: One time [Dama Ben Nesina-Rashi] was sitting amongst the dignitaries of Rome wearing a gold garment and his mother [who was insane-Tosafus] came along and tore it from him and hit him over the head and spat in his face and he did not shame her.”; Kiddushin 32a “Rav Huna tore a silk garment in front of his son Raba Bar Rav Huna in order to test him to see if he would get angry. He did so when his son was already angry over another issue.” See Shulchan Gavoa 240:11; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:12 and 29

[203] Rambam ibid

[204] Shach 240:4; Rama 240:8; Perisha 240:15; Beir Heytiv 240:3

[205] Michaber 240:8; Rambam Mamarim 6:7; Kiddushin 31b “They said to him, has your mother thrown in front of you a wallet full of money to the sea and you still held back from shaming her?” and Kiddushin 32a “Rebbe Eliezer was asked to what extent a person must honor his parent? He replied that one must honor them to the point that even if they were to take his wallet and throw it in front of him to the sea, nonetheless, he should restrain himself from embarrassing them. According to the opinion which states that the above rule would only apply if parent were throwing his own money into the sea, nonetheless the system will challenge being the son would inherit this money from his father.”; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:29; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 383-384; 402-407 footnotes 182-186

[206] See Maharik Shoresh 166 that it refers to the wallet of the father, brought in Igros Admur 81 who mentions a dispute in this matter. In truth, this matter is debated in the Rishonim and Poskim [Michaber versus Rama], if it applies even to the wallet of the son, or only to the wallet of the father, as we will bring next IY”H. 

[207] Implication of Michaber ibid and Rambam ibid, and so understands Shach 240:11 and Bach that the Michaber and Rambam are arguing on Rama and prohibit the son from stopping the parent; Semag Asei 112; Meiri Kiddushin 32a; Yerushalmi Kiddushin 1:7; Maharam Milublin 136; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 444-447 and 455-456 and 474-476 [that some Rishonim forbid stopping the father if he receives some benefit from it] and 483-484

[208] The reason: As although his son is not obligated to honor his father with his own money, and is likewise not obligated to fear his father with his own money [Rama ibid], nonetheless, he may not stop him and shame him from throwing turning away his money being that he can anyways force his father to reimburse him in court. [Shach 240:11; Bach 240; Shita Lo Noda Lemi Kiddushin ibid in name of Raavad; See Chasam Sofer Y.D. 229 in name of Maharam Melublin 136; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 457] Alternatively, this opinion holds that although one is not obligated to spend any of his own money in order to honor his parents, he must spend all of his money in order not cause them pain. [Beir Hagoleh 240:21; Beis Yosef 240; See Taz 240:17 and Ran Kiddushin 13a and Tosafus Kesubos 86a and Nekudos Hakesef on Taz ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 456]

[209] Rama ibid; Tur 240; Rameh Kiddushin ibid; Maharik Shoresh 166, brought in Igros Admur 81; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnotes 449-454 and 459-461 and 474-476 [that some Rishonim, Tosafus Kiddushin 32a and Tosafus Harosh,  permit stopping the father if he receives no benefit from it]

[210] Maharik Shoresh 166, brought in Igros Admur 81

[211] The reason: As the son is not obligated to honor his father with his own money, and is likewise not obligated to fear his father with his own money [Rama ibid] Now, although the son can force his father to pay him back in court, nonetheless, we do not force the son to trouble himself to go through the court system to get reimbursement and hence he may stop the father from throwing away his money if he wishes. [Shach 240:11; Bach 240]

[212] Rama ibid; Tur ibid; Rameh ibid; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 462

[213] Aruch Hashulchan 240:28

[214] Tosafus Kiddushin 32a

[215] Rama 240:8; Tur ibid; Rameh ibid; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 463-465 and 468

Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that the child cannot take his father to court to reimburse the loss. [Maharam Lublin 136; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 467]

[216] Rama 240:8; See Chapter 5 Halacha 14D for the full details of this subject

[217] Michaber 240:19; Tur 240:19; Rambam Mamrim 6:8; Kiddushin 32a; Sefer Chassidim 565; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 429-430; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:52

[218] See Tosafus Avoda Zara 6b; Machaneh Chaim 1:47

[219] Sefer Chassidim 562; See Tosafus Sanhedrin 63b; Rosh 7:3; Chofetz Chaim Hilchos Lashon Hara 9:1; Chazon Ish Y.D. 62:13

[220] Yad Malachi 367; Yitzchak Yiranein Hilchos Talmud Torah 6

[221] Rama 240:8; Tur 240 in name of Rosh; Rambam Mamrikm 5:15; Teshuvos Hageonim 206; Rameh Kiddushin 32a; Erechin 23a in story of Rav Huna; Shach 240:4; Beir Heiytiv 240:5; Kneses Hagedola 240:4; See Michaber C.M. 14; Shach 240:12; Bach end of 241 and Taz 241:2; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:30; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 405 footnote 462-473

[222] See Shut Harif 22

[223] Kneses Hagedola 240, brought in Birkeiy Yosef 240

[224] Sefer Chassidim 584 based on a story he brings, brought in Birkeiy Yosef 240:3; Kesav Sofer Y.D. end of 108; Maharam Milublin 136 that according to Michaber 240:8 it is forbidden from the letter of the law being that it is forbidden for one to shame him.

[225] Omitted in Kneses Hagedola even though he normally records the teachings of Sefer Chassidim, brought in Birkeiy Yosef ibid

[226] Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid

[227] Rama 241:6

[228] Rama Y.D. 240:8 and C.M. 14:1; Maharik Shoresh 58; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 406 footnote 470-473

[229] Rama ibid; See Maharik Shoresh 58; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 473

[230] Michaber 241:5; Rambam Mamrim 5:13

[231] Michaber 241:5; Rambam Mamrim 5:13

[232] Michaber 241:5; Rambam Mamrim 5:13

[233] Rambam Mamrim 5:14

Bookmark