כיבוד הורים - פתיחה ללימוד הסוגיה
הדף מאת: רות אלסטר / בית מדרש אלול
שיעור פתיחה ללימוד הסוגיה במסכת קידושין על כיבוד הורים
פתיחה
דיון
  • האם כבוד זה משהו שנותנים או שמבקשים?
  • האם חשוב לנו שיכבדו אותנו? למה? מה המושג הזה כולל ועל מה הוא מבוסס?
  • כיבוד הורים וכבוד ה'
    תנו רבנן נאמר: כבד את אביך ואת אמך, ונאמר: כבד את ה' מהונך, השוה הכתוב כבוד אב ואם לכבוד המקום;
    נאמר: איש אמו ואביו תיראו, ונאמר: את ה' אלהיך תירא ואותו תעבוד, השוה הכתוב מוראת אב ואם למוראת המקום;
    נאמר: מקלל אביו ואמו מות יומת, ונאמר: איש איש כי יקלל אלהיו ונשא חטאו, השוה הכתוב ברכת אב ואם לברכת המקום; אבל בהכאה - ודאי אי אפשר;
    וכן בדין [ראוי הדבר], ששלשתן שותפין בו.
    The Sages taught that it is stated: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:11), and it is stated: “Honor the Lord with your wealth” (Proverbs 3:9). In this manner, the verse equates the honor of one’s father and mother to the honor of the Omnipresent, as the term “honor” is used in both cases. Similarly, it is stated: “A man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), and it is stated: “You shall fear the Lord your God and Him you shall serve” (Deuteronomy 6:13). The verse equates the fear of one’s father and mother to the fear of the Omnipresent. Likewise, it is stated: “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:17), and it is stated: “Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin” (Leviticus 24:15). The verse equates the blessing, a euphemism for cursing, of one’s father and mother to the blessing of the Omnipresent. But with regard to striking, i.e., with regard to the halakha that one who strikes his father or mother is liable to receive court-imposed capital punishment, it is certainly not possible to say the same concerning the Holy One, Blessed be He. And so too, the equating of one’s attitude toward his parents to his attitude toward God is a logical derivation, as the three of them are partners in his creation. As the Sages taught: There are three partners in the forming of a person: The Holy One, Blessed be He, who provides the soul, and his father and his mother. When a person honors his father and mother, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: I ascribe credit to them as if I dwelt between them and they honor Me as well.
    דיון
    3. מה משמעות ההשוואה בין כיבוד הורים לכבוד ה'?
    שלשה שותפין באדם
    תנו רבנן, שלשה שותפין הן באדם: הקדוש ברוך הוא, ואביו, ואמו, בזמן שאדם מכבד את אביו ואת אמו, אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא: מעלה אני עליהם כאילו דרתי ביניהם וכבדוני.
    “Say to wisdom: You are my sister, and call understanding your kinswoman” (Proverbs 7:4), which indicates that one should be as knowledgeable in the Torah as in the identity of his sister. And it states: “Bind them upon your fingers, you shall write them upon the tablet of your heart” (Proverbs 7:3). And it states: “As arrows in the hand of a mighty man, so are the children of one’s youth” (Psalms 127:4). And it states: “Sharp arrows of the mighty” (Psalms 120:4). And it states: “Your arrows are sharp, the peoples fall under you” (Psalms 45:6). And it states: “Happy is the man who has his quiver full of them; they shall not be put to shame when they speak with their enemies in the gate” (Psalms 127:5). The Gemara asks: What is the meaning of the phrase “enemies in the gate” with regard to Torah study? Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba says: Even a father and his son, or a rabbi and his student, who are engaged in Torah together in one gate become enemies with each other due to the intensity of their studies. But they do not leave there until they love each other, as it is stated in the verse discussing the places the Jewish people engaged in battle in the wilderness: “Therefore it is said in the book of the wars of the Lord, Vahev in Suphah [beSufa], and the valleys of Arnon” (Numbers 21:14). The word “vahev” is interpreted as related to the word for love, ahava. Additionally, do not read this as “in Suphah [beSufa]”; rather, read it as “at its end [besofa],” i.e., at the conclusion of their dispute they are beloved to each other. The Sages taught: “And you shall place [vesamtem] these words of Mine in your hearts” (Deuteronomy 11:18). Read this as though it stated sam tam, a perfect elixir. The Torah is compared to an elixir of life. There is a parable that illustrates this: A person hit his son with a strong blow and placed a bandage on his wound. And he said to him: My son, as long as this bandage is on your wound and is healing you, eat what you enjoy and drink what you enjoy, and bathe in either hot water or cold water, and you do not need to be afraid, as it will heal your wound. But if you take it off, the wound will become gangrenous. So too the Holy One, Blessed be He, said to Israel: My children, I created an evil inclination, which is the wound, and I created Torah as its antidote. If you are engaged in Torah study you will not be given over into the hand of the evil inclination, as it is stated: “If you do well, shall it not be lifted up?” (Genesis 4:7). One who engages in Torah study lifts himself above the evil inclination. And if you do not engage in Torah study, you are given over to its power, as it is stated: “Sin crouches at the door” (Genesis 4:7). Moreover, all of the evil inclination’s deliberations will be concerning you, as it is stated in the same verse: “And to you is its desire.” And if you wish you shall rule over it, as it is stated in the conclusion of the verse: “But you may rule over it” (Genesis 4:7). The Sages taught: So difficult is the evil inclination that even its Creator calls it evil, as it is stated: “For the inclination of a man’s heart is evil from his youth” (Genesis 8:21). Rav Yitzḥak says: A person’s evil inclination renews itself to him every day, as it is stated: “And that every inclination of the thoughts in his heart was only evil all day [kol hayyom]” (Genesis 6:5). “Kol hayyom” can also be understood as: Every day. And Rabbi Shimon ben Levi says: A person’s inclination overpowers him every day, and seeks to kill him, as it is stated: “The wicked watches the righteous and seeks to slay him” (Psalms 37:32). And if not for the fact that the Holy One, Blessed be He, assists each person in battling his evil inclination, he could not overcome it, as it is stated: “The Lord will not leave him in his hand” (Psalms 37:33). A Sage from the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: My son, if this wretched one, the evil inclination, encounters you, pull it into the study hall, i.e., go and study Torah. If it is a stone it will melt, and if it is iron it will break, as it is stated with regard to the Torah: “Is not My word like fire, says the Lord, and like a hammer that breaks the rock in pieces?” (Jeremiah 23:29). Just as a stone shatters a hammer, so too one can overcome his evil inclination, which is as strong as iron, through Torah study. With regard to the second part of the statement: If it is a stone it will melt, this is as it is stated with regard to the Torah: “Ho, everyone who thirsts, come for water” (Isaiah 55:1), and it states: “The water wears the stones” (Job 14:19), indicating that water is stronger than stone. § The baraita (29a) teaches that a father is commanded to marry his son to a woman. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this matter? As it is written: “Take wives and bear sons and daughters, and take wives for your sons and give your daughters to men” (Jeremiah 29:6). The Gemara analyzes this verse: Granted with regard to his son, this is in his power, i.e., he can instruct him to marry a woman, as a man is the active agent in a marriage. But with regard to his daughter, is this in his power? She must wait for a man to marry her. The Gemara answers: This is what Jeremiah was saying to them in the aforementioned verse: Her father should give her something for her dowry, and he should dress and cover her with suitable clothing so that men will leap to marry her. § The baraita further states that a father is commanded to teach his son a trade. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? Ḥizkiyya said: As the verse states: “Enjoy life with the wife whom you love” (Ecclesiastes 9:9). If this verse is interpreted literally, and it is referring to an actual woman, then one can derive as follows: Just as a father is obligated to marry his son to a woman, so too, he is obligated to teach him a trade, as indicated by the term: Life. And if the wife mentioned in this verse is allegorical, and it is the Torah, then one should explain the verse in the following manner: Just as he is obligated to teach him Torah, so too, he is obligated to teach him a trade. § The baraita adds: And some say that a father is also obligated to teach his son to swim in a river. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? It is necessary for his life, i.e., this is potentially a lifesaving skill. § The baraita further teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: Any father who does not teach his son a trade teaches him banditry. The Gemara asks: Can it enter your mind that he actually teaches him banditry? Rather, the baraita means that it is as though he taught him banditry. The Gemara asks: What is the difference between the opinion of the first tanna and that of Rabbi Yehuda? Both state that a father must teach his son a trade. The Gemara answers: There is a difference between them in a case where the father teaches him to engage in business. According to the first tanna this is sufficient, whereas Rabbi Yehuda maintains that he must teach him an actual trade. § The mishna teaches: With regard to all mitzvot of a father with regard to his son, both men and women are obligated to perform them. The Gemara inquires: What is the meaning of the expression: All mitzvot of a father with regard to his son? If we say that this is referring to all of the mitzvot that a father is required to perform for his son, are women obligated in these? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: A father is obligated with regard to his son to circumcise him, and to redeem him? This indicates that his father, yes, he is obligated to do these, but his mother, no, she is not obligated to perform these mitzvot for her son. Rav Yehuda said that this is what the mishna is saying: With regard to each mitzva for the father that is incumbent upon the son to perform for his father, both men and women are obligated in them. The Gemara comments: We already learned this, as the Sages taught in a baraita, with regard to the verse: “A man shall fear [tira’u] his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3). I have derived only that a man is obligated in this mitzva; from where do I derive that a woman is also obligated? When it says in the same verse: “A man shall fear [tira’u] his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), employing the plural form of the verb, this indicates that there are two that are obligated here, both a man and a woman. If so, that both of them are obligated, what is the meaning when the verse states: “Man”? In the case of a man, it is in his power to perform this mitzva; whereas with regard to a woman, it is not always in her power to perform this mitzva, because she is under the authority of another person, i.e., her husband. As she is obligated to her husband to maintain her household, she is not always able to find time for her parents. Rav Idi bar Avin says that Rav says: Consequently, if a woman is divorced, then both of them, a daughter and a son, are equal with regard to honoring and fearing their father and mother. The Sages taught that it is stated: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:11), and it is stated: “Honor the Lord with your wealth” (Proverbs 3:9). In this manner, the verse equates the honor of one’s father and mother to the honor of the Omnipresent, as the term “honor” is used in both cases. Similarly, it is stated: “A man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), and it is stated: “You shall fear the Lord your God and Him you shall serve” (Deuteronomy 6:13). The verse equates the fear of one’s father and mother to the fear of the Omnipresent. Likewise, it is stated: “He who curses his father or his mother shall be put to death” (Exodus 21:17), and it is stated: “Whoever curses his God shall bear his sin” (Leviticus 24:15). The verse equates the blessing, a euphemism for cursing, of one’s father and mother to the blessing of the Omnipresent. But with regard to striking, i.e., with regard to the halakha that one who strikes his father or mother is liable to receive court-imposed capital punishment, it is certainly not possible to say the same concerning the Holy One, Blessed be He. And so too, the equating of one’s attitude toward his parents to his attitude toward God is a logical derivation, as the three of them are partners in his creation. As the Sages taught: There are three partners in the forming of a person: The Holy One, Blessed be He, who provides the soul, and his father and his mother. When a person honors his father and mother, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: I ascribe credit to them as if I dwelt between them and they honor Me as well. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that a son honors his mother more than he honors his father, because
    דיון
    4. ג' שותפין באדם: האם זו הסיבה של המצוה? איך זה משפיעה על הגדרת המצוה? על המחויבות שלנו?
    מורא אב ומורא אם
    תניא, רבי אומר: גלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם, שבן מכבד את אמו יותר מאביו, מפני שמשדלתו בדברים, לפיכך הקדים הקדוש ברוך הוא כיבוד אב לכיבוד אם; וגלוי וידוע לפני מי שאמר והיה העולם, שהבן מתיירא מאביו יותר מאמו, מפני שמלמדו תורה, לפיכך הקדים הקדוש ברוך הוא מורא האם למורא האב.
    It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: It is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that a son honors his mother more than he honors his father, because she persuades him with many statements of encouragement and does not treat him harshly. Therefore, in the mitzva of: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:11), the Holy One, Blessed be He, preceded the mention of the honor due one’s father before mentioning the honor due one’s mother. The verse emphasizes the duty that does not come naturally. Similarly, it is revealed and known before the One Who spoke and the world came into being that a son fears his father more than his mother, because his father teaches him Torah, and consequently he is strict with him. Therefore, in the verse: “A man shall fear his mother and his father” (Leviticus 19:3), the Holy One, Blessed be He, preceded the mention of fear of the mother before the mention of fear of the father.
    דיון
    5. הילד ירא יותר מאביו: האם זה רלוונטי בימינו?
    6. הסיבה ליראת האב המובאת בגמרא היא "מפני שמלמדו תורה". איך ניתן להבין זאת? למה זה יכול להיות מקביל היום?
    מי מעורר כבוד?
    דרש עולא רבה אפיתחא דבי נשיאה, מאי דכתיב: יודוך ה' כל מלכי ארץ כי שמעו אמרי פיך? מאמר פיך לא נאמר אלא אמרי פיך, בשעה שאמר הקדוש ברוך הוא אנכי ולא יהיה לך, אמרו אומות העולם: לכבוד עצמו הוא דורש, כיון שאמר כבד את אביך ואת אמך, חזרו והודו למאמרות הראשונות. רבא אמר, מהכא: ראש דברך אמת, ראש דברך ולא סוף דברך? אלא, מסוף דברך ניכר שראש דברך אמת.
    § Ulla the Great interpreted a verse homiletically at the entrance to the house of the Nasi. What is the meaning of that which is written: “All the kings of the earth shall give You thanks, O Lord, for they have heard the words of Your mouth” (Psalms 138:4)? It is not stated: The word of Your mouth, in the singular. Rather, the verse uses the expression: “The words of Your mouth,” in the plural. To what is this phrase referring? When the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: “I am the Lord your God” (Exodus 20:2), and, in the same verse: “You shall have no other gods before Me,” the nations of the world said: He teaches this for His own honor, as both statements entail respect for God. Once He said: “Honor your father and your mother” (Exodus 20:11), they returned and conceded the truth of the first statements, which is why the verse uses the plural expression: “Words of Your mouth,” i.e., all the words of God’s mouth. Rava said: This can be derived from here: “The beginning of Your word is truth” (Psalms 119:160). Is the beginning of Your word truth but not the end of Your word? Rather, from the end of Your word it is apparent to everyone that the beginning of Your word is truth.
    דיון
    7. איך אנחנו מרגישים מול בקשת כבוד? האם מכבדים יותר את מי שדורש כבוד או את מי שאינו דורש?
    8. האם אפשר לעשות קל וחומר מהקב"ה? מה נלמד ממדרש זה על מה שמצופה מאיתנו?
    מקורות נוספים
    תני תנא קמיה דרב נחמן: בזמן שאדם מצער את אביו ואת אמו, אמר הקדוש ברוך הוא: יפה עשיתי שלא דרתי ביניהם, שאלמלי דרתי ביניהם ציערוני.
    אמר ר' יצחק: כל העובר עבירה בסתר - כאילו דוחק רגלי שכינה, שנאמר: כה אמר ה' השמים כסאי והארץ הדום רגלי.
    אמר רבי יהושע בן לוי: אסור לאדם שיהלך ארבע אמות בקומה זקופה, שנא': מלא כל הארץ כבודו.
    רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לא מסגי ארבע אמות בגילוי הראש, אמר: שכינה למעלה מראשי.
    A tanna taught a baraita before Rav Naḥman: When a person causes his father and mother suffering, the Holy One, Blessed be He, says: I did well in not dwelling among them, for if I had dwelled among them they would have caused Me suffering as well, as it were. Rabbi Yitzḥak says: Anyone who transgresses in private, it is considered as though he is pushing away the feet of the Divine Presence, i.e., he distances God from him, so to speak. As it is stated: “So says the Lord: The heaven is My throne and the earth is My footstool” (Isaiah 66:1). When someone sins in secret, he demonstrates that he thinks God is absent from that place, and it is as though he pushes His feet away from the earth. With regard to the same issue, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says: It is prohibited for a person to walk even four cubits with an upright posture, which is considered an arrogant manner, as it is stated: “The entire world is full of His glory” (Isaiah 6:3). One who walks in an arrogant manner indicates a lack of regard for the glory and honor of God that is surrounding him, and thereby chases God from that place, as it were. The Gemara relates: Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, would not walk four cubits with an uncovered head. He said: The Divine Presence is above my head, and I must act respectfully.
    שאל בן אלמנה אחת את ר' אליעזר: אבא אומר השקיני מים ואימא אומרת השקיני מים, איזה מהם קודם? אמר ליה: הנח כבוד אמך ועשה כבוד אביך, שאתה ואמך חייבים בכבוד אביך. בא לפני רבי יהושע, אמר לו כך. אמר לו: רבי, נתגרשה מהו? אמר ליה: מבין ריסי עיניך ניכר שבן אלמנה אתה, הטל להן מים בספל וקעקע להן כתרנגולין.
    The son of one widow asked Rabbi Eliezer: If my father says to me: Give me water to drink, and my mother also says to me: Give me water to drink, which of them should I honor first? Rabbi Eliezer said to him: Set aside the honor of your mother, and perform the honor of your father, as you and your mother are both obligated in the honor of your father. He came before Rabbi Yehoshua and asked him the same question, and Rabbi Yehoshua said this same answer to him. The man said to him: My teacher, if one’s mother is divorced, what is the halakha? Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: From your eyelashes, which are filled with tears, it is evident that you are the son of a widow, and you have no father. Why, then, are you asking this question as though it were relevant for you? Consequently, Rabbi Yehoshua answered him sarcastically: Pour water for them into a pitcher and squawk at them as one does to summon chickens. In other words, if one’s mother is divorced, the same honor is due to both parents, and neither takes precedence.
    דף מספר 1 בסדרה כיבוד הורים - הסוגיה במסכת קידושין, דפים נוספים בסדרה: