ת"ר מכבדו בחייו ומכבדו במותו בחייו כיצד הנשמע בדבר אביו למקום לא יאמר שלחוני בשביל עצמי מהרוני בשביל עצמי פטרוני בשביל עצמי אלא כולהו בשביל אבא במותו כיצד היה אומר דבר שמועה מפיו לא יאמר כך אמר אבא אלא כך אמר אבא מרי הריני כפרת משכבו והני מילי תוך שנים עשר חדש מכאן ואילך אומר זכרונו לברכה לחיי העולם הבא...
ת"ר איזהו מורא ואיזהו כיבוד מורא לא עומד במקומו ולא יושב במקומו ולא סותר את דבריו ולא מכריעו כיבוד מאכיל ומשקה מלביש ומכסה מכניס ומוציא
Our Rabbis taught: He must honour him in life and must honour him in death. ‘In life’, e.g., one who is heeded in a place on account of his father should not say: ‘Let me go, for my own sake’, ‘Speed me, for my own sake’, or ‘Free me, for my own sake’, but all ‘for my father's sake.’ ‘In death’, e.g., if one is reporting something heard from his mouth, he should not say: ‘Thus did my father say’, but, ‘Thus said my father, my teacher, for whose resting place may I be an atonement.’14 But that is only within twelve months [of his death].15 Thereafter he must say: ‘His memory be for a blessing, for the life of the World to come.’ ...
Our Rabbis taught: What is ‘fear’ and what is ‘honour’?19 ‘Fear’ means that he [the son] must neither stand in his [the father's] place nor sit in his place, nor contradict his words, nor tip the scales against him.20 ‘Honour" means that he must give him food and drink, clothe and cover him, lead him in and out.
A mamzer is obligated to honor and fear his father even though he is not liable for striking him or cursing him until he repents. Even when his father was a wicked person who violated many transgressions, he must honor him and fear him.
If he sees his father violate Torah law, he should not tell him: 'Father, you transgressed Torah law.' Instead, he should tell him: 'Father, is not such-and-such written in the Torah?', as if he is asking him, rather than warning him.
מי שיש לו בן מכל מקום פוטר אשת אביו מן היבום וחייב על מכתו ועל קללתו ובנו לכל דבר חוץ ממי שיש לו בן מן השפחה ומן העובדת כוכבים:
גמ' מכל מקום לאתויי מאי אמר רב יהודה לאתויי ממזר
MISHNAH. IF ONE HAS ANY KIND OF SON, [THAT SON] EXEMPTS HIS FATHER'S WIFE FROM THE LEVIRATE MARRIAGE, IS LIABLE TO PUNISHMENT FOR STRIKING OR CURSING [HIS FATHER]. AND IS DEEMED TO BE HIS SON IN EVERY RESPECT. FROM THIS IS EXCLUDED THE SON OF A SLAVE OR A HEATHEN.
GEMARA. What does the expression ANY KIND include? Rab Judah said: It includes a mamzer
בעו מיניה מרב ששת בן מהו שיעשה שליח לאביו להכותו ולקללו
א"ל ואחר מי התירו אלא כבוד שמים עדיף הכא נמי כבוד שמים עדיף
מיתיבי ומה מי שמצוה להכותו מצוה שלא להכותו מי שאינו מצוה להכותו אינו דין שמצוה שלא להכותו
מאי לאו אידי ואידי במקום מצוה הא בבנו הא באחר
לא אידי ואידי לא שנא בנו ולא שנא אחר ולא קשיא כאן במקום מצוה כאן שלא במקום מצוה והכי קתני ומה במקום מצוה שמצוה להכותו מצוה שלא להכותו שלא במקום מצוה שאינו מצוה להכותו אינו דין שמצוה שלא להכותו
תא שמע היוצא ליהרג ובא בנו והכהו וקיללו חייב בא אחר והכהו וקיללו פטור והוינן בה מאי שנא בנו ומאי שנא אחר ואמר רב חסדא במסרבין בו לצאת ואינו יוצא רב ששת מוקי לה בשאין מסרבין בו לצאת אי הכי אחר נמי אחר גברא קטילא הוא והאמר רב ששת ביישו ישן ומת חייב הכא במאי עסקינן בשהכהו הכאה שאין בה שוה פרוטה והאמר רבי אמי אמר ר' יוחנן הכהו הכאה שאין בה שוה פרוטה לוקה מאי פטור דקאמר פטור מממון מכלל דבנו חייב בממון אלא בדינו הכא נמי בדינו אלא אחר היינו טעמא דפטור דאמר קרא (שמות כב, כז) ונשיא בעמך לא תאור בעושה מעשה עמך התינח קללה הכאה מנלן דמקשינן הכאה לקללה אי הכי בנו נמי כדאמר רב פינחס בשעשה תשובה הכא נמי בשעשה תשובה אי הכי אחר נמי אמר רב מרי בעמך במקוים שבעמך אי הכי בנו נמי מידי דהוה לאחר מיתה מאי הוה עלה אמר רבה בר רב הונא וכן תנא דבי רבי ישמעאל לכל אין הבן נעשה שליח לאביו להכותו ולקללו חוץ ממסית שהרי אמרה תורה (דברים יג, ט) לא תחמול ולא תכסה עליו:
A problem was propounded to R. Shesheth. May one be appointed an agent [by Beth din] to flagellate and curse his father?2 — He replied, Who then permitted even a stranger to do this, but that the Divine honour overrides [other prohibitions]: so here too, the Divine honour overrides [the prohibition against smiting and cursing one's parents].3 ...Come and hear: If one was going forth to execution, and his son came and smote him and cursed him, he is liable; if a stranger did this, he is exempt. Now we pondered thereon, What is the difference between a son and a stranger? And R. Hisda answered: This refers to one who is being impelled forth, but holds back?6 — R. Shesheth maintains that it refers to one who is not urged to go forth. If so, a stranger too [should be punished for beating him]? — As far as a stranger is concerned, he is already a dead man.7 But did not R. Shesheth say: If one insulted a sleeping person, and he died [in his sleep], he is nevertheless liable [to punishment for same]?8 — The reference here is to a blow which inflicted an injury less than a perutah in value. But did not R. Ammi say in R. Johanan's name: [Even] if one smote his neighbour with a blow inflicting less than a perutah's worth of damage, he is punished with lashes? — By 'exempt', non-liability to monetary compensation is meant. It follows then that a son is liable to monetary compensation!9 But it must therefore mean, [he is liable] according to the law pertaining to him.10 If so [a stranger too is exempt from] the law pertaining to him [for smiting his neighbour, viz., lashes].11 But this is the reason why a stranger is exempt, because the Writ saith, Thou shalt not curse a prince among thy people: (Ex 22:27) meaning, [only] when he acts as is fitting for thy people. This is well as far as cursing is concerned: but whence do we know the same of smiting? — Because we compare smiting with cursing. If so, should not the same apply to his son? — Even as R. Phineas said [elsewhere]: This refers to one who had repented. If so, even a stranger [should be liable]? — R. Mari answered, 'among thy people' implies 'abiding among thy people'. If so, should not the same apply to his son? It is the same as after death. What is our final decision? — Rabbah son of R. Huna said, and a Tanna of the school R. Ishmael [taught] likewise; For no offence may a son be appointed an agent to smite or curse his father, excepting if he be an inciter, since it is written, neither shalt thou spare nor conceal him (Dt 13:9)
שאלו את ר"א עד היכן כיבוד אב ואם אמר להם כדי שיטול ארנקי ויזרקנו לים בפניו ואינו מכלימו
כי אתא רב דימי אמר פעם אחת היה לבוש סירקון של זהב והיה יושב בין גדולי רומי ובאתה אמו וקרעתו ממנו וטפחה לו על ראשו וירקה לו בפניו ולא הכלימה תני אבימי בריה דרבי אבהו יש מאכיל לאביו פסיוני וטורדו מן העולם ויש מטחינו בריחים
When R. Dimi came, he said: He [Dama son of Nethinah] was once wearing a gold embroidered silken cloak and sitting among Roman nobles, when his mother came, tore it off from him, struck him on the head, and spat in his face, yet he did not shame her
ת"ש (תהלים טו, ד) נבזה בעיניו נמאס זה חזקיהו מלך יהודה שגירר עצמות אביו על מטה של חבלים
Come and hear! In whose eyes a vile person is despised (Ps 15:4) — this refers to Hezekiah, king of Judah, who had his father's remains dragged upon a pallet made of ropes.
But if it [the respect paid to the dead] is in honour of the living, why [did he do so]? — It was in order that his father might obtain forgiveness.
And for the sake of his father's atonement he disregarded the honour of Israel?! Israel itself was pleased to have its honour violated for his sake
על מטה של חבלים - דרך בזיון מפני שהיה אביו רשע וביזהו לעיני כל כדי שיתייסרו האחרים ולכבוד עצמו לא חש ומפני כבוד אב נמי ליכא למיחש דנשיא בעמך כתיב (שמות כב) בעושה מעשה עמך נבזה בעיניו הוא עצמו נתבזה ונמאס בפני עצמו שלא חש לכבודו במקום קידוש ה׳ ואי אמרת כבוד שעושין למת אינו שלו אלא של חיים מ"ט עביד הכי למה ביזה את החיים:
On a pallet- a degrading manner, since his father was evil. He degraded him in front of everybody so the others would be pained. He did not worry about his own dignity. Also, there is no concern for his father's dignity since it is written "a prince among your people" (Ex 22)--i.e. one who behaves as one of your people is degraded in his eyes. He himself disgraced and degraded himself, because he did not concern himself with his honor in a situation of sanctifying God's name. And if you say the honor given to the dead is really for the sake of the living, why would he act in such a way that degraded the living?
A mamzer is obligated to respect and fear his father. Even if his father was evil and full of sins- he honors and fears him. [Rema's comment: Some say that he is not obligated to honor his evil father unless he did teshuvah.]
רדב"ז הלכות ממרים פרק ו
ויש תקוה שיעשה תשובה ולא תזכרנה הראשונות ונמצא הבן עבר למפרע
Ridbaz, Laws of mamzerim
There is hope that he will do teshuvah and not remember the early deeds and the son will retroactively be a sinner.
R. David Cohen suggests yet another reason for exempting an abused child from the obligation of honor. Asserting that there are limits to how much a person is allowed to spend in order to fulfill a positive commandment—no more than one-fifth of one’s monetary assets—he argues that emotional distress and psychological consequences are excessive personal costs that free one from an obligation. He maintains that Halakhah does not re-victimize abused children by forcing them to honor their abusers; that would by a price much too high to pay.
Furthermore, the Talmud concludes that while a child must expend time and effort in order to honor a parent, the child does not have to spend any personal resources; the obligation is fulfilled mishel av, with parental assets. While many acts of honor make demands on a child’s time, emotions, and energies, the emotional and psychological burdens imposed on an abused child in order to honor an abusive parent far surpass any appropriate mi-shel ben filial (responsibility). In addition, children are not obligated to honor parents when the expressions of that honor support sinful acts. Acts of abuse are sinful and children are not required to submit to them.
משל מי רב יהודה אמר משל בן רב נתן בר אושעיא אמר משל אב אורו ליה רבנן לרב ירמיה ואמרי לה לבריה דרב ירמיה כמ"ד משל אב
At whose expense [is an elderly parent taken care of]? Rab Judah said: The son's. R. Nahman b. Oshaia said: The father's. The Rabbis gave a ruling to R. Jeremiah — others state, to R. Jeremiah's son — in accordance with the view that it must be at the father's expense. An objection is raised: It is said: Honour thy father and thy mother; and it is also said: Honour the Lord with thy substance (Prov 3:9): just as the latter means at personal cost, so the former too. But if you say: At the father's [expense], how does it affect him? — Through loss of time.
(ה) העומד בשעת יציאת נשמה של איש או אשה מישראל חייב לקרוע. (טור בשם רמב"ן וב"י אף לדעת רש"י) ואפילו אם לפעמים עשה עבירה לתיאבון או שמניח לעשות מצוה בשביל טורח: הגה: אבל רגיל לעשות עבירה אין מתאבלין עליו (מרדכי סוף מ"ק) וכל שכן על מומר לעבודת כוכבים (שם ופוסקים וכן מוכח מש"ס פי' נגמר הדין וכמה דוכתי)
One who stands at the time of death of a Jewish man or woman is obligated to tear [a garment]. And even if sometimes they sinned because of their appetites, or they put aside mitzvot because they were too busy. [Rema: but we do not mourn for one accostumed to sin, and all the more so one who converted to idolatry]
Is mourning for abusive parents obligatory, discretionary, or prohibited? There is no obligation to mourn for an abusive parent. If the mourning is for the sake of the memory and honor of the deceased, then an abusive parent who is classified as a rasha should not be mourned. And if mourning is for the sake of the living, then it is up to the children to decide, in consultation with their rabbis and mental health professionals, on their psychological readiness and the appropriateness of engaging in traditional mourning practices. If the children decide that they are psychologically strong enough to mourn, and that sitting shivah is not perceived by them as a continuation of the burden of abuse they suffered during their parents’ lifetimes, they may choose to observe these practices. However, if mourning would place too heavy an emotional burden on them, they should not sit shivah or observe other mourning practices. If, at sometime in the future, as part of their ongoing healing process they choose to mourn their abusive parent, they may determine the appropriate and meaningful ways to do so.