Tuesday, April 08, 2014

a father fasting ta'anis bechorim for a katan

1) If a katan is a bechor, the Rama brings down that the child’s father should fast on his behalf.  R’ Chaim Kanievsky was asked whether the child can make/participate in a siyum to exempt his father from the chiyuv and he answered in the affirmative.

I like the lomdus behind the question: does the Rama mean the chiyuv ta’anis is on the katan, but since the katan can’t physically fast the father is mekayeim the ta’anis on his behalf, in which case the katan can make the siyum, or does the Rama mean that the chiyuv ta’anis is on the father, not on the katan, in which case the katan’s siyum doesn’t help?

R’ Chaim seems to assume as a davar pashut that the siyum of a katan is enough of a simcha to override the fast.  I couldn’t find it last night, but I seem to recall that the Rogatchover raises this as a question.  If the idea of a siyum is to celebrate completing a mitzvah, maybe the siyum of a katan who has no chiyuv in mitzvos doesn't count.  Can a woman make a siyum (whether women have to fast ta'anis bechorim seems to depend on stiros in Midrashim) to remove the chiyuv of fasting?   

2) Someone came to R’ Chaim Kanievsky and said that he decided to fast instead of doing the usual siyum for ta’anis bechorim.  R’ Chaim paskened that since he made a siyum in past years, he needs to do a hataras nedarim to break the minhag. 

16 comments:

  1. "Can a woman make a siyum?"

    Rav Wahrman in Shearis yosef chelek 2 siman 4 has a whole piece on this. His conclusion - yes they can. (Bc he thinks women are not chayavos in Talmud torah, but are chayavos in yedias hatorah. I've heard that Rav Schachter is somech on this when the question arises.)
    http://hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=51882&st=&pgnum=47

    The Rogatchover is in tshuvos Tzafnas Paneach chelek 2 siman 10, he says a katan can make a siyum.

    I actually have a shtickel on this, I'm forwarding to you :)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rav Scheinberg btw held that women can't make a siyum (quoted in an RJJ article a long time ago on siyumim.)

      Delete
    2. Now that you remind me, I recall I saw R' Wahrman's piece awhile back. Unfortunately not everything comes to mind when writing the post. I think I have a chazakah now -- three pieces in about a week (the bitul b'rov one, the meshech chochma, and this one) that you've also written about : )

      Delete
    3. almost...
      except I didn't write on the Meshech Chochma, that article was Belizon's

      Delete
  2. But why would the chiyuv taanis be on the father? The father isn't a bchor, the son is! So where's the Hava amina for a sibas chiyuv for the father?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let me answer you with a question -- if there is a chiyuv ta'anis on the child, why can the father fast on his behalf? Why not just say the kid is patur and is exempt, like we do by any other ta'anis?
      Once you say this is a unique din, so the question of how to formulate it is up for grabs, no?

      Delete
    2. Cause the father has shlita over the son, so if the child has a chiyuv the father is responsible for it. So how did you answer the question which was on the other tzad?

      Delete
    3. i don't know what you mean by "shlita." Since when does a father have to do mitzvos on behalf of his kid?

      Delete
    4. To answer your previous question , of the katan being patients, it's not a regular chiyuv on the gavra, it's the fact he's a bechor, it's the din bchor shebo.

      On the second question, then why does the father fast for him? Why should the father have the sons chiyuv (and not the son having the chaotic)?

      Delete
  3. When my children or grandchildren make a siyum [for ta'anis bechoros or otherwise] it is a bigger simcha and celebration for me than when I do it myself. I don't really care about whether they were mekayim a mitzva or not.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Re: a katan making a siyum -

    I think we might also potentially be mechalek that a katan's siyum can exempt a katan's chiyuv to fast, but could not exempt a gadol's chiyuv to fast.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I health hear the point, but doesn't that depend if it's the same chiyuv? Seems like the Katan has the same chiyuv as the gadol.

      Delete
    2. This is opening a different can of worms, but bepashtus, a katan's chiyuv is never really the same as that of a gadol. (I think katan is always considered an eino mechuyav badavar that can't be motzi the rabim, even on a din derabanan like megilla, there's a big sugya of trei derabanans not being motzi chad derabanan by bentching and the like. Here though, you're not being "motzi" anybody in the siyum, just it needs to be a siyum to pater the chiyuv, and I'm just suggesting that it may only be considered a siyum insofar as other ketanim are concerned.)

      Delete
    3. By a katan it might be different. He may be mechuyav in things, but he has issues in implementing them, since he can't be poel a chalos. So by being part of a siyam, he isn't creating a chalos, hes just there.

      Delete
  5. What's the lomdus of a siyum patering a taanis? We say siyum allows one to eat meat during the nine days. Is there any other time a siyum paters or is doche?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Arugas haBosem writes that the whole point of the ta'anis is to make a zecher for the nes of the bechorim being saved. If one makes a siyum to commemorate the same, it is a kiyum of the takanah (http://divreichaim.blogspot.com/2008/04/siyum-on-taanis-bechorim-ii.html). The pashtus though is that since the ta'anis is only a minhag b'alma, any simcha is enough to be doche it. Some have the same practice (I think the Steipler brings this down) of making a siyum on erev Rosh haShana because the S.A. brings a minhag ta'anis there as well.

      Delete