Page 93 - TzurbaFlipUSA_Neat

Lo Ta’achilum? 6 The Rambam (Maachalot Assurot 17:27), however,
unequivocally disagrees: 8

Enabling a minor to violate a Rabbinic prohibition ןרוסיאש םירבד וליפאו רוסא םידיב וליכאהל לבא"
"…םירפוס ירבדמ
One possible answer is that it is permitted for an
adult to engage in Sefiyah Beyadayim on Yom Kippur “But [for an adult] to directly feed a minor [a
because the Yom Kippur restrictions are only Rabbinic forbidden food] is forbidden, and even if [the food is
in origin. Of course, this answer relies on two major only] forbidden Rabbinically.”
assumptions, both of which require analysis. First, it The Torah (Vayikra 16:29) commands that on
assumes that it is permissible for an adult to administer Yom Kippur, “teanu et nafshoteichem,” “You shall
a Rabbinic prohibition to a minor. Second, it assumes afflict your souls.” Beyond this general injunction,
that the Yom Kippur restrictions are only prohibited the Torah does not explicitly proscribe the five
Rabbinically. Let us explore, in turn, each of these restrictions of the day. The Talmud (Yoma Chapter 8)
assumptions. extrapolates the five restrictions from various verses

The Talmud (Yevamot 114a) states that even and establishes that the severe punishment of Kareit,
according to the stringent opinion that an adult spiritual excision, which results from violating the
must separate a minor from violating the Torah, that commandment prescribing affliction (Vayikra 23:29),
is true only regarding a Biblical law, but an adult is applies only to violating the prohibition against
not obligated to prevent a minor from violating a eating and drinking, but not to the other restrictions.
Rabbinic prohibition. The Rashba (Yevamot 114a) Since the Torah’s punishment of Kareit applies to
posits that this same hierarchy, namely that Rabbinic the restriction against eating and drinking, it is clear
prohibitions are one level more lenient than Biblical that at least this restriction is Biblically prohibited.
prohibitions, is also maintained according to the However, the Rishonim debate the status of the other
opinion that the Halacha follows, that adults are four restrictions. Indeed, there are indications in the
not obligated to prevent minors from violating even Talmud that the other four restrictions do not share
Biblical prohibitions. Only directly causing a minor the same origin as the restriction against eating and
to violate a Torah prohibition is forbidden, but it drinking. Without any Biblical sources, the Talmud
is permissible to directly cause a minor to violate a records several leniencies with regard to the other four
Rabbinic prohibition. Based on this logic, the Rashba restrictions: a king and a bride are permitted to wash
9
7
rules that one may cause a minor to violate a Rabbinic their faces; a postpartum woman is permitted to wear
10
prohibition if doing so is for the benefit of the minor. leather shoes; a person suffering from a scalp ailment
6 An analysis of Rashi’s explanation of the Talmud in Yoma serves to sharpen the question. When the Talmud initially assumed that adults are not
permitted to directly administer the Yom Kippur restrictions to minors, Rashi (“Inshi”) explains that this assumption is based on the prohibition of Lo
Ta’achilum as recorded in the Talmud in Yevamot. Thus, when the Talmud reverses its initial assumption in its conclusion, it is unclear how it addressed
the prohibition of Lo Ta’achilum, of which it was acutely aware initially, according to Rashi.
7 See, however, Shu”t HaRashba 1:92.
8 Rav Ovadiah Yosef (Yabia Omer YD 1:4:4) suggests that the dispute between the Rambam and the Rashba about whether or not an adult is per-
mitted to administer a Rabbinic prohibition to a minor depends on the nature of Rabbinic prohibitions in general. All agree that Torah prohibitions
are Issurei Cheftza, intrinsically, objectively forbidden. The Rambam believes that Rabbinic prohibitions are also Issurei Cheftza, and the prohibi-
tion against administering forbidden substances to minors should therefore apply to them as well. The Rashba, however, contends that Rabbinic
prohibitions are only Issurei Gavra, prohibitions on the person, not Issurei Cheftza, prohibitions on the object. In other words, the Rabbis do not have
the power to turn an object that is intrinsically permitted according to Torah law into something that is intrinsically forbidden. They can only forbid a
person from engaging with that object. Thus, it follows that there can be no prohibition for an adult to administer a Rabbinic prohibition to a minor
because Rabbinic prohibitions are intrinsically permitted and are only forbidden regarding the person. Since the person in question is a minor, who is
not obligated in Mitzvot, it would not make sense to prohibit the adult from administering the Rabbinic prohibition to him.
9 Yoma 73b
10 Yoma 73b

ןנברמ אברוצ רופיכ םוי תוכלה · 91