If your spouse is irreligious, can she trusted to say she went to the Mikvah?
Can you allow your son to stay in your house if he insists on staying there with his girlfriend?
Can you eat from the food they bring you?
Do you have to be afraid they’ll make your oven, microwave, and dishes Treif?
If they cook is it Bishul Acu”m?
If they touch wine does it become Yayin Nesech?
Can you give them food and drink if they won’t wash their hands or make a Brocha?
Are they מצטרפף לזימון ?
What happens if they bring Chametz into your house on Pesach?
If the air conditioner shuts off on Shabbos and they turn it on do you have to leave the house?
If they turn on a light on Shabbos can you use that room?
Rabbi Yossi Bensoussan, Mashgiach Ruchani at Yeshiva High School of Cleveland, Certified Alcohol and Substance Abuse Counselor (CASAC)
The most recent podcast regarding the נאמנות of a close relative who isn’t frum was interesting, as always.
Reb Moshe’s חידוש with regard to קים לי might seem to have a precedent and possibly be dependent on a מחלוקת between the רא”ה and the רשב”א (בדק ומשמרת הבית ב”א ש”א דף ח’). They discuss if one is permitted to send a young perceptive child to purchase kosher meat on your behalf. The רא”ה opines that since a קטן is not נאמן, they cannot be believed that the meat they purchased is indeed kosher. The רשב”א disagrees and explains that although a קטן is not נאמן from an עדות perspective, we can employ a חזקה that an intelligent child will only purchase kosher meat.
The פרי חדש (סימן קי ס”ק טז) writes that that common custom is to rely on the רשב”א.
Extrapolating the logic of the רשב”א may allow one to rely on a גדול as well in situations where they are not נאמן, but we can employ a strong חזקה that they would only purchase/cook kosher, i.e. קים לי.
Obviously, one can differentiate between the scenarios, but it would seem to be a logical precedent to rely on an individual when typical נאמנות is not applicable.
בגמרא עירובין דף מד מבואר דאין אליהו בא בשבת מפני שאין תחומין למעלה מעשרה. וצ”ע לפי”ז איך בא אליהו לברית מילה בשבתSubmitted by Miri
|There’s a chiluk. By Shabbos (havdalah) he can’t come because we’re talking that he’s physical and his body is revealed (with his neshama) but by a bris were talking about that his body isn’t revealed|
Re Shiur 380
I agree with R. Yossi Bensoussan 100% –
When five siblings in a row go off the derech one after the other it’s almost always not primarily because of the negative influence of the oldest (after all who influenced him?). Rather it’s because the parents unfortunately were unable or unwilling to learn from the mistakes they made with the first one and they keep on repeating it with the ones that come after with the same results. The idea that a charismatic sibling in a reasonably emotionally healthy family will have more influence than even a nebby father in inconsistent with what we know from developmental psychology. Of course, the parent has to assert his parental role in an active and pleasant way and not just assume that his biological role of father automatically confers that influence to him.
[See: Hold on to your kids: Why parents need to matter more than peers. Gordon Neufeld and Gabor Maté (2014) – International authority on child development Gordon Neufeld, Ph.D., joins forces with bestselling author Gabor Maté, M.D., to tackle one of the most disturbing trends of our time: children today looking to their peers for direction – their values, identity, and codes of behavior. This “peer orientation” undermines family cohesion, interferes with healthy development, and fosters a hostile and sexualized youth culture. Children end up becoming overly conformist, desensitized and alienated – being “cool” matters more to them than anything else.]
Reb Dovid asked R. Bensoussan if there was any empirical evidence on the impact of the oldest sibling who goes off on the following siblings. Although I’m not aware of any empirical studies that study that exact question, I am sending some related material that I think you might relevant.
A recently published report by a distinguished scholar on a major study on the transmission of faith from one generation to the next came to the following conclusion. For almost four decades, Vern Bengtson and his colleagues (2013) have been conducting the largest-ever study of religion and family across generations. They have followed more than 350 families composed of more than 3,500 individuals whose lives span more than a century–the oldest was born in 1881, the youngest in 1988–to find out how religion is, or is not, passed down from one generation to the next. They found that despite enormous changes in American society, a child is actually more likely to remain within the fold than leave it. And while outside forces do play a role, the crucial factor in whether a child keeps the faith is the presence of a strong family bond. Parents who take their faith seriously and interact with their children during their formative years in a warm, affirming, and respectful manner are more likely to pass on their religious tradition, beliefs, and practices. Bengtson, V. (2013). Families and Faith: How Religion is Passed Down across Generations. Oxford University Press.
(ויחי מז:לא) וישתחו ישראל על ראש המטה
רש”י: ד”א, על שהיתה מטתו שלימה
בשיעורי תורה מרבי שלמה וולבה: יוסף נשלח למצרים בעל כרחו של יעקב, ואעפ”כ אם לא היה עומד בצדקו, אומרת התורה שיעקב אבינו אשם, מפני שלא היתה מטתו שלימה. אם יש לאדם בן שאינו מתנהג כשורה, הוא לא יכול לתלות את זה בחברים רעים שקלקלו את בנו – אלו הם סתם תירוצים…
Influence of Deviant Friends on Delinquency: Searching for Moderator Variables, F. Viatro, M. Brendgen, R.E. Tremblay Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, Vol. 28, 2000, 313-325.
…weak bonding to conventional peers leads to association with deviant friends (314). In contrast to parent monitoring, attachment to parents reduced the influence of deviant friends… At a certain point, it becomes difficult and even impossible to prevent teenagers from becoming exposed to deviant friends. Hence, it may be effective in the long run to foster the parent-child bond through communication, support, and shared activities in addition to monitoring the child’s behavior (321). …adolescents with unfavorable attitudes toward deviancy are not influenced by deviant friends (322).
“In the realm of hungry ghosts” by Gabor Mate page 278: it is commonly thought that peer affiliation leads to drug use because kids set a bad example for each other. That’s part of the picture, but a deeper reason is that under ordinary circumstances, adolescents who rely on their peers for emotional acceptance are more prone to being hurt, to experiencing the sting of each other’s immature and therefore often insensitive ways of relating. They are more stressed than are children who are well connected to nurturing adults. Kids are not cruel by nature, but they are immature. They taunt, tease, and reject. Those who have lost their orientation to adults and look to the peer group instead find themselves having to shut down emotionally for sheer protection. As we have seen with children abused at home, emotionally shutting down… greatly increases the motivation to use drugs.
[I saw a quote from a rapper – If I’m more of an influence on your son as a rapper than you are as a father… you got to look at yourself as a parent].