Communicated: TefillaChillul Tefila Bifarhesia, as well as halachicly challenged verbiage and dress, are external manifestations of a critical lack of personal yiras shomayim which has lethal consequences.
This column is dedicated to the refuah sheleimah of Shlomo Eliezer ben Chaya Sarah Elka.
At the beginning of this week’s parshah the Torah says that when Yisro, Moshe Rabbeinu’s father-in-law, joined Bnei Yisrael in the desert, one “ish” (man) bowed to the other and kissed him. The pasuk does not specify who bowed and kissed whom. The Mechilta says that since the pasuk refers to Moshe as an “ish” elsewhere, we should assume that Moshe bowed and kissed Yisro. The Mechilta concludes that this is the source in the Torah that one must honor his father-in-law.
The Tur, in Yoreh De’ah 240:24, quotes another source for this halacha. The medrash in Tehillim says that we derive this halacha from Dovid HaMelech, who called his father-in-law, Shaul HaMelech “avi” (my father). The Aruch Hashulchan writes that he does not understand this source, since we find that the title “father” can be added as a sign of respect for individuals who are not related at all. However, he suggests that perhaps since Dovid referred to Shaul as his father while he was chasing him, he would not have done so merely out of respect – if not for the fact that one must honor his father-in-law.
The Bach (Yoreh De’ah 240:24) says that this halacha applies to one’s mother-in-law as well. But he adds that the obligation to honor one’s in-laws differs from the obligation to honor one’s parents. The obligation to honor one’s in-laws is merely the same as the obligation to honor an elderly, important person, i.e. to stand up when they walk into a room (presumably one must perform this honor even if his in-laws are not elderly or important people). However, one is not obligated to perform for one’s in-laws the other obligations that one must perform for his or her parents, e.g. feed them, dress them, etc.
The Pischei Teshuvah, in Yoreh De’ah 240:20, agrees with the Bach that the obligation to honor one’s in-laws differs from the honor that one is required to show parents. He offers proof from the following halacha: the Gemara in Kiddushin 30b says that a married woman is exempt from honoring her parents because she is not available to perform the necessary actions. A single woman is required to honor her parents whether she never married, is divorced, or is widowed. (This halacha appears in Shulchan Aruch Yoreh De’ah 240:17.) If a man has the same obligation to honor his in-laws as he does his parents, why then would his wife be exempted from honoring her parents when she gets married? Since her husband must bestow honor upon her parents as if they were his own, that should not interfere with her obligation to honor her parents.
He continues by saying that whenever a situation arises whereby one person is obligated to honor two people and one of those people is obligated to honor the other (e.g. a child must honor both of his parents, and his mother must honor her husband), when both parents command a child to perform different actions he must first adhere to his father’s command since his mother is obligated to honor her husband as well (Yoreh De’ah 240:14). Therefore, if a man had an obligation to honor his in-laws we would say that if her father and her husband both command her to do two different things, she should listen to her father since she and her husband are both commanded to adhere to her father’s command. Since we pasken that she is exempt from honoring her father, we can infer that her husband does not have an obligation to honor his in-laws; rather, he must merely show them the respect that he would show an elderly, important person.
Reb Reuvain Grozovsky, in Yevamos, siman 4, asks a question on the proof of the Pischei Teshuvah to the Bach, that one is not obligated to honor one’s in-laws in the same manner that he is obligated to honor his parents. The basis behind the Pischei Teshuvah proof is based on the assumption that the reason why a married woman is exempt from honoring her father is because she is obligated tohonor her husband. He therefore concludes that if a man would be obligated to honor his father-in-law that should not exempt his wife from honoring her father, since he too is obligated to do so. However, although a woman is obligated to honor her husband (as the Rambam says in Hilchos Ishus 15:19), this is merely mi’derabbanan and would not exempt her from her mitzvah mi’de’oraisa of honoring her father.
Rather, Reb Reuvain suggests that the reason why a married woman is exempt from the mitzvah of honoring her father is not because she must honor her husband, but rather because she has other obligations (she’budim) to her husband – mi’de’oraisa. These obligations do not require her to honor her husband but rather obligates her to perform certain things for him. Therefore, she cannot honor her father since she is obligated to be available for her husband. Thus, even if her husband was indeed obligated to honor his wife’s father as if it was his own father, she would nevertheless still be exempt from honoring her father – since she has other obligations that prevent her from honoring her father.
About the Author: For questions or comments, e-mail RabbiRFuchs@gmail.com.


You must log in to post a comment.


I watch my children use blocks to build a large structure, observing the trepidation with which they add each block. As the structure becomes larger there is a greater risk of it collapsing, thus bringing an end to an hour of playful labor. I anticipate what will happen when one child adds a block to the top floor, compromising the integrity of the building and resulting in the collapse of the entire structure. The argument that ensues is predictable, as each child blames the other for “ruining” the fun. As an adult, I wonder about the need to attribute blame. Will assigning blame be instrumental in rebuilding the structure?

In this week’s parshah the Torah discusses the halachos of when one steals from another and when confronted in beis din, the thief swears falsely with his denial that he stole. This parshah was already taught in parshas Vayikra; however, there are two halachos that the Torah adds in this parshah to this topic.
In order to carry from one’s home into the street (even when the area is enclosed by a properly constructed eruv), the eruvin ceremony must be performed. This ceremony involves the placing of food in one designated home on behalf of all Sabbath observers in the enclosed area. In order for the eruvin ceremony to be valid, however, it must be performed on behalf of all owners of streets and homes in the enclosed area.

Hymie was visiting Israel and enjoying an afternoon with his grandchildren in the park. After pushing them on the swings and watching them slither down the slides, he went to sit down on a bench in the corner of the park.
Question: On Friday night the chazzan in many shuls ascends the bimah for Kabbalat Shabbos but goes to the amud starting for Barchu. Why?
Question: As Shavuot is fast approaching – a holiday on which we dwell on the story of Ruth and the origins of the royal house of David – I was wondering if you could help me resolve something. Some people say that Rabbi Yehudah HaNassi, the redactor of the six orders of the Mishnah and a scion of King David, purposely kept any mention of Chanukah and the Hasmonean kings out of the Mishnah because the Hasmoneans improperly crowned themselves and ignored the rule that all Jewish kings are supposed to come from the tribe of Yehudah. Is this true?
Menachem
(Via E-Mail)
The Rema writes (Ohr Hachaim, 494:4), “It is customary to spread branches of trees in our synagogues and homes [on Shavuos] in order to commemorate that which the sages say [Rosh Hashanah 16a] that on Shavuos the world is judged concerning [how many] fruits the trees will produce [that year].”
Summer Eruvin
‘A Separate Contribution From Each’
(Eruvin 72b)
If a man suspects his wife of infidelity, he is to bring witnesses and warn her not to go into private quarters with the man in question. If she violates that warning, he is to bring her to the kohen, who will give her the “bitter waters” to drink. If she was falsely accused and was innocent, she will be blessed with children. If she was guilty, she will die a gruesome death.
A flash of red caught my eye, and I looked up and saw a cardinal perched on the picnic table on my deck. What a miracle, I marveled. You’re beautiful. Thanks, Hashem. And then my mind’s wheels began to roll, and it struck me that several miracle stories had come my way this week. The stories prodded me to think of and feel Hashem’s presence as a more tangible and vivid reality.
Over the years I’ve received letters from all over the world in which people share feelings and thoughts they’ve experienced upon becoming became Torah observant. Usually these letters arrive not long after the writers had heard one of my speeches. No matter where a particular speech took place, and no matter whether I spoke the language or had to use a translator, the magic always works. In reality, it’s not magic at all but a little voice in the soul – the “Pintele Yid,” that spark of G-d’s Word engraved on all our neshamahs. Here is one recent letter.
By the time these words are printed, there will be only a few more days left before Shavuos. We hope that up until that point, we will still have been counting the days of Sefiras Ha’Omer with a bracha, but we also know that too often, despite our best efforts, we drop out of counting with a bracha some time before the count is complete.
In this week’s parshah the Torah tells us that the bechorim were replaced by the levi’im to serve in the Mikdash. The Torah says that there were 273 more bechorim than levi’im. Those bechorim could not simply be replaced, and had to be redeemed. Hashem told Moshe that each bechor should give five shekalim to Moshe, who, in turn, should give them to Aharon and his sons. With that, they would be redeemed.
Question: Is there anything special that one should do on Yom Yerushalayim?
Question: As the shamash in a small community shul with an aging population, I am faced with numerous challenges. The following is only one of them. During sefirah, different people daven for the amud for Ma’ariv. Once, a bar mitzvah was one of them. On another occasion, a very recent ger lead the service. Were these individuals allowed to lead the congregation in counting sefirah? I also wonder, in general, if everyone should be trusted to lead the counting. What if someone forgot to count on one of the previous nights but does not inform anyone of this?
No Name
(Via E-Mail)

In this week’s parshah the Torah discusses the halachos of when one steals from another and when confronted in beis din, the thief swears falsely with his denial that he stole. This parshah was already taught in parshas Vayikra; however, there are two halachos that the Torah adds in this parshah to this topic.
In this week’s parshah the Torah tells us that the bechorim were replaced by the levi’im to serve in the Mikdash. The Torah says that there were 273 more bechorim than levi’im. Those bechorim could not simply be replaced, and had to be redeemed. Hashem told Moshe that each bechor should give five shekalim to Moshe, who, in turn, should give them to Aharon and his sons. With that, they would be redeemed.
In parshas Behar the Torah reiterates some of the halachos of ribbis, and teaches several new halachos as well. The pasuk says that one should not take ribbis from his fellow, he should fear God, “v’chei achicha imach – and your brother shall live with you.” The Gemara derives from the end of this pasuk that if one does charge ribbis and collects it, it must be returned.
This week I will be addressing a question from a previous column – with a new answer.
The pasuk in this week’s parshah (Vayikra 23:14) says, “V’lechem v’kali v’karmel lo sochlu ad etzem hayom hazeh ad haviachem es korban elokeichem – And you shall not eat bread [etc.] on this very day until you bring the offering of your God.” This pasuk teaches us that all of the five grains (wheat, spelt, rye, oats, and barley) are forbidden from the time they are harvested until after the korban omer is brought.
.
Both of this week’s parshiyos discuss the various arayos – forbidden relationships. The Gemara in Kiddushin 67b states that if one attempts to perform kiddushin on one of the arayos, the kiddushin is invalid.
The Rambam writes the halachos of Sefiras Ha’Omer in Hilchos Temidim U’musafin (7:22-25). He says that there is a mitzvas assei to count seven complete weeks from the day that the korban omer was brought. The mitzvah is to count the days and the weeks. We count at night because the mitzvah requires that we count at the beginning of the day, which is at night. If one forgot to count at night he may count by day.
Printed from: http://www.jewishpress.com/judaism/parsha/must-one-honor-his-in-laws/2013/01/31/
Scan this QR code to visit this page online: