Which Mitzvot Take Precedence?: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Giving Up One's Hiddur Mitzvah to Enable Someone Else's Mitzvah
| (3 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 29: | Line 29: | ||
===Putting Oneself First for Mitzvot=== | ===Putting Oneself First for Mitzvot=== | ||
# A person can not give up his own mitzvah to enable someone else's mitzvah. One needs to take care of their own mitzvot first.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:4 and OC 5:32:4 based on Kiddushin 29b and Bava Metsia 62a. The Rabbis opinion in Kiddushin 29b, which is codified as the halacha, is that it is more important to learn Torah oneself over affording one's children the opportunity to learn Torah if it is only possible for one of them to learn. If it is true about oneself and one's child that one comes first certainly a person takes precedence over other people. Rabbi Akiva in Bava Metsia 62a holds that it is necessary to save oneself over saving someone else if there's only resources for one to survive. Rav Moshe applies these principles to mitzvot and says that it is obvious that if one has the opportunity to do a mitzvah one should not and may not sacrifice it so that someone else can fulfill it. He quotes a Chatom Sofer who seems to imply otherwise and disagrees.</ref> | # A person can not give up his own mitzvah to enable someone else's mitzvah. One needs to take care of their own mitzvot first.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:4 and OC 5:32:4 based on Kiddushin 29b and Bava Metsia 62a. The Rabbis opinion in Kiddushin 29b, which is codified as the halacha, is that it is more important to learn Torah oneself over affording one's children the opportunity to learn Torah if it is only possible for one of them to learn. If it is true about oneself and one's child that one comes first certainly a person takes precedence over other people. Rabbi Akiva in Bava Metsia 62a holds that it is necessary to save oneself over saving someone else if there's only resources for one to survive. Rav Moshe applies these principles to mitzvot and says that it is obvious that if one has the opportunity to do a mitzvah one should not and may not sacrifice it so that someone else can fulfill it. He quotes a Chatom Sofer who seems to imply otherwise and disagrees.</ref> | ||
# If a person is presented with two mitzvot opportunities one which is a great mitzvah and one which is a lesser mitzvah, he should take the greater mitzvah for himself and let his friend do the lesser mitzvah.<ref>Moed Katan 9a</ref> | # If a person is presented with two mitzvot opportunities one which is a great mitzvah and one which is a lesser mitzvah, he should take the greater mitzvah for himself and let his friend do the lesser mitzvah.<ref>Rashi Moed Katan 9a s.v. mitzvah writes that if presented with two mitzvot one should pick the bigger one and leave the smaller one for his friend. See Haarot Rav Elyashiv 9a s.v. lo is bothered that this is obvious and the nuance in the gemara is regarding the other case where no one else will do the smaller mitzvah.</ref> | ||
# One should sacrifice a tenth of one's time available to learn towards helping teach others who need more help learning Torah.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:4 and OC 5:32:4 based on Ervin 54b and Bava Metsia 33a. In Eruvin, Rabbi Perida spent a lot of time teach a student 400 times and when he didn't understand it another 400 times. Bava Metsia 33a establishes that although a person may take care of their own monetary needs before others, he shouldn't be too exacting upon taking care of himself otherwise he'll abolish the principle of chesed. Rav Moshe says that although there is no fixed amount of time to allot to teaching Torah to those who need it, it is reasonable that a tenth of one's time is appropriate just like we find in the area of giving maaser of one's money to tzedaka. He adds that whereas for tzedaka it is recommended to give up to twenty percent of one's money, there is no such recommendation with regards to teaching since one needs to learn himself. | # One should sacrifice a tenth of one's time available to learn towards helping teach others who need more help learning Torah.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:4 and OC 5:32:4 based on Ervin 54b and Bava Metsia 33a. In Eruvin, Rabbi Perida spent a lot of time teach a student 400 times and when he didn't understand it another 400 times. Bava Metsia 33a establishes that although a person may take care of their own monetary needs before others, he shouldn't be too exacting upon taking care of himself otherwise he'll abolish the principle of chesed. Rav Moshe says that although there is no fixed amount of time to allot to teaching Torah to those who need it, it is reasonable that a tenth of one's time is appropriate just like we find in the area of giving maaser of one's money to tzedaka. He adds that whereas for tzedaka it is recommended to give up to twenty percent of one's money, there is no such recommendation with regards to teaching since one needs to learn himself. | ||
* Yad Melachim p. 95 agrees with Rav Moshe and discusses the proof from Eruvin. Yalkut Gavriel Tzedaka 249:26 p. 39 quotes Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Derech Sicha p. 509) that one doesn't have to chase this opportunity but if approached one should give a tenth of one's time to teach in line with Rav Moshe. Yisrael Arevim 16:22 quotes that Rav Shimon Schkop (Intro to Shaarei Yosher) gave one tenth of his time to teaching. Shaarei Mechila v. 2 p. 326 quotes that he heard directly from Rav Ovadia Yosef that he agreed with Rav Moshe and also commented that Rav Ovadia personally followed that ruling. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 5:281 agrees with Rav Moshe and quotes it from Rav Shneider as well.</ref> If a person does so with pure intent he does not have to worry about losing out.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:4 and OC 5:32:4. Tzror Hamor (Devarim 6:5) notes that the first paragraph of Shema is in singular and the second is in plural. He explains that the first one is about a person who serves Hashem purely out of love for Him and so he is able to serve Hashem together in unity with all Jews. However, the second paragraph address a person who serves Hashem for reward and to avoid punishment; as such, he is in constant competition with other Jews for mitzvot and therefore the Torah's language is written in plural.</ref> | * Yad Melachim p. 95 agrees with Rav Moshe and discusses the proof from Eruvin. Yalkut Gavriel Tzedaka 249:26 p. 39 quotes Rav Chaim Kanievsky (Derech Sicha p. 509) that one doesn't have to chase this opportunity but if approached one should give a tenth of one's time to teach in line with Rav Moshe. Yisrael Arevim 16:22 quotes that Rav Shimon Schkop (Intro to Shaarei Yosher) gave one tenth of his time to teaching. Shaarei Mechila v. 2 p. 326 quotes that he heard directly from Rav Ovadia Yosef that he agreed with Rav Moshe and also commented that Rav Ovadia personally followed that ruling. Teshuvot Vehanhagot 5:281 agrees with Rav Moshe and quotes it from Rav Shneider as well.</ref> If a person does so with pure intent he does not have to worry about losing out.<ref>Igrot Moshe EH 4:26:4 and OC 5:32:4. See Tzror Hamor (Devarim 6:5) who notes that the first paragraph of Shema is in singular and the second is in plural. He explains that the first one is about a person who serves Hashem purely out of love for Him and so he is able to serve Hashem together in unity with all Jews. However, the second paragraph address a person who serves Hashem for reward and to avoid punishment; as such, he is in constant competition with other Jews for mitzvot and therefore the Torah's language is written in plural. See Lehavat Dovid v. 2 p. 217.</ref> | ||
===Grabbing the Mitzvah or Honoring Another?=== | ===Grabbing the Mitzvah or Honoring Another?=== | ||
# If there is only one object for a mitzvah available and everyone is bidding for it, is it appropriate to honor the rabbi with the mitzvah or should one endeavor to take it for oneself? Some say that it is best to take it oneself since if one needs to take care of oneself first when it comes to one's finances certainly one should do so for mitzvot as well.<ref>Shaarei Knesset Hagedola (on Bet Yosef 660:1) writes that his father once one | # If there is only one object for a mitzvah available and everyone is bidding for it, is it appropriate to honor the rabbi with the mitzvah or should one endeavor to take it for oneself? Some say that it is best to take it oneself since if one needs to take care of oneself first when it comes to one's finances certainly one should do so for mitzvot as well.<ref>Shaarei Knesset Hagedola (on Bet Yosef 660:1) writes that his father once one | ||
| Line 44: | Line 45: | ||
===Giving Up One's Hiddur Mitzvah to Enable Someone Else's Mitzvah=== | ===Giving Up One's Hiddur Mitzvah to Enable Someone Else's Mitzvah=== | ||
# If a person has an opportunity to either fulfill a mitzvah in the most ideal fashion himself or help another person fulfill the mitzvah on a basic level but sacrifice his ideal mitzvah and only fulfill a basic mitzvah, it is preferable to do the basic mitzvah and enable another Jew's mitzvah.<ref>Magen Avraham 658:12 writes a case in which a person has a personal etrog that he could use for the mitzvah and another town doesn't have any etrog. If he could still borrow an etrog for someone in his town and fulfill his basic mitzvah he should donate his etrog to the other town.</ref> This applies whether he is enabling many people to do a mitzvah or just an individual.<ref> The [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=628&pgnum=166 Bet Yakov 114] posits that this is only true if his donation would enable many more Jews to fulfill a mitzvah, but if it is a choice between keeping his etrog or donating it to an individual who otherwise couldn't fulfill the mitzvah at all and him just borrowing, it is better to keep his own etrog. His logic is based on the answer of Tosfot Shabbat 4a that one can do a minor sin to help out a multitude of Jews. The Eliya Rabba 658:12 disagrees and thinks that it is always best to donate the etrog to enable another Jew's mitzvah even if it is an individual Jew as long as he could still borrow an etrog. He adds that this is only true if that individual wasn't negligent. Furthermore, regarding chanuka candles, the Magen Avraham 671:1 comments that it is better to give up some of one's oil for another Jew to fulfill the basic mitzvah even if that means he too will fulfill the basic mitzvah as opposed to him selfishly doing the enhanced mitzvah himself. Chemed Moshe 671:2 disagrees with the Magen Avraham's application in Chanuka because he holds it is in fact mandatory to light according to the number of the night. Chazon Ovadia Chanuka p. 23 sides with the Magen Avraham and quotes that most poskim agree with the Magen Avraham including Yad Aharaon, Chayei Adam 154:48, Moed Lkol Chay 27:48, Bet Ovad 671:5, and Mishna Brurah 671:6.</ref> | # If a person has an opportunity to either fulfill a mitzvah in the most ideal fashion himself or help another person fulfill the mitzvah on a basic level but sacrifice his ideal mitzvah and only fulfill a basic mitzvah, it is preferable to do the basic mitzvah and enable another Jew's mitzvah.<ref>Magen Avraham 658:12 writes a case in which a person has a personal etrog that he could use for the mitzvah and another town doesn't have any etrog. If he could still borrow an etrog for someone in his town and fulfill his basic mitzvah he should donate his etrog to the other town.</ref> This applies whether he is enabling many people to do a mitzvah or just an individual.<ref> The [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=628&pgnum=166 Bet Yakov 114] posits that this is only true if his donation would enable many more Jews to fulfill a mitzvah, but if it is a choice between keeping his etrog or donating it to an individual who otherwise couldn't fulfill the mitzvah at all and him just borrowing, it is better to keep his own etrog. His logic is based on the answer of Tosfot Shabbat 4a that one can do a minor sin to help out a multitude of Jews. The Eliya Rabba 658:12 disagrees and thinks that it is always best to donate the etrog to enable another Jew's mitzvah even if it is an individual Jew as long as he could still borrow an etrog. He adds that this is only true if that individual wasn't negligent. Furthermore, regarding chanuka candles, the Magen Avraham 671:1 comments that it is better to give up some of one's oil for another Jew to fulfill the basic mitzvah even if that means he too will fulfill the basic mitzvah as opposed to him selfishly doing the enhanced mitzvah himself. Chemed Moshe 671:2 disagrees with the Magen Avraham's application in Chanuka because he holds it is in fact mandatory to light according to the number of the night. Chazon Ovadia Chanuka p. 23 sides with the Magen Avraham and quotes that most poskim agree with the Magen Avraham including Yad Aharaon, Chayei Adam 154:48, Moed Lkol Chay 27:48, Bet Ovad 671:5, and Mishna Brurah 671:6.</ref> | ||
# The poskim discuss how this concept differs from another known concept that a Jew should not sin in order to prevent another Jew from sinning (Shabbat 4a). Why isn't it considered sinning to aid another Jew to minimize one's mitzvah? Some answer that it is permitted to minimize one's mitzvah for another Jew's religiosity and it is only forbidden to sin in order to help another Jew.<ref>Shevet Halevi 6:36 from [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=43673&st=&pgnum=79 Sdei Chemed Aleph 257 Peot Hasadeh 57] writes that we say that a person should miss out on mitzvah in order to save his friend and the gemara was only saying you can’t sin to save your friend but to miss a mitzvah you certainly can. Shevet Halevi rules that way in order to say that you should go to do kiruv in a town without a minyan to help them avoid aveirot. Sdei Chemed quotes Nechmad Lmareh who disagrees. Mahari Ben Lev 4:4 is a proof for the Sdei Chemed and Shevet Halevi.</ref> Some answer that one can't sin to prevent another Jew from sinning, but one may sin in order to enable Jew to accomplish a mitzvah.<Ref>Chazon Ovadia Chanuka p. 24 explains why the Magen Avraham 671:1 isn't an issue of ''chateh bishvil she'tizkeh'' (Heb. חטא בשביל שתזכה; tran. sin in order to earn merit) based on the Mizrachi on Smag (Hilchot Shofar 54b) that it is permitted to teach children how to blow shofar on Shabbat even though it is a sin since it enables them to do a mitzvah and it isn't similar to sinning to prevent your friend's mitzvah. He supports this from the Ateret Yisrael Bdarkei Avot 237b, Ritva Eruvin 32b, Binyan Tzion 1:124, Limudei Hashem 4a, and Mishnat Chachamim 113b. He notes that this isn't unlike Tosfot Pesachim 59a and Tosfot Shabbat 4a. Chazon Ovadia (sh"t 2:46) quotes the Nodeh Beyehuda OC 3 who clearly disagrees with the Mizrachi as he rule that a person is forbidden to delay to make a minyan for those who are davening later since he should daven as early as possible and he should not sin to compensate for their negligence. Rav Ovadia notes that the Mizrachi would permit this since it is enabling them to fulfill a positive mitzvah.</ref> | # The poskim discuss how this concept differs from another known concept that a Jew should not sin in order to prevent another Jew from sinning (Shabbat 4a). Why isn't it considered sinning to aid another Jew to minimize one's mitzvah? Some answer that it is permitted to minimize one's mitzvah for another Jew's religiosity and it is only forbidden to sin in order to help another Jew.<ref>Shevet Halevi 6:36 from [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=43673&st=&pgnum=79 Sdei Chemed Aleph 257 Peot Hasadeh 57] writes that we say that a person should miss out on mitzvah in order to save his friend and the gemara was only saying you can’t sin to save your friend but to miss a mitzvah you certainly can. Shevet Halevi rules that way in order to say that you should go to do kiruv in a town without a minyan to help them avoid aveirot. Sdei Chemed quotes Nechmad Lmareh who disagrees. Mahari Ben Lev 4:4 is a proof for the Sdei Chemed and Shevet Halevi. (See Rashi Pesachim 95a s.v. shein and Likutei Halachot who might support this approach.)</ref> Some answer that one can't sin to prevent another Jew from sinning, but one may sin in order to enable Jew to accomplish a mitzvah.<Ref>Chazon Ovadia Chanuka p. 24 explains why the Magen Avraham 671:1 isn't an issue of ''chateh bishvil she'tizkeh'' (Heb. חטא בשביל שתזכה; tran. sin in order to earn merit) based on the Mizrachi on Smag (Hilchot Shofar 54b) that it is permitted to teach children how to blow shofar on Shabbat even though it is a sin since it enables them to do a mitzvah and it isn't similar to sinning to prevent your friend's mitzvah. He supports this from the Ateret Yisrael Bdarkei Avot 237b, Ritva Eruvin 32b, Binyan Tzion 1:124, Limudei Hashem 4a, and Mishnat Chachamim 113b. He notes that this isn't unlike Tosfot Pesachim 59a and Tosfot Shabbat 4a. Chazon Ovadia (sh"t 2:46) quotes the Nodeh Beyehuda OC 3 who clearly disagrees with the Mizrachi as he rule that a person is forbidden to delay to make a minyan for those who are davening later since he should daven as early as possible and he should not sin to compensate for their negligence. Rav Ovadia notes that the Mizrachi would permit this since it is enabling them to fulfill a positive mitzvah.</ref> | ||
# A person should do kiruv to teach people about Torah and mitzvot even if that means missing out on davening with a minyan.<ref>Shevet Halevi 6:36 based on the based of chateh bishvil she'tizkeh.</ref> | # A person should do kiruv to teach people about Torah and mitzvot even if that means missing out on davening with a minyan.<ref>Shevet Halevi 6:36 based on the based of chateh bishvil she'tizkeh.</ref> | ||
#There is a discussion if it is necessary to spend money in order to stop another Jew from sinning.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (sh"t v. 2 p. 419) quotes and seems to accept the Mahari Vayil 157 who proves from Sanhedrin 73a that you only need to spend to save someone’s life but not to stop him from sinning. See Yad Eliyahu 30:3.</ref> | #There is a discussion if it is necessary to spend money in order to stop another Jew from sinning.<ref>[https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=907&pgnum=419 Chazon Ovadia (sh"t v. 2 p. 419)] quotes and seems to accept the Mahari Vayil 157 who proves from Sanhedrin 73a that you only need to spend to save someone’s life but not to stop him from sinning. See Yad Eliyahu 30:3.</ref> | ||
===Sacrificing One's Mitzvah Altogether for Someone's Mitzvah=== | ===Sacrificing One's Mitzvah Altogether for Someone's Mitzvah=== | ||
# If someone could either fulfill a rabbinic mitzvah or enable his friend fulfill a biblical mitzvah he should enable his friend to fulfill a biblical mitzvah.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (sh"t 2:46) writes that it is preferable to give up one's kezayit of matzah for afikomen to enable another Jew to fulfill the basic mitzvah of eating one kezayit since his deoritta mitzvah is more important than your derabbanan mitzvah. Although we generally not allow a person to sin to help his friend, here since the outcome of his friend's mitzvah is much greater than his fulfillment it is permitted (Tosfot Shabbat 4a, Magen Avraham 254:21). He quotes Minchat Elazar 2:38 who says the same about giving up one's matzah for the second seder to enable someone to eat matzah at the first seder.</ref> | # If someone could either fulfill a rabbinic mitzvah or enable his friend fulfill a biblical mitzvah he should enable his friend to fulfill a biblical mitzvah.<ref>Chazon Ovadia (sh"t 2:46) writes that it is preferable to give up one's kezayit of matzah for afikomen to enable another Jew to fulfill the basic mitzvah of eating one kezayit since his deoritta mitzvah is more important than your derabbanan mitzvah. Although we generally not allow a person to sin to help his friend, here since the outcome of his friend's mitzvah is much greater than his fulfillment it is permitted (Tosfot Shabbat 4a, Magen Avraham 254:21). He quotes Minchat Elazar 2:38 who says the same about giving up one's matzah for the second seder to enable someone to eat matzah at the first seder.</ref> | ||
