The mouthful of babies from Raban’s house

שו”ת › Category: Talmudic study › The mouthful of babies from Raban’s house

asked 5 years ago

To the Rabbi, peace be upon you.
We assume that the observance of the mitzvot and the study of Torah by children have no intrinsic meaning. Their only meaning is that by observing them, the father fulfills the mitzvot of education imposed on him. Only after they reach the age of mitzvot do the mitzvot take on an intrinsic meaning. The Gemara says that the hall is not held except for the sake of the mouths of the infants of the house of Rabban (Shabbat 11:). But according to what we have argued, the study of the Torah of Tashber has no intrinsic meaning, but only the observance of the mitzvot of education imposed on the father. So what meaning does the Gemara attribute to the mouths of Tashber?
The question is not in the mystical sense but in the logical sense. If there is no self-meaning then what benefit can be derived from it?
I thought I might say that following the discussion about the Bar Mitzvah during the counting of the Omer, in which it is claimed that one continues to count with a blessing, since the counting before the Bar Mitzvah completes the counting after the Bar Mitzvah, that studying Torah before receiving a commandment is also considered to be fulfilling the commandment of studying Torah after receiving a commandment, since it prepares the basis for study after receiving a commandment. In other words, there is value in studying Torah before receiving a commandment, but only receiving a commandment reveals the value of the mitzvah.
A second possibility that I thought of from the very warning that the elders are warned about the little ones regarding the prohibitions of eating (which is not just an educational law) is that the value of the little ones learning Torah is not only from the perspective of the mitzvah on the father but also from the perspective of correcting reality in its correct form. The correct reality of children is that they do not eat carrion and that they learn Torah. This is not only from the perspective of the mitzvah on the father to prepare them for the observance of the mitzvah but also from the perspective of correcting reality in itself.
Can the Rabbi help us please?

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Leave a ReplyCancel reply

0 Answers

0 Vote Up Vote Down

מיכי Staff answered 5 years ago

I don’t understand where this assumption comes from? It is clear that there is value in children’s Torah study. It is not a mitzvah, but even for adults, study is not really a mitzvah (at least for some of the first ones). Studying Torah is something more fundamental than a mitzvah, and therefore the Torah did not command it. Incidentally, this study has value and obligation (not halakhic) for women just like men. Women are exempt from the mitzvah, but not from the value. See my articles in the morning: https://mikyab.net/%D7%9B%D7%AA%D7%91%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%9E%D7%90%D7%9E%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%9D/%D7%9E%D7%91%D7%98-%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%9C%D7%99%D7%9 E%D7%95%D7%93-%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94-%D7%9C%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%9 D-%D7%95%D7%9C%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%A0%D7%A9%D7%99%D7%AA Incidentally, the observance of a mitzvah by minors, according to the law of education, is not necessarily obligatory only on the parents. Rashi and Toss disagree on this in Berakhot and Megillah. According to Rashi, it is obligatory on the minor himself. See Kehi Sukkah 62. I once explained the two laws that appear in Kehi there by saying that observance is done by the minor and the responsibility for observance lies with the parents. I see no connection to the question of counting the small one who made it big. There is no issue of “innocence” here.

Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

י.ד. replied 5 years ago

Thank you very much.
Also on the Torah it is written that the Torah of the Lord is pure. And the explanation is that the things add up, as is told about the Kotzker who paid respect to his first rabbi in the Bible who taught letters and explained that no one has ever disputed this. The Torah that is learned after a bar mitzvah is not a separate page. It is based on what was learned before and cannot be separated. Therefore, even if at the time there was no mitzvah, it can be said that retroactively after a bar mitzvah there is a mitzvah here.
And this is of course in addition to all the other elements that the rabbi added.