Riddles of the Week (For answers see above)
1) In this week’s parsha we have the pasuk: איש אמו ואביו תראו ואת שבתותי תשמורו – “Every man shall revere his mother and his father and you shall observe My Shabbos”, from which we learn the obligation for a child to fear his parents, the mitzvah known as kibbud av v’eim. The halachah is (Yoreh De’ah 240:5) that money spent on this mitzvah should come from the parents pocket. If the parents aren’t prepared to spend money, the children aren’t required to use money of their own. If the parents don’t have any money and the children do, then they must use their own money.
The question is, even if the parents have money, why should the mitzvah of kibbud av v’eim be different to all other mitzvos, where we find that a person is obligated to spend up to a fifth of his own money in order to fulfill the mitzvah?
2) If one’s father or mother is ill, and the child is davening for their recovery, is the child allowed to mention the parents name, or must the child add something beforehand and say “revered father” or some other addition?
3) A person who causes another Jew to violate any of the commandments, such as giving wine to a nazir to drink, transgresses the prohibition (Vayikra 19:14) against placing a stumbling block before the blind. When the nazir drinks the wine, besides transgressing the prohibition against consuming wine, does he additionally violate the prohibition against placing a stumbling block before the blind, as his choice to consume the wine causes the person who gave it to him to have sinned by placing a stumbling block before the blind?
4) A person who causes another Jew to violate any of the commandments transgresses the prohibition (19:14) against placing a stumbling block before the blind. Is it forbidden to invite a non-religious Jew to come for a Shabbos meal, which may cause him to sin by driving back and forth?
5) There is a mitzvah to honor the elderly by rising in their presence (19:32). The Gemara (Kiddushin 32b) adds that this obligation also applies to talmiday chachomim, even if they are young. In what case would we be required to stand up for a man who is neither aged nor learned?
