Is There a Mitzvah of Chinuch for a Kotan to Get Intoxicated on Purim?
The Mishnah Berurah (343:3) writes as follows:
“The age for chinuch (i.e., training children) for positive commandments depends on the child, according to his mental acuity and general understanding of the matter. For example, if a child understands the idea of Shabbos, his parent is obligated to accustom him to hear kiddush and havdolah. If a child understands how to properly wear tzitzis, he is obligated, as stated earlier in siman 17. This applies both to Torah commandments and Rabbinic commandments.”
According to this, it would seem that the mitzvah of chinuch obligates a kotan to drink wine on Purim, once he reaches an understanding of the matter.
R’ Moshe Sternbuch (Mo’adim U’Zemanim, Vol. 2, Purim 190) cites the pirush of the Gaon on the pasuk (Esther 9:28): וימי הפורים האלה לא יעברו מתוך היהודים וזכרם לא יסוף מזרעם – “May these days of Purim never cease among the Jews, nor shall their remembrance perish from their descendants.”
The Gaon explains: “[The phrase] ‘these days of Purim’ refers to feasting and rejoicing; [the phrase] ‘shall never cease among the Jews’ refers to adults. [The phrase] ‘their remembrance’ refers to the obligation to recite the Megillah, and the phrase ‘shall not perish among their descendants’ means that even children are obligated in the recital of the Megillah.”
It emerges from the Gaon, that children are obligated to hear the Megillah, but are not obligated in the Purim meal or the obligation to rejoice on Purim. R’ Moshe Sternbuch is puzzled by this ruling:
“If they have reached the age of chinuch, they are obligated in all mitzvos, which includes feasting and simcha; and if they have not reached the age of chinuch, then they are not obligated in Megillah either!”
He answers:
We may suggest the following explanation ... When the mitzvah involves a physical action, such as reciting shema, donning tefillin, wearing tzitzis ... a father is indeed obligated to be mechanech his son. However, chinuch does not apply when a mitzvah is primarily fulfilled in one’s mind, such as the rejoicing achieved by feasting and drinking. For a minor is incapable of feeling the desired rejoicing. Rather, he views the entire matter as a game and an entertainment. It is thus impossible to train him in this mitzvah ... I found this idea in the Rishonim, for the Ran in Arvei Pesachim (108a) concludes that there is no mitzvah of chinuch for a kotan to drink Four Cups of wine, since one needs to be able to enjoy and rejoice in drinking it, and a minor does not enjoy wine. Thus, the primary intent of the mitzvah is inappropriate for him ... we can now understand the Gra’s position. One is certainly obligated to train his son to hear Megillah, but the mitzvah of feasting and rejoicing is primarily fulfilled in the mind, and as such, do not apply to a minor, who is unable to “taste” this rejoicing.
In other words, the mitzvah of chinuch applies only to mitzvos fulfilled through actions or words, but not to mitzvos fulfilled by one’s emotions. Accordingly, one must educate his son to hear Megillah, since it is fulfilled through the act of hearing; but he need not educate him in feasting and rejoicing, which are mitzvos fulfilled through one’s emotions and a kotan will not experience the desired rejoicing.
Chinuch When the Mitzvah is Not Being Fulfilled Properly
R’ Tzvi Kushelevsky shlita challenges the above based on a Terumas HaDeshen (Psakim U’Kasavim 62) who explains why it is forbidden to feed a kotan something forbidden although he is a minor.
The Terumas HaDeshen writes: “The Torah was concerned lest he fall into the habit of committing transgressions when he matures, because he will be inclined to continue eating what he had been accustomed to.”
Clearly, the purpose of chinuch is to accustom a child to perform mitzvos and refrain from sin. This idea can also be found in Rashi (Chagigah 6a d.h. kotan) where Rashi writes: “The entire objective of chinuch is to train a kotan to continue doing what he is used to when he grows older.”
If so, we may ask: What difference is there whether a kotan is mature enough to comprehend true rejoicing? Ultimately, he is becoming accustomed to drinking wine to fulfill the mitzvah of rejoicing when he grows older, so why would the mitzvah of chinuch – which is “to train him to continue doing mitzvos when he grows older” – not apply?!
Seemingly, this question would be contingent on the machlokes whether the mitzvah of chinuch is fulfilled when a kotan doesn’t perform the mitzvah with all its details. The Mishnah Berurah (658:28) cites varying views as to whether a kotan may use a borrowed lulav on the first day of Succos, considering that an adult does not fulfil his obligation unless he actually owns the lulav.
It would seem that R’ Moshe Sternbuch’s reasoning for why a kotan is not obligated in the mitzvah of rejoicing on Purim conforms to the opinion that chinuch applies only when the mitzvah is fulfilled in its entirety. It follows, therefore, that a kotan would not be obligated in rejoicing on Purim since he does not appreciate the matter. However, according to the poskim who maintain that the mitzvah of chinuch applies even when the kotan does not fulfill the mitzvah in its entirety – as long as he is being trained to perform mitzvos – it would emerge that there should be a mitzvah for a kotan to rejoice and drink on Purim even if he does not fully comprehend the matter, since he is being trained to do mitzvos when he grows older.
However, upon further thought it could be that everyone agrees that even if generally the mitzvah of chinuch applies even if the mitzvah isn’t being performed in all its detail, that only applies to mitzvos being fulfilled through an action, but not to mitzvos fulfilled by one’s heart. For in the former case, the child benefits by fulfilling mitzvos even if he is not fulfilling them properly, since the action itself accustoms him to perform the mitzvah. However, regarding mitzvos that are primarily fulfilled through one’s heart, R’ Sternbuch’s opinion would appear correct, that chinuch cannot apply, since the kotan does not even understand that he is fulfilling the mitzvah – hence there is no benefit in training him in this manner for when he grows older.
We can ask another question on the Mo’adim U’Zemanim, however, this needs some introduction:
Drinking Wine on Purim – An End, or a Means Toward an End?
The Emek Berachah (pg. 136) brings an interesting idea from the Brisker Rav, he explains that on Purim, drinking wine is not simply the means to fulfill the obligation of simcha, as is the case with other Yomim Tovim, but rather drinking is itself the fulfilment of the mitzvah, he writes:
“The simcha of Purim is different than that of other Yomim Tovim, in that we do not generally find an obligation to become intoxicated ‘to the point of being unable to differentiate...’ This is because the primary mitzvah of the other Yomim Tovim is to rejoice with Hashem – and meat and wine are merely the means to stimulate the simcha (as stated in Rambam, Hilchos Yom Tov 6:20). On Purim, however, the pasuk states: משתה ושמחה – ‘feasting and gladness’, which conveys that the feasting itself is the mitzvah and not a mere means to achieve simcha. Based on this distinction, Chazal enacted the obligation to become intoxicated ‘to the point of not being able to differentiate’.”
Question on the Mo’adim U’Zemanim
The Mo’adim U’Zemanim compares the mitzvah of drinking on Purim to that of Four Cups of wine on Pesach in that both are fulfilled primarily in the heart, and thus do not apply to a minor. This approach, however, is inconsistent with the understanding of the Brisker Rav. The Brisker Rav asserts that the obligation of drinking wine on Purim is fundamentally different from that of other Yomim Tovim. Drinking wine on Purim is not merely the means to fulfill the mitzvah of rejoicing, as is the case by other Yomim Tovim, but is rather the fulfillment of the mitzvah of rejoicing itself. Accordingly, drinking wine on Purim is a mitzvah fulfilled through an action just like hearing the Megillah, and thus the mitzvah of chinuch should indeed apply! It is only regarding the Four Cups of wine that a kotan is exempt since these serve as a means toward achieving joy, which a kotan is incapable of. If so, the Gaon’s differentiation between the mitzvah of Megillah (in which a kotan is obligated) and feasting and rejoicing (in which he is exempt) requires further study, since according to the Brisker Rav feasting and drinking on Purim are not merely a means; they are an end. Tzorich iyun.
