Chapter 2: Who is obligated to honor and fear their father and mother
The offspring who is obligated to honor his parent
1. Women-Is a woman obligated to honor her father and mother?
Both men and women are equally obligated to honor and fear their father and mother. This is with exception to a married woman, as will be explained next.
A married woman: A married woman is exempt from [fulfilling the acts of] the command of honoring her father and mother, being that she is subjugated to her husband [i.e. Reshus Acheorim Aleha] and is hence unable to fulfill this command. [Thus, a husband’s wishes come before that of her parents even regarding those matters in which the wife is not subjugated to her husband. If, however, her husband is not particular about her continuing to honor her parents, then her obligation to honor them remains just like a man. Furthermore, it is praiseworthy for the husband to instruct his wife explicitly to precede the wishes of her father and mother prior to his. Practically, we assume that the husband is not particular unless he explicitly instructs the wife otherwise. Thus, a wife is to fulfill her fathers or mothers needs prior to her husband’s, unless she explicitly heard from her husband otherwise, or it can be assumed that in such a case the husband would not compromise on being preceded.]
A divorcee or widow: The above exemption of a married woman applies only so long as she is still married, however, if she becomes divorced or widowed then she becomes obligated in the command to honor [and fear] her father and mother just like a man.
Which types of honor is a married woman exempt from?
She is exempt from all types of honors even those which she is not obligated to provide for her husband. Nevertheless, all those honors that she is able to do for her parents without diminishing from her husband’s needs, she must continue to do on behalf of her parents. Thus, she must still stand on their behalf when they enter the room [unless they forgive their honor]. Certainly, she is still required to speak with her parents respectfully as doing so will not diminish any of her husband’s needs.
Matters related to fearing one’s parents: A married woman is only exempt from matters of honor and not from matters of fear that she is obligated to have towards her parents. Accordingly, it still remains for a married woman to sit in her parents’ place, or contradict their word, or call them by name. However, she’s not obligated to listen to the instructions of her parents when they contradict the honor or instructions of her husband.
If a married woman is staying by her parents, is she obligated in her parents’ honor?
If a married woman is staying by her parents without her husband, then she is obligated in their honor. Furthermore, some Poskim rule that she is obligated in their honor if her husband is there. Other Poskim, however, rule that she is exempt from honoring them even when she is staying by her parents and her husband is not with her.
May husband prevent his wife from talking with her parents?
May husband prevent his wife from visiting her parents?
Must a married woman help support her parents who are poor?
Yes, as will be explained in Chapter 5 Halacha 14B.
2. Child before the age of Mitzvos:
A child was below the age of Bar/Bas Mitzvah is exempt from the mitzvah of honoring his parents just like he is exempt from all mitzvot of the Torah. However, some Poskim rule that although a child is not punished for not doing this mitzvah, just as he is not punished if he doesn’t fulfill other mitzvah’s, nonetheless, he is obligated to honor his parents, and the parents and teachers must educate him to do so, and so is the practical ruling and custom.
Does one need to repent for his lack of Kibbud Av Vaeim that he transgressed when he was a child?A child [below Bar/Bas Mitzvah] who hit his father or committed other sins while still a child, although he does not need to repent when he grows older, nevertheless, it is proper for him to accept upon himself a certain matter for the sake of repentance and atonement, even though he had transgressed before he became of punishable age. [The purpose of this repentance is not for the sake of removing Divine retribution, being that he is not liable for any punishment. However, the forbidden act, despite not being punishable, leaves a damaging impact and spiritual stain on the soul of the child. It is for this reason that the child should do some act of repentance for the sake of cleansing his soul of any spiritual blemish.]
Is a person who hit his parent when he was a child below the age of Chinuch encouraged to perform a certain matter for the sake of repentance?
Some Poskim rule that the above Teshuvah is only relevant for children who damaged when they were of age to remember what they did. If, however, they were of very young age, and they don’t remember the incident, they are not required to do Teshuvah at all. However, some Tzadikim did Teshuvah even for pain that they caused their parents prior to the age of Chinuch.
3. A son who is very old, or a great scholar, or leader [i.e., Nassi or king]:
Even if a son is a great Torah scholar, and even if he is very old, he still remains obligated in the Mitzvah of honoring his parents. Even if he is a leader such as a Nassi or king he remains obligated in the mitzvah. Even a son who is the main Rebbe of his father in Torah learning is obligated to honor his parents although with some limitations as explained in chapter 5 Halacha 22. Nonetheless, some Poskim rule that a son is exempt from performing those matters of service for his parents which are beneath his dignity due to his old age or scholarliness, or prestigious position.
4. Mamzer and out of wedlock child-Is a Mamzer obligated to honor her father and mother?
A Mamzer is obligated to honor and fear his father [and mother, even though the child is exempt from capital punishment for hitting and cursing them prior to them doing Teshuvah]. This applies even if his father was a Rasha, as explained in Halacha 12. [Certainly, a child born out of wedlock is obligated to honor his father and mother.]
5. Shtuki-One who does not know the identity of his father:
Mother: A person who is Halachically defined as a Shtuki, which is that he does not know the identity of his father even though he knows the identity of his mother, is [nonetheless] liable for hitting and cursing his mother. [Accordingly, it is understood that such a son is equally obligated to honor his mother even though he does not know the identity of his father.]
Acclaimed father: A person who is Halachically defined as a Shtuki is not liable for hitting and cursing his father. This applies even if the mother claims a certain man to be his father, nonetheless, she cannot cause him to get punished due to her word.
6. Gentile-Sheva Mitzvos Bnei Noach:
Although Gentiles were not commanded in the laws of honoring and fearing their father and mother as part of the seven Noahide commands, nevertheless, they are practically obligated in showing some degree of reverence to their parents. [Thus, it is forbidden for a Gentile to shame, curse, or hit his parents. Likewise, they are obligated to listen to their instructions, although they are not obligated to feed and clothe them.] A gentile who honors his parents receives reward even if he is not obligated to do so from the letter of the law.
|Esav honoring his father:
Esav was renowned for his meticulous honor that he showed his father. Until this day his descendants reap the rewards of his mitzvah, and due to it were given the power to rule over the Jewish people.
7. Child of a gentile mother and Jewish father:
A person’s son from a maidservant [i.e., Shifcha Kenanis] or from a Gentile woman [is not considered Jewish and hence] is not liable [for hitting or cursing] his father or mother. [Likewise, this child who is a Gentile is not obligated in the laws of honoring his parents, neither his Jewish father nor Gentile mother. This applies even if the child later converts to Judaism.]
8. Child of a Gentile father and Jewish mother:
The child of a Jewish mother and gentile father is not liable for hitting or cursing his mother or father, as only one who is liable for hitting and cursing his father is liable for hitting and cursing his mother, and since he is exempt from cursing his father who is a Gentile, so too he is exempt from cursing his mother. Nonetheless, some Poskim ruled that the child of a Gentile father and Jewish mother remains obligated in honoring and fearing his mother even though he is exempt from honoring and fearing his Gentile father. However, other Poskim leave this matter in question, as perhaps since he is exempt from honoring his father so too he is exempt from honoring his mother.
9. Ger/Converts- Is a convert obligated to honor and fear his parents?
Hitting or cursing or shaming: One who converted is not liable [for hitting or cursing] his father or mother. This applies even if his father or mother also converted. Even if a woman converted when she was already pregnant, then the child born is not liable [for hitting or cursing] his father or mother. [Nevertheless,] it remains forbidden for a convert to curse or hit or shame his father [or mother] in order so people do not say that his conversion caused him to leave a higher state of holiness to a lower state of holiness. This applies even if his parents are idol worshipers.
Honoring and fearing: Due to the reason stated above, a Ger is Rabbinically obligated to slightly respect his Gentile parents. [This especially applies if the parents also converted and are now Jewish. Nevertheless, even then the obligation of respect is only Rabbinical even if the mother converted while pregnant. He is to respect his parents on the same level that is accepted within the Gentile world. However, some Poskim rule that he is to honor his parents to the same level that a child must honor Jewish parents. If one’s Gentile parents are ill one is to care for them if there is no one else available to do so.]
Ger/convert mourning his gentile parent: A convert does not mourn the passing of his relatives. This applies even if his relatives converted as well. Thus, a convert does not mourn the passing of his children who converted. Likewise, a convert does not mourn the passing of a parent who converted. [Likewise, a convert who had a Jewish father does not mourn his passing. If, however, the mother converted while pregnant with the child, then the mother and child mourn each other’s passing, although the child and father do not mourn each other’s passing even if he converted with them. Practically, the child may choose to mourn a non-Jewish parent if not doing so will cause embarrassment to the family.]
Ger/convert saying Kaddish for his gentile parent? Yes. However, he is to try to do so inconspicuously.
Ger/convert praying for his gentile parent: A convert’s prayer on behalf of his parents does not help [to the same extent as a regular son who Davens for his father]. [However, he may Daven for him if he so chooses, and such a prayer does have some affect.
From the Rav’s Desk
Dear Rabbi, I am a convert, but my father was Jewish and would like to know whether I should keep the Yahrzeit of my father as well as whether I receive precedence to lead the prayer for the Amud over somebody who is within the year of mourning. Basically, we only have a single minyan available and the person who is within his year of mourning for his mother generally leads the prayers, although he gives it up for anyone who has a Yahrzeit, and I would like to know if I receive the same status?
Being that you are a righteous convert, therefore from the letter of the law you are not obligated to keep the Yahrzeit customs for your biological Jewish father. Nonetheless, you may do so if you choose and so is recommended. Thus, you should keep the regular Yahrzeit customs. However, you cannot differ somebody else from his rights to the Amud during his year of mourning for his parent, although if the person agrees he may forgo that right on your behalf, if he chooses.
Explanation: A convert is considered to not have any halachic relations including regarding the laws of mourning, and therefore from the letter of the law is not obligated to mourn his parents. This applies even if his father was Jewish. Nonetheless, certainly he may choose to do so just like any Jew may take upon himself to say Kaddish on behalf of another Jew. However, obviously cannot differ somebody else who was an actual Chiyuv.
Sources: See regarding a convert not mourning his relatives: Michaber and Rama Y.D. 374:5; Shach 374:4; see regarding the laws of precedence: Kiryas Chana 35, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 376:7; Beis Hillel 376 that so is implied from Rama ibid and Maharik Shoresh 44; Chasam Sofer 345, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 376:7
10. Slave-Child of a slave and maidservant [Eved Canani and Shifcha Cananis]:
A slave does not have any lineage, and hence his father [or mother] is not considered like his father for any purpose. Accordingly, even if a slave was emancipated, he is not liable for cursing or hitting his father [or mother] and there is no prohibition involved in doing so any more than any other person. [Thus, the child of a Jewish owned slave and maidservant is not obligated the laws of honoring his parents even after the child is freed from being a slave.]
11. Adopted children:
A. Adoptive Parents-Is an adopted child obligated in the laws of Kibbud Av Vaeim towards his adoptive parents?
Although a person who adopts an orphan is considered like one who has given birth to him, nonetheless, a child who was adopted is not obligated in the scriptural Mitzvah of honoring and fearing his adoptive father and mother. Nonetheless, he is to show them respect more than the norm, as although he is not obligated in the mitzvah of Kibbud Av Vaeim, he is obligated to show them gratitude for bringing him up and troubling themselves on his behalf. [In this regard, it is similar to a convert who is to still show some extra respect to his biological parents despite not being obligated in the scriptural laws of Kibbud Av Vaeim. Likewise, he may be obligated to honor them similar to the obligation for one to honor his Rebbe. Thus, for example, although he is not obligated to stand up for them when they enter a room, the adopted child should try to care for them and serve them their requests.]
May one say Kaddish for the passing of an adopted parent? Yes, an adopted son is to say Kaddish on behalf of his adoptive parents after their passing if there are no biological sons saying Kaddish for the deceased parent.
B. Biological Parents-Is an adopted child obligated in the laws of Kibbud Av Vaeim towards his biological parents?
Yes. He is obligated in all the laws of honoring and fearing his biological parents just as any other child would be obligated towards his parents. This applies even though his biological parents have never done any kindness towards him, and perhaps have created resentment in the child for having given him over for adoption, nonetheless the biological child is still obligated in the mitzvah.
Should an adopted child place effort to discover the identity of his biological parents so he can honor them and fulfill the mitzvah of Kibbud Av Vaeim? This matter debated amongst today’s Poskim. While some say that it is proper to discover their identity in order to fulfill the mitzvah, others say that it is better not to in order not to put oneself into a challenge of transgressing this mitzvah. [Practically, the adopted child should weigh the pros versus the cons of knowing the identification of his biological parents before making such a decision and seek consultation if necessary.]
The parent who is obligated to be honored and feared
12. Parent is a Rasha-Must one honor a parent who is a Rasha?
The dispute: Some Poskim rule that one is obligated to honor and fear his father [and mother] even if his father [or mother] is a [habitual] Rasha and big Baal Aveiros [i.e. transgressor]. Other Poskim, however, rule that one is not obligated to honor [or fear] his father [and mother] if his father [or mother] is a [habitual] Rasha [and was rebuked for doing so and is not considered a Tinok Shenishba], unless he has performed Teshuvah. [This applies whether he transgresses a positive or negative command. This, however, only applies if the parent is a habitual transgressor and not if he simply transgressed once. Likewise, it only applies if the parent transgresses a Biblical prohibition or command, and not by a transgression of a rabbinical prohibition. Likewise, this only applies if the parent has yet to repent, however, if there is circumstantial evidence that leans to support the fact the parent did Teshuvah, then he is no longer a Rasha and must be respected. Likewise, this only applies if the parent is not considered a Tinok Shenishba, otherwise one is obligated to respect him. For all practical purposes, almost all nonreligious Jews today fall under this category as will be explained the Q&A.]
The final ruling: Practically, one is to follow the former opinion which obligates one to honor his parents even if they are habitual transgressors. However, the above is only applicable if the parent sins due to ignorance or due to not overcoming his personal lusts. However, if the parent is a Mumar Lehachis who recognizes his creator [and is thus not a Tinok Shenishba] and purposely rebels against him, then even according to the first opinion, there is no need to respect him and it is even forbidden to do so. Furthermore, one may be lenient in a case where it is possible that the transgressing parent is doing so Lehachis, relying on the second opinion above. Furthermore, even in the case that the parent is transgressing out of lust, one is not obligated to honor him after his death.]
Shaming and causing pain to one’s parent: According to all opinions, one may not cause pain to one’s parents even if they are a Rasha, and one is thus only exempt from honoring them according to the lenient opinion brought the above. [Accordingly, certainly one may not shame his parents even if they are a Rasha. The Zohar states that Rachel was punished for stealing her father’s idols and causing him pain even though her to her intent was to save him from idolatry. Some Poskim, however, rule that this prohibition is only against actively shaming or causing pain to one’s parent, however one is not obligated to actively prevent shame or pain from occurring to such a parent who is a Rasha, and he may choose to remain passive.]
The status of a Tinok Shenishba and today’s non-religious Jews:
Background: The concept of a Tinok Shenishba is recorded in the Talmud and Rishonim, and is defined as a person who is an Apikores in his belief system or a Mumar in his Torah observance, but does not receive the halachic definition and severity of an Apikores and Mumar, and is hence not to be treated like an Apikores, being that he cannot be blamed for his heretical beliefs and behaviors. Now, for the definition of who enters into this category of people who cannot be blamed for their heretical beliefs, we find many levels, as well as debates amongst the Poskim. The most basic definition of a Tinok Shenishba, which is not under debate, is a child who has been brought up in a home of heresy. Now, while the above definition of Tinok Shenishba certainly applies so long as the child does not even know that he’s really Jewish, it is debated in the Rishonim and Poskim whether it still applies even after he discovers his Jewish identity. Some Poskim rule that once the Tinok Shenishba is made aware of his Jewish identity and of the Jewish people and their observance of Torah and Mitzvos, then if he still continues in his ways of nonobservance, then he loses the status of a Tinok Shenishba and is considered like a regular Apikores. Other Poskim, however, rule that he continues to be considered a Tinok Shenishba even after he discovers his Jewish identity and the Jewish religion. Practically, the main opinion follows this latter approach. Furthermore, even according to the dissenting opinion which holds that they are considered like heretics, the level of exposure that is necessary for them to leave their status of Tinok Shenishba, is so high that today there virtually no longer exists any Apikorosim, even if a child was brought up observant and then went off the Derech. Furthermore, even if this level of exposure has been reached, the person retains the status of a Tinok Shenishba until he is properly given reproof for his mistaken ways, and hence since today people no longer know how to give reproof even if they try, therefore almost all nonreligious Jews today retain the status of a Tinok Shenishba.
The practical law by todays non-frum Jews and the law of Kibbud Av Vaeim: Based on the above, the final ruling follows that most if not all nonreligious Jews today are defined as a Tinok Shenishba, and hence a child is obligated in respecting his nonreligious parents even according to the lenient opinion above. Nonetheless, some Poskim are lenient in this matter even today and rule that a child does not have to respect his non-observant parents any more than acceptable in the secular world. However, even according to this opinion, he nonetheless remains obligated to respect his nonobservant parents to the same level expected in the secular world in order not to cause a desecration of G-d’s name and have them remorse even more the fact that the child became observed. Likewise, according to all opinions it is forbidden to shame them or cause them pain as explained above.
Must a child who grew up not observant and became a Baal Teshuvah honor his parents who are not religious?
Yes, as explained above. Furthermore, even according to the opinions above who are lenient, one must still show them the respect that is accepted within secular culture and may not shame or cause them pain. Furthermore, even according to the lenient opinion, through showing them more respect than accepted in the secular society due to having become observant, this itself will encourage the parents to become closer to observance and to respect their child’s choice.
Must a child who grew up observant honor his parents who are no longer religious?
Yes, as explained above.
Should Baalei Teshuvah not live with or near their parents in order to avoid friction?
In all cases in which leading a Torah lifestyle will cause friction with one’s parents who are not yet accepting of one’s child choices and may get upset about his decisions to keep Shabbos and kosher especially in the home, then it is best for the child to minimize as much as possible the situations from occurring. Hence, it is better that he lives in a different country, or a distant area, and certainly not within the home of the parent.
13. Shoteh-Parent is old, or mentally incapacitated; institutionalizing a parent, old age homes:
In general, one is obligated to honor and fear his parents even if they have lost their mind. Nonetheless,regarding dealing with the parent, there are certain leniency’s which are applied towards the child in such case, as will be explained in this Halacha.
A. Dealing with a parent who has lost their mind:
If a person’s father or mother has lost their mind, the child needs to try to treat them and act with them in accordance with their mental capability, until [G-d] has mercy on them [and returns them to sanity]. If, however, it is not possible for the child to deal with his parent being that the parent has become unbearably insane, then he may go and leave them be and instruct others to properly deal with them. [Hence, if one’s parent has lost their mind or becomes unbearable to care for in their old age, then one may enter the parent into an old age home or other facility that can care for them. Furthermore, he’s even encouraged to have other people deal with his parents then to deal with them himself in a dishonorable manner. Furthermore, even if there is no one who is able to take care of them due to their state of insanity, the son may absolve himself from responsibility of dealing with them. However, the above allowance to institutionalize a parent only applies if one is truly not able to deal with his parents because of their mental deterioration, if however one can deal with them but is simply worried that he may not honor them as much as is required, then it is disputed amongst the Poskim as to whether he may place them in an institution. Practically, in all cases that the care for the parent would be better if they were in the institution, then one may place the parent in the institution even if the son can also care for his parent but to a lesser degree. Likewise, in all cases that the son would need to fight with his parent in order for them to follow with the care that is required, then it is better that they be placed in an institution and have this done by others.]
Is a child obligated to listen to the instructions of a parent who is insane?
No, with the exception to matters relating to their general health and well-being.
B. May one place his elderly parents in an old age home:
This follows the same law as above, and hence if the children cannot care for the parent due to the overburdening demands, or if they will simply receive better care in the old-age home, or due to them entering into too many arguments with the parent, then the parent may be placed in an old age home.
What is to be done if there is a dispute in the family as to which institution or old age home to send the parent to?
If the parents have not made their opinion known, or are too incapacitated to do so, then if one of the children have been appointed by the parent as their medical proxy, then his decision is the final decision in this matter. If no medical proxy was appointed, then the matter is to be given to the local Beis Din and they are to appoint a medical proxy on behalf of the parents for the decision to be made.
C. Hiring another person to care for one’s parents in one’s place?
Based on the above, it is understood that it is permitted for a child to hire another person to care for his parents in his stead. One may even hire a Gentile for this purpose. Nonetheless, as is the general rule, is a greater mitzvah for one to personally serve and honor his parents then to do so through a hired emissary. This applies even if the son is a Torah scholar. If, however, the son lives a distance from the parent, or simply does not get along well with them, then he may hire someone to provide them their needs rather than do so himself. In such a case, it is proper for one to pay the emissary for his troubles, even if the emissary is willing to do so for free. Nonetheless, if the parent desires that specifically his son care for him, then he cannot delegate the duty to another person to do so, and is even to live next to his parents for this purpose.
14. Children who do not get along with their parents:
A. Narcissistic parents-May one distance himself from his parents if they have bad character traits and cause him much pain?
Yes. It is permitted for a son or daughter to distance themselves from their parent if the parent is of bad temperament and causes tremendous pain to the child. [It is permitted to do so in order so the child does not come to be put in a situation where he will belittle their honor. However, he may not do so in order to purposely cause them pain, and hence it is self-understood that he may not necessarily sever ties with them and is only to distance himself to a point where a healthy relationship can be maintained. In all cases one should consult with a Rav for advice prior to making any decision of distance and estrangement.]
B. May one distance himself from a parent who is an alcoholic or addicted to drugs?
Yes, as stated above.
C. May one distance himself from his parents if they simply have bad chemistry and don’t get along?
Yes, as stated above.
D. May one distance himself from his parents if they request from him things that are not befitting for them?
 Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 408-417
 Michaber 240:17; Rambam Mamrim 6:6; Mishneh Kiddushin 29a “All positive commands that are not time-dependent both men and women are equally obligated in”; Kiddushin 30b; Tosefta Kiddushin 1:8; Yerushalmi Kiddushin 1:7; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:48 and Miluim p. 638; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 422; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 571 footnote 103-111
 The source: This is learned from the verse “Ish Imo Veaviv Tirau”, with the word Tirau/fear being in plural, thus implying that both a son and daughter are obligated to honor their parents. [Braisa in Kiddushin 30b; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 683]
 This refers to a Nessua, however, an Arussa who still lives by her father’s home is obligated in his honor. [Divrei Shalom 1:111; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 422 footnote 707
 Seemingly she is certainly exempt from doing the acts of fear towards her parents, as the expounding of this exemption is learned specifically from the command involving fear. However, see Q&A below that the Poskim rule that she is obligated in fear.
 Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; Kiddushin ibid; Rashba Kesubos 39a; Perisha 240:25
The meaning of this statement: Some write that this means that the husband has authority over her in place of her parents, as she needs to provide him with his needs at all times. [Tosafus HaRashba ibid in name of his teacher and Tosafus Harosh ibid; Riy brought in Tosafus Yesheinim ibid; Perisha ibid; Implication of Michaber ibid and Beis Yosef Y.D. 240 who write that she is Meshubedes Lebaalah; Gur Aryeh Kiddushin 30b and Meshivas Nafesh 1:16-3 that since we rule that Kibbud is Mishel Av, therefore, the husband does not need to give his wife over to serve her parents; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 698 and 708] Others however negate this reason as a woman is only Rabbinically Meshubad to work for her husband, and hence they write that the exemption of the married woman is because she is simply not found by her parents. [Tosafus Kiddushin 30b; Tosafus Rashba and Tosafos Yesheinim ibid who personally question the previous opinion; See Divrei Shmuel Derush 11; Igros Moshe O.C. 1:158 that Biblically she is required to be in her husband’s home; Tzafichas Bedevash 54 that Biblically she is still obligated and it is the Sages who uprooted her obligation; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 701-705]
 The scriptural source: This is learned from the use of the term “Ish” in the verse mentioned above, to teach us that only a man remains constantly obligated to honor the parents while a women’s obligation can sometimes be revoked. [Braisa in Kiddushin 30b]
 Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:255
 Shach 240:19
 Sefer Chassidim 335
 Chayeh Adam 67:17; Kitzur SHU”A 143:13; See Chinuch 33
 Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; Rav Idi Bar Avin in Kiddushin 30b “Rav Idi Bar Avin states that the above exemption of a married woman applies only so long as she is still married, however, if she becomes divorced then she becomes obligated in the command to honor her father and mother just like a man.”
 See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 573 footnote 126-129
 Igros Moshe Y.D. 1:255
 Pirush Hamishnayos Rambam Kiddushin 1:7 [29a]; Ralbag Parshas Yisro; Chinuch Mitzvah 33; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 424
 Ralbag Parshas Yisro; Sefer Morah Horim Ukevoda 7:11 in name of Rav Elyashiv; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 424; However, see Mishneh Halachos 7:153
 Chareidim Asei 9 Asei 1:26; Mizrachi Vayikra 19:3; Karban Aaron on Toras Kohanim 19:3; Rishon Letziyon 240:17; Maharsha Kiddushin 34a; Chasdei Dovid on Tosefta Kiddushin 1:8; Mishneh Halachos 7:153; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 424 footnote 715; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 572 footnote 112-117
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that a married woman is not obligated in fearing her parents, just as she is exempt from honoring them. [Maharitz Geiso in Teshuvos Hageonim 120; Maharal in Gur Aryeh Kedoshim 19:3; Meiah Shearim 341; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 424; Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 572 footnote 118-121]
 Mahritz Geios Teshuvos Hageonim 120; Maharal in Gur Aryeh Kedoshim 19:3 and in Agados Kiddushin ibid; Sefer Hamakneh Kiddushin 31b; Maharam Shick Kiddushin 30b; Biurei Rav Perlow on Rasag 9; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 424 footnote 719; Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 573 footnote 122-125
 Rameh Mipano 89; Divrei Shmuel Derush 11 according to opinion of Tosafus that the exemption is because she is in her husband’s house
 Chidushim Kadmonim Kiddushin 30b
 Tzapichis Bedevash 54; Divrei Shmuel Derush 11 according to opinion of Riy that the exemption is because she is subjugated to her husband; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 422 footnote 706
 Mishneh Halachos 7:153
 Michaber E.H. 74:9; Rambam Ishus 13:14; Semag Lavin 81 [once or twice a month]
 See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 425
 Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 33; Minchas Soles 33:1
 Sut Bashamayim Rosh 326; Kisei Deharsana 73; See Maharsham 2:224-18
 Admur 343:11; Rama 343; Mahariy 62; Bach 343; Shvus Yaakov 1:177 brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah C.M. 349:2; Gilyon Maharsha Y.D. 240:1; Based on story in Shabbos 56b; Baba Kama 98b, brought in Kaf Hachaim 343:32; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:1 footnote 25
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that a child is not required to repent at all for his wrongdoing even when he becomes older. [Beis Yaakov 3, brought in Shvus Yaakov ibid] Practically, we do not rule like his opinion. [Shvus Yaakov ibid; Kaf Hachaim ibid]
 Bach 343: The verse in Mishlei 19:2 states that “Even without knowledge, a soul is no good.” This teaches us that even a child that transgresses a sin without knowledge causes impurity to his soul, it is thus proper for him to do Teshuvah; See Terumos Hadeshen 2:62; Likkutei Sichos 14 p. 144 footnote 13; Sichos Kodesh Balak 5730; Shulchan Hamelech 343
 Sefer Chassidim ibid “However if he was very young when the action was committed and he does not remember, he does not need to pay”; Beis Yaakov 3; See Piskeiy Teshuvos 343:14; Lehoros Nasan 4:34; 6:102
 Maor Vashemesh Parshas Maaseiy and Divrei Chaim Parshas Ki Savo regarding Reb Meilech Milizensk that he repented for paining his mother prior to birth and when nursing
 Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 425
 Meiri Kiddushin 31b; Darkei Moshe Y.D. 240:7
 See Kesubos 103a and Haflah there; Melachim 1 2:19 that King Solomon bowed to his mother in her honor; Meiah Shearim 36
 Ramban Toras Adam Inyan Keriah; Ritva Bava Metzia 33a in name of Ramban; Gilyon Tosafus Shita Mekubetzes Bava Metzia 32a
 Michaber 240:18; Tur 240; Rambam Mamarim 6:11; Mishneh Yevamos 22a; Sanhedrin 85b; Rif Yevamos 5a; Rosh Yevamos 2:3; Chinuch Mitzvah 212; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 408
 Rambam Mamarim 6:10
 Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 408
 Michaber 241:7; Rambam Mamrim 5:9
 Pesakim Uteshuvos 241:7; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibbud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 375; Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 574 footnote 133-146
 Omitted from Sanhedrin 56b; See Kiddushin 31a which implies that a gentile is not commanded in the Mitzvah of Kibbud Av “Ula taught: The extent that one must go to honor one’s parents can be learned from a certain idol worshiper from the city of Ashkelon by the name of Dama the son of Nesina. The sages came to him with a business offer to purchase an item of his that would give him 600,000 gold coins as profit. However, since the key to retrieve the item was under the head of his father who was sleeping, he could not sell the item, as he did not want to awaken his father and cause him pain. Rebbe Eliezer taught the same story, however adding that the item that the sages desire to purchase was a precious stone for the Ephod, and that the next year G-d rewarded the Gentile by having a red cow born to his heard. When the sages approached him regarding the sale of the red cow, he replied that although he could request any money in the world, he only request the amount of money that he lost from not selling the precious stone the previous year due to his desire to honor his parent. Rav Chanina stated that if someone who is not even commanded in the mitzvah receives such reward all the more so will be the reward of one who is commanded and does so.”; Nazir 61a; Rabbeinu Chananel Ben Shmuel and Rabbeinu Baruch on Kiddushin ibid; Rabbeinu Peretz on Nazir ibid; Beis Hillel 241; Yad Avraham 241; Zekan Aron 2 Y.D. 87; Yad Shaul 241:4; Shaareiy Deiah 241:9; Divrei Yatziv Y.D. 127; Likkutei Sichos 5:147 and 154-155; 313-314; 406; Vol. 36 p. 95; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnotes 63-64
 Implication of Michaber Y.D. 241:6 who says that a convert is obligated to respect his parents being that he was obligated to do so prior to his conversion [Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 241; However, see Likkutei Sichos Volume 5 p. 154 footnote 38 that from here we learn that he is obligated in not shaming his father and not that he must also respect]; Implication of Megillah 17a that Yaakov as punished for the 22 years that he did not serve his parents [See Likkutei Sichos p. 154 footnote 32]; All Geonim who list Kibbud Av Vaeim as part of the laws a gentile is to keep [brought in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 67-68]; Rashi end of Parshas Noach that Avraham was required to fulfill Kibbud Av and 9:23; Binyamon Zev 169; Zekan Aron 2 Y.D. 87; Igros Haperi Megadim Igeres 3:20, brought in Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 241:9; Nachal Eshkol 2 p. 126; Keli Chemda Yisro 7; Meiah Shearim Shaar 51; Igros Moshe 2:130; Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnotes 66; Likkutei Sichos 5:51 footnote 34 that Kibbud Av existed before Matan Torah and therefore Sheim was required to assist his father Noah in assisting with feeding the animals in the ark; Likkutei Sichos 5:142 footnote 5b; p. 147; p. 154 that at the very least they were commanded against shaming their parents and therefore we find that Cham was punished for shaming his father [See Bereishis Raba 36:6; Pirkei Derebbe Eliezer 23; Rashi 9:23] and that is also why Lavan was considered wicked for the fact that he answered prior to his father Besuel [see Rashi Chayeh Sarah 24:50] p. 160-161 that gentiles were only commanded in a certain degree of honoring their parents and not to the full extent of a Jew after the giving of the Torah
The reason: This obligation is due to that a) the Gentiles have accepted upon themselves to honor their parents despite not being commanded in it. [Geonim ibid; Zekan Aron 2 Y.D. 87; Igros Haperi Megadim Igeres 3:20 and Poras Yosef, brought in Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 241:9; Likkutei Sichos 5:147] b) The Gentiles are slightly obligated in honoring their parents in order to show their gratitude and not cause a desecration of G-d’s name. [Keli Chemda Yisro 7; Igros Moshe 2:130; Likkutei Sichos Volume 5 p. 160 footnote 67-68 and page 407 based on Yerushalmi Peiah 1:1] c) The Gentiles accepted this command upon themselves when the Torah was given. [Meiah Shearim Shaar 51] d) Any matter that is required for the settlement of the world is an obligation even upon Gentiles and is included in the command to civilize the world and establish courts of justice [i.e., Dinim]. Hence, even gentiles were commanded in a certain degree of honoring their parents but not to the full extent of the Jewish people after the giving of the Torah in which case honoring one’s parents became a full independent command. [Likkutei Sichos Volume 5 p. 160 and p. 406 based on Ramban and Yerushalmi ibid; Nachal Eshkol ibid; Keli Chemda ibid] e) Any matter which the human mind obligates as a part of morality and civility is obligatory upon gentiles. [Hakdamas Ran Gaon Brachos; Yad Efraim 4 p. 170; Likkutei Sichos Vol. 36 P. 95 footnote 47] See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 376 footnote 67-75; See Likkutei Sichos 36:96 that there are two aspects in the mitzvah of honoring one’s parents, one an intellectual moral aspect which is between man and his fellow, and a second which is between man and God, as through honoring one’s parents one honors God. The Rebbe there explains that only the former aspect is relevant to Gentiles, while the latter aspect is only relevant for Jews, as only by Jews is the infant light of God united with their bodies, and hence does honoring them not consist of idolatry, in contrast to Gentiles in which honoring them with consist of Shituf.
 Keli Chemda ibid
 Kiddushin ibid
 See Targum Yonason Ben Uziel Vayishlach 32:12; Bereishis Raba 82:14; Devarim Raba 1:5; Zohar 1:146; Likkutei Sichos 36:91 footnote 10
 See Tanchuma 8 and Pesikta Rabasi 23 that Moshiach cannot come until Esav receives his reward for honoring his parents
 Michaber 241:8; Rambam Mamrim 5:9
 Rabbeinu Yerucham 1:4; Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 33; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 409
 See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 409
 Michaber 241:8; Rambam Mamrim 5:9 [regarding father] 10 [regarding mother]; Bava Basra 149a
 Minchas Soles 33:3
 Minchas Chinuch 33; P”M Pesicha Koleles 2:19
 See Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:50 and Miluim 9; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 409
 See Michaber 241:8; Rambam Mamrim 5:9 [regarding father] 10 [regarding mother]; Bava Basra 149a
The reason for the exemption of the mother: If a woman converted when she was already pregnant, then the child born is not liable for hitting or cursing his mother, as the verse states that one is liable for cursing his father and mother and from here we learn as only one who is liable for hitting and cursing his father is liable for hitting and cursing his mother. [Rambam Mamrim 5:10] Now, as for the reason that a Shtuki is nonetheless liable for cursing his mother even though he does not know his father and is not held liable for doing so, this is because if witnesses would come and testify regarding the identity of his father that he would be liable since the potential liability for cursing his father exists he is therefore liable for cursing and hitting his mother and is not included in the above exemption learned from Scripture. [Kesef Mishneh and Radbaz on Rambam ibid]
 Michaber 241:9; Rambam Mamrim 5:11; See Likkutei Sichos Volume 5 p. p. 154 that at the very least they were commanded against shaming their parents and therefore we find that Cham was punished for shaming his father [See Bereishis Raba 36:6; Pirkei Derebbe Eliezer 23; Rashi 9:23] and that is also why Lavan was considered wicked for the fact that he answered prior to his father Besuel [see Rashi Chayeh Sarah 24:50] it is for this reason that is forbidden for a convert to shame his parents as indeed he was commanded in this prior to his conversion. [Likkutei Sichos ibid footnote 38] See there that possibly the source for this prohibition is the fact that we see even Ravens do not shame their parents and we are required to learn from the nature of animals prior to the giving of the Torah [Likkutei Sichos ibid]
 Michaber 241:9
 Rambam Mamrim 5:11; Chinuch Mitzvah 260; Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:130; Kinyan Torah 4:102; Divrei Yatziv Y.D. 127; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid Miluim p. 639; However, see Shevet Halevi 5 Kuntrus Hamitzvos 24:3; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 409-410
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that a convert is exempt from honoring his father and mother. [Tur 241]
 Zichron Yehuda Teshuvos 15
 Implication of Michaber 241:8
 Igros Moshe ibid
 Or Sameiach on Mamarim ibid
 Igros Moshe ibid
 Michaber Y.D. 374:5; Rambam
 Michaber ibid
 Rama ibid; Shach 374:4
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule a convert must mourn the passing of his mother who converted with him. [Mordechai, according to opinion that first day of mourning is Biblical] However, according to our ruling that the first day of mourning is Rabbinical, he is not obligated to mourn his mother’s passing. [Shach ibid]
 Michaber E.H. 4:5 “A Jew who has relations with one of these women, the offspring follows the mother’s identity.”; Rama O.C. 282:3 [regarding getting Aliyah]; Y.D. 159:3 [regarding Ribis]; E.H. 16:2; 44:9; Rambam Hilchos Issurei Biyah 12:7; 15:3-4, 6; Rebbe Yochanon in Yevamos 17a and 23a and 45b based on Devarim 7:3-4; Mishnah Kiddushin 66b, 68b; Ramban on Vayikra 24:10
 Gesher Hachaim 19:3-4
 See Chasam Sofer 326, brought in Pischeiy Teshuvah 345:3, regarding suicide that “although the ruling is that one does not sit Shiva, nevertheless if this will cause the family embarrassment, the Rav may be stringent to tell the family to sit Shiva, as although we are lenient in Aveilus in case of dispute, we are not lenient in the honor of the children of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov.”; See Sefer Toras Hager 12 footnote 98; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid
 Zekan Aaron 2:87; Yechaveh Daas 6; Nitei Gavriel 40:20; Piskeiy Teshuvos 132:20; See regarding a related issue: Sefer Chassidim 790; Leiv Chaim and Chaim Bayad [Falagi] 33; Darkei Teshuvah 151:29; Beis Shearim Y.D. 229; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:50
 Sefer Chassidim 790
 Yechaveh Daas 6:60
 Yechaveh Daas ibid
 Michaber 241:9; Rambam Mamrim 5:11
 P”M Pesicha Koleles 2:19; Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 33 and 212; See Rambam Mamrim 5:11; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 409
A Half slave: See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid
 See Nishmas Avraham 4:39
 Chasam Sofer O.C. 164; Lechem Shleima Y.D. 2:72; Nachlas Tzevi 1:37; Halichos Shlomo of Rav SZ”A Tefila 18:14; Mishneh Halachos 4:70; Ashreiy Haish 40:16 in name of Rav Elyashiv; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:56; See; Megillah 13a; Sanhedrin 19b; Shemos Raba 4:2; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 410; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 574 footnotes 130-132
 See Sanhedrin 19b
 Chasam Sofer ibid based on Sotah 49a and Rashi there regarding Rav Acha Bar Yaakov whose grandson whom he also adopted stated that he does not have to bring him a cup of water being that he is not his biological son.
 See Nishmas Avraham ibid in name of Rav SZ”A that for all practical purposes, one should respect them in the same manner that one would respect his biological parents
 In truth, the custom is to be lenient in this matter even regarding biological parents under the assumption that they forgive their honor, although by biological parents we initially rule that one should explicitly receive forgiveness from them regarding standing up in their honor. This forgiveness would not be necessary to be received from adoptive parents.
 Chasam Sofer O.C. 164 and Y.D. 345; Nitei Gavriel 49:8; Nishmas Avraham ibid; See Sdei Chemed Asifas Dinim Aveilus 156
 See Chinuch Mitzvah 33; Michaber 240:8 and 18; Meshech Chochmah Devarim 5:16; Igros Moshe Y.D. 2:130; Nishmas Avraham ibid
 See Vavei Hamudim Vechashukeihem p. 28
 See Brachos 53b that one is obligated to chase after a mitzvah, brought in Minchas Yitzchak 2:75; Menachos 41a that in a time of wrath one is punished even for not fulfilling a non-obligatory positive command
 See Kiddushin 31b that due to its severity and demanding details, Rebbe Yochanon stated that from a certain perspective, one who has not met his parents benefits from the fact that he will not be subject to being punished for not properly honoring them.; Conclusion of Rav Chaim Kanievsky and Rav Zilbershtrom ibid; A similar argument has been brought in Poskim regarding not moving to Israel being that it is difficult to follow all the laws dependent on the land
 Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:49 and Miluim p. 638; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 410-415; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 570 footnote 92-97
 Michaber 240:18; Tur 240 in name of Rambam; Rambam Mamarim 6:11; Mishneh Yevamos 22a; Sanhedrin 85b; Rif Yevamos 5a; Rosh Yevamos 2:3; Bach 240; Stam opinion in Chayeh Adam 67:18; Kitzur SHU”A 143:9; Kesav Sofer Y.D. 171; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:19; Derech Pikudecha Mitzvah 33; Likkutei Sichos 5:309; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 543
 See Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim footnote 95-96
 The reason: As perhaps one’s parent will repent and hence one is still obligated in his honor. [Radbaz on Rambam Mamarim 6:11] A proof for this opinion can be brought from the Midrash which states that people would have complained about Avraham that he did not honor his father, even though his father was a Rasha . [Bach ibid, brought in Likkutei Sichos 5:310]
 Rama 240:18; Tur 240 based on Bava Metzia 62a, Bava Kama 94b; Mordechai Yevamos Remez 13 in name of Rabbeinu Tam; Yireim Mitzvah 222; Hagahos Maimanis 6:7; Semag Asei 112-113; Aruch Hashulchan 240:39; Amudei Harazim Mitzvah 56:8; Halef Lecha Shlomo Y.D. 250; See Taz 240:17 who defends in length this opinion of the Tur against the questions of the Beis Yosef ibid; Likkutei Sichos 5:309; ; Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid footnote 528
 Rishonim ibid [i.e. Yireim, Semag, Rashal]; See Poskim in Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim footnote 92-94
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that although one is not obligated to honor his father who is a Rasha he is obligated to fear him. [Beis Meir Y.D. 240:23; See Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 570 footnote 97]
 Yireim Mitzvah 222; Semag Asei 112; Hagahos Maimanis Mamrim 6
 See Q&A!
 The reason: As there is a difference between the obligation to honor one’s parents versus the prohibition to curse them and cause them pain, and hence although it remains forbidden to curse or cause pain even to a father who is wicked, nonetheless, one is not obligated in their honor. Furthermore, even regarding cursing them it is a mere prohibition and not a penalty of death. [See Taz 240:17; Nekudos Hakesef on Taz ibid]
 Implication of Yireim Mitzvah 222; Semag Asei 112; Hagahos Maimanis Mamrim 6; Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 48; Halef Lecha Shlomo Y.D. 250; See Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid footnote 425
Other opinions: Some Poskim rule that he is only considered a Rasha, for which he is not obligated in being respected by his children if he transgresses negative commands and not if he only transgresses positive commands by not fulfilling them. The reason for this is because it follows the same laws and guidelines of a Rasha for invalidation of testimony. [Michtam Ledavid Y.D. 33]
 Pnei Yehoshua Bava Kama p. 94; Pischeiy Teshuvah 240:15; See Koveitz shiurim Bava Kama 104
If he refuses to repent after being made aware of his transgression: If the parent was warned after his purposeful transgression, and he refuses to repent for it than some Poskim rule that he is considered a Rasha in this regard even if he only transgressed one time, being that he is now transgressing the obligation to repent and is hence considered a habitual transgressor. [Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 48; Rashash Yevamos 22b]
 Atzei Levona 240
Other opinions: Some Poskim question that perhaps the status of a Rasha can be obtained even if the parent merely transgresses a rabbinical prohibition. [Minchas Chinuch Mitzvah 48]
 Nachlas Tzevi 240 based on Beis Shmuel E.H. 42:2; Radbaz 1:140
 See Q&A!
 Bach 240; Kitzur SHU”a 143:9; Kesav Sofer Y.D. 171; Ben Ish Chaiy Shoftim 2:39; Derech Pikudecha Mitzvah 33; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:49
 Rishon Letziyon 240 and 241:4; Or Hachaim Hakadosh Vayikra 19:3; Sefer Chofetz Chaim Falagi 96; Aruch Hashulchan 240:39; See Birkeiy Yosef 241:4; Likkutei Sichos 5:309 in name of Kesef Mishneh on Rambam ibid regarding Masiach Umeidiach
Other opinions: Some Poskim are stringent even in such a case, to obligate a child to honor his Mumar Lehachis parent. [Shut Haradach Bayis 30 Cheder 2]
 Sefer Moreh Horim Ukevodam p. 196 in name of Rav Elyashiv; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:49
 Radbaz and Lechem Mishneh on Rambam Mamarim 6:11; Maharam Shick Y.D. 346; Maharitz Dushinsky 1:94; See Encyclopedia Talmudit ibid p. 413
The reason: As the entire reason why, one is to respect the parent who is a transgressor is because perhaps one’s parent will repent and hence once he has died without repentance he is no longer obligated in his honor. [Radbaz on Rambam Mamarim 6:11] Alternatively, the reason is because honor had parent after his death is only rabbinical required and by a parent who is a transgressor the sages never made this institution. [Sefas Emes 240:2; Tiferes Yisrael Pesachim 4:9]
Shaming the parent: From some Poskim it is implied that it is easy even permitted to shame a parent who is a Rasha after his death in order so it serve for him as an atonement. [Peri Chadash on Rambam ibid; Maharam Shick ibid]
Other opinions: From some Poskim it is implied that one is obligated to honor the parent even after his death even if he was a Rasha. [Implication of Kesef Mishneh on Rambam ibid and Beis Yosef 240]
 Michaber 241:5 [regarding hitting]; Shach 240:20; Taz 240:17; Bach 240; Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 1:64; Biur Hagr”a 240:29; Shvus Yaakov 1:76; Chida in Midbar Kdeimos Mareches Chaf 1; Chidushei Chasam Sofer Bava Metzia 62a; See Hagahos Rav Akiva Eiger 240; See Shut Saba Kadisha 2:10
Is this prohibition biblical or rabbinical? Some Poskim rule that by a Rasha this prohibition rabbinical, even though in general it is a biblical prohibition. [Bach ibid; Chidushei Chasam Sofer Bava Metzia 62a]
 Zohar Parshas Vayeitzei p. 164; Shiyurei Bracha 240:1
 Mishneh Lemelech Hilchos Malveh Veloveh 4:4; Chidushei Chasam Sofer Bava Metzia 62a; Avnei Nezer Y.D. 171
 See Sefer Bina Vadas 1; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:49
 See Shabbos 68b; Avoda Zara 26a
 See Rambam Mamarim 3:3; Ramban and Nimukei Yosef on Bava Metzia 110a, brought in Darkei Moshe 159 and Beis Yosef Y.D. 159; Radbaz Mamarim 3:3; Shut Rabbeinu Betzalel Ashkenazi 3
 This can be whether due to him having been kidnapped from a very young age by heretics or Gentiles and being brought up in their home, or due to simply being switched at the hospital and going home with the wrong set of parents who are Gentiles, or due to the fault of their parents, such as if the parents gave the child up for adoption to gentile parents, or the mother intermarried and the child was brought up in a Gentile home. In all these cases the child is defined as a Tinok Shenishba and not an Apikores even after he becomes Bar and Bas Mitzvah and applies whether he simply has heretical beliefs or is brought up in a different religion such as Islam, Christianity, etc. and practices them.
 Admur Ribis 80 in parentheses; Rama Y.D. 159:3 “and don’t know Toras Yisrael”; Shach 159:6 and 8; Ramban and Nimukei Yosef Bava Metzia 42a in name of Rabbeinu Tam, brought in Darkei Moshe 159:2 and Beis Yosef Y.D. 159; Radbaz Mamarim 3:3; Derisha 159:2; Shut Rabbeinu Betzalel Ashkenazi 3; 2nd opinion in M”B 385:1 regarding Karaits; Igros Moshe E.H. 1:82-22 and 4:59 regarding reform Jews; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:528; 2:564; 5:95; 6:90; Minchas Shlomo 2:4-10 and Halichos Shlomo Pesach 9 footnote 135; Bina Vadaas Miluim in name of Rav SZ”A; Betzeil Hachochmah 2:76; Shevet Halevi 9:198; Yissa Yosef 3:97; See Piskeiy Teshuvos ibid footnote 22
 Admur Ribis 79 “A heretic Jewess who has a son from a gentile which is brought up like a heretic just like him, it is forbidden to lend him money with interest according to all opinions, as he is like a child who has been captured by gentiles and is not similar to a real Apikores which is defined as a person who knows his creator and intentionally rebels against him… However, this boy does not know. Now even though afterwards he discovered that he is Jewish, and he sees the Jewish people and their religion, he nonetheless maintains the status of an Anuss [i.e., Tinok Shenishba] and according to all is not considered a rebel. Thus, according to all opinions it is forbidden to lend money with interest to Karite Jews, as although they are deniers of the oral tradition, they do not have the status of a Apikores. Being that they are not deniers due to their own will but rather due to the fact that their parents brought them up with this mistake and they are therefore like a Jewish child that has been captured and brought up with their mistake and is defined as an Anuss [i.e. Tinok Shenishba].”; Rambam Mamarim 3:3 “Even though the person afterwards discovered that he is a Jew and he sees the Jewish people and their religion nonetheless he still defined as a Anuss [i.e. Tinok Shenishba] being that he was brought up with that mistake. Therefore, it is proper for one to influence them to do to Teshuvah, and to draw them with words of peace until they return to the strength of the Torah.”; Beis Yosef O.C. 385 and Y.D. 159 regarding Karaits; 2nd and main opinion in Darkei Moshe 159:2 as rules Rambam and Beis Yosef ibid; 1st opinion in M”B 385:1 regarding Karaits; Chazon Ish Yoreh Deah 2:6, 16 and 28 and 62:21; Zekan Ahron 12; Binyan Tziyon 23; Melamed Lehoil O.C. 29
 This is the main ruling of Admur ibid; Chazon Ish ibid; Rebbe in Likkutei Sichos 2:273; 6:273; 15:198; 26:131; Toras Menachem 51:226; Hisvadyus 5748 4:60; 5750 Shemos p. 144; Mishneh Halachos 14 p. 59
 Igros Kodesh Rayatz 2:526 “A person is only defined as an Apikores if he denies the Torah and Mitzvos and in G-dliness due to his own foreign ideologies which are the result of deep philosophical thought, as was common amongst the philosophers in previous generations. However in our generation, even those who are completely unobservant r”l majority, if not all, of them are very distant from any deep philosophical and ideological understandings and rather are simply drawn after such opinions, and the lack of fulfilling Mitzvos, on the majority is simply because it’s easier that way for their life and not because heaven forbid they are intentionally rebelling and betraying G-d. Even their transgressions of negative commands are not in order to get G-d angry but rather simply to fulfill their lusts.” “; Chazon Ish Yoreh Deah 2:16 “It appears that the concept of Moridin [i.e. a real Apikores] only applies in the time that the providence of G-d is revealed, as it was during the times that we witnessed miracles which acted as a sign from heaven, and at a time where there were Tzaddikim of the generation who lived with open miracles that were viewable by all, as in such a case one who still maintains heretical beliefs shows that his intent is simply to rebel …. However, at a time that there is complete concealment of our faith…. Our job is to return them with chains of love and show them the light of the Torah as much as we can.”
 Hagahos Maimanis Deios 6
 Ahavas Chesed in name of Hagriy Mulin based on Maharam Melublin; Chazon Ish Yoreh Deah 2:6 and 28
 Chazon Ish ibid; Rebbe in Likkutei Sichos 2:273; 6:273; 15:198; 26:131; Toras Menachem 51:226; Hisvadyus 5748 4:60; 5750 Shemos p. 144; Mishneh Halachos 14 p. 59
 Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:49 in first and Stam approach; See Minchas Shlomo 35; Shevet Halevi 4:17
 See Poskim ibid in first opinion above; Teshuvos Vehanhagos 1:528; 2:564; 5:95; 6:90; Igros Moshe E.H. 1:82-22 and 4:59 regarding reform Jews; Minchas Shlomo 2:4-10 and Halichos Shlomo Pesach 9 footnote 135; Shevet Halevi 9:198; Ishkavtei Derebbe 2:166 in name of Stepler; Yabia Omer 8 Y.D. 21 regarding parents who actively try to dissuade one from becoming or being observant due to their hatred for religion are certainly considered heretics that are not to be honored
 Teshuvos Vehanhagos ibid; See 241:9 “it remains forbidden for a convert to curse or hit or shame his father [or mother] in order so people do not say that his conversion caused him to leave a higher state of holiness to a lower state of holiness. This applies even if his parents are idol worshipers.”
 Minchas Shlomo 35; Shevet Halevi 4:17; Pesakim Uteshuvos ibid
 Likkutei Sichos 39:298
 Some Poskim rule that the command to honor ones father and mother does not fully apply if the parent has lost their mind or acts eccentrically in public and shames and embarrasses themselves. Nonetheless, even in such a case the child remains obligated to fear the parent. Likewise, even in such a case one is obligated to feed them and clothe them. [See Riy Perlow on Rasag Asei 9-10; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Morah Av Vaeim Vol. 42 p. 570 footnote 98]
 Michaber 240:10; Tur 240; Rambam Mamarim 6:10; Kiddushin 31b regarding mother of Rav Assi “Rav Assi had an elderly mother and would do whatever she asked. If she asked for jewelry, he would give her jewelry. When she asked for a husband, he replied that he would search for one on her behalf. When however, she asked for a husband like him, he realized that she lost her mind, and he therefore left her for Israel.”; Ran and Nimukei Yosef Kiddushin 13a; Ralbag Parshas Yisro; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:36; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 416
Other opinions: Some Poskim question this ruling and state that it is not correct to follow it. [Raavad Mamrim 6:10] The Poskim however negate this opinion being that it is based on an explicit teaching in the Talmud. [Ran ibid; Beis Yosef 240] However, in truth the intent of the dissenting opinion is not to say that a child does not have the right to leave his parent if he is unable to deal with them due to their state of insanity, which is explicitly written in the Talmud. Rather, he is dissenting over the added words of the Rambam which instructs the child to appoint someone else to guard over his parent. Now, if the parent is able to be guarded by someone else then why can’t the son himself do it, and if the child himself can’t do it then how will someone else be successful in doing so. [Taz 240:14; Derisha 240:2; Bach 240; Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 1:64] According to this opinion, not only may the child absolve himself from dealing with his parents if they are too unbearably insane, but he may even do so if there’s no one else who can deal with them.
 Ralbag Parshas Yisro
 See Taz 240:14; Derisha 240:2; Previous footnote
 Some Poskim imply that a child may choose to delegate the care of his parent to another person even if he is able to do so himself. [Setimas Michaber ibid; Rambam ibid; Ran and Nimukei Yosef Kiddushin 13a] However, from other Poskim it is evident that any time the child himself can care for the parent, he may not delegate the care to someone else. [Raavad Mamrim 6:10, as explained in Taz 240:14; Derisha 240:2, Bach 240; Rashal in Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin 1:64]
 Shevet Halevi 2:111-7 based on Radbaz and Migdal Oz on Rambam Mamarim 6:10
 Aruch Hashulchan 240:32; Tzitz Eliezer 12:59
 Bach 240
 See Michaber C.M. 290; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:36 footnote 323
 Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:37
 Shemen Hamur Chelek Haderushim p. 111; Zera Emes 2:148; Kneses Yechezkal Mareches Chaf; Implication of Kiddushin 31b; See however Machaneh Chaim 2 C.M. 29 who implies that a son cannot delegate the mitzvah to another
 Article of Rav Sheprun in Koveitz Hayashar Vehatov 13:7
 Kiddushin 41a; Sdei Chemed 4:239; See Admur 249
 Shemen Hamur ibid; Michtam Ledavid Y.D. 32; Or Hayashar Pesachim 104b; Har Tzevi Y.D. 97
 Yismach Moshe Parshas Eikev; Mur Veahalos 31; Sdei Chemed 9 Divrei Chachamim 44; Darkei Teshuvah 28:61; Doveiv Meisharim 1:47-2; See however P”M 432 A”A 5
 Shemen Hamur ibid
 Piskeiy Riaz Kiddushin 1:8-12, brought in Shiltei Hagiborim; Aruch Hashulchan 240:33; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:36; Encyclopedia Talmudit Erech Kibud Av Vaeim Vol. 26 p. 416-417
 Aruch Hashulchan 240:33; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:36
 Sefer Chassidim 343; Chacham Tzevi 20; Pesakim Uteshuvos 240:36
 Rameh Kiddushin 31b; Yam Shel Shlomo Kiddushin ibid; Chacham Tzevi Tosafus Chadashim 20