This lesson explores two adjacent verses in chapter 19 that serve as major foundations in raising children: "Discipline your son, for there is hope" and "A man of great wrath bears punishment." We will examine the insights of Rabbeinu Yonah, Ralbag, the Vilna Gaon, Rashi, Metzudas David, and the Malbim, and see how each illuminates a different angle of the very same warning: yes, discipline, but never out of anger.
יַסֵּר בִּנְךָ כִּי יֵשׁ תִּקְוָה וְאֶל הֲמִיתוֹ אַל תִּשָּׂא נַפְשֶׁךָ׃ (יט, יח) - Discipline your son, for there is hope, and do not set your heart upon his crying.
Rabbeinu Yonah, Ralbag, the Vilna Gaon, and the Malbim all follow a single line of thought here. At first glance, this is an explanation one might not have arrived at simply - yet they all maintain that this is the plain meaning of the verse. "Discipline your son, for there is hope": do not say there is no longer any point, that this child is stubborn, that he refuses to accept rebuke, that there is no hope. Absolutely not. Discipline your son, give him mussar again and again, for there is hope - you have what to look forward to, and tangible benefit will come from the guidance you impart to him.
"And do not set your heart upon his crying" - the word hamito is like hemyato (his groaning and weeping), just as shevito means his captivity (shivyato) and bechito means his weeping (bechiyato). The meaning here is groaning, weeping. If the child groans and cries, do not set your heart upon him, do not let your heart soften, and do not pity him the moment you hear the sound of his weeping. For it is far better that he cry now rather than cry later, and better that he cry rather than you cry.
גְּדָל חֵמָה נֹשֵׂא עֹנֶשׁ כִּי אִם תַּצִּיל וְעוֹד תּוֹסִף׃ (יט, יט) - A man of great wrath bears punishment, for if you rescue, you will only add more.
Rabbeinu Yonah explains: even though I told you in the previous verse, "and do not set your heart upon his crying," meaning that you should not pity the child upon hearing him weep, but rather demand of him what ought to be demanded - nevertheless, I warn you: beware if you are a person of great wrath. There are parents who say, "Right, one must not show pity," but that parent happens to be hot-tempered, and when he erupts he is capable, Heaven forbid, of causing mortal harm. About this it is said, "he bears punishment" - you will bear guilt and be punished for it, just as though you had harmed a stranger.
And why? Because one must examine the motive behind the blow. Was it out of a desire to correct him, out of a wish to instill good conduct and noble character traits? No. You struck him because you are irritable. You heard that the child did something, and you lost control and flew into a rage. You acted out of wrath. This is a grave warning emphasized in many sefarim: one must never discipline a child in anger. When an action stems from anger, it is always far beyond what is necessary and far beyond what is appropriate. An angry person does not act rationally, but emotionally: if it is physical discipline, it is many times harsher than necessary; and if it is a punishment, it is entirely disproportionate to the child's deed. The matter infuriated him, and he acted out of wrath.
Therefore, on the one hand, do not be swayed by his weeping, but on the other hand, do not act out of your anger. On the contrary, the verse states: "for if you rescue" - what ought you to do? Rescue him from your own hand when you are angry! And why? "You will only add" - for if you do not rescue him from yourself, there is a danger that you will inflict far more than he deserves, far beyond the misdeed he committed. It is therefore exceptionally dangerous.
The Vilna Gaon continues along this same line: If you see that your wrath toward him is overwhelming, that your anger is intense, and you cannot strike him lightly or discipline him gently - in his words, "without stirring up all your wrath upon him," echoing the verse "and He stirred not up all His wrath" - and you know that the moment you begin to strike him you will lose control. Indeed, we know many people like this, for whom the start is like a spark: he begins striking out of anger, and instead of calming him down, he becomes even more heated, turns redder, shouts louder, and then it becomes an actual mortal danger to the child.
Concerning this it is said, "shall bear punishment" (nosei onesh), though the Gaon interprets it differently from Rabbeinu Yonah. It does not mean "you will be punished for it," but rather: when you feel that you are full of great wrath, bear the punishment - bear his punishment yourself, meaning do not punish him at all; forgive him completely. For if the alternative is between punishing him out of intense fury or giving him nothing at all, it is better that you give him nothing. If you are overcome with wrath, it is better to forgive him and not strike him at all.
From this emerges a very crucial principle in chinuch: punishment and striking are never for the past, but for the future. When someone did something improper and is punished for it, it is not because of what was done, but to ensure that such things will not be done in the future. And how will one know to refrain? Because he remembers: last time I did such-and-such, it cost me dearly. Thus, punishment is meant to rectify, not to seek retribution.
The proof is: if a person were told about a child who did such-and-such, but you will never meet him again, or Heaven forbid that he passed away - would it cross anyone's mind to take retribution against him for what occurred? Absolutely not! There is no longer any reason to educate him, you will never see him again, or he is no longer among the living. Who would go and punish him for what happened? Punishment is never for the past; it is always meant to correct the future, so that next time the same mistake will not be repeated.
This also explains "and do not set your heart to his death": do not strike him excessively to the point of killing him. For "to put to death" occurs when you come to take retribution for the past, but what will you gain from this for the future? The logic of punishment is that he should not repeat the mistake, and when you kill him there is no future at all - it is as though you are punishing solely for the past.
What, then, is the proper way? "You will have to do it again" (ve'od tosif - literally, "and you shall add further"). Each time, give him a little. This is the meaning of "you shall add": little by little. And this does not refer specifically to physical discipline, but rather a little mussar each time, a little guidance along the path of truth each time - not a massive amount all at once, but little by little. "For if you rescue him, you must do it again": rescue him while you are in your anger and do not harm him at all, and afterward give a little bit each time. This is far more beneficial than delivering one severe blow all at once, which causes nothing but harm.
Ralbag explains: someone who is of great wrath will inevitably receive punishment for his excess of fury; it is impossible that he will not suffer from it. If you are of great wrath, take into account that you will bear punishment. And this is a reality one can see all around: hot-tempered people are constantly in disputes with others. He gets upset with someone, asks, "What do you think, that I'll let him get away with it?", and goes and screams at him. Such a person is constantly embroiled in conflicts. Thus, he bears punishment.
And should he argue: "Sir, it works! Those at whom I got angry and screamed - I put them in their place immediately, and that was the only thing that worked for me." To this Ralbag replies: "Even if it happens that at times fury saves him from an adversary" - true, there are times when anger put people in their place, they were startled and frightened, and as a result you achieved what you wanted - "yet this trait will continue to cause him to act this way with others, until one of them rises up against him and brings him down in ruin." In other words: you managed to overpower that person, that one was frightened of you, and a third trembled, but you are liable to run into someone who could not care less about you, and he will deliver such a blow that you will regret ever opening your mouth. You might be strong against the weak, but someone will come along who will give you a real thrashing, and then you will see what punishment you have received - you became entangled with someone you never should have crossed. Therefore, know: this conduct is destructive, and one who possesses great wrath will ultimately receive his punishment.
Rashi interprets differently: "A man of great wrath bears punishment" - if you see that a punishment hangs over your fellow, and even though you harbor great wrath toward him, you "bear punishment," much like "bearing iniquity" (nosei avon), meaning you do not exact retribution from him. You could have taken revenge now, as people say, "I was waiting for this opportunity," yet nevertheless you do not exact retribution from him as he deserved. To do this, a person truly must be on the level of a great individual, capable of restraining his desires and conquering his impulses.
Moreover, "for if you deliver him" (ki im tatzil). It is not enough that you do not push a stone after the fallen one, nor cast a stone after him, but rather remain passive - the verse tells you: that is not sufficient. You see him falling; do not give him an additional kick, but go and rescue him - the very one against whom you harbor severe wrath. "You will yet increase" (ve'od tosif) - the Holy One, blessed be He, promises that through this you will add days and goodness. For one who acts in this manner achieves a great triumph over his yetzer (evil inclination), and without any doubt, his assurance from Hashem is immense.
The Metzudat David explains: "A man of great wrath bears punishment" - one who is angry is the one who inflicts punishment. He will certainly harm the object of his fury, bringing punishments upon others and causing them injury. "For if you deliver him, you will only add" - you see someone furious at his fellow, raging and practically on the verge of killing him, and you step in to calm things down. Know that he will not calm down; instead, he will turn his wrath upon you as well. Suddenly, he lands a punch on the very person who came to save the day! For such is the nature of wrathful people: when someone intervenes to pull an angry person away from the target of his anger, he resents it, as he wanted to vent his rage against him, and so he directs his fury at you instead. Hence, it is often advisable not to intervene in disputes at all. Thus, either way there is a problem: the angry person harms the one he is angry with, and if you attempt to rescue the victim from his hands, he will become even angrier with you. It is dreadful and terrible to be a person of great wrath.
The Malbim explains: "A man of great wrath bears punishment" - the one who must bear punishment is the person of great wrath. If he is an angry individual, he must bear punishment so that he may temper his fury. And when it comes to a child who reacts with anger, he must be penalized for his anger so that he learns to master his traits and his temper. A situation where a child lashes out whenever he feels like it cannot be tolerated; as his educator, you must ensure there is a consequence for his being a person of great wrath.
"For if you deliver him, you will only add" - if you spare the angry person from punishment, rationalizing, "Well, they provoked him, it is a natural reaction," and offering similar excuses to avoid taking action against him, then the fury will only intensify its power. Why? Because the child has seen that anger pays: I got angry, I screamed, nothing happened to me, and afterward they even gave me what I asked for! Therefore, if you have a child who is prone to great wrath, ensure that he bears a penalty for his anger. If you spare him and show misplaced pity, he will only add wrath upon wrath and continue behaving this way indefinitely.
The Malbim also offers a wonderful explanation that links the previous verse to this one. "Chasten your son" - discipline your son and do not assume he is beyond hope, "for there is hope"; there is something to look forward to, and if you discipline him and impart mussar (moral correction), you will rectify him. "And do not set your heart on his death" - do not let your heart contemplate that he will suffer spiritual ruin; do not say, "There is nothing more to be done with him, this child is a lost cause, let us focus on the other children, there is no remedy for this one."
And why? "For a man of great wrath bears punishment" (reading "gedol chemah" homiletically as "giddel chemah" - raised in butter). Here is an innovative interpretation: If you treat him with kid gloves and claim there is nothing to be done with him - that spiritually he is finished, so there is no point in trying to rectify and straighten him out, nor any point in disciplining him with mussar - and instead, what do you do? "Giddel chemah," you raise the child in a pampered manner, like butter, treating him only with softness and cushioning. The result will be that you raise a child corrupt in his conduct, a child who will grow up wild and undisciplined.
And if you wish to spare him from punishment - "for if you deliver him" (ki im tatzil), related to "and they emptied (vayenatzlu) Egypt," meaning to strip away or empty - if you seek to empty him of punishment, know that not only will you fail to spare him, but "you will only add": he will receive a far greater punishment. For you raised a child through overindulgence, in rivers of butter, where everything was cushioned for him, and by doing so, you cause him to stray from the proper path and magnify his eventual punishment.
What is stated regarding King David? "And his father had never grieved him at any time by saying, 'Why have you done so?'" And what came of this? Adonijah son of Haggith. And what else came of this? Absalom, a rebellious son. In the words of the Ralbag, David did not succeed as well in the upbringing of these children. Why? Because "he had never grieved him." A father must know when to set boundaries and when to hold his child accountable.
And so we hear stories about terrible and severe things that youths do, and their parents say in great anguish: We do not understand how he could do such a thing; after all, we always gave him whatever he asked for, we always showered him with everything. But they do not understand that the question is itself the answer. How could he do such a thing? Because you always gave him whatever he asked for; because you always showered him with everything; because you never demanded anything of him, you never set boundaries, and you never built a backbone within him so that he would know what is expected of him and what he must do. People only ever sympathized with him, accommodated him, exerted themselves for him, and did everything for him - and as a result, he grew up wild and undisciplined. And regarding this it is said: "And do not set your heart upon his crying" - do not be swayed by all of his tears.
There is another explanation, following the first approach we mentioned regarding "and to his death": even when you discipline your son, proceed gently, not with severe violence. Be careful not to cause him serious harm, Heaven forbid. And this does not mean that one is permitted to strike him until he is on the verge of death and only actually killing him is forbidden; the Gemara states that this is not so, but rather that a teacher strikes students with a shoelace - a light blow, not with a calf-leather strap, and not thirty-nine lashes. That is to say, even when one must discipline, it should be done gently.
We have already discussed this several times: these things were said in their own time. In our times, physical striking is not spoken of at all; it is an exceedingly rare measure reserved only for extreme cases, and even then, only with great discretion and utmost caution - ensuring it is not a humiliating blow, and that the child will not come to harbor hatred as a result. Moreover, an "older son" in this context is not someone who is thirty years old: once a child reaches the age of seven, eight, or nine, one must already cease hitting entirely. Absolutely completely. For today's generation is a rebellious and insolent one, and when a father raises a hand against a child, the child erupts against him, degrades him, screams, and acts with utter disrespect. Thus the strike produces the opposite effect: instead of inspiring respect and awe toward the father, it breeds contempt.
Therefore, one must know that at the age when a child begins to understand, there are many other forms of discipline long before physical strikes. In practice, striking in our generation has not proven effective; to put it more plainly, it has proven to be the most negative and rapid way to lose our children. Among those who resorted to hitting, children went astray - not at age fifteen, but as early as age ten. These are known situations, truly terrible. Therefore, know that this is not the way. When the verse speaks of "chastise your son," in our times it refers far more to withholding games or privileges that he desires: if you behave well, I will buy this for you or do this for you; if you do not behave well, you do not deserve it. But physical striking, as stated, yields very little benefit and usually causes only damage.
"Chastise your son, for there is hope" - never despair of the child and never say that his hope is lost; and do not surrender to his weeping and wailing when you know that what is demanded of him is just. Yet on the other side stands the warning, "A man of great wrath will bear punishment": one who acts out of anger will be punished, for he always metes out far beyond proper measure; and according to the Vilna Gaon, when you are in a state of fury, it is better to forgive entirely than to punish. Punishment is never vengeance for the past, but rather rectification for the future, and its method must be "little by little," not a severe blow all at once. The Ralbag teaches that an angry person will ultimately fall into the hands of someone who is not intimidated by him; Rashi teaches that the level of a great person is to bear iniquity and even rescue the one who angered him, and his reward will be length of days and goodness; and the Metzudas David warns that even the rescuer may suffer harm. The Malbim adds two perspectives: punish the angry child so that he does not learn that tantrums pay off, and do not "raise him in butter" (overly pamper him), for total cushioning without demands and without boundaries - just as we learned regarding Adoniyah, "his father had never grieved him" - is what causes a child to stray and magnifies his ultimate punishment.