28 Feb FAMILY AND MISHLO’ACH MANOS

On Purim, we send
gifts of food to friends,
in fulfillment of the
verse “U-mishlo’ach
manos ish le-rei’ehu,
and of sending
portions a man to
his fellow” (Esther
9:22). Mishlo’ach manos is one of the
mitzvos of Purim. We fulfill it by sending
two different food items to one person,
although it is common to send to many
more people. How should families handle
this obligation? Within a married couple,
is each spouse required to give their own
separate mishlo’ach manos? Earlier, we
discussed whether a woman is obligated at
all and concluded that most Ashkenazim
and some Sephardim believe that they are.
If so, how should women and children fulfill
this mitzvah?
I. Women Acting Strictly
Rav Avraham Gombiner (17th cen.,
Poland; Magen Avraham 695:14) writes that
while women are obligated in mishlo’ach
manos, he does not see that they actually
give them on Purim. He suggests that
when a husband gives mishlo’ach manos to
multiple people, he sends for his wife also.
If so, only a single woman or a widow or a

divorcee needs to give her own mishlo’ach
manos. He concludes that nevertheless,
one should be strict. What does he mean
by this comment about being strict? Later
authorities disagree about his intent.
Rav Avraham Danzig (19th cen., Lithuania;
Chayei Adam 155:33) understands Magen
Avraham as saying that it is wrong for
married women to rely on their husband
sending mishlo’ach manos on their behalf.
Rather, women should be strict. However,
he does not say what being strict entails.
Do women have to send on their own? Or
should they not rely on their husband and
instead explicitly instruct their husbands to
send for them?
Rav Shlomo Ganzfried (19th cen.,
Hungary; Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 142:4)
says that women have to send on their
own. When Magen Avraham says that
women should be strict, he means that they
should not fulfill their mitzvah through
their husband sending mishlo’ach manos
for them. Similarly, Rav Yechiel Michel

Epstein (19th cen., Russia; Aruch Ha-
Shulchan, Orach Chaim 695:18) says that a

woman does not fulfill the mitzvah with her
husband’s mishloa’ach manos because the
obligation falls on her. He adds that in his
time and place, the practice was, in fact, that

married women gave mishlo’ach manos to
a friend. More recently, Rav Ya’akov Ariel
(cont., Israel; Ohalei Halachah, Purim, ch.
7 n. 16) says that a married woman should
send mishlo’ach manos to a friend. He adds
that preferably she should send it to a widow
or single woman, who often particularly
appreciate the gesture of friendship.
II. Assigning a Mishlo’ach Manos
Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (20th
cen., Israel; Halichos Shlomo, Mo’adim,
vol. 2, ch. 19, par. 17) says that a husband
only has to notify his wife that he is giving
mishlo’ach manos on her behalf. He adds
(ad loc., Devar Halachah, n. 27) that this is
what the Magen Avraham means when he
says that women should be strict. A woman
does not have to give her own mishlo’ach
manos. Nor does a husband have to make
sure that she owns the mishlo’ach manos
that he gives. Rather, she cannot just
passively rely on him. Instead, he has to say
to her that he is giving on her behalf and
notify the recipient that it is from her.
Similarly, Rav Auerbach’s student,
Rav Avigdor Nebenzahl (cont., Israel;
Yerushalayim Be-Mo’adeha, Purim,
Responsa, no. 138, p 411) says that a married
woman fulfills her obligation if her husband
sends double the minimum amount for
mishlo’ach manos (four items instead
of two or two very large items). Rav
Nebenzahl assumes the married couple
send mishlo’ach manos as partners. Just
like two men can send mishlo’ach manos
as partners if the amount sent is double
the minimum amount (Pietrekowski,
Piskei Teshuvah, vol. 1, no. 144), so too
a married couple can send as partners.
Rav Nebenzahl adds (ibid., no. 139) that
if a woman wants to give on her own,
she does not need to make sure that she
owns the food she is giving. There is no
requirement to own the food you give for
mishlo’ach manos as long as you have
implicit permission to give it.
Rav Shmuel Wosner (21st cen., Israel;
Shevet Ha-Levi, vol. 9, no. 147) points
out that Rav Yosef Te’omim (18th cen.,
Germany; Pri Megadim, Orach Chaim,
Eishel Avraham 695:14) omits Rav
Gombiner’s conclusion that women
should be strict. He leaves it that married
women do not have to give mishlo’ach
manos. Only single women must
give. Therefore, Rav Wosner says, the
common practice today that the family
gives together as a single unit is proper.
And if the wife prepared a mishlo’ach
manos and even intended one to be her
own, then regardless of who delivers
it, the woman fulfills the mitzvah
even according to Magen Avraham’s
recommended strict view.

III. Women and Adult Children
Children over the age of bar and bas
mitzvah are obligated in all of the mitzvos.
Do they have to give their own mishlo’ach
manos? At first glance, the answer would
seem to be that they are obligated. Why
should mishlo’ach manos be different from
any other mitzvah?
Indeed, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach
(ibid.) says that just like a wife can fulfill her
obligation in mishlo’ach manos through her
husband giving, so too can young children
fulfill through their father. By implication,
he seems to say that adult children cannot
fulfill their obligation through their father.
Rav Shmuel Kamenetsky (cont., US; Kovetz
Halachos, Purim, ch. 15, par. 16) says that
a married woman can fulfill her obligation
through her husband giving a jointly owned
mishlo’ach manos. Technically, the husband
does not even have to notify her but it is
proper to do so. However, adult children
— even if they live and eat in their father’s
home — have some money of their own and
therefore are obligated to give their own
mishlo’ach manos (ibid., par. 18).
Rav Avraham David Horowitz (20th cen.,
Israel; Responsa Kinyan Torah, vol. 1, no.
132, sec. 2, par. 2) says that a wife who lives
and eats in her husband’s home is exempt
from the mitzvah of mishlo’ach manos.
Therefore, he adds, adult children who
likewise live and eat in their father’s home
are also exempt from the mitzvah. However,
I have not found any other authority who
agrees with this leniency.