Our Gemara on Amud Aleph explores why the wicked King Amon was spared certain humiliation and disparagement, while Menashe was not:

The Gemara asks: For what reason did the tanna’im not enumerate the wicked Amon among the kings with no share in the World-to-Come? The Gemara answers: He is not enumerated due to the honor of Josiah, his righteous son.

The Gemara then challenges: Let us also not enumerate Menashe due to the honor of Hezekiah, his righteous father?

The Gemara explains: The son confers merit upon the father, as it is to the father’s credit that he raised a righteous son, but the father does not confer merit upon the son.

This statement in the Gemara reflects the nature of spiritual compensations—how the merit of a son can stand in for the father, but not vice versa. (This is not an absolute, and commentaries explain exceptions and distinctions where a father can bring merit to the son; see Tosafos Sotah 10b.)

The commentaries provide various explanations to clarify why merit flows more easily from son to father, each offering a unique perspective on a deeper theological idea. Maharsha explains that sometimes, even an immoral father desires for his son to be better than he was. If the son leads a virtuous life, it’s assumed that the father played some role—whether through his actions, attitude, or values—shaping his son’s positive turn. Therefore, it is considered a merit for the father. However, if the son remains on a sinful path, the father’s merits have no impact, as the son has not yet been influenced by him.

Other commentaries suggest that reward is tied to the physical world. A son, who is living and in the physical world, can bring merit to his deceased father because the son’s actions are presumably shaped by the father’s teachings, or at least the father’s care and support. But if the son requires merit from the father, it becomes impossible once the father has passed, as he is no longer part of the physical world and cannot add to the son’s spiritual ledger.

One final fascinating and nuanced explanation comes from Machshavas Charutz (19), which states that we cannot accept that merit can be literally transferred from one person to another, as if it were a financial calculation. Merit cannot be given; it must be earned. So what does it mean? It means that the father may have implanted a leaning toward goodness in the son, even if the father’s actions or behavior didn’t manifest that goodness clearly. This is different from the Maharsha’s explanation, where the father directly influenced the son through his wishes or guidance. Even if the father did not express any desire for his son to be better, the son’s goodness is still a product of his upbringing, and that itself is a good deed that God rewards.

To illustrate, consider this radical example: A father was a hitman, but the son, having learned his father’s skills, becomes a war hero. It’s not that the father wished for the son to be virtuous (as in the Maharsha’s explanation), but the son’s actions, despite their initial negative roots, are a result of the father’s parenting, and God rewards good deeds. On the other hand, if the father was righteous, how could his righteousness count as merit for his son? The father can claim that he assisted his son and take credit for his future actions, but the son cannot claim to assist his father based on his father’s past actions.

This is just one perspective. As other commentaries note, we clearly do believe in the merit of the fathers, zechus avos, as expressed in the first paragraph of Shemoneh Esre and parts of the Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur liturgy.

In summation, as we discussed earlier in the blog post Psychology of the Daf, Sanhedrin 96, even the smallest unconscious gestures can transmit values to the next generation. This process works both ways: Positive values, as well as destructive and immoral ones, can be unconsciously absorbed and passed down through several generations until it breaks out into a full-blown situation, as seen in a previous post, Psychology of the Daf, Sanhedrin 102, quoting Ramban in Devarim (29:17).

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.

Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com