Mi Yodeya is a question and answer site for those who base their lives on Jewish law and tradition and anyone interested in learning more. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

As far as I know, living people can positively affect the dead. This is the reason we say Kaddish and learn Mishnayos for the souls of the deceased. (Feel free to comment with more examples of this.) If you want to get more mystical, there are numerous stories of tzaddikim finding tikkunim for sinful souls.

So today I read an article that mentioned how the Mormon Church posthumously baptized Simon Wiesenthal's parents, and I wondered: is it possible to negatively affect the souls of the deceased?

(Mormon posthumous baptism just provided the impetus for this question. I'm interested in the more general idea of souls being negatively affected after death.)

@DoubleAA brought up an interesting point in the comments that I didn't think of. Is a soul affected when a living person sins because of something the deceased did while alive?

Specifically, I'm wondering if there are sources that discuss this, rather than looking for personal logic and intuition.

share|improve this question
If you assume doing mitzvot helps them because they 'caused' you to do it, then if someone sins because of the deceased, it should negatively affect him as well as he 'caused' him to sin. – Double AA Feb 16 '12 at 21:12
As far as Mormon baptsim goes, this is sort of a duplicate of judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/8653. But IMO this question is good even if the Mormon-baptism issue is removed from it. +1. – msh210 Feb 16 '12 at 21:13
@DoubleAA, except that (as we know from other contexts) God rewards according to certain rules he doesn't use to punish. Maybe (conjecture) that applies here, too. – msh210 Feb 16 '12 at 21:13
@DoubleAA, You actually bring up something I hadn't thought of. I asked only about actions that the deceased had nothing to do with, and didn't cause. You bring up another fascinating aspect that I didn't think of. Thanks! I've added it to the question. – HodofHod Feb 16 '12 at 21:22
zachin l'adam shelo befanav, v'ain chayivin oso ela befanav. – YDK Feb 17 '12 at 7:48
up vote 7 down vote accepted

Summary: One who drinks water on the eve of Shabbat or, according to other opinions, following mincha on Shabbat, steals water from the souls in Gehenom and thus harms them.

There is little, if any, Scriptural discussion regarding the continued life of a soul following death, therefore we are left exploring the murky depths of Midrash. I refer you to the (odd?) halachic dispute regarding drinking water on the eve of Shabbat and following mincha on Shabbat. A good discussion of the argument can be found in the book 'Kaddish' by Leon Wieseltier. Here are some excerpts [page 100-105 of first Vintage Books edition, 2000]:

The ערוגת הבושם:

.... on the Sabbath the dead are relieved of the judgment of hell. On that afternoon the souls are made to stand by a gleaming fountain of water that flows at the entrance to the garden, and then rinse themselves in the water to cool their bodies from the fire... Since the souls at that hour are standing by that fountain, the geonim and the [post-Talmudic] rabbis established the custom that we do not drink water between the afternoon service and the evening service on the Sabbath, because we would be stealing it from the dead."

The שיבולי הלקט [about]:

According to a rabbinical legend, when an individual drinks water at twilight [on the afternoon of the Sabbath], it is as if he were stealing the water from his dead. And I have found this in the responsa of the geonim: 'We have heard it said in the name of the early sages that for the duration of twilight, permission is granted to the souls of the dead to drink water. And when one drinks water at the hour when the souls of the dead are drinking water, the souls of the dead who are one's kin are not permitted to drink. For this reason, the sages said that it is as if one were stealing from one's own relatives."

The אור זרוע from Isaac of Vienna:

When the afternoon [of the Sabbath] comes... it is the practice of the righteous.... and then to eat a meal. Our Master Tam [רבנו תם] scolded them and said that it was forbidden, citing the tale in the Jerusalem Talmud about a man who drank water between the afternoon prayer and the evening prayer, and the angel of death came and slew him, because he drank when the dead were drinking and so was a robber of the dead."

The מרדכי from Mordecai ben Hillel:

... Rabbi Meshullam responded that in his text of the ancient rabbinical legend he had a different formulation. His text said that 'those who eat and drink on the afternoon of the eve of the Sabbath [steal from the dead] and the reason is that [by Friday afternoon] the dead are exhausted from the judgment they have endured all week. And for this reason he was strict about not drinking on the afternoon of the eve of the Sabbath.... And it is the custom of the whole world to be careful [about drinking the water of the dead]..."

The Bach concludes that one should not drink either Friday afternoon or Saturday afternoon.

Needless to say, the practice of refraining from drinking during these times has all but disappeared, though as can be seen above, was widely practiced in Ashkenazic lands in the Middle Ages.

share|improve this answer
+1 Great answer, and thanks for bringing sources! – HodofHod Feb 19 '12 at 14:42
The custom has fallen into disuse BECAUSE circumstances changed. I believe the prohibition on drinking water referred only to running water straight from a body of water (lake, river), not tap water from pipes, and definitely not bottled water. – LN6595 Nov 27 '15 at 3:29

The Torah says (in the 10 commandments) that God punishes the guilty for 3 or 4 generations.

In many places, I have seen people troubled by this idea, and the general kiruv answer is that if person's children do not do mitzvot, because of the sins of the parent the parent is punished for those lack of mitzvot and sins being done, up to 3 or 4 generations.

It would seem from this answer and common question, that yes, a person can negatively affect the dead.

share|improve this answer
The language-פֹּקֵד עֲו‍ֹן אָבֹת עַל-בָּנִים עַל-שִׁלֵּשִׁים וְעַל-רִבֵּעִים, לְשֹׂנְאָי- implies that the children inherit their fathers sins, not the other way around. (it could be so, but is not implied by the pasuk) – YDK Feb 17 '12 at 7:46
Yes, it's a drash which changes the plain meaning of the verse. – avi Feb 17 '12 at 11:17
Any sources for this? – HodofHod Feb 17 '12 at 14:09

HaRav Musafi writes in his Sefer (Shivat Sion) that when someone says Hashkava for someone after the first year of their death it can Has WeShalom have a negative effect and may Has Weshalom lead to the Neshama to get tortured. He also says that when someone reads the Haftara "Lezecher Nishmat" someone and makes mistakes it can also negatively effect the Neshama Has Weshalom.

share|improve this answer

"There shall not be found among you any one that maketh his son or his daughter to pass through the fire, one that useth divination, a soothsayer, or an enchanter, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or one that consulteth a ghost or a familiar spirit, or a necromancer. For whosoever doeth these things is an abomination unto the LORD; and because of these abominations the LORD thy G-d is driving them out from before thee." Deuteronomy 18:10-12

To believe that this Mormon ceremony actually has any effect on Jewish souls in Olam Haba is a violation of the above Torah verses.

Whether or not a living Jew's negative conduct negatively affects that Jew's deceased parents (or possibly teachers?) is debatable; but it's clear that anything the non-Jews do independently, with any motive, has zero effect.

share|improve this answer
What if you taught a gentile to always eat eiver-min-hachai? (yes, I know it's extreme...) Would his continued eating harm you? Very possibly yes. – Double AA Feb 17 '12 at 13:28
@DoubleAA That's already a different case. I suppose I could add one word to clarify "anything the non-Jews do INDEPENDENTLY, with any motive, has zero effect. – user1095 Feb 17 '12 at 13:30
I think that would make your answer correct :) – Double AA Feb 17 '12 at 13:34
The Mormon story was just the impetus for this more general question. Also, I don't understand how those pesukim would be violated. Could you elaborate, please? Thanks! – HodofHod Feb 17 '12 at 14:12
@HodofHod There is a general prohibition of believing in superstition. I searched for the scriptural source of this prohibition, and this is what I found. If someone can provide a better scriptural source, I will add and/or replace. Leviticus 18:3 is generally understood to mean doing nonsense superstitions (not walking on a crack in the sidewalk, throwing salt over ones left shoulder, etc.), where as the verses above prohibit using non-Jewish spiritual practices, as if they had any power. – user1095 Feb 18 '12 at 16:53

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.