[Avodah] The Fungibility of Mitzvos

[Micha Berger via Avodah]

As y'all know, I'm obsessed with this topic. The notion of metaphysical
causality that interferes with "you get what you deserve / need" bothers
me.

So I appreciated RNSlifkin finding these sources.
http://www.rationalistjudaism.com/2017/04/can-you-do-mitzvos-to-benefit-others.html

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

Can You Do Mitzvos To Benefit Others?
April 03, 2017

Can you do mitzvos in such a way that the merit for them will benefit
other people? Can you designate them to receive the reward for your
mitzvah in their mitzvah bank account, such that they receive more
Divine favor?

A friend of mine recently forwarded to me a request on behalf of someone
who is tragically unwell. The community was requested to pray for his
recovery, which is certainly a time-honored Jewish response. But there
was also a request to do mitzvos on his behalf, as a merit for God to
heal him. My friend wanted to know if there was any classical Jewish
basis for this.

In my essay "What Can One Do For Someone Who Has Passed Away?" I noted
that classically, one's mitzvos are only a credit to those people who
had a formative influence on you. One's mitzvos cannot help the souls
of other people. Rashba cites a responsum from Rav Sherira Gaon on this:

  "A person cannot merit someone else with reward; his elevation and
  greatness and pleasure from the radiance of the Divine Presence is
  only in accordance with his deeds." (Rashba, Responsa, Vol. 7 #539)

Maharam Alashkar cites Rav Hai Gaon who firmly rejects the notion that
one can transfer the reward of a mitzvah to another person and explains
why this is impossible:

  "These concepts are nonsense and one should not rely upon them. How
  can one entertain the notion that the reward of good deeds performed
  by one person should go to another person? Surely the verse states,
  'The righteousness of a righteous person is on him,' (Ezek. 18:20)
  and likewise it states, 'And the wickedness of a wicked person is upon
  him.' Just as nobody can be punished on account of somebody else's sin,
  so too nobody can merit the reward of someone else. How could one think
  that the reward for mitzvos is something that a person can carry around
  with him, such that he can transfer it to another person?" (Maharam
  Alashkar, Responsa #101)

The same view is found explicitly and implicitly in other sources, as I
noted in my essay. There is simply no mechanism to transfer the reward
for one's own mitzvos to other people. It seems that only very recent
mystical-based sources claim otherwise.

Now, I don't see any reason why there should be any difference if the
person that one is trying to help is deceased or alive. Nor do I know of
any source in classical rabbinic literature that one can do a mitzvah
as a merit to help someone that is sick. Prayer, yes. And Tehillim are
also a form of prayer (though it may depend upon which Tehillim are
being recited). But I know of no classical source that one can honor
one's parents or learn Torah or send away a mother bird as a merit for
somebody else.

(The most common example of people attempting to do this may be the
custom of women to separate challah on behalf of a sick person. Here
too, though, it appears that the classical basis of this is not that the
mitzvah of separating challah is crediting the sick person, but rather
that the person separating the challah thereby has a special time of
power/inspiration, which makes their prayer more powerful.)

If I'm wrong in any of the above, I'll be glad to see sources showing
otherwise. But so far, I have found that while people are shocked
when one challenges the notion that you can learn Torah on behalf of
someone who is sick, nobody has yet actually come up with any classical
sources demonstrating otherwise. Furthermore, if this indeed was a part
of classical Judaism, we would certainly expect it to have prominent
mention in the writings of Chazal and the Rishonim. We appear to have
another situation of something widespread that is believed to be an
integral and classical part of Judaism, and yet is actually a modern
innovation that has no basis in classical Judaism whatsoever.