MISC section - contents: Q We had a minyan for Mincha without a mourner, and so we did not say Kaddish after Aleinu. We subsequently did some learning, after which I recited Kaddish D'rabbanan. Some people questioned whether this is the right thing since, Baruch Hashem, both of my parents are alive. Can/should one with living parents say Kaddish D'rabbanan (=KD)? A There is nothing per se about Kaddish that makes it appropriate only for mourners. Chazanim regularly say the Kaddeishim during the tefilla. The main issue has to do with the Kaddish following Aleinu at the end of the tefilla (and in a few places, during Shacharit). That was instituted to give mourners who are not able to be the chazan the opportunity to recite at least that Kaddish and thereby elevate the souls of their departed parents. Thus, poskim write that when one whose parents are alive says Kaddish, it may look as if a parent has died, and we refrain from this in order to "not open our mouth to the Satan". In contrast, KD was instituted based on the special impact that it has for the world, in general. The gemara (Sota 49a) mentions the saying of "Y'hei Shmei Rabba" after learning aggada (homiletic portions of the Torah) as one of two things that keep the world in existence. In theory and according to the great majority of classical sources (see Shut Chatam Sofer, IV 132; Pitchei Teshuva, YD 376:4) it need not be limited to mourners or those whose parents have died in the past. On the other hand, there is an opinion that only one who does not have parents says KD (Matei Efrayim, cited in Tzitz Eliezer VII, 49). Even though this opinion is rejected, it is hard to deny that the perception of most people is that it is said by mourners or those without parents. This perception of people causes a situation where it is understandable for a parent to be disturbed that their child is reciting KD. Some authorities (see Yabia Omer III, YD 26) say that under those circumstances, there is an element of "opening the mouth to the Satan". What happens if a parent objects to the saying of Kaddish when he need not do so? There is a major machloket among Rishonim in a case that a father tells his son not to recite Mourner's Kaddish for his mother (the father's wife, not divorcee). The Maharam (cited in Tashbetz 425) says that the father's objection, which has a logical basis, should be heeded, even though it is unfortunate, as it is important to say Kaddish for the mother. But the Rama (Yoreh Deah 376:4) says that we reject the father's objection and instruct the son to say Kaddish for his mother. Our case is different from the Rama's in both directions. On one hand, if the parents and others would be more knowledgeable as to the background of KD, there would be no reason to object. On the other hand, there is less of a requirement to say KD, certainly if we are speaking about after a learning session that is not part of davening. It is very common for group learning to end without KD (for better or for worse, and that is not our topic now) even if mourners are present. So why create a questionable situation when one can finish the learning without a Kaddish? We suggest the following approach, which is in line with that of Rav O. Yosef shlita (Yabia Omer, ibid.). The parent(s) have the prerogative to object to their son saying KD, but one need not ask their permission in advance. If one wants to ask his parents, he can say that it is permitted for a son with living parents to say Kaddish and hope they do not object. If someone without living parents is present, he should ideally be the one to say KD, but if no one is saying the KD at the beginning or end of davening, then it is fine for anyone to recite it (Rav Sh. Z. Orbach z.t.l. instructed a colleague of ours with parents to act this way.) In any case, your friends at the minyan have no reason to object. Ask the Rabbi Q&A is part of Hemdat Yamim, the weekly parsha
sheet published by Eretz Hemdah. You can read this section or the entire Hemdat
Yamim at www.ou.org or
www.eretzhemdah.org.
And/or you can receive Hemdat Yamim by email weekly, by sending an email to
info@eretzhemdah.org with the message:
Subscribe/English (forthe English version) or Subscribe/Hebrew (for the hebrew
version). Please leave the subject blank. Ask the Vebbe Rebbe is partially
funded by the Jewish Agency for Israel However, though most people think of this as war in the desert,
outside and away from Eretz Yisrael, in truth, it was a war ABOUT Eretz Yisrael.
The war against Amalek is in every generation, and against... Amalek of the heart, that is, the evil inclination, and the spirit of Amalek - the adversary of Israel... This is Samael and his hosts, whose main power is in the gates of Jerusalem when its lands are desolate... The strength and rulership of Amalek's spirit is in the gates of Jerusalem, as mentioned above, but only when there is destruction and desolation near the gates and in the unwalled areas of Jerusalem... This delays the connection between the Jerusalem of below and Jerusalem of above... The war against the desolation is waged not only by setting up tents of Ya'akov and dwelling places of Israel in their respective places, but also by planting its land and fulfilling the commandments dependent on it (Kol HaTor, chapter 7) Thus, Amalek uprooted himself to wage war against the Jewish people in the desert to keep them there, that is, to prevent them from coming to Eretz Yisrael, settling the land, and developing it. The unification of the Jewish people with the land promised to their ancestors has the direct effect of increasing holiness in the world, and eliminating evil. To survive, Amalek had to stop that process in its tracks; he has continued to do so over the generations until this very day. According to the Shem M'Shmuel, Balak and Bilaam, when they
tried to curse the Jewish people, had attempted the same goal for the same
reason as Amalek. Thus, it is not surprising to learn that, according to the
Zohar, the combination of their two names produces two words: Amalek, and Bavel
(Babylonia) - the location of the first Jewish exile from Eretz Yisrael. And thus now, after thousands of years of exile, during which Eretz Yisrael had remained desolate and almost uninhabitable, we have to ask the question, who's keeping us out now? As we witness the rebuilding and repopulating of the land of Tanach, we have to honestly ask ourselves, against whom is the real battle today, if not Amalek - on whatever front he is waging it? To return home to Eretz Yisrael and to end her desolation -
physical and spiritual - is to win the war against Amalek. To fulfill the
mitzvot dependent upon the Land is to push the spirit of impurity from her
borders, and eventually, from the world itself. The war against Amalek first
began in the desert in Moshe Rabeinu's time. Let it end, once and for all, in
ours. TORAH THOUGHTS as contributed by Aloh Naaleh members for
publication in the Orthodox Union's 'Torah Insights', a weekly Torah publication
on Parshat Ha'Shavuah It was not so, however. For when the people arrived hungry in the Wilder- ness of Sin, they again protested vehemently claiming that they had been better off in Egypt. So Hashem provided manna, which proved for eternity that not even forty years in a barren desert could hamper His infinite capacity to fend for His creatures. The manna was the first great equalizer - for each received this
"Food from Heaven" on a daily basis in exactly the amount needed. Moreover, the
double portion received for Shabbat reinforced the notion that trust in Hashem
does not restrict livelihood. With such rich potential for moral awakening we
surely concur with Rabbi Akiva that manna is the very same food that sustains
the angels. And how, therefore, should we view G-d's beneficence today? [The Parshat B'shalach Homepage]
|
