Siman 132: U-va LeTzion

1. KADDISH YATOM

 

The entire Bi'ur Halakha on this siman discusses the rules for apportioning out the mourner's kaddish.

 

The association of kaddish with mourners is mentioned in Sofrim 19:9.  The custom of mourners saying the kaddish is usually attributed to the ability of the son's prayer or learning to lessen the wicked father's punishment in the next world.  This special power is the subject of a well-known Midrash.  In this Midrash, which has many variations, R. Akiva (or another Sage) finds a ghost condemned to a kind of Sysiphian punishment.  When the Sage learns that the wicked departed left a son, he seeks out the son and brings him back to the way of Torah, and the son takes part in public prayers.  The father appears to the Sage in a dream to inform him that his sentence was commuted in the merit of his son.

 

Not all of the versions actually mention kaddish.  See for instance Kalla Rabati 2:9 which refers only "to bless[ing] in the congregation;" Pirkei de-R. Eliezer Zuta 17 (at the end) which mentions "barkhu;" Zohar Chadash Ruth 84c which mentions Torah learning (in this midrash, not only does the son ease the father's punishment but when the son eventually achieves the status of a true talmid chakham the father is able to rise to the abode of the tzadikkim).  In the Rishonim, the Midrash is brought down in a form which does mention kaddish; see Or Zarua Shabbat II, Rabbeinu Bachaye Devarim 21:8.

 

There is also a Midrash which says that when the departed THEMSELVES answer to Kaddish, their punishment is commuted (Eliyahu Zuta 20).

 

 

Among Ashkenazim the mourners' kaddishim are:

1. After "Mizmor shir chanukat ha-bayit" before "Barukh she-amar" (Nusach Ashkenaz);

2. After "Aleinu;"

3. After "shir shel yom".

4. The kaddish de-rabanan said after the korbanot preceding the tefilla;

5. The kaddish de-rabanan said after the ketoret recited at the end of the tefilla.

6. After "Aleinu" at mincha;

7. After "Shir ha-ma'alot" at Ma'ariv (Nusach Sefarad of the Chasidim).

8. After "Aleinu" at Maariv.

 

We see that each nusach has seven mourners' kaddishim.  (Ashkenazim have #1 but not #7 and Sefardim vice versa.)  The last kaddish of each service is said by any yatom if there is no actual mourner or yahrzeit; the others are not said at all if there is no mourner.  The half-kaddish after the Torah reading is reserved for a mourner if there is one, otherwise it is recited even by someone who is not a yatom.

 

The custom until recent generations was that each kaddish was said by one mourner.  This resulted in the complicated hierarchy explained in the BH, which attempted to balance the INTENSITY of mourning (shiva greater than sheloshim greater than first year), the FREQUENCY of kaddish (a yahrzeit has preference since he does not get a second chance until the following year), and the relative RIGHTS of the congregant (a dues-paying member or regular congregant has greater rights than a visitor).  "Ties" were very frequent, and had to be resolved by lot.

 

Every gabbai had to master these rules perfectly in order to prevent squabbling among kaddish-sayers.

 

The Pitchei Teshuva on Yoreh De'a 376 s.k. 6 cites a view that if there are many mourners all may recite kaddish together, to avoid friction.  This view is also mentioned in the Kitzur Shulchan Arukh 26:18.  This custom is nearly universal today - though the Chatam Sofer OC 159 prefers the old custom because if all recite kaddish in unison, no one mourner is inducing the congregation to praise HaShem.  My impression is that there are only a few old gabbais around who remember how to allocate kaddishim.

 

It occurs to me that another good reason for allowing everyone to say kaddish together is that many people come to shul only when they have to say kaddish.  I have been to congregations in America where it seemed like the majority of the congregants were saying kaddish - those who don't have to say kaddish simply don't make it to weekday minyan.  If the kaddishim were rationed, these people would not be attracted to shul.  In many places, there would be no minyan without mourners and yahrzeits who would not otherwise attend services.

 

Penei Barukh 34 note 69* mentions that the custom of Sefaradim has always been to allow all mourners to recite kaddish in unison, and this is also evident from the Chatam Sofer.

 

2. WOMEN AND KADDISH YATOM

 

The Sha'arei Teshuva on our siman (printed together with the MB) in s.k. 3 cites the Shevut Yaakov II:23 that a daughter should say kaddish only in the home.  The Be'er Heitev (also printed with the MB) in s.k. 4 cites the Knesset Yechezkel to the same effect.  The Gesher Ha-Chayim 30:5 rules in accordance with these opinions, and adds that if the daughter is before bat mitzva, the custom in many places was to allow her to say kaddish even in shul.

 

The Pitchei Teshuva YD 376:3 cites Chavot Yair (222) who was asked about a man who in his will requested that his daughter say kaddish for him at a minyan of avrekhim at his home.  The Chavot Yair concludes that while there is no reasoning (sevara) which militates against this, it should be avoided because it will cause a proliferation of customs, and "the customs of Israel are Torah and they require strengthening."

 

However, as the Gesher Ha-Chayim points out, there were some cities in Europe where it was customary for a daughter to say kaddish if there was no son.  Hence, in these places the reasoning of the Chavot Yair would dictate the opposite of the previous case - that the daughter SHOULD say kaddish so as not to weaken the minhag.

 

The Kitzur Shulchan Arukh 26:20 cites both the Knesset Yechezkel as well as the Chavot Yair without deciding between them.  Consequently, we find no authorities who oppose women saying kaddish in a private minyan, as long as there is no contrary custom,

 

On the other hand, the Penei Barukh 34:20 writes that "all of the posekim" oppose the Shevut Yaakov.  In notes 35 and 36, he cites the Sedeh Chemed (Aveilut 160) who brings opinions on both sides of the question.  He cites Mateh Efraim (Kaddish Yatom IV:8) who opposes women saying kaddish.  There are many other citations there, including the Knesset Yechezkel which rules leniently, at least according to the Be'er Heitev.  The stringent citations do not seem to add up to "all of the posekim" or even most of them, especially given the immense stature of the Be'er Heitev, Sha'arei Teshuva and Kitzur Shulchan Arukh which are widely accepted reference works.  (The Chafetz Chaim explicitly stipulated that the Mishna Berura should never be printed without the Be'er Heitev and the Sha'arei Teshuva - that's why they appear even in the pocket editions.)

 

It would seem that in a place where there was no minhag either way, the Chavot Yair's criterion would not be relevant, and so if the parent requested that the daughter say kaddish, then the request should be honored.  (This would be the case at any rate if there was a private request.)  However, if the request itself was made with the intention of creating a new minhag, perhaps the CY's reasoning would still apply - it may be that we are disturbed by the specter of a few people creating an entirely new minhag through their deathbed instructions.

 

Indeed, Rabbi Zvi Shechter related in a shiur that Rav Soloveitchik once used to rule that having a daughter say kaddish is better than hiring someone - which conforms to my theory that the Chavot Yair is not relevant when there is no minhag, since New York two generations ago was fundamentally a place without a uniform minhag.  Despite this, later on when the Rav felt that the motivation for the women saying kaddish was to innovate a new minhag, he used to discourage the practice.

 

At any rate, it does seem that if there is no particular minhag, there is no opposition to a woman saying kaddish in a private minyan, since even the Chavot Yair is opposed only on the basis of minhag and the strict opinion in the Kitzur is based on the CY, and all other opinions are lenient.  And the reasoning of Rav Soloveitchik ("mishna acharona") might not apply here, since I doubt that a new minhag will arise of forming private minyanim for every deceased person who has daughters but no sons.  However, even the lenient Sha'arei Teshuva explicitly limits a woman to saying kaddish at such a private minyan, and I have no sources which sanction a grown daughter saying kaddish in Beit Knesset.

 

WHEN THERE IS A SON

 

The Bi'ur Halakha (about two thirds of the way through) mentions that if there are two sons, even though they are saying kaddish for the same person they are equal in any lottery, because each one has an individual obligation to say kaddish.  It seems clear that this is NOT true for women.  None of the sources I found discuss a woman saying kaddish when there is a son to recite kaddish for the departed.  If there are two reasons for a son to say kaddish - ilui neshama for the parent plus individual obligation - it seems that only the first exists for a daughter, even according to the opinions which favor a daughter saying kaddish.

 

3. KEEPING PERSPECTIVE

 

In Rabbi Yisrael Shurin's important biography series "Morei Ha-Uma" (II:112) he tells the story of a lady in New York who complained to Rav Shmuel Kushelevitz that the gabbai forgot to send her a card informing her when Yom Kippur fell, and therefore she neglected to light a yizkor candle.  The Rav delicately asked her if she FASTED on Yom Kippur.  The lady became very annoyed - how could the Rav raise a minor concern like fasting while she was discussing the great mitzva of lighting a yizkor candle!

 

This should remind us to keep a proper perspective when carrying out those customs which show respect for the departed, who are now in the world of truth.  The Kitzur Shulchan Arukh 26:22 points out that the greatest thing a person can do for the "ilui neshama" of his parents is to mend his own ways.  Kaddish is only the emblem of the fact that the orphan magnifies and sanctifies God's name in his or her actions, not only by saying "yitgadal ve-yitkadash shemei raba."  It seems from the Midrash that the main influence on the father's punishment was the son's teshuva, not his kaddish.  Especially important is the fact that in kaddish or Barkhu the son causes OTHERS to praise God (as we mentioned from the Chatam Sofer), highlighting the importance of exemplary humane conduct.

 

4. KEDUSHA DE-SIDRA (KDS) - U-BA LE-TZION

 

Rava said, every day's curse is worse than its predecessor's, as it is said (Devarim 28) "In the morning you will 'who will bring evening,' and in the evening you will say 'who will bring morning?.'"  Which morning does this refer to?  If you say morning the next day, who knows if it will be better than today?  Rather, the morning that just passed [that is, we will be reduced to praying that things do not get any worse].  On what then does the world subsist - on Kedusha DeSidra and on the kaddish of Aggada, as it is said (Iyov 10:22) "The earth is dimmed in the mist of the shadow of death and without orders (sedarim) [and it appears like the mist]."  But if there is order, then it appears out of the mist  (Sota 49a).

 

            Rashi explains that the two parts of the liturgy mentioned - KDS and the kaddish of aggada - are special because in them we sanctify God's name in connection with Torah learning that even simple Jews take part in.  In KDS we recite three verse and then translate them, so that even those who do not know Hebrew can understand; the Kaddish of aggada is said after the Shabbat derash which is at the level of the simple people, on the day when everyone comes to shul, and is also in Aramaic.

 

This theme, that the world is worthy of subsistence because of the simple Torah fulfillment of simple Jews, is a feature of the famous story of R. Shimon bar Yochai:

 

When he and his son left the cave the second time, R. Shimon thought that the world must be resting only on the merit of the two of them - obviously a tremendous burden.  Then he saw a simple man carrying two myrtle branches to honor the Shabbat - one corresponding to "shamor," one corresponding to "zakhor," and his mind was set at ease (Shabbat 33b.).

 

According to Rashi in Sefer HaPardes, at one time the congregation used to actually devote the time after Amida and Tachanun to Torah learning, just as many congregations today have a short shiur after shacharit.  But since people were rushed, a standardized, shortened version was introduced, comprising a few verses and their translation.  On Shabbat when we read from the Torah and the Prophets at length (and often hear a sermon) there is no Kedusha DeSidra, because then we are fulfilling the original custom which KDS came to replace. Even so, we say it at Mincha so as to not skip a day.

 

WITHOUT A MINYAN

 

Kedusha is a "davar she-bikedusha," and therefore requires a minyan (SA OC 54:1).  KDS is also a kind of kedusha, as its name testifies, and for this reason the Gaon Rav Tzemach ruled that it may not be said without a minyan.  The Zohar (Teruma II:132b) also forbids this.  The halakha, however, is like the Rosh who rules that without a minyan, one may say this part of the service as one who is reading verses from the Tanakh.

 

The Zohar cited is the source for the principle mentioned in the Rema and the Mishna Berura s.k. 4 that any [kedusha] in Aramaic should not be recited as a congregation.  But in shiur 56 on siman 101 we learned that prayers in Aramaic should not be recited without a congregation!

 

Actually, the rules do not contradict.  Individual prayers are not said in Aramaic because the attending angels don't understand (or esteem) this language (Shabbat 12b).  The community MAY pray in Aramaic because the community does not require the assistance of a pleading angel (see my explanation in shiur 56).  The community does not say kedusha in Aramaic for a related reason, since Aramaic is mere vernacular and is not a fitting way for a Jewish congregation to sanctify God's name.  But an individual may say kedusha in Aramaic, because kedusha is not a prayer.

 

ALEINU

 

Aleinu as part of the Rosh HaShana nusach is at least as old as the siddur of Rav Amram Gaon (over 1100 years ago) and probably as old as the Rosh HaShana musaf itself (add about another thousand years).  As the closing prayer of the service, it is at least as old as the Machzor Vitry (900 years ago).  The Kolbo (siman 16) traces it to Yehoshua using a most convoluted acrostic (the starting words are chosen in a seemingly arbitrary way and go backwards, and even so the acrostic is not complete).  He also found it in the Midrash "Pirkei de-R. Eliezer", but I can't find it in the extant version.

 

Many prayer books have a censored version, since Christian censors viewed the words "for they bow down to vanity and emptiness" as an indictment of Christian faith - an unlikely supposition given that the prayer apparently antedates Christianity.