Adar Rishon
[1] (Halacha 474)
Question: In a leap year, what is the added month — Adar Rishon or Adar Sheni?
Answer: It is written in the Talmud Yerushalmi1: 'Is Adar Rishon the addition, is Adar Sheni the addition? What is [the difference] between them ..'.
And the Korban HaEidah explained: 'He is in doubt which of the months is the addition, the first month or the second month'.
And the Gemara there in the Yerushalmi brings various proofs that Adar Rishon is the addition.
And so wrote Rashi2: 'The days of Adar Rishon, which is made the intercalation of the year'. And so wrote Tosafos there3: 'But for us it is better to fill the first, which is the month of intercalation that was added to the year, even though we say that the year is intercalated at its end. And in the Yerushalmi of Megillah there is a dispute, for we say there: Ukva found two letters — in one it was written "and it was pleasing in his eyes and in the eyes of his colleagues, add thirty days to the year," and in one it was written "and it was pleasing in his eyes and in the eyes of his colleagues, add a month of days to the year." The one who says thirty days [holds] Adar Rishon is the addition; the one who says a month of days [holds] Adar Sheni is the addition. And in the end they rejected it, for he holds: if they wished thirty, if they wished a month'.
And likewise in Tosafos Nedarim4 they wrote: 'And it says that a stam Adar of a leap year is Adar Sheni, for the month of intercalation is Adar Rishon and not Adar Sheni. Know this, for Adar Rishon is of thirty days [and] the second of twenty-nine; and further, that the Megillah and Purim are in the second — evidently the first is the month of intercalation'.
If so, we have seen that the added month is the month of Adar Rishon5.
Question: A person who was born in a year in which there is only one month of Adar, and in the year he becomes bar mitzvah there are two months of Adar — when does he become bar mitzvah?
Answer: The Yerushalmi6 wrote: 'Rabbi Avin [expounded]: "אקרא7 לאלהים עליון לאל גומר עלי" ("I call to God Most High, to the God who fulfills for me") — a girl of three years and one day, and the beis din reconsiders to intercalate it [the year], her virginity returns; and if not, her virginity does not return'.
We see in the words of the Yerushalmi that 'if she was born at the beginning of Adar, and in the third year she was cohabited with at the end of Adar, her virginity does not return; and if after this the beis din reconsidered — when they would sanctify [the month] by sighting — and intercalated the year, and thus she is still within her three years, her virginity again returns8'.
And the Hagahos Mordechai9 wrote: 'Regarding the matter of the youth who reached 13 years, whether the month of intercalation is included — it appears to me that certainly it is not counted, since it is said in the Yerushalmi that the return of virginity within three years for a virgin and the delay of the signs [of maturity] depend on the intercalation of the month of the year, as it is written "אקרא לאלקים עליון לאל גומר עלי" ("I call to God Most High, to the God who fulfills for me") — the meaning of "gomer" [is] He completes and agrees with the beis din below in their intercalation; and if they intercalated the year her virginity returns, and the signs also delay in coming if they intercalated the year. Therefore it appears to me that regarding anything of holiness, whether for tefillah or for zimun, he does not complete [his majority] until he is 13 years old with the month of intercalation included, as is implied in Perek HaSho'el10 regarding that case of the bathhouse and regarding one who rents a house to his fellow etc.'.
The Mahari Mintz11 wrote: 'Since Adar Rishon is certainly the month of intercalation, by reasoning we should say: if one were born in Nissan and the 13th year were a leap year, the matter is obvious that we say he becomes bar mitzvah in Nissan and not in Adar; so too let us say that in Adar Sheni he becomes bar mitzvah and not in Adar Rishon, which is the month of intercalation, and we would not call that Adar but rather Shevat; and were one to call it Shevat, it is obvious that we would say he becomes bar mitzvah in Adar, as explained regarding one born in Nissan. So too here, what difference does it make — and because of the calling of the name that they called it Adar shall we bring this one to be liable to punishment, God forbid? And shall we not say: the year was intercalated, it was intercalated for him? For the calling of the name did not come for this reason, but because Adar is the last of the months they gave it this name'.
And so wrote the Rama12: 'And one who was born in Adar and becomes bar mitzvah in a leap year does not become bar mitzvah until Adar Sheni'.
However, the Maharash HaLevi13 disagreed with the Rama and wrote: 'And it also appears to my humble opinion that if a youth was born in a regular year in [such-and-such of] Adar, and his 13th year is a leap year, he need not wait until Adar Beis, but rather in Adar Alef he becomes bar mitzvah .. and further, that the youth, upon being 13 years old, is obligated in mitzvos, and it is not fitting to delay him and postpone his acceptance of the yoke of mitzvos upon himself for another month; on the contrary, as long as we can bring him into the covenant of the yoke of Torah and mitzvos it is fitting to bring him in and to hasten the end of his time. If so, in our case too it appears that as long as one can hasten the fulfillment of his mitzvah it is fitting to do so, for the essential Adar is the first'.
But in practice the poskim held like the words of the Rama, and as the Pri Chadash14 wrote. Yet some were concerned15 also for the words of the Maharash HaLevi, as the Rebbe16 wrote: 'that the halacha was not decided like him — which is understood to be a stringency [and possibly also a leniency in a place where there is at any rate some doubt] — whereas regarding the laying of tefillin, which in any case is brought in the Magen Avraham to lay two months before this, and it is brought in the HaYom Yom that our minhag is to begin two months earlier. And even according to the Rama's words to begin laying on the day of the bar mitzvah (which we do not practice at all, as above), in any case it is worthwhile to begin laying a month and one day17 before this, as brought in the Orchos Chaim of the tzaddik of Spinka, siman 37'.
It appears from the words of the Rebbe that it is fitting to be concerned for the words of R. Shmuel HaLevi, [and so he wrote not to begin laying [tefillin] on this date in Adar Rishon but rather to do so earlier, especially since in any case our minhag is to lay two months before18].
If so, the essence in halacha is that one born in a regular year celebrates the bar mitzvah in Adar Beis, but we are also concerned for the opinion that he is obligated in mitzvos from Adar Alef
--------------
Notes:
1 Megillah 1:5 ↩
2 Rosh Hashanah 19b ↩
3 s.v. "Adar hasamuch l'Nissan" ↩
4 63b s.v. "V'hatanya" ↩
5 But see below the words of the Maharash HaLevi, and Terumas HaDeshen 294, and the words of the Magen Avraham OC 568:20 ↩
6 Kesubos 1:2 ↩
7 Tehillim 57:3 ↩
8 Machatzis HaShekel OC 55:10 ↩
9 Yevamos remez 115-116 ↩
10 Bava Metzia 102 ↩
11 Responsa 9 ↩
12 Shulchan Aruch OC 55:10 in the hagahah ↩
13 In Responsa OC 16, and see what he brings there from Terumas HaDeshen 294 ↩
14 55:10 ↩
15 See also Responsa Beis Shlomo EH 56. Shevet HaLevi vol. 6 9. vol. 10 105. Vayaan Yosef OC 33. Lehoros Nason vol. 13 end of 1, and see also what is referenced above note 5 ↩
16 Igros Kodesh vol. 14 p. 464 ↩
17 The Orchos Chaim brought the words of Responsa Beis Shlomo there who wrote: 'Only that my opinion is that he should begin some days, or at any rate one day, before the day he was born, so that one not come to err to rule like the words of R. Shmuel HaLevi to include him in the count of ten, until he is 13 years and one day old in Adar Sheni, in accordance with the Acharonim whose words are the essential ruling.' ↩
18 Some learned from this letter and held that also according to our custom it is fitting (that all those born in a regular year and celebrating a bar mitzvah in a leap year, in Adar Beis) to be concerned and to begin laying from the month of Teves. But seemingly there is no proof from this letter, for as stated it speaks of being concerned at least to lay from a month and a day before the bar mitzvah, which in any case the Magen Avraham brought. And likewise our minhag is to lay two months before the bar mitzvah. And seemingly so too it is practiced among Anash, to begin from the month of Shevat ↩
[2] (Halacha 475)
In the previous halacha we saw that the poskim wrote that a minor born in the month of Adar in a regular year celebrates his bar mitzvah in a leap year in the month of Adar Beis (except that they are stringent regarding tefillin from Adar Alef).
Question: What is the law when a person is born in a leap year in the month of Adar Alef, and in the year of his bar mitzvah there are two months of Adar — when does he become bar mitzvah (this question is relevant this year, for those celebrating a bar mitzvah were also born in a leap year).
Answer: The Mahari Mintz1 wrote: 'And likewise this appears to me an obvious matter: if one was born in Adar Rishon and one in Adar Sheni, and in the thirteenth year there is also intercalation, then certainly we would say the one born in the first becomes bar mitzvah in Adar Rishon and the second in the second, and we say "the end of the law is like the beginning of the law," and this one according to his own and that one according to his own'.
And so too it appears from the plain meaning of the words of the Mechaber2. And so wrote the Levush3.
However, the Magen Avraham4 noted on this and wrote: 'One who is born in a regular year does not become bar mitzvah until Adar Sheni, as written in the hagahah. If so, this one too, even though he was born in the leap year, nevertheless last year was a regular year and he became twelve years old in stam Adar; if so, his 13 [years] are not complete until the year of Adar Sheni .. therefore it appears to me that he becomes bar mitzvah in Adar Sheni'.
But in Responsa Shvus Yaakov5 he wrote regarding the words of the Olas Tamid and Magen Avraham: 'This caused them not to examine the source of the law of the hagahos of the Rama there, which is from the responsum of R. M. Mintz siman 9 .. And so wrote the Levush in siman 685 and the Taz in YD end of 306, and so wrote my brother-in-law the Rav in Sefer Eliyah Zuta, and he objected to the Olas Tamid; and certainly had the M.A. seen the words of R. M. Mintz who is the source of this law he would not have disagreed .. Also in the responsum of the R. Shmuel HaLevi, part OC 16, he ruled so simply, and so is the widespread minhag among all the halachic authorities, and so agreed in halacha and in practice my in-law the famous gaon R. D. Oppenheim, may he live, av beis din of the holy community of Prague. And one who disagrees in this and relies on the opinion of the M.A. is nothing but an erroneous ruling against the majority of the great Acharonim; and also one cannot say in such a case that it is fitting to be stringent not to consider him an adult until he waits another month of days — this is not so, for it is better to advance him to the obligation of mitzvos, for the zealous are early to mitzvos, and so wrote there in the responsum of R. Shmuel Levi, and these are his words: and it is not fitting to delay him and postpone his acceptance of the yoke of mitzvos upon himself for another month; on the contrary, as long as we can bring him into the covenant of the yoke of Torah and mitzvos it is fitting to bring him in and hasten the end of his time, end quote. And since this law is clear and a peg that will not be moved, that one born in the leap year in Adar Rishon completes his year in Adar Rishon in a leap year'.
And so wrote the Be'er Heitev6: 'And so is the widespread minhag among all the halachic authorities, and so agreed in halacha and in practice the gaon R. David Oppenheim ztz"l, not like the M.A., and so wrote A.Z. and so ruled the Pri Chadash, see there'. And so the poskim held in halacha and in practice like the words of Maharam Mintz.
If so, one who was born in Adar Rishon, the bar mitzvah will be in Adar Rishon, and one who was born in Adar Sheni, the bar mitzvah will be in Adar Sheni
Question: One who was born in Adar of a regular year, when does he observe the birthday minhogim in a leap year?
Answer: In the previous halacha we saw that the essential Adar is Adar Sheni [and only that we are also concerned for Adar Rishon]. And regarding marking the birthday, we find regarding the Rebbetzin Chaya Mushka, of blessed memory, who was born on the 25th of Adar 5661, which was a regular year, that in the Igros Kodesh of her father, the Rebbe Rayatz7, there is a letter from Tuesday, the 23rd of Adar Rishon 5693, where he writes [in free translation]: 'Beloved daughter! This coming Thursday will fall the date dear and pleasant to us all, of your — and our — pleasant and happy birthday ..'. And again there is a letter from erev Shabbos kodesh Parshas Shemini, the 24th of Adar Sheni8, in which the Rebbe Rayatz writes [in free translation]: 'In a year in which there is Adar Rishon and Sheni, the true Purim is in Adar Sheni. Your dear and happy birthday for us is tomorrow, the 25th of Adar Sheni ..'.
Also in Sefer Maaseh Melech9 it is brought that when the Rebbe traveled to the Ohel in a leap year in honor of the Rebbetzin's birthday, he traveled both on the 25th of Adar Alef and on the 25th of Adar Beis. And so too it is related in the sefer B'chol Beisi Ne'eman10: One year, R. Zalman Gurary picked up the telephone to the Rebbetzin and asked: "Rebbetzin, when is your birthday? In Adar Rishon or in Adar Sheni?" The Rebbetzin replied and said: 'Gleybt mir, Rabbi Gurary, ich veys aleyn nisht, ich veys nor az mayn man fort oyfn Ohel beyde chadoshim' (Believe me, Rabbi Gurary, I myself do not know, I know only that my husband travels to the Ohel in both months).
And in addition it is brought11 that in a leap year, from the 25th of Adar Alef until the 24th of Adar Beis, they observed that the Rebbe would say both the new chapter and the old chapter.
And in Kovetz Hiskashrus12 R. M. Zeligson brought a note from a private yechidus from the months of Adar 5733 [in free translation]: 'Conduct yourself in all the birthday minhogim both in Adar Rishon and in Adar Sheni, even though regarding halacha one must decide which of them is the essential one; but since this is a matter of minhag — one can fulfill both'.
If so, it is fitting to mark and observe the birthday minhogim on both days, both in Adar Alef and in Adar Beis, and during the intervening time to say both chapters, both the new and the old.
--------------
Notes:
1 Responsa 9 ↩
2 Shulchan Aruch OC 55:10 ↩
3 685:1 ↩
4 OC siman 55:10. And preceding him the Olas Tamid 55:5. And see also Responsa Me'il Tzedakah in the name of his teacher R. A. Broida. And for the explanation of their reasoning see Responsa Kinyan Torah vol. 4 11 ↩
5 vol. 1 9 ↩
6 11 ↩
7 vol. 15 p. 202 ↩
8 p. 204 ↩
9 ch. 35 letter 7 ↩
10 ch. 12 p. 410 ↩
11 Maaseh Melech there letter 4, and see Halichos Menachem vol. 1 ch. 46 note 17 ↩
12 issue 453 ↩
[3] (Halacha 476)
Laws of the month of Adar - Purim (3)
Question: Chazal said1 "Mishenichnas Adar marbin b'simcha" (when Adar enters we increase in joy) — does this joy already begin from Adar Alef or only from Adar Beis?
Answer: In the Talmud Yerushalmi tractate Megillah2 it is stated: 'R. Levi in the name of Rabbi Chama bar Chanina: that year was a leap year. What is the reason? "מיום ליום ומחדש לחדש שנים עשר הוא חדש אדר" ("From day to day and from month to month — the twelfth is the month of Adar")'. That is, according to the plain meaning of the Yerushalmi it emerges that Purim fell that year in the month of Adar Alef.
And Rabbi Yonason Eibeschitz3 wrote: 'But it is known in the Yerushalmi tractate Megillah that that year — on which Haman, may his name be blotted out, decreed to destroy and kill the Jewish people — was a leap year, and Haman in his decree on the 13th of Nissan [reasoned]: "מיום ליום ומחדש לחדש שנים עשר הוא חדש אדר" ("From day to day and from month to month — the twelfth is the month of Adar"); if you count from month to month it is in Adar Rishon, and his decree was on Adar Rishon; and it is known that the constellation Pisces is shared by the two Adars. And therefore he rejoiced, for since "trouble does not arise twice," behold Moshe died in the month of Adar Sheni, as explained in the Gemara Kiddushin [38a] .. And if so, the decree which was, that is, on Adar Rishon, "trouble does not arise" etc. does not apply; and in any case her constellation is evil, for one constellation is shared by the two Adars, and therefore he rejoiced a great joy. But in truth his hope was dashed, for it is known in the Gemara Sotah [12b] .. and in Adar Rishon he [Moshe] was born; and if so, either way it is impossible to kill Israel: in Adar Rishon the birth of Moshe protects, and Adar Sheni — Moshe died, "trouble does not arise twice"; and this is the doubling of the statement of Chazal: "on the 7th of Adar Moshe died" — that is Adar Sheni — and "on the 7th of Adar he was born" — that is Adar Rishon; and it is well. And behold, although Haman's plan was in Adar Rishon, but afterwards, when Mordechai annulled his decree and it was reversed to kill the Jews' enemies, Mordechai commanded for Adar Sheni, for we expound [Megillah 7a] "the second" — Adar Sheni; and his reason was to juxtapose the redemption to the redemption of Nissan, for it is the matter I have written, that the holy festival days protect greatly, and the merit of Nissan and the festivals of Hashem are what protected, and therefore he juxtaposed redemption to redemption; and therefore Rashi explained [Taanis 29a] on "Mishenichnas Adar marbin b'simcha" — the days of Purim, and Pesach the days of Nissan — to teach us regarding Adar Sheni, which juxtaposes redemption to redemption, and in this month Chazal spoke'.
If so, we have seen that he indeed explains the words of Rashi as coming to teach us that the joy was fixed on Adar Sheni specifically [and so wrote the Yaavetz4, who wrote: 'You further asked what compelled Rashi there in the Gemara "Mishenichnas Adar" to explain "the days of miracles were Purim and Pesach" .. And one can say further that he wished also to hint that in a leap year joy applies only in Adar Sheni'.]
But nevertheless, from the words of Rabbi Yonason Eibeschitz it is explained that the decree and the salvation were also in the merit of Adar Alef,
And in a similar way the Chasam Sofer5 wrote: 'And in a derush of aggadah I said that the year of the miracle was fit to be intercalated according to the calculation, and Haman intended to decree destruction in the month of Adar Rishon, as it is written "in the twelfth month," and not on the 13th, so that the merit of Moshe Rabbeinu would not protect, for the month of Moshe Rabbeinu is in the second, as the Yaavetz wrote in his siddur, see there, for they had doubt regarding the man [manna] in their vessels from the 7th of Adar until the offering of the omer, see there. And in any case Haman rejoiced a great joy that at least the name Adar worsened the constellation of Israel; but at any rate he did not wish to do it in his actual month, for afterwards his merit would protect; alternatively, because the milu'im were on the 23rd of Adar adjacent to Nissan, for on the first of Nissan the Mishkan was erected and in the Adar before it were the milu'im, and he feared that there would be merit for Israel in it. And when Mordechai and Esther prevailed they did not intercalate that year, so that the month of the war would occur in the month of Moshe Rabbeinu, and therefore they needed to intercalate the following year, and they made the days of joy in the second and forbade eulogy in the first, for both cause [it]; but the essence is in the second because of juxtaposing redemption to redemption, and understand this'.
And so he wrote at the conclusion of a responsum6: 'And I conclude with a blessing .. like the light of morning, on Tuesday in which "ki tov" was doubled, the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Rishon, in which we increase in joy, of the seder "V'shochanti b'socham," 5589. Moshe HaKatan Sofer of Frankfurt am Main'.
If so, according to them there is great reason for joy also in Adar Rishon.
And so too we find further among the Acharonim who wrote thus in practice, as the sefer Avodas Aharon7 wrote: 'And in the leap year, since we hold in the Shulchan Aruch that the 14th and 15th of Adar are forbidden in eulogy and fasting, and so we hold that some have the minhag to increase somewhat in the seudah on these days, if so we consider these as days of miracles, and consequently we increase (in joy) from when Adar Rishon enters'.
And in practice the Rebbe writes in a letter: 'Chazal said "Mishenichnas Adar marbin b'simcha," and one can say that it is from Adar Rishon. And a sign for the matter, though not a complete proof: a) from the fact that in the sugya "Ein bein Adar Rishon etc." (Megillah 6b) they did not count also this8. b) The miracle of Purim depends on this, that Moshe was born in Adar, and see in Sotah (12b) that some say he was born in Adar Rishon'.
And so the Rebbe writes9 (free translation): 'It emerges that also from when Adar Rishon enters there should be the matter of increasing in joy .. even though, of course, this is not comparable to the increasing in joy of the Adar in which the days of Purim actually fall ..'.
Also in the sichos of the week of Parshas Terumah 5752 the Rebbe mentioned10: 'to add and increase in things that cause joy .. in a manner of increasing and going, and light, and rejoicing on each and every day of the two months of Adar, to add each day in matters of joy..'.
And to note from what Rabbi Eliezer Ashkenazi wrote in the introduction to Yosef Lekach on the Megillah: 'And more than words of Torah they made strengthening of their words to be observed and remembered, to read the Megillah with joy and with songs, every single year, zealous and careful, and in the leap year with two Adars, they commanded to rejoice, elders with youths; therefore they called these days Purim'.
If so, we have seen that it is fitting to increase in joy from when Adar Rishon enters11.
--
Notes:
1 Taanis 29a ↩
2 1:5 ↩
3 Yaaros Devash vol. 2 derush 2 ↩
4 In She'ilas Yaavetz vol. 2 88, and see also Teshuvah MeAhavah vol. 2 301, and in Responsa Shevet HaLevi vol. 10 105 ↩
5 Responsa vol. 1 163 ↩
6 vol. 5 20 ↩
7 By R. Aharon Yosef Feinzilber, Warsaw 5654, on tractate Taanis, in "B'Sefer Nichtavim" letter 15 ↩
8 And see Magen Avraham OC 568:20 ↩
9 Likkutei Sichos vol. 16 p. 344 ↩
10 Toras Menachem 5752 vol. 2 p. 297 ↩
11 See also Nitei Gavriel Purim ch. 11 din 1 ↩
[4] (Halacha 477)
Question: A person who has a yahrzeit in a regular Adar, when must he mark it in a leap year — in Adar Alef or Beis¹?
Answer: Some of the Rishonim inclined to say that he should fast in Adar Rishon, as the Maharil1 wrote: 'And the day on which his father died, whether to fast in Adar Rishon or the second — regarding this our teachers in Austria were asked and their opinion was not unified; some ruled the first and some the second. And I am not worthy to decide, except that there is some [reason] to bring a proof from the passing of Moshe Rabbeinu, that we fast in the first .. And a further proof, that regarding vows we follow the language of people and this is like a vow, for stam, Adar Rishon according to Rabbi Yehudah at the end of Perek Konam Yayin, for in documents one writes stam Adar, and we hold like him against Rabbi Meir .. And in the first perek of Megillah, were it not for juxtaposing redemption to redemption and the other derashos there, they would advance to make Purim in the first. But there is a reason there: one does not pass over the mitzvos, as it is there. And further, just as in Shevat we do not eulogize at all even though it is a leap year, so too let us say in Adar Rishon since it is called stam Adar according to Rabbi Yehudah as above. And with all this, I saw already in Sefer Chasidim that one whose father died in Adar Rishon in a leap year was stringent in a regular year to say Kaddish also in Shevat, or the reverse, [I have forgotten]'.
And similarly the Terumas HaDeshen2 wrote: 'Question - one whose parents passed away in Adar in a regular year, when the intercalation years arrive, in which Adar shall he fast and say Kaddish and Barchu — in the first or in the second? Answer: it appears that he should do it in the first, and we take this reason because this matter resembles one who vowed .. And regarding vows, one who vows to do a certain thing in Adar does it in Adar Rishon .. And our case has nothing at all to do with juxtaposing redemption to redemption; therefore we follow the reason that one does not pass over the mitzvos, and he does it in the first; and all the more so if he passed away in the leap year in the first, that he does it always in the first. However, in this I concede that if he passed away in the leap year in the second, that he does it always in the second, and it is well'.
And similarly the Mahari Mintz3 wrote: 'And what I customarily rule to those who ask me about the fast from the day his father or mother died, whether they fast in Adar Rishon or in the second — that they fast in the first. And so I have customarily ruled from days of old, for a reason I will explain, and afterwards I saw in the responsum of my relative HaRav R. Y. Weil .. And to me it appears that the day on which he died is not in the category of vows that a person vows .. rather it depends on minhag .. and since it is a minhag we say, as they were accustomed so it is .. And therefore it is logical to me, my reason, for it is logical to say that this minhag came either because on the day his father or teacher died his fortune was harmed, or because of atonement for his father or teacher .. And since for this reason they were accustomed to fast, either because of atonement for his father or for both reasons, it is fitting and logical to say that one whose father or mother or teacher died in Adar in a regular year, and in the following year there is intercalation, stops saying Kaddish in Shevat, so as not to make him [the deceased] wicked, for the judgment of the wicked is twelve months .. And if so, one who passed away in a regular year, if the year was afterwards intercalated, his judgment and sentence conclude in Adar Rishon, and so there the fast and the Kaddish apply, and so every year .. And therefore one must distinguish between the matter of fasting and the matter of bar mitzvah. And it is possible that had I known from the outset the responsum of my relative HaRav R. Weil z"l, I would have answered my questioners: some rule thus and some say thus, and I would have left the choice to them; and I have written what appears to my humble opinion'.
But there are Rishonim who wrote that the essence is to fast in Adar Beis, as the Mahari Weil4 wrote: 'When the day comes on which a father or mother died in Adar, I heard that Mahari Molin ruled to fast on both, but it appears that one should fast in Adar Sheni and not in the first, for we say regarding vows: one who vows "until Adar," if he did not know the year was a leap year — until Adar Rishon; and if he knew the year was a leap year — until Adar Sheni; and so too here he knew [it], b'gu"ch, the 11th, 14th, 17th, 19th; and I am accustomed to rule like Mahari z"l'.
If so, we have seen that in this matter the Rishonim were undecided: some wrote to observe the yahrzeit minhogim in Adar Alef, and some wrote to observe them in Adar Beis, and some wrote to observe on both.
And in practice the Mechaber5 wrote: 'When the day on which his father or mother died occurs in Adar, and the year is a leap year, he fasts in Adar Beis'.
But the Rama wrote: 'And some say he fasts in the first, unless he died in the leap year in Adar Sheni, in which case they are accustomed to fast in the second, and so is the minhag, to fast in the first; however some are stringent to fast on both'.
And the Magen Avraham6 wrote: '.. Since we say in Taanis 18a "for a full month" and Rashi explained "that the year is a leap year" etc., it clearly implies that it applies in Adar Sheni .. If so, also the day his father died one should observe in the second. And in the Terumas HaDeshen he brings a proof to observe in the first from that which we say in the first perek of Megillah that the reading of the Megillah is in the second because juxtaposing redemption to redemption is preferable — implying that were it not for this reason we would do it in the first, see there. And in the responsum of the Maharil siman 31 he rejected this proof, since regarding the Megillah we might have thought to do it in the first because one does not pass over the mitzvos; and in the Gemara it implies that were it not for the verse we would have done Purim on both, see there .. And further, the 14th and 15th are forbidden in eulogy and fasting on both; therefore by law one should fast on both, but since the day his father died is only a minhag, he need do only as he did originally, for from the outset he accepted it upon himself with this intention; but one who vowed to fast on the day his teacher died and the like must fast on both, as above ..'.
If so, the Mechaber wrote to mark it in Adar Beis7, but the Rama wrote in Adar Alef8, and that some are stringent on both Adars; the Magen Avraham inclines to say that by law it is required on both9.
And in practice the essence is like the words of the Rama, to observe in Adar Alef, but there are some of the rabbanim of Anash10 who ruled to be stringent to observe the yahrzeit minhogim both in Adar Alef and in Adar Beis (except that in Adar Beis he does not have precedence over others).
Notes:
1 The reasons the poskim below mention for marking the yahrzeit in Adar Alef [they hold also according to the poskim that the essential Adar is Adar Beis and that therefore most poskim held that bar mitzvah is in Adar Beis, since there one needs 13 complete years. And] they are: a) from the aspect of the laws of vows — perhaps he accepted upon himself the fast and the yahrzeit minhogim for the month of Adar Alef. b) One does not pass over the mitzvos. c) In the first year his judgment concludes after eleven months in Adar Alef. (Likewise there are poskim who ruled thus also regarding bar mitzvah, to be concerned for Adar Rishon, as explained in halacha no. 474) ↩
2 Responsa 31 ↩
3 294 ↩
4 Responsa 9 ↩
5 Chiddushei Dinim v'Halachos 5 ↩
6 Shulchan Aruch OC 568:7 ↩
7 there 20, and see also what he wrote in siman 580:8 ↩
8 And so wrote the Chasam Sofer, Responsa OC 163 ↩
9 See also Rama YD 402:12, and see also Aruch HaShulchan 568:13-14 ↩
10 And see also Shach YD 402:11 from the Maharshal ↩
11 See Hiskashrus issue 293 p. 20 note 20. Sefer HaMadrich (Garelik) ch. 73 letter 3 p. 294 ↩
[5] (Halacha 478)
/ Bar mitzvah in a year when the original date does not exist (1)
Question: A person who was born on the 30th of Shevat - the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar in a regular year, and his bar mitzvah year is a leap year — when does he enter the yoke of mitzvos: on the 30th of Shevat, or are we concerned that his birthday is fixed to the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar, and in a leap year [since Adar Beis is the essence] it is the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Beis?
Answer: This question is also connected to other dates on which there is a change in the bar mitzvah year from the birth year, as follows.
a) Born on the 1st of Kislev in a year when the month of Cheshvan was deficient, and in the bar mitzvah year Cheshvan is full and there is a 30th of the month:
The Bach1 wrote: 'Regarding the youth who was born on Rosh Chodesh Teves, and his bar mitzvah occurred on Rosh Chodesh Teves, which is the first day of the two days of Rosh Chodesh Teves — whether he may pray Maariv on Friday night, which is the first day of Rosh Chodesh Teves .. And even though the year in which the youth was born on Rosh Chodesh Teves was deficient and now the year is full, it does not matter to us'.
And his words were brought in the glosses of Rabbi Akiva Eiger2: 'And if when he was born on Rosh Chodesh Kislev Cheshvan was deficient, and now there are two days of Rosh Chodesh Kislev, he becomes bar mitzvah on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev. So wrote the Bach'. And so wrote in practice the Derech HaChaim3. And in the Mishnah Berurah4.
If so, it appears that the view of the Bach and his school is that Rosh Chodesh is considered a date in itself, [and therefore also one born in a year when there was only one day of Rosh Chodesh, and in the bar mitzvah year there are two days of Rosh Chodesh, is considered an adult immediately on the eve of the first of Rosh Chodesh, even though it is the 30th of the previous month], except that, as will be explained below, seemingly one can say that this halacha is not agreed upon by the Magen Avraham and the Alter Rebbe.
b) Born on the 30th of Cheshvan in a year when Cheshvan is full, but in the bar mitzvah year the month of Cheshvan is deficient and there is no 30th of Cheshvan:
In a case where a day is missing, such as one born on the 30th of Cheshvan and in his bar mitzvah year the month of Cheshvan is deficient and there is only one day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev, the Magen Avraham5 wrote: 'And one who was born on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev, and when he becomes bar mitzvah Cheshvan is deficient and Rosh Chodesh Kislev is only one day, it needs examination whether he becomes bar mitzvah on the 29th of Cheshvan, for it implies in Nedarim 60 that in truth the first day of Rosh Chodesh is the 30th day of the previous month, only that in the language of people they call it Rosh Chodesh, and so in EH siman 126:6 there are various opinions; and in any case it appears to me that he does not become bar mitzvah until Rosh Chodesh, for his year is not yet complete until 29 days of Cheshvan pass, since we require 13 complete years as above, and see what I wrote in siman 568:7'. [And similarly the Alter Rebbe6 wrote].
If so, one who was born on the 30th of Cheshvan in a year when Cheshvan is full, but in the bar mitzvah year the month of Cheshvan is deficient and there is no 30th of Cheshvan, becomes bar mitzvah only on the 1st of Kislev.
But it appears from the words of the Magen Avraham and the Alter Rebbe here that they disagree with the earlier words of the Bach, since the implication of their words appears that one should not consider the first of Rosh Chodesh as a date in itself, as the Eliyah Rabbah7 wrote: 'And to me it appeared, according to the view of the aforementioned M.A., that he does not become bar mitzvah until the second day of Rosh Chodesh, for the first day of Rosh Chodesh is considered the thirtieth day of the previous month'.
However, we find among the poskim who wrote that perhaps there is no dispute here, as the Eliyah Rabbah concludes: 'and one may distinguish somewhat'. And so wrote the Pri Megadim8, that the Magen Avraham can be reconciled with the Bach, and these are his words: 'And if Rosh Chodesh Kislev was one day and Cheshvan deficient when he was born, and now there are two days of Kislev, see the Eliyah Rabbah in the name of the Bach that he becomes bar mitzvah on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev. And even according to the M.A. one can say it is the thirtieth day of Cheshvan, nevertheless one can say that the M.A. concedes to the Bach that he becomes bar mitzvah on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Kislev, see there'9.
And since there is an angle to explain the words of the Magen Avraham10 [and accordingly also the words of the Alter Rebbe] such that they accord with the aforementioned words of the Bach, therefore seemingly one should be concerned l'chumra for the words of the Bach, that Rosh Chodesh is a date-name in itself. [And therefore, although we do not establish him as an adult regarding something that is a stringency, such as being a chazzan to be motzi others and the like, but not to be lenient, such as regarding the obligation of tefillin and the like].
c) Born on the 30th of Shevat, and the bar mitzvah year is a leap year:
Similarly [that Rosh Chodesh is considered a date in itself11] wrote also the Responsa Binyan Tzion12 regarding one born on the 30th of Shevat: 'And regarding the doubt of his honor, may he live, concerning one born on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Adar in a regular year who becomes bar mitzvah in a leap year — to my humble opinion it appears obvious that he does not become bar mitzvah until the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheni, as the opinion of his honor also inclines .. for the two days of Rosh Chodesh we reckon only as one long day ..'.
And according to him, one born in a regular year on the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar (which is the 30th of Shevat), and who reaches the age of mitzvos in a leap year, must be concerned that he enters the yoke of mitzvos only on the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Beis.
However, many Acharonim disagreed with him and held simply that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat, and so wrote13 in the name of Maharil Diskin and Rav Shmuel Salant. And so wrote in Lehoros Nason14: 'But when he was born on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Adar, which is in the category of the 30th of Shevat and belongs to the previous month as the aforementioned M.A. wrote, and Adar has not yet begun, therefore he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat, which is the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Alef15.
And especially according to the opinion of the Magen Avraham and the Alter Rebbe who, as above, seemingly do not learn that Rosh Chodesh has an independent status like the words of the Bach [but only that since there are poskim who wrote that perhaps they do not disagree, therefore one should be concerned l'chumra for the view of the Bach; if so, in our case, where in any event there is an angle to say that the Adar is Adar Alef16], his law is that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Alef.
If so, we have seen that the Acharonim disagreed regarding one born on the date of the 30th of Shevat, whether in a leap year he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat or on the 30th of Adar Alef, and the essential halacha is that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat.
--------------
Notes:
1 Responsa Bach HaYeshanos 145 ↩
2 55 ↩
3 28:4 ↩
4 55:45 ↩
5 55:10 ↩
6 55:13 ↩
7 55:9 ↩
8 Eishel Avraham 55:10 ↩
9 But see what the Berur Halacha wrote p. 132 (and so wrote in Kovetz Otzros Yerushalayim, vol. 46 p. 732) that the M.A. disagrees with the Bach ↩
10 The matter also accords with the words of the M.A. in siman 568 end of 20, according to the version of the Machatzis HaShekel. (But there are other versions in the words of the M.A. there) ↩
11 But see the Berur Halacha p. 134 that one may explain the words of the Bach in a different way, and that one should not learn from this to the case of the 30th of Shevat ↩
12 151, and so wrote in Responsa Yad Yitzchak vol. 3 54 ↩
13 In the sefer MiBen Shmuel 6 ↩
14 Responsa vol. 13 1 ↩
15 And see Shevet HaLevi vol. 10 105 who wrote: *'To my humble opinion he becomes an adult on the 30th of Shevat, the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Alef, from the essential halacha at any rate*, and the ruling of the Binyan Tzion, with due respect to his greatness, is not understandable .. *therefore certainly from the essential law he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th day of the month of Shevat, the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Alef, and your honor conveyed to me that so ruled the geonim of Jerusalem in the days of the geonim Maharil Diskin zy"a and Rav Shmuel Salant zy"a. And indeed, in order to be concerned for the gaon the author of Binyan Tzion and those like him, it is worthwhile to be stringent* not to establish him as an adult regarding something that is a stringency, such as to be motzi others and the like, but to be lenient not to establish him as an adult, such as regarding the obligation of tefillin and the like, the matter inclines to the opinion of those who hold that from the 30th of Shevat, the 1st of Rosh Chodesh, he becomes an adult, as above'. And see also Halacha Berurah siman 55 letter 28 ↩
16 And if so, it has both points of the date: a. the 30th of Shevat, b. the 1st of Rosh Chodesh. Or one can say in another way that according to the M.A. and the Alter Rebbe (it is not that Rosh Chodesh is the date in itself, but rather that) the essence in entering bar mitzvah is not to reach the date on which he was born, but rather the essence is that 13 years pass over him. And if so, one born on the 30th of Shevat, when 29 days of Shevat have passed becomes bar mitzvah, and it has no bearing at all on Rosh Chodesh Adar. And see also Responsa Ohel Yehoshua 108 ↩
[6] (Halacha 480)
/ Bar mitzvah in a year when the original date does not exist (2)
In halacha number 478 we learned the dispute of the poskim whether Rosh Chodesh is considered an independent date, and this is a practical difference for another question, as follows:
Question: A person who was born in a leap year on the 30th of Adar Rishon, and when he becomes 13 it is a regular year in which there are only 29 days in the month of Adar. When does he enter the yoke of mitzvos and celebrate the bar mitzvah?
Answer: The Responsa Halachos Ketanos1 wrote: 'A woman who had not previously given birth, and gave birth to twins — one opened the womb on the 29th of Adar Rishon, and one on Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheni — this one enters the category of his years a full month before his fellow'.
That is, according to the Halachos Ketanos, the twin who was born later — on the 30th of Adar Alef [the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar Beis] — will be bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat, a month before the one who was born a day before him on the 29th of Adar Alef, whose bar mitzvah will be only on the 29th of Adar.
And so too it appears from the words of the Magen Avraham (according to the version of the Machatzis HaShekel)2 who wrote regarding yahrzeit3: 'And if he died on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Adar Sheni, he fasts the following year on the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar and not on the 29th of it, for Adar always stands in place of Adar Sheni'. (Except that in these words of the M.A. there are various versions and explanations).
And similarly the Responsa Binyan Tzion4 wrote: 'What the Shulchan Aruch (in siman 55) ruled regarding one born on the 29th of Adar Rishon and another on the 1st of Adar Sheni, who become bar mitzvah in a regular year, that then the one born on the 29th must wait until the 29th, and the one born on the first of the month becomes bar mitzvah on the first of the month — it implies explicitly that if the first one had been born on the 30th of Adar Rishon then it is obvious that he becomes bar mitzvah in a regular year on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Adar and we do not say that he does not become bar mitzvah until the 30th of Adar which is Rosh Chodesh Nissan; rather it must be that the two days of Rosh Chodesh we reckon only as one long day'.
And so wrote many other poskim5 that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat. However, in Responsa Minchas Yitzchak6, although he agreed thus from the essential law that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat, he concluded: 'and in any case regarding leniency there is still room to deliberate'7.
But as we saw in halacha no. 478, that seemingly from the words of the Magen Avraham and Rabbeinu it appears that in principle one should not consider the first of Rosh Chodesh as a date in itself, and if so, one born on the 30th of Adar Rishon has no connection to the month of Shevat, but rather was born after 29 days of Adar Alef passed; if so, just as one born on the 29th of Adar Rishon counts in a regular year 29 days of Adar8, so too for one born on the 30th of Adar, 13 complete years from day to day are not reached until after 29 complete days of Adar pass, just as [for] one born after 29 days have already passed. And if so, only on the 1st of Nissan will he have 13 complete years.
And there are also some of the Acharonim9 who wrote thus in halacha, that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 1st of Nissan.
[Except that, as we saw, there are those who explain also in the view of the Magen Avraham [and if so, so too is the view of the Alter Rebbe] that he too agrees that Rosh Chodesh is like a date in itself, and therefore one should be concerned for this l'chumra. And in our case, to be concerned for the opinion that he becomes bar mitzvah on the 1st of Rosh Chodesh Adar, which is the 30th of Shevat10].
If so, we have seen that there are various opinions among the Acharonim regarding one born on the 30th of Adar Alef whose bar mitzvah year is a regular year, that some say he becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat, some say on the 1st of Adar, and some say on the 1st of Nissan, and seemingly one should act l'chumra. However, we heard in the name of Rav M.S. Ashkenazi11 who said that it is accepted to rule that one born on the 30th of Adar Alef becomes bar mitzvah on the 30th of Shevat12.
Notes:
1 vol. 2 174 ↩
2 OC 568:20, but see in Ohel Yehoshua vol. 2 108, other explanations in the words of the M.A. ↩
3 However, a yahrzeit differs from a bar mitzvah, in that regarding it one must fix a date that belongs to the day of passing (and see also halacha number 477 note 1, and therefore one also should not learn from the rulings of rabbanim regarding birthday minhogim), whereas a bar mitzvah, whose essence is that 13 years must pass over him and not the fixing of a specific date; nevertheless we find several of the poskim below who learned and cited as a source the words of the M.A. ↩
4 151 ↩
5 See Responsa Mishpatecha L'Yaakov 13. And in Responsa Minchas Yitzchak vol. 6 8. Except that in vol. 8 7 he brought that one rav brought support for his words, but: 'in any case there is a slight difference, for according to what the aforementioned rav wrote, the bar mitzvah in a regular year is on the first day of Adar, that is on the second day of Rosh Chodesh, and according to what is explained in the Minchas Yitzchak there the bar mitzvah is on the first day of Rosh Chodesh Adar, as above'. Responsa Even Yisrael (Fisher) vol. 9 63 p. 56. Halacha Berurah OC siman 55 din 28 ↩
6 vol. 6 8 ↩
7 And see also Responsa Vayaan David vol. 1 11, and see there regarding calling him up to the Torah ↩
8 Either because we are concerned that Adar Rishon is the essence (see Chochmas Shlomo 55:10), or because a regular Adar includes both, or because he must count the days after the month of Shevat ↩
9 See Responsa Binyan Av vol. 1 1, and Responsa Lehoros Nason vol. 13 1 ↩
10 Except that regarding one born on the 30th of Shevat we wrote that there is a further reason why it should not be fixed on Rosh Chodesh Adar Beis, unlike in our case ↩
11 And in the name of Rav Y.K. Marlow, of blessed memory, we heard that he ruled thus *regarding a birthday*, to observe the birthday minhogim in a regular year on the 30th of Shevat, but see what is written in note 3 ↩
12 And perhaps his intent is l'chumra, as several of the poskim wrote to be concerned l'chumra ↩
[7] (Halacha 481)
[Continuation of halacha number 214]
Setting the time of the wedding on all the days of the month of Adar
Question: Are there days in the month on which it is customary not to hold weddings?
Answer: The Rashba1 wrote: 'That which is customary that one does not marry women until the filling of the moon in these lands is not divination. Rather, just as one anoints kings over a spring so that his kingdom should continue, so they do at the filling and not at the waning. And it is a good sign, in the manner that one draws wine in pipes before grooms, and there is nothing in it of "the ways of the Emorite"'. And so wrote the Ran2 and the Nimukei Yosef3, and the Beis Yosef4 brought them.
And the Maharil5 explained: 'Question. Why does the master rely on protesting not to hold weddings after the end of half the [lunar] cycle .. Answer. This is certainly forbidden to divine and to soothsay, but the moon is the star of Israel and they count by it, and it is a good sign for all Israel when it fills and increases, as we say .. for all Israel in the blessing of the moon; and the master said "a house, a child, and a wife" — even though there is no divination, there is a sign; and it resembles that which Rav said "Mishenichnas Adar marbin b'simcha" and in Av and in the Omer to diminish, for in [those] days .. [ominous], so too when the moon grows it is a good sign, and may it be good. And therefore we prefer to hold weddings during the increase of the addition and not during the increase of the waning; but far be it from me to protest against holding [a wedding] after half the month. And so is the minhag in the land of Erets HaDamim and its environs, and so is the minhag in this country, and peace'.
And in practice the Mechaber6 wrote: 'They were accustomed that one does not begin on Monday or Wednesday, and one does not marry women except at the filling of the moon7'.
And so wrote the Rama8 in the hagahah: 'And they were accustomed not to marry women except at the beginning of the month, while the moon is in its fullness'.
However, we find that several of the Acharonim9 wrote that the Rishonim and the Mechaber and the Rama came only to explain the permissibility of the minhag and not to rule that one must act thus, as the Responsa Aryeh D'bei Ilai10 wrote: 'There is in this no trace of prohibition in transgressing this minhag that our sages instituted; rather, on the contrary, they came to inform us that there is in this no concern of divination or "the ways of the Emorite" for one who is particular about it. And the term "they were accustomed" explained in the Shulchan Aruch did not come to say that there is an obligation in this to act according to the minhag, but only that the minhag is not against the halacha, since there is in it no concern of divination'.
But even so, many of the communities of Israel took [it] like the plain meaning of the words of the Mechaber and the Rama and were very particular not to marry women in the second half of the month11. And as the Sdei Chemed12 elaborated, that so they were accustomed in many communities of the Jewish people, both the Ashkenazim and the Sephardim.
And so it is brought in Sefer HaMinhagim13 that our minhag is that we do not marry in the first half of the month except in a few months. And so we find in the Igros Kodesh many replies from the Rebbe regarding this restriction14.
If so, we have seen the minhag brought in the Shulchan Aruch not to marry women except at the beginning of the month, before the moon wanes, and so it is brought in Sefer HaMinhagim - Chabad; but see below the Rebbe's replies on this.
The month of Adar and Adar Alef
But even among those who follow this minhag there are months in which they did not practice [it], as the Aruch HaShulchan15 wrote: 'And there are months in which they were accustomed not to be particular about this: in Elul and Tishrei and Adar'.
And so wrote the Sdei Chemed there in the name of HaRav Shneur Zalman Pinsker, av beis din of Cherson, that they were lenient in the month of Adar, for it is said of it "and the month which was turned for them from grief to joy and from mourning to a festival," and the whole month is implied, and "Mishenichnas Adar marbin b'simcha", and "a Jew who has litigation with [a non-Jew]" etc., for his fortune is strong.
And so wrote in Sefer HaMinhagim there, that in the month of Adar and Elul one holds a chuppah on all the days of the month.
Question: What regarding the month of Adar Alef?
Answer: This question of HaRav Gavriel Zinner, author of the Nitei Gavriel, to the Rebbe regarding what is written in Sefer HaMinhagim — whether the intent is also to the days of the month of Adar Rishon — and the Rebbe answered him16: 'I have not heard explicitly. And to my humble opinion — in our times, whoever advances a wedding in accordance with the law of Moshe and Yisrael, this is praiseworthy. And especially after there have already been "tena'im" (and even a decision to that effect, and the closeness that comes through it). And Chazal said that also the completion of the "neshamos she'baguf" brings the son of David, the true and complete redemption'.
And on this basis he wrote in his sefer17 that also in Adar Rishon one should hold weddings on all the days of the month.
If so, we have seen that even for those who are accustomed not to marry women in the second half of the month, in the month of Adar one may marry throughout the month, and so too in the month of Adar Alef, throughout it.
However, apart from this reply, there is a further reply in which the Rebbe revealed his opinion that in our times, in general, it is preferable to advance the wedding rather than to be particular about all these strictures if it causes the wedding to be delayed.
And as brought in Shulchan Menachem18: 'Restrictions in these days of ours regarding the days of the wedding — apart from the explicit ones, as is understood and obvious — that bring about the postponement and delay of the time of the wedding — bring in very many cases, in our many sins, to stumbling-blocks in matters of tznius etc. of the chosson and kallah; and understand this well, and it requires very great deliberation whether they are worthwhile, or on the contrary. [And therefore my advice in general — not to delay the time of a wedding]'.
If so, we have seen that in practice the Rebbe aroused that in our times it is preferable as much as possible to advance the wedding, even though it would be in the first half of the month.
--------------
Notes:
1 Responsa attributed to the Ramban 283 ↩
2 Sanhedrin 65b ↩
3 Sanhedrin 16b ↩
4 YD 179 ↩
5 Responsa (new) 92 ↩
6 Shulchan Aruch YD 179:2 ↩
7 And the Kerem Shlomo (Haas) wrote: 'And one must say that the beginning of the month is also called the filling of the moon' ↩
8 Shulchan Aruch EH 64:3 ↩
9 And see also the Makneh, Kuntres Acharon in siman 64, and Yehuda Yaaleh (Assad) Responsa vol. 2 24. And see what is referenced in HaNisu'in K'Hilchasam ch. 5 letter 49 note 150. Nitei Gavriel Nisu'in ch. 47 note 12. Shemiras Guf V'Nefesh vol. 2 160 letter 2 ↩
10 EH 18 ↩
11 See what is referenced in Nisu'in K'Hilchasam and Nitei Gavriel and Sefer Shemiras Guf V'Nefesh there ↩
12 Ma'areches Chosson V'Kallah letter 21 (vol. 6 p. 1254 onwards) ↩
13 p. 76 ↩
14 See Sefer Shidduchin V'Nisu'in vol. 2 p. 49 onwards ↩
15 EH 64:13 ↩
16 A reply dated the 10th of Shevat 5746, brought in his sefer Nitei Gavriel Nisu'in vol. 1 ch. 48 note 51 ↩
17 ch. 48 letter 22 ↩
18 vol. 6 p. 151 ↩
[8] (Halacha 482)
Purim Katan (1)
Question: Is there a prohibition of eulogy and fasting on Purim Katan?
Answer: It is stated in the Mishnah in tractate Megillah1: 'If they read the Megillah in Adar Rishon and the year was intercalated, they read it in Adar Sheni. There is no difference between Adar Rishon and Adar Sheni except the reading of the Megillah and gifts to the poor'. The Gemara there brings a beraisa in which the Tannaim disagreed regarding this law, and concludes: 'And they are equal regarding eulogy and fasting, that they are forbidden on both these and those'.
And the Rishonim disagreed regarding the meaning of the Gemara's words: 'And they are equal regarding eulogy and fasting, that they are forbidden on both these and those'.
The Rambam2 wrote: 'These two days, which are the fourteenth and fifteenth, are forbidden in eulogy and fasting for everyone in every place, whether for the people of walled cities who observe only the fifteenth, or for the people of [unwalled] towns who observe only the fourteenth, and the two days are forbidden in eulogy and fasting in Adar Rishon and in Adar Sheni'. And so wrote Rabbeinu Peretz3.
But the Maharam of Rothenburg4 wrote: 'And that which you asked, whether one should make a first Purim in Adar Rishon and fast on its eve. [No, for one should not make Purim on it at all, and all the more so one need not fast on the day before it. And] that which we learned in the first perek of Megillah "there is no difference between Adar Rishon and Adar Sheni except the reading of the Megillah and gifts to the poor" — this means: if they read the Megillah in Adar Rishon and gave gifts to the poor, and then the beis din reconsidered to intercalate the year, [then] they must read again in Adar Sheni. So is the explanation, and so all the halacha proves'. And so wrote his students, the Tashbetz5. And the Mordechai6.
And so wrote his student the Rosh7: 'And they are equal regarding eulogy and fasting, that they are forbidden on both these and those — the explanation: if they read the Megillah on the fourteenth and on that very day they intercalated the year, it is forbidden in eulogy and fasting, but in the rest of the leap year it appears to me that it is permitted in eulogy and fasting; so it appears to me to explain the passage'.
If so, the Rishonim disagreed whether the 14th and 15th of Adar Alef are always forbidden in eulogy and fasting, or whether this law applies only in the time when they would sanctify [the month] by sighting, and it refers to a case where they did not know the year would be intercalated and had already begun to fulfill the mitzvos of Purim, and then it was decided to intercalate the year and to postpone Purim, [so that] the days on which they began to fulfill the mitzvos of Purim are forbidden in eulogy and fasting, but in a year in which they know in advance that it is Purim Katan there is no prohibition of eulogy and fasting.
And in practice the Mechaber8 wrote: The 14th and 15th of Adar Rishon .. and it is forbidden in eulogy and fasting; but the other matters are not practiced on them; and some say that even eulogy and fasting are permitted.
And the Rama wrote in the hagahah: 'And the minhag is like the first opinion'.
★ ★ ★
Question:What is the law of saying Tachanun on Purim Katan and Shushan Purim?
Answer: The Rambam9 wrote: 'It is a widespread minhag in all Israel that there is no nefilas apayim on Shabbosos .. and on Purim'. And the Hagahos Maimoniyos10 wrote: 'And so is our minhag at Minchah of the eve of Chanukah and Purim and the eve of Rosh Chodesh .. and so on the 14th and 15th of Adar Rishon in the leap year'.
And the Maharil11 wrote: 'Purim Katan that falls in a leap year on the 15th of Adar Rishon once fell on Friday, and at Minchah on Thursday the chazzan asked Mahari Segal whether to say Techinah, and he said that by law one should not say Techinah. But he recalled that they were accustomed to say Techinah in Magenza [Mainz], and so they did. And he said that in any case the settlements in its environs should not say Techinah on that night. And on Friday morning they did not say Techinah nor "LaMenatze'ach." And on Shabbos, which is Shushan Purim Katan, they do not mention neshamos and do not say Tzidkascha Tzedek. Once Purim Katan fell on Sunday, and on Shabbos they said Tzidkascha Tzedek. And on Monday of Shushan Purim Katan they did not say Techinah, except "Kel Erech Apayim"'.
And in a gloss by the Maharak he wrote: On Purim Katan in the first Adar of a leap year, one says Lamnatzeiach and does not say Tachanun. And even on Shushan Purim Katan one does not say Tachanun, and one does not say Tzidkascha. And I have seen written that once there was a chazzan in Vienna on Purim Katan who did not say Lamnatzeiach on the two days, and a great man who was in the shul at that time made mention of it. And also in that old collection I saw written that once it happened in Kremsier, and likewise they did not say Lamnatzeiach on these two days. And there is a reason, as will be explained below regarding the fifteenth of the second Adar.
And as a matter of halacha the Mechaber wrote12: On the fourteenth and fifteenth of the first Adar one does not fall on one's face, and one does not say the psalm "May Hashem answer you on the day of trouble.."'.
And it is written in Shiyurei Knesses HaGedolah13: 'And likewise on the day before them, one does not say Nefilas Apayim at Mincha. And if it is Shabbos, one does not say Tzidkascha.
And so wrote the Alter Rebbe in his siddur: 'The minhag of Sefard is that on every day on which there is no Tachanun and Nefilas Apayim, one does not say Lamnatzeiach Ya'ancha, nor Tefillah LeDavid. That is to say .. and Purim Katan, which is the fourteenth and fifteenth of the first Adar .. also at Mincha .. and the eve of Purim Gadol and Katan'.
Accordingly, we have seen that they disagreed as to whether there is a prohibition of fasting on the fourteenth and fifteenth of the first Adar, and we have seen the ruling of the Rema that the minhag follows the view that one does not fast. And that one does not say Tachanun on these days, including at the Mincha preceding them.
In the coming halacha we will discuss regarding a groom who marries on Purim Katan or on Shushan Purim Katan whether it is permitted for him to fast on them.
--------------
Notes:
1 6, 2 ↩
2 Hilchos Megillah VeChanukah 2:13 ↩
3 Cited in note 5 ↩
4 Responsa (Lvov edition) siman 195 ↩
5 Siman 178. But in the gloss of Rabbeinu Peretz he disagreed with him and wrote that they were accustomed to make Purim in the first Adar on the fourteenth of it with regard to eating and drinking and to make a great feast. For with regard to eulogy and fasting the fourteenth of the first Adar is like the fourteenth of the second Adar. And he concludes: 'And that which he explained in the body of the text, that this which was taught "there is no difference between the first Adar etc." means if they read etc., is a scribal error, as is proven there explicitly as I have explained' ↩
6 Megillah remez 784 ↩
7 Megillah chapter 1 siman 7 ↩
8 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 697 se'if 1 ↩
9 Hilchos Tefillah U'Nesias Kapayim 5:15 ↩
10 Os shin ↩
11 Minhagim, Hilchos Purim ↩
12 Ibid. ↩
13 Hagahos Beis Yosef OC siman 697 at its end (and see also in Shulchan Gavoah os gimmel) ↩
[9] (halacha 483)
Purim Katan (2)
In the previous halacha we saw that the Rishonim disagreed as to whether there is a prohibition of fasting on the fourteenth and fifteenth of Adar.
Question: According to the views that it is forbidden to fast on the fourteenth of the first Adar, is that only for the inhabitants of the open towns, and on the fifteenth of the first Adar only for the inhabitants of the walled cities, or is it forbidden for everyone to eulogize and to fast both on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth?
Answer: The Rambam wrote1: 'These two days, which are the fourteenth and the fifteenth, are forbidden in eulogy and fasting for every person in every place, both for the inhabitants of the walled cities who observe the fifteenth alone, and for the inhabitants of the towns who observe the fourteenth alone, and the two days are forbidden in eulogy and fasting in the first Adar and in the second Adar'.
On the other hand, it is written in Tosfos HaRid2: 'And they are equal in eulogy and in fasting, that they are forbidden this one on that one — meaning the towns on the fourteenth and the walled cities on the fifteenth — but to forbid the one on the other was said only in the Adar in which the Megillah is read'. And so he wrote in his rulings: 'But to forbid the one on the other was said only in the Adar in which the Megillah is read'.
But Rabbeinu Peretz3 wrote: 'And likewise great men are accustomed to make a feast and rejoicing on the fourteenth of the first Adar. However, regarding the fifteenth it requires study, for even in the second Adar the fifteenth applies only by reason of forbidding the one on the other, and also in the Talmud it says "there is no difference between the fourteenth of the first Adar etc." and it did not mention the fifteenth; nevertheless, perhaps it took that which is primary, and the same law applies to the fifteenth. And also the world was not accustomed to make a feast except on the fourteenth of the first Adar alone'.
Also the Meiri4 was in doubt about the matter and wrote: 'And it has not become clear to me whether in the first one is forbidden the one on the other or not'.
And as a matter of halacha the Mechaber ruled5: On the fourteenth and fifteenth of the first Adar one does not fall on one's face, and one does not say the psalm "May Hashem answer you on the day of trouble," and it is forbidden in eulogy and fasting; but other matters are not practiced on them; and some say that even in eulogy and fasting they are permitted. And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And the minhag follows the first view'.
Accordingly, we have seen that as a matter of halacha it was ruled that on the two days it is forbidden in eulogy and fasting6.
★ ★ ★
Question: What is the law of a groom and bride who marry on Purim Katan — may he fast?
Answer: We have seen that it was ruled as a matter of halacha that these two days are forbidden in eulogy and fasting, and on this basis the poskim wrote7 that also in the first Adar a groom should not fast on these days.
And as also appears from the words of the Mahar"i of Brunn8 who wrote: 'Therefore it appears to me that where the day of the chuppah falls on the fourteenth of the first Adar, and all the more so on Chanukah and Purim and Rosh Chodesh, they should hold the chuppah in the morning and he should not eat until after his chuppah, so it appears to me, Yisrael of Brunn'.
And indeed there is one who wrote9 regarding the fifteenth of the first Adar that a groom who is an inhabitant of a city that is not surrounded by a wall is permitted to fast; but many of the Acharonim wrote that, as we saw above that the poskim held that even an inhabitant of a town is forbidden to fast on the fifteenth, accordingly a groom who is an inhabitant of a town should also not fast on the fifteenth of the first Adar10.
Accordingly, we have seen that the poskim wrote that the groom need not fast on the day of his chuppah on Purim Katan or on Shushan Purim Katan11, and there are those who forbade this by law.
Notes:
1 Hilchos Megillah VeChanukah 2:13 ↩
2 Megillah 6, 2 ↩
3 In the glosses on the Semak, mitzvah 148, cited in Beis Yosef siman 697 ↩
4 Megillah 6, 2 ↩
5 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 697 se'if 1 ↩
6 And as the Erech Lechem (Taiib) wrote, siman 697:1: 'And the view of all the poskim is that the two days are forbidden' ↩
7 Be'er Moshe (Yerushalimski) siman 37. Nimukei OC siman 697 os 1. Responsa Minchas HaKometz siman 37. Responsa Lehoros Nosson vol. 2 siman 110. Nitei Gavriel Purim Responsa siman 2 ↩
8 Responsa siman 93 (cited in Knesses HaGedolah Hagahos HaTur Even HaEzer siman 62 os 16) ↩
9 Arugas HaBosem siman 182 ↩
10 And so it is written in Responsa Lehoros Nosson there ↩
11 Except that, as the Magen Avraham wrote, siman 573 s"k 1, in the name of the Bach: 'In Nissan he fasts. For it is only a minhag', meaning that wherever the prohibition of fasting is only from minhag, the groom fasts, and as the Alter Rebbe wrote, siman 429 se'if 9, "and one does not fast during the entire month of Nissan, even an individual fast, and needless to say that one does not decree a fast on the community during the entire month. And all these matters are not from the essence of the law but are a minhag that was practiced in the later generations .. but a groom and bride on the day of their chuppah are accustomed to fast even on Rosh Chodesh Nissan, for the reason that will be explained in siman 573'. And accordingly, with regard to the prohibition of fasting on Purim Katan we saw that the Rema cited above wrote: 'And the minhag follows the first view'. And perhaps it may be said (and see what is written in Halachos U'Minhagei Chabad p. 147) in the precise wording of the Rema, that he means that the essential halacha is like the words of the Maharam and the Rosh that there is no prohibition of fasting, but that nevertheless they *were accustomed* not to fast (and see also Pri Megadim Mishbetzos Zahav siman 697 s"k 1: 'If one explicitly vowed to fast on Purim Katan, it may be said that the vow takes effect, since it is merely a minhag'). And accordingly it would seem that this is like the words of the Bach and Magen Avraham and the Alter Rebbe mentioned above, that on a day on which one does not fast only by reason of minhag, the groom does indeed fast. *And perhaps this is the explanation of that which is brought in the name of the Rebbe (Toras Menachem 5711 vol. 2 p. 252. Mekadesh Yisrael p. 91) who agreed that the groom (Rabbi Tzvi Hirsch, may he rest in peace, Chitrik) should fast on Purim Katan*. And this still requires study ↩
[10] (halacha 484)
Purim Katan (3)
We learned that as a matter of halacha Purim Katan and Shushan Purim Katan are forbidden in eulogy and fasting
Question: Besides the prohibition of eulogy and fasting, is there a need to increase in rejoicing?
Answer: The Tosfos wrote1: 'There are those who are accustomed to make days of feasting and rejoicing on the fourteenth and on the fifteenth of the first Adar, and the plain flow of the Mishnah also implies so, from that it says "except for the reading of the Megillah alone" and "gifts to the poor," from which it is implied that with regard to feasting and rejoicing this one and that one are equal. And this is not correct, for we say in the Gemara "this — with regard to eulogy and fasting this one and that one are equal," from which it is implied that there is no rejoicing and feasting, for perforce this is not dependent on that, for if this were dependent on that it would be teaching us that feasting and rejoicing were practiced on them and thereby it would be forbidden in eulogy, for the days stated in Megillas Ta'anis that are forbidden in eulogy do not have feasting and rejoicing and so is the halacha, that one need not be stringent to make feasting and rejoicing in the first Adar'.
But from the words of the Ran2 it appears that the prohibition of fasting stems from the obligation of feasting and rejoicing, and this is his language: 'Except for the reading of the Megillah and gifts to the poor. It appears to me that this is the reason that it did not also say the Purim seudah, because we conclude in the Gemara that with regard to eulogy and fasting this one and that one are equal, meaning that they are forbidden in this and in that, and the prohibition in eulogy and fasting is derived from rejoicing and feasting, as we say in the Gemara3 "rejoicing" teaches that it is forbidden in eulogy, "feasting" teaches that it is forbidden in fasting, and that is the essence of its obligation, that of the extra seudah, for we say a person is obligated to become intoxicated on Purim, or it is possible that we say it is merely Rabbinic and not from the essence of the obligation, and it is also close to the matter that it is fitting to increase the seudah on the fourteenth of the first, but with regard to sending portions, since they resemble gifts to the poor which apply only in the second, it implies also that even sending portions applies only in the second4 and even though those who read earlier give gifts to the poor on the day of their reading and do not send portions, that case is different, for they do not make a seudah [as it was said above that the rejoicing applies only in its time]'.
And so wrote Rabbeinu Peretz5: 'And likewise great men are accustomed to make feasting and rejoicing on the fourteenth of the first Adar'. And so he wrote in his glosses on the Tashbetz Katan6: 'Our teachers were accustomed to make Purim in the first Adar on the fourteenth of it with regard to eating and drinking and to make a great seudah .. And our teachers of the later generations were precise that since with regard to eulogy and fasting this one and that one are equal, accordingly one should increase the seudah on the fourteenth of the first Adar just as on the fourteenth of the second Adar. And so Rabbeinu Yechiel of Paris was regularly accustomed to increase in rejoicing and in the seudah on the fourteenth of the first Adar and to invite people with him, as the language of the Mishnah also implies, "there is no difference between etc."; however, a great seudah one need not make'.
And the Beis Yosef wrote7: 'And nowadays they were not accustomed to increase the seudah, neither on the fourteenth nor on the fifteenth of the first Adar'.
And as a matter of halacha the Mechaber wrote8: 'On the fourteenth and fifteenth of the first Adar one does not fall on one's face .. and it is forbidden in eulogy and fasting; but other matters are not practiced on them ..'.
And the Rema wrote in a gloss there: 'Some say that one is obligated to increase in feasting and rejoicing on the fourteenth of the first Adar, and we are not accustomed so; nevertheless, one should increase somewhat in the seudah in order to fulfill the view of the stringent ones; and וטוב לב משתה תמיד ("one who is of good heart has a continual feast")9.
And the Taz wrote10: 'Nevertheless one should increase somewhat in the seudah etc.'. In the gloss of the Tashbetz siman 178 it is written that one should increase, and Rabbeinu Yechiel of Paris was regularly accustomed to increase and to invite people, as implied by the language of the Mishnah "there is no difference between Adar etc."; and the Rema properly concludes here וטוב לב משתה תמיד ("one who is of good heart has a continual feast")'.
And the Rebbe explained11 that the Taz understood that the conclusion of the words of the Rema, וטוב לב משתה תמיד ("one who is of good heart has a continual feast"), came to say that it is not enough to increase somewhat in the seudah, but rather one must increase in the seudah and rejoicing after the manner of the second Adar.
Accordingly, we have seen that it was ruled that as a matter of halacha there is no obligation of feasting and rejoicing, but even so one should increase in feasting and rejoicing in order to fulfill the view of the stringent ones.
★ ★ ★
Question: Is this rejoicing of Purim Katan on the fourteenth of the first Adar also for the inhabitants of the walled cities?
Answer: There are those who wrote12 that the Rema's instruction to increase somewhat in rejoicing in the seudah on the fourteenth is only for the inhabitants of the open towns but not for those of the walled cities. But the Minchas Yitzchak13 wrote: 'On the contrary, there is a novelty pertaining to the inhabitants of the walled cities with regard to Purim Katan, for in every year, on Purim itself, an inhabitant of a walled city surrounded by a wall who reads on the fifteenth has no festive day at all on the fourteenth, (whereas the inhabitants of the towns have an obligation to increase somewhat in feasting and rejoicing also on the fifteenth, Shushan Purim), whereas on Purim Katan of the first Adar in a leap year, according to all opinions, on the fourteenth there is rejoicing and a festive day, and then it is the essence of Purim Katan even for the inhabitants of the walled cities mentioned, and accordingly there is the opportunity to make feasting and rejoicing also on the fourteenth, and this is simple'.
Tomorrow we will discuss whether the inhabitants of the open towns need to rejoice also on the fifteenth — Shushan Purim Katan.
Addition: The Rebbe explains there that the fact that the Rema writes the matter of increasing in rejoicing only as a hint, in saying "one who is of good heart has a continual feast," is because this is such an exalted level of rejoicing that therefore there is no explicit obligation upon it in the Shulchan Aruch, similar to the rejoicing of Simchas Torah, and therefore this rejoicing is the preparation for the rejoicing of the time to come. May it come speedily in our days.
Notes:
1 Megillah 6, 2 ↩
2 Megillah 3, 2 of the pages of the Rif ↩
3 5, 2 ↩
4 The Kesav Sofer wrote in his commentary on the Torah at the end of parashas Tetzaveh: 'But were it not for the Ran it would appear to me to say, based on those who explain that sending portions belongs to the seudah .. and according to this, one who is stringent to increase in rejoicing should also conduct himself to send portions and should not grasp the rope at both ends — to give pleasure to his own soul and not benefit others; and one whose heart is grudging about benefiting others should not increase in feasting for himself either. And that is what [the Rema] concludes, "and one who is of good heart," who is not grudging about benefiting others, "has a continual feast," accepts upon himself the stringency of the poskim' ↩
5 In the glosses on the Semak mitzvah 148. Cited in Beis Yosef OC siman 697 ↩
6 Siman 178 ↩
7 OC siman 697 ↩
8 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 697 se'if 1 ↩
9 Mishlei 15, 15 ↩
10 Siman 697 s"k 2 ↩
11 Likkutei Sichos vol. 26 p. 215 ↩
12 Chasam Sofer on the Torah, Tetzaveh p. 70. And see also Beirur Halacha vol. 3 p. 412 ↩
13 Vol. 10 siman 58 ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp group