Days on which marriages are not held
[א] (Halacha 1067)
Question: What are the days on which it is forbidden to marry?
Answer: The Mishnah in Tractate Beitzah1 states regarding Yom Tov: 'And these are [prohibited] on account of reshus (optional matters) .. and one does not perform kiddushin, nor chalitzah, nor yibum.' And the Gemara asks: 'And one does not perform kiddushin — but he is performing a mitzvah! It is not necessary [to say this] except where he has a wife and children .. And regarding all of them, what is the reason? A decree lest he write.'
However, in the Yerushalmi2 Yoma ch. 1, end of halacha 1, a different reason3 is given: that it should not be like making an acquisition on Shabbos4.
The Rishonim disagree regarding the words of the Bavli. Rashi wrote there: 'And one does not perform kiddushin — but he is performing a mitzvah — for he marries a woman to be fruitful and multiply, and why is it called reshus (optional)?' That is, the Gemara's intent is only to ask why this is called reshus, but even if he has no wife and children we do not find a heter to perform kiddushin.
But Tosafos wrote in the name of Rabbeinu Tam that when he has no wife and children he may perform kiddushin on Shabbos. These are the words of Tosafos: 'But he is performing a mitzvah — the Kuntres (Rashi) explained .. implying that even if he has no wife and children it is nonetheless forbidden .. But Rabbeinu Tam explained: "but he is performing a mitzvah, so why did they decree, etc.," and it answers "it is not necessary except where he has a wife and children," but if he has no wife and children it is permitted to perform kiddushin, for he is performing a mitzvah..'5.
However, in Sefer HaYashar6 Rabbeinu Tam wrote a limitation on this heter: 'And to perform kiddushin with a woman on Shabbos for one who has no children — b'dieved (after the fact) I have permitted it, and even l'chatchilah (at the outset) if there was a pressing need of the moment.'
And moreover it is written in the Hagahos Maimoniyos7: 'But Rabbeinu Tam wrote in a responsum that under great pressure they permitted performing kiddushin on Shabbos, but nonetheless he would not rule so in practice, and see Tosafos in the chapter Mashilin Peiros, end quote.'8
> Thus Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam disagree as to whether a person who has no wife and children may perform kiddushin on Shabbos; and even according to Rabbeinu Tam this heter applies only in a case of need, and some wrote that he did not rule so in practice.
The Rif, the Rosh, and the Rambam9 cited the words of the Mishnah and the prohibition of kiddushin, and did not mention a heter in a case where he has no wife and children; it appears from this that they understood like Rashi, that there is no heter at all to perform kiddushin on Shabbos.
The Semak10 wrote, according to those who permit performing kiddushin on Shabbos (when he has no wife and children): 'However it appears that to consummate the marriage is forbidden, based on that [passage] in the first chapter of Yoma.'11.
> That is, according to the Semak, even according to Rabbeinu Tam who permitted performing kiddushin on Shabbos, he did not permit the marriage itself.
However, in the Darkei Moshe12 he wrote: 'But this is not implied in the Semag, Hilchos Yom Tov13:
In practice, the Mechaber, in Hilchos Shabbos14, wrote: 'And one does not perform kiddushin.' And in Even HaEzer15 he wrote: 'One does not bring a virgin to the chuppah on Shabbos, because through the chuppah he acquires rights to her found objects and the work of her hands, and this is like making an acquisition on Shabbos. And a widow — the chuppah does not acquire her, but only through the seclusion of cohabitation does he acquire her found objects and the work of her hands; therefore he must seclude himself with her before Shabbos, so that it should not be like making an acquisition on Shabbos.'
And the Rema16 wrote: 'And some permit performing kiddushin where he has no wife and children. And it is possible that likewise bringing [her] to the chuppah is permitted; and although the halacha is not so, nonetheless one relies on this under pressing circumstances, especially since great is human dignity — as is customary that sometimes they were unable to settle the dowry on Friday until nightfall, so they perform the chuppah and the kiddushin on Shabbos night, since they had already prepared for the seudah and the marriage, and it would be an embarrassment to the bride and groom if he did not marry then; nonetheless, l'chatchilah one should be careful not to come to this.'
These are the words of the Alter Rebbe17: 'One does not perform kiddushin with a woman, nor chalitzah, nor divorce — a decree lest he write .. And likewise one does not perform yibum, nor bring a woman to the chuppah, even if he betrothed her while it was still day, because through this he acquires her rights of inheritance, and it is forbidden to make an acquisition on Shabbos, since it is included in the decree of buying and selling that they decreed lest he write, as stated in siman 306. And some permit performing kiddushin and bringing to the chuppah for one who has no wife and children, because of the mitzvah of procreation; and although this is not the main [view], nonetheless one relies on it under pressing circumstances, for great is human dignity — as is customary that sometimes they were unable to settle the dowry on Friday until nightfall, so they perform the chuppah and the kiddushin on Shabbos night, since they had already prepared for the seudah and the marriage, and it would be an embarrassment to the bride and groom if he did not marry then; nonetheless, l'chatchilah one must be careful not to come to this, for many transgressions come from delaying the chuppah; and every God-fearing person should be stringent upon himself not to hold marriages at all on Shabbos, as stated in Even HaEzer siman 62.'
> Thus we have seen that one does not perform kiddushin or marriage on Shabbos. In the next halacha we will look at [the law] regarding a festival and Chol HaMoed.
--------------
Notes:
1 36b ↩
2 Yoma ch. 1, end of halacha 1 ↩
3 Some wrote (see also Beis Meir siman 339) that the Yerushalmi speaks with regard to *marriage* (and therefore the Semak below wrote that marriage is forbidden according to all, thereby reconciling the view of Rabbeinu Tam), and see also in the words of the Alter Rebbe below; but the Semag wrote that the Yerushalmi disagrees. As the Semag wrote in Lavin siman 75: 'And in this the Yerushalmi disagrees with our Talmud, for there it explains that the reason one does not perform kiddushin is because of making an acquisition — that is, because it is written (Yeshaya 58:13) ממצוא חפצך ודבר דבר ("from pursuing your affairs and speaking words"), while in our Gemara it explains, "and regarding all of them, what is the reason? A decree lest he write."' (And it seems that based on this the Rema wrote — see below — that according to the Semag one could say that even marriage — chuppah — is permitted.) ↩
4 Further on, the Yerushalmi brings [a discussion] regarding a widow, that she should not be married on Shabbos. And this is not the place [to elaborate]. ↩
5 And see also Semak mitzvah 194: 'And "one does not perform kiddushin" is established in our Talmud as referring to where he has a wife and children, and it is implied that if he does not have [them] it is permitted to perform kiddushin.' ↩
6 The responsa section, siman 48:10 ↩
7 Hilchos Ishus 10:14 [50] ↩
8 And see also the Chiddushei HaRashba, Beitzah there. ↩
9 The Rambam, Hilchos Shabbos 23:14, wrote: 'One does not judge on Shabbos, nor perform chalitzah, nor yibum, nor kiddushin — a decree lest he write.' And see also Hilchos Ishus 10:14: 'And needless to say that it is forbidden to marry on Shabbos.' ↩
10 mitzvah 194 ↩
11 And see also Kol Bo siman 58: *'And it appears that to consummate the marriage is forbidden.'* And see what the Beis Yosef and Darkei Moshe wrote (OC siman 339) regarding the view of the Ran — who wrote (on the Rif, Beitzah 20a): 'And nonetheless Rabbeinu Tam z"l wrote in a responsum that one does not perform kiddushin with a woman on Shabbos except under great pressure, and even if he betrothed [her] while it was still day it is forbidden to bring her to the chuppah on Shabbos, for he acquires her in order to inherit her; and know this, for so we learned "one does not perform yibum" even though there is only cohabitation there; and in the Yerushalmi they said that those who marry widows must marry [before it was still day].' And see what the Prisha wrote, siman 339:1, that the words of the Semak refer only to Yom Tov. ↩
12 OC siman 339, os 2 ↩
13 Except that it is not clear in the words of the Rema that he refers to this matter; however, in the gloss below he also wrote so, and they cited the Semag. ↩
14 Shulchan Aruch OC 339:4 ↩
15 siman 64:5 ↩
16 OC there, in the gloss; and see at length Responsa of the Rema siman 125, an incident that the Rema himself did. ↩
17 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 339, se'ifim 4–5 ↩
[ב] (Halacha 1068)
Question: What is the ruling regarding marriage on a festival?
Answer: In the previous halacha we saw the words of the Mishnah regarding kiddushin on a festival and the dispute of the Rishonim, and the halacha regarding kiddushin and marriage on Shabbos; however, regarding a festival there is an additional matter, which also pertains to the days of Chol HaMoed, as follows.
Regarding marriage, the Mishnah in Tractate Moed Katan1 states: 'One does not marry women on the festival, neither virgins nor widows, and one does not perform yibum, because it is a rejoicing for him.' The Gemara asks: 'And if it is a rejoicing for him, what of it? Rav Yehudah said in the name of Shmuel, and likewise Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Oshaya, and some say Rabbi Elazar said in the name of Rabbi Chanina: because one does not mix one rejoicing with another rejoicing. Rabbah bar [Rav] Huna said: because he sets aside the rejoicing of the festival and occupies himself with the rejoicing of his wife. Abaye said to Rav Yosef: this [teaching] of Rabbah bar [Rav] Huna is from Rav, for Rav Daniel bar Ketina said in the name of Rav: from where do we know that one does not marry women on the festival? As it says ושמחת בחגך ("And you shall rejoice on your festival") — "on your festival" and not with your wife. Ulla said: because of the trouble. Rabbi Yitzchak Nafcha said: because of the neglect of procreation.'
But regarding betrothal (erusin), it is stated in the Tosefta2: 'One does not perform kiddushin with women on the festival; Rabbi Yehudah permits, lest another precede him.'
And likewise in the Gemara3: 'Shmuel said: it is permitted to betroth a woman on Chol HaMoed, lest another precede him .. Let us say [a baraisa] supports him: One does not marry women on the festival, neither virgins nor widows, and one does not perform yibum, because it is a rejoicing for him. But to betroth is permitted! — It is stating "it is not necessary": it is not necessary [to state] betrothal, where he performs no mitzvah, but even to marry, where he performs a mitzvah, is forbidden. Come and hear, for the school of Shmuel taught: one may betroth but not consummate the marriage, and one does not make an engagement seudah, nor perform yibum, because it is a rejoicing for him. Conclude from this.'
And the Rambam4 wrote: 'One does not marry women nor perform yibum on the festival, so that the rejoicing of the festival should not be forgotten amid the rejoicing of the marriage; but he may remarry his divorcee, and one may betroth women on the festival, provided that he does not make an engagement seudah nor a marriage seudah, so as not to mix another rejoicing with the rejoicing of the festival.'5.
> Thus we have seen that regarding the festival (in addition to the discussion in the previous halacha regarding Shabbos and Yom Tov) there is a prohibition of marriage6 on the festival, including on the days of Chol HaMoed; however, it is permitted to perform betrothal on Chol HaMoed7.
[And to note that in the previous halacha we saw the words of the Semak8, who wrote: 'However it appears that to consummate the marriage is forbidden, based on that [passage] in the first chapter of Yoma,' and the Prisha9 wrote: 'For even the Semak forbade consummating the marriage only for the reason that one does not mix one rejoicing with another rejoicing, and for this reason too the Kol Bo wrote it only in Hilchos Yom Tov, see there .. since they wrote it only regarding Yom Tov, it works out well that the Rema refers to Shabbos, and there the reason of not mixing one rejoicing with another does not apply, and this is clear.']
In practice, regarding Yom Tov, the Mechaber10 wrote: 'And one does not perform kiddushin, nor consummate marriage.'
And likewise the Alter Rebbe11 wrote: 'Just as on Shabbos .. one does not perform kiddushin nor bring [a woman] to the chuppah .. so too one does not do any of these on Yom Tov, see siman 339 and 306.'
And regarding Chol HaMoed, the Mechaber12 wrote: 'One does not marry women on the festival, neither virgins nor widows, and one does not perform yibum; and it is permitted to betroth, provided that the betrothed one does not make an engagement seudah in the house of his betrothed at the time of betrothal; and it is permitted to hold dancing and celebration and to make the seudah of the betrothed one with his companions not in the house of his betrothed; and likewise for the betrothed one to dine in the house of his betrothed not at the time of betrothal is permitted.'
> Thus we have seen that on Yom Tov one may not perform betrothal or marriage, and on Chol HaMoed it is permitted to perform betrothal but not marriage.
Notes:
1 8b ↩
2 Moed Katan 8b ↩
3 there, 18b ↩
4 Hilchos Yom Tov 7:16 ↩
5 And see also Rambam, Hilchos Ishus 10:14: 'And even on Chol HaMoed one does not marry women, as we explained, because one does not mix one rejoicing with another rejoicing, as it says מלא שבוע זאת ונתנה לך גם את זאת ("Complete the week of this one, and we will give you also that one").' ↩
6 The poskim disagree whether the prohibition applies also to a marriage without a seudah — see the commentaries on the Shulchan Aruch, siman 546:1, that it depends on the aforementioned reasons in the Gemara. ↩
7 But the engagement seudah is forbidden; however, since this is not common, this is not the place [to elaborate]. ↩
8 mitzvah 194 ↩
9 OC siman 339, se'if katan 1. But see in the previous halacha that they understood the words of the Semak as applying also to Shabbos. ↩
10 Shulchan Aruch OC 524:1 ↩
11 there, se'if 1 ↩
12 Shulchan Aruch OC 546:1 ↩
[ג] (Halacha 1069)
Sefiras HaOmer
Question: What is the source of the minhag not to hold marriages between Pesach and Shavuos1?
The Gemara in Tractate Yevamos2 states: 'They said: Rabbi Akiva had twelve thousand pairs of students, from Gevas to Antipras, and they all died in one period because they did not treat one another with respect, and the world was desolate, until Rabbi Akiva came to our Rabbis in the south and taught it to them — Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehudah, Rabbi Yosi, Rabbi Shimon, and Rabbi Elazar ben Shamua — and they were the ones who upheld the Torah at that time. It was taught: they all died from Pesach until Atzeres.'
This Gemara relates the tragedy that occurred during [the period] from Pesach until Atzeres, but no mourning practices, nor a prohibition of marriage because of this, are mentioned; yet already from the days of the Geonim we find that they practiced so3, as follows:
Rabbeinu Netronai Gaon4 wrote: 'And as for what you asked, why one does not perform kiddushin and does not consummate marriage between Pesach and Atzeres — whether it is because of a prohibition or not — know that it is not because of a prohibition, but because of a minhag of mourning; for so the Sages said: Rabbi Akiva had twelve thousand pairs of students, and they all died between Pesach and Atzeres because they did not treat one another [with respect]; and it was taught concerning it, "and they all died an unusual death by askara (diphtheria)"; and from that time onward the early ones had the minhag during these days not to consummate marriages; and one who jumped ahead and consummated — we do not penalize him with punishment or lashes, but if he comes to ask at the outset, we do not instruct him to consummate; and regarding kiddushin — one who wishes to perform kiddushin between Pesach and Atzeres may perform kiddushin, since the essence of rejoicing is only at the chuppah.'
And the Ritz Giat5 wrote: 'And it is a minhag among all Israel not to marry between Pesach and Atzeres, and it is because of mourning, not because of a prohibition, for so the Sages said: Rabbi Akiva had twelve thousand pairs of students, and they all died between Pesach and Atzeres because they did not treat one another with respect, and they all died of askara; and from that time onward they had the minhag to mourn for them, not to marry a woman during these days. And this applies specifically to marriage, whose essence of rejoicing is in the chuppah and the consummation, but to betroth and perform kiddushin — no. And regarding marriage too, one who jumped ahead and consummated is not punished, but if one comes to ask at the outset, we instruct him not to do so and not to violate the minhag of Israel; and so the Geonim ruled.'
And Rabbeinu Yerucham6 wrote: 'To perform kiddushin and to consummate marriage between Pesach and Atzeres — Rav Hai z"l wrote in a responsum that one may perform kiddushin, for there is no rejoicing except at the chuppah and the seudah; but if one comes to ask whether he may consummate the marriage, we tell him: do not do so, because of the students of Rabbi Akiva who all died of askara between Pesach and Atzeres because they did not treat one another with respect; and if he transgressed and consummated, we do not lash him nor penalize him with any penalty.'
[Additional Rishonim mentioned the minhag, and we will see some of them in the next halacha in the discussion regarding the time in which the custom is not to hold marriages.]
The Tur7 wrote: 'It is customary in all places not to marry a woman between Pesach and Atzeres, and the reason is not to increase rejoicing, for at that time the students of Rabbi Akiva died; and the Ri Giat wrote: specifically marriage, which is the essence of rejoicing, but to betroth and perform kiddushin is fine; and regarding marriage too, one who jumped ahead and consummated is not punished, but if one comes to do it at the outset, we do not instruct him to do so; and thus the Geonim ruled.'
In practice, the Mechaber8 wrote: 'It is customary not to marry a woman between Pesach and Atzeres, until Lag BaOmer, because at that time the students of Rabbi Akiva died; but to betroth and perform kiddushin is fine, and regarding marriage too, one who jumped ahead and consummated is not punished.'
And the Shtei Yados9 wrote: 'That which they had the custom not to marry women until Lag BaOmer — when there is a cause and reason there, we are not concerned for the minhag, such as one who has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation, or who has no one to serve him, and the like; provided that he does not increase in rejoicing, for the reason of the minhag is because of the rejoicing — for this minhag is no stronger than the mourning of thirty days, and this is clear.'
But the Bach10 wrote: 'It appears to me that there is no distinction between a marriage of mitzvah — such as where he has no wife and children — and a marriage that is not of mitzvah, for in such an old mourning practice, which is only a minhag, they did not distinguish between them, and so the minhag was.'
The Knesses HaGedolah11 too cited the words of the Shtei Yados above, and concluded: 'And we do not practice so.'
These are the words of the Alter Rebbe12: 'It is customary not to marry a woman and not to take a haircut between Pesach and Atzeres, for we mourn for the 24,000 students of Rabbi Akiva who died during these days. But it is permitted to make a shidduch without marriage, lest another precede him. And it is also permitted to make a seudah after the shidduchin or after the kiddushin. But they should not hold dancing and celebration. And needless to say that they should not hold optional dancing and celebration. But it is permitted to hold an optional seudah, such as a gathering of friends, without dancing and celebration and excessive rejoicing. One who jumped ahead and married during these days is not penalized at all, since he performed a mitzvah. But one who took a haircut during these days is penalized for having violated the minhag. One who has not yet fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation, or who has no one to serve him — since he is permitted to marry even within the thirty days of mourning for his father and mother, for whom he is obligated to mourn by rabbinic decree, all the more so he is permitted to marry during the mourning of these days, which is only a mere minhag. Nonetheless, in these lands they had the custom to be stringent.'
> Thus we have seen that there is an ancient minhag not to hold marriages between Pesach and Atzeres. [But shidduchin or kiddushin is permitted], and in the next halacha we will look at the various opinions and minhogim as to when the custom is not to marry.
--------------
Notes:
1 In this halacha we will discuss only the minhag itself, and in the coming halachos we will look at the details of the minhag and on which days the minhag applies. ↩
2 62b ↩
3 And see the article by Rabbi Gedaliah Oberlander, Or Yisrael issue 39, on the reasons for the minhag and its spread. ↩
4 Teshuvos HaGeonim — Shaarei Teshuvah siman 278 ↩
5 Hilchos Chadash and Sefiras HaOmer, page 344 ↩
6 Nesiv 22, part 2 ↩
7 OC siman 493 ↩
8 Shulchan Aruch OC there, se'if 1 ↩
9 51b. And the Pri Chadash, OC 493:1, wrote in accordance with his words regarding one who has not fulfilled procreation. ↩
10 Beginning of siman 493. Cited also in the Chok Yaakov, se'if katan 1. ↩
11 Hagahos HaTur, OC siman 493 ↩
12 there, se'ifim 1–3 ↩
[ד] (Halacha 1070)
Sefiras HaOmer (2)
Question: When is the time in which the custom is not to marry during this period between Pesach and Atzeres?
Answer: In the previous halacha we saw the words of the Gemara in Yevamos1 62b: 'It was taught: they all died from Pesach until Atzeres.'2. And the plain meaning of the wording is that they died throughout this entire period [though some noted that they died throughout the whole time between Pesach and Shavuos, but not on Pesach, the Shabbosos, and Rosh Chodesh, and in total this comes to 33 days3]. And based on this the Geonim wrote that the mourning practices are from Pesach until Atzeres, and so several of the Rishonim wrote.
[The Maharal4 wrote a novel explanation: 'And therefore they died specifically from Pesach until Atzeres, and they were dying because they did not give respect — [this is that number,] namely 32 days, and on Lag BaOmer they stopped. Even though it says that they died from Pesach until Atzeres, nonetheless the decree ceased on Lag BaOmer, such that no more fell ill; only those who had fallen ill before Lag BaOmer died after Lag BaOmer.'].
But in practice we find several approaches among the Rishonim as to on which days they died, and when the laws of mourning apply: a) Some wrote that they died from Pesach until Lag BaOmer, and from Lag BaOmer it is permitted to hold marriages. [And within this view, some practice a heter from the night of Lag BaOmer, and some permitted only from Lag BaOmer during the day.] b) Some permitted holding marriages only from the 34th of the Omer. c) Some wrote that they died only on the days on which Tachanun is said, which comes to 32 days, and the entire day of Lag BaOmer is already a day of rejoicing. d) [Some wrote that one must mark a total of 33 days of mourning, and based on this] some had the custom of mourning practices from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Shavuos. [And based on this, some of the Acharonim ruled e) to observe mourning from before Rosh Chodesh until the three days of Hagbalah.] f) Some wrote that the mourning is from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Lag BaOmer. g) Some had the custom that there is no mourning on the days of Rosh Chodesh, since it is like a Yom Tov, but the poskim rejected this minhag, as follows:
a)5 Rabbeinu Avraham Min HaHar6 wrote: 'And in the Midrash [it is] from Pesach until Lag BaOmer, and because of this they had the custom not to marry women from Pesach until Lag BaOmer.'
And likewise the Manhig7 wrote: 'And it is not the custom to consummate marriage between Pesach and Atzeres .. but the custom in France and Provence is to consummate [marriage] from Lag BaOmer onward. And I heard in the name of Rabbeinu Rabbi Zerachiah of Gerona that he found written in an old book that came from Spain that they died from Pesach until pros of Atzeres — and what is "pursa"? Half, as we learned "we inquire into the laws of Pesach thirty days [before]," and half of that is fifteen days before Atzeres, and that is Lag BaOmer. Aleph-Beis-Nun (Avraham ben Nathan).'
And the Meiri8 wrote: 'And these students, it was mentioned here that they all died from Pesach until Atzeres, and there is a tradition in the hands of the Geonim that on the day of Lag BaOmer the dying ceased .. and so it is customary because of this not to marry a woman from Pesach until that time.'9
b) It is written in the Derashos of R"Y ibn Shuib10: 'I heard that there is in the Midrash "until pros of Atzeres," which is fifteen days [before] Atzeres, as they say "pros of Pesach, pros of Chag," which are fifteen days in Nissan and in Tishrei; and when you remove fifteen days from forty-nine days, thirty-four remain, and behold they are thirty-three complete [days], and one shaves on the thirty-fourth day in the morning, for part of the day is like all of it. And it is a mitzvah to count days, and a mitzvah to count weeks.'
And the Tashbetz11 wrote: 'And know that the minhag is to forbid only until Lag BaOmer, and one should wonder why. But Rabbi Zerachiah HaLevi z"l wrote that he found written in an old Spanish book that they died from Pesach until pros of Atzeres. What is "pros"? Half. What is "pros"? No less than sixteen days .. and this is Lag BaOmer, for from Lag BaOmer until Atzeres is sixteen days, and part of the 34th day of the Omer is like all of it, according to all the laws of mourning, as stated in the chapter Eilu Megalchin12; there remain fifteen days, which are the pros of Atzeres — that is, half of the thirty days during which one inquires and expounds the laws of Atzeres. And according to this it appears that the entire day of Lag BaOmer is forbidden, and part of the 34th day, since part of the day is like all of it; and according to the words of the Ramban z"l, part of the night suffices, as he wrote in Sefer Toras HaAdam .. And that which [it says] Lag BaOmer and not the 34th — because the 34th day is not complete.'
c) In the Maharil13 it is written: 'Mahar"i Segal said: even though it is [stated] in the Gemara that the students of Rabbi Akiva died from Pesach until Atzeres, nonetheless we make the day of Lag BaOmer a day of rejoicing, because they died only on the days on which Tachanun is said among the seven weeks of the Omer, and on every day when Tachanun is not said they did not die; and now remove from the 49 days of the counting: the 7 days of the festival, the 3 days on which Rosh Chodesh falls — two of Iyar and one of Sivan — and the 7 Shabbosos, there remain 32; it turns out that they died only 32 days; therefore, when those 32 days on which they died are complete, on the morrow they make a day of rejoicing as a remembrance.'
d) In the Pardes of Rashi14 it is written: 'And one does not marry women between Pesach and Atzeres, for they are susceptible days, since a plague fell upon the students of Rabbi Akiva. But I have seen that they marry after Pesach until Rosh Chodesh Iyar; but after Rosh Chodesh they begin not to marry.'
And in the Shibolei HaLeket15 he wrote: 'And there are places that have the custom to marry until Rosh Chodesh Iyar, but after Rosh Chodesh they begin not to marry.'
e) Magen Avraham16: 'But in this country they had the custom to marry and take haircuts on the three days of Hagbalah; therefore it appears to me that they should not marry or take haircuts on Rosh Chodesh Iyar and on the first of the days of Hagbalah, [where] we say part of the day is like all of it, and so it is implied in the Maharil, see there.'
f) In the customs of Rabbeinu Avraham Hildik17 it is written: 'And it is not customary to hold celebrations or marriages from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Lag BaOmer, for on Lag BaOmer the plague that was among the students of Rabbi Akiva was halted, and they made that day a Yom Tov.'
g) The Beis Yosef18 wrote: 'And some have the custom to take haircuts on Rosh Chodesh Iyar, because Rosh Chodesh is like a Yom Tov and one should not observe on it anything that is on account of mourning, and it appears to me that since most of the world did not practice so, it is an error in their hands. And it is possible that this arose for them from what the Ri ibn Shuib wrote in the name of Tosafos, that what is said [regarding] Lag BaOmer is not as they practice, but rather 33 days: when you remove the seven days of Pesach and 7 Shabbosos and the two days of Rosh Chodesh, which are 16 days on which mourning does not apply, there remain from the 49 days 33, end quote. And because they saw there that on the two days of Rosh Chodesh mourning does not apply, they adopted a heter on them; but this is certainly a mistake, for they said that on the two days of Rosh Chodesh mourning does not apply only according to those who practice the prohibition of haircutting until Atzeres, for without the two days of Rosh Chodesh you arrive at 33 days; but for us, who practice the prohibition only until 33 days of the Omer, all 33 days it is forbidden to take a haircut, even on Rosh Chodesh.'
> Thus we have seen the various minhogim that the poskim mentioned, and in the next halacha we will look at the words of the Mechaber and the poskim.
Notes:
1 62b ↩
2 However, in the Gemara the wording is that they died *from Pesach until Atzeres*, but in the Midrash the wording is *between Pesach and Atzeres*, as the Pri Chadash wrote, OC 493:1: 'At the end of Midrash [Rabbah] Koheles [ch. 11, os 10] it is [stated] that they died between Pesach and Atzeres, and with this wording we can say that on Lag BaOmer they stopped dying; but the wording of our Talmud implies that their dying continued until Atzeres.' ↩
3 See below in the words of the Ri ibn Shuib, and in the words of the Maharil. ↩
4 In the Chiddushei Aggados ↩
5 However, some of these sources could be explained as intending "until, but not including"; but it appears more [correct] to explain that their intent is to permit also on Lag itself. ↩
6 Yevamos there ↩
7 Hilchos Erusin and Nisuin, page 538 ↩
8 Yevamos there ↩
9 And see also Kaftor VaFerach ch. 7, and the Abudraham, "Between Pesach and Atzeres." ↩
10 The first day of Pesach ↩
11 Responsa, part 1, siman 178 ↩
12 20b ↩
13 The laws of the days between Pesach and Shavuos [7] ↩
14 Hilchos Aveilim ↩
15 Seder Pesach siman 235. And in a similar vein it is written in Maaseh HaGeonim siman 59. ↩
16 siman 493, se'if katan 5 ↩
17 Kovetz Al Yad, new series, book 9, p. 196 ↩
18 OC siman 493 ↩
[ה] (Halacha 1071)
Sefiras HaOmer (3)
In the previous halacha we saw the views of the Rishonim regarding the time of mourning during Sefiras HaOmer.
Question: How was the halacha decided in practice?
Answer: The Mechaber1 wrote: 'It is customary not to marry a woman between Pesach and Atzeres, until Lag BaOmer, because at that time the students of Rabbi Akiva died; but to betroth and perform kiddushin is fine, and regarding marriage too, one who jumped ahead and consummated is not punished.'
And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'However, from Lag BaOmer onward everything is permitted.'
And the Mechaber2 further wrote: 'It is customary not to take a haircut until Lag BaOmer, for they say that then they stopped dying, and one should not take a haircut until the 34th day in the morning, unless the 33rd day falls on the eve of Shabbos, in which case one takes a haircut on it in honor of Shabbos.'
And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And in these lands the custom is not according to his words; rather they take haircuts on the 33rd day and increase somewhat in rejoicing on it, and do not say Tachanun on it. And one should not take a haircut until Lag itself, and not from the evening before. However, if it falls on Sunday, the custom is to take a haircut on Friday in honor of Shabbos.'
And the Mechaber3 further wrote: 'Some have the custom to take a haircut on Rosh Chodesh Iyar, and it is an error in their hands.'
And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'However, in many places the custom is to take haircuts until Rosh Chodesh Iyar, and those [people] do not take haircuts from Lag BaOmer onward, even though it is permitted to take a haircut on Lag BaOmer itself. And those places where the custom is to take haircuts from Lag BaOmer onward do not take haircuts at all after Pesach until Lag BaOmer. And one should not practice in one city part of this minhag and part of that minhag, because of "lo sisgodedu" (do not form factions), and all the more so that one should not adopt the heter of both.'
> Thus the Mechaber cited the minhag that the mourning prohibition is until the 34th of the Omer, and the Rema cited the minhag that the days of mourning are from Rosh Chodesh Iyar until Atzeres.
The Taz4 wrote that there is an additional reason to be stringent regarding marriage even when there is no mourning for the students of Rabbi Akiva. These are his words: 'And it may be said that certainly the essential [view] is that after Lag BaOmer they did not die; and even so we practice some mourning because of the decree of Tatnu (4856) that occurred in Ashkenaz between Pesach and Atzeres, as is spelled out in the yotzros and piyutim that we say on those Shabbosos, which were composed like dirges — so it appears to me [is] the reason for our minhag not to marry after Lag BaOmer. But to take a haircut is certainly permitted after Lag BaOmer, for because of this decree they were stringent only regarding the excessive rejoicing of marriage; whereas before Lag BaOmer, when the students of Rabbi Akiva died and it is incumbent upon the whole world to mourn for them, they were more stringent, even regarding haircutting.'
The Alter Rebbe5 cited the various minhogim at length, and concluded6: 'If one has a doubt about the local minhag, he cannot adopt the leniencies of the minhogim — that is, to practice a heter until Rosh Chodesh Iyar according to the latter view, and also to practice a heter from Lag BaOmer onward until the eve of Atzeres according to the first view — since these two leniencies contradict one another. But he may adopt the stringencies of the minhogim — that is, to practice the prohibition from Pesach until the eve of Shavuos, or until the first day of Hagbalah, except for Lag BaOmer. And although he practices two stringencies that contradict one another, he is not like the fool who walks in darkness, since he did so because of the doubt he had as to which minhag is the essential one. Nonetheless, he need not do so; rather he may adopt whichever minhag he wishes, and we are not concerned that perhaps the minhag of this place is not so, since mourning is only a mere minhag and one should not be stringent in a case of doubt.'
In practice, generally speaking, the Sephardim follow the words of the Mechaber and permit marriages only from the 34th of the Omer. And the Ashkenazim permit on Lag BaOmer (and in the next halacha we will look at the detailed laws regarding the day of Lag itself), and regarding the rest of the days of the counting, today too there exist various minhogim: some permit until Rosh Chodesh Iyar, and some permit from Rosh Chodesh Sivan, as the Mishnah Berurah7 wrote: 'And behold, in our country the custom is to marry and take haircuts on the three days of Hagbalah; therefore the Magen Avraham concludes that one must be careful not to marry or take haircuts on the two days of the month of Iyar, and also on the first of the days of Hagbalah in the morning specifically, for we say part of the day is like all of it, and thus through this the 33 days for which we practice mourning are completed. And the Chayei Adam wrote that so too is the custom in the holy community of Vilna, that they practice the prohibition from the first day of Rosh Chodesh Iyar until the 3rd of Sivan in the morning, except for Lag BaOmer, on which they practice a heter; and there are places8 where the custom is to be lenient only on Rosh Chodesh Iyar, on Lag BaOmer, and on Rosh Chodesh Sivan until Shavuos.'
Thus we have seen that in principle, according to most minhogim, there are 33 days that mark the mourning, except that there are various minhogim as to when the custom is to mark them; and the Alter Rebbe cited that one may be stringent from Pesach until Shavuos or until the three days of Hagbalah.
> In practice, the custom of many (and so it appears is the custom in Chabad9) is to be concerned for all the minhogim and to mark the mourning practices throughout all the days of Sefiras HaOmer10 (except for Lag BaOmer); except that, as we saw in halacha number 481 the words of the Rebbe regarding the importance of not postponing the wedding, in recent years the Rebbe approved holding marriages even on the three days of Hagbalah11.
--------------
Notes:
1 Shulchan Aruch OC 493:1 ↩
2 there, se'if 2 ↩
3 there, se'if 3 ↩
4 there, se'if katan 2 ↩
5 there, se'ifim 5–6 ↩
6 se'if 7 ↩
7 there, se'if katan 15 ↩
8 But he commented on this in the Shaar HaTziyun, se'if katan 13: 'So it is implied from the Derech HaChaim. Although I do not know clearly from where he found this minhag to be lenient on the second day of the month of Sivan.' And see the Igros Moshe, OC part 1, siman 159 (and part 2, siman 45). ↩
9 See the letter of the Rebbe printed in Shulchan Menachem, part 6, pp. 155–156 ↩
10 In addition to the aforementioned words of the Taz, we saw in the previous halacha that some emphasized that there must be 33 days of mourning; and we also saw that some say they died only on the days when Tachanun is said, and that they died until Atzeres. Thus (particularly according to our minhag, that we say Shehecheyanu on Shabbos) there is reason to practice mourning practices until the eve of Shavuos. ↩
11 See Shiurei Halacha L'Maaseh (Levin), OC end of siman 65. Hiskashrus issue 1081, p. 15. [And likewise in the year 5751 a groom (RD"G) wrote to the Rebbe several dates for a wedding before and after the festival of Shavuos, and the Rebbe chose the date of the 3rd of Sivan.] ↩
[ו] (Halacha 1072)
Sefiras HaOmer (4)
Question: May one marry on Lag BaOmer?
Answer: In the previous halacha we saw the differences in minhogim written by the Mechaber and the Rema — that the Mechaber wrote that the custom is to permit marrying from the 34th of the Omer, and the Rema wrote that the custom is to permit marrying on Lag BaOmer (but they are stringent from the 34th onward).
And the Alter Rebbe1 wrote: 'Thirty-three days — some say that they begin from the first day of Sefiras HaOmer and conclude on Lag BaOmer, for on that day the last of the 24,000 died; therefore it is somewhat customary to increase in rejoicing on this day, and Tachanun is not said on it, since on it they stopped dying. And although some of them died on this very day, nonetheless, regarding mourning, on the final day we say part of the day is like all of it, as stated in Yoreh Deah siman 395; therefore, when one observes mourning for one hour or less on the 33rd day — that is, that he refrains from taking a haircut until after the day has become light on Lag — that is sufficient, and it is permitted for him to take a haircut on Lag after some part of the day has passed, and to marry a woman on it, and likewise from Lag onward .. Nonetheless, even on Lag itself he should be careful not to take a haircut before daybreak, since we say only that part of the day is like all of it, but night — even the entire night — is not like the whole day, and the mourning did not cease until the next day; therefore Tachanun is said at the tefillah of Minchah of the eve of Lag. And there are places that have the custom not to say Tachanun at Minchah of the eve of Lag, because they rely [on the view] that at the beginning of the night of Lag the mourning ceased, and therefore Tachanun is not said at the Minchah preceding it, just as it is not said at the Minchah preceding the other days on which Tachanun is not said, for their night is like their day; and according to their minhag they are also permitted to take haircuts and to marry on the night of Lag (for according to their words they observe mourning only 32 days).'
And in the Siddur the Alter Rebbe wrote: 'The Sephardic minhag is that on every day on which Tachanun and nefilas apayim are not said, one does not say "Lamnatzeiach yaancha" nor "Tefillah L'David" — that is, even the entire month of Nissan .. and Lag BaOmer .. and the eve of Lag BaOmer.'
The Rebbe wrote2: 'Behold, it is not customary within Anash to set a wedding on the days of the counting, and not even on Lag BaOmer or on Rosh Chodesh Iyar [obviously, except if there is a great necessity].'
And in another letter the Rebbe3 wrote: 'Regarding the suggestion to arrange the wedding on Thursday, the eve of Friday, Lag BaOmer. Behold, in general it is better, if possible, that the wedding be on the day after Shavuos or on the days following it until the middle of the first half of the month of Sivan. And if for some reason he specifically wants Lag BaOmer, then, because of the differences of opinion that exist in this, as explained in the Acharonim, it should be held on Friday but not on the night of the eve of Friday.'
> From these letters it appears that l'chatchilah one should not set a wedding for Lag BaOmer, and in a case of great necessity that it be on Lag BaOmer during the day, and not on the night of Lag BaOmer.
The Rebbe, in the sicha of the night of Lag BaOmer 57374, said [in free translation]: 'Regarding Lag BaOmer, there are several views as to whether it begins from the morning or begins from the night before, as brought in the poskim and also in the Alter Rebbe in his Shulchan Aruch, with reasons and rationales for both opinions. The practical difference from this is regarding the saying of Tachanun at the Minchah before it: if it begins from the night, then Tachanun is not said even at the Minchah before it, just as we do not say "Tzidkascha tzedek" at the Minchah of Shabbos, the eve of Rosh Chodesh, and the like; whereas if it begins only from the morning, it has no bearing on the Minchah before it, as on Pesach Sheni, where Tachanun is said at the Minchah before it; therefore, although in the Shulchan Aruch the Alter Rebbe did not decide clearly between the two opinions, since in the Siddur he wrote that at the Minchah of the eve of Lag BaOmer Tachanun is not said, from this it is understood that ultimately he decided — and in a manner equal for everyone — that the matter of Lag BaOmer begins from the night; and with all the shturem, there is here an additional special matter that pertains to the special date of this year, which has several matters connected to pilpul and special halachos .. When Lag BaOmer falls on the eve of Shabbos there are several changes regarding the weddings held on Lag BaOmer, for since weddings are mostly held in the middle of the day or toward evening (not on the night before), as a result there are several changes regarding the seudos, etc., as explained in the poskim.'
And there are Chabad rabbis who wrote5 that from this sicha it is understood that the Rebbe retracted what he wrote in the aforementioned letters, since Lag BaOmer begins already from the night according to the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur, and therefore one may also marry from the night of Lag BaOmer.
However, it may be said that there is no proof from the aforementioned sicha6, and on the contrary7 — it is possible that the Rebbe's intent is that the words of the Alter Rebbe in the Siddur are not a decision regarding the dispute brought in the Shulchan Aruch concerning the passing of the students of Rabbi Akiva, but rather a general decision regarding the matter itself — that the rejoicing of Lag BaOmer begins from the night [and it is possible that this is because of the hilula of Rashbi] — that is, the rejoicing of Lag BaOmer begins from the night, and this has bearing on the non-saying of Tachanun, but there is still nothing in this to teach regarding all the other detailed laws of Lag BaOmer. And as is also explained in the sicha of Lag BaOmer 57448 that there are distinctions in this: 'This farbrengen is connected with Lag BaOmer, whose beginning is at the Minchah of the eve of Lag BaOmer, as the Alter Rebbe wrote in his Siddur regarding the saying of Tachanun: "The Sephardic minhag is that on every day on which Tachanun is not said, one does not say Lamnatzeiach yaancha, etc.," and he goes on to enumerate all the days on which Tachanun is not said, including Lag BaOmer, and the eve of Lag BaOmer at Minchah .. And from this it is understood that the matter of Lag BaOmer begins already from the time of the Minchah prayer on the day before (after midday), which is why Tachanun is not said on it. And even though there are gradations in the matter — the eve of Lag BaOmer at the time of Minchah, the night of Lag BaOmer, and the day of Lag BaOmer, and as we find in halacha that there are matters that are not [in effect] even on the night of Lag BaOmer, but only on its day (and all the more so that they are not [in effect] on the eve of Lag BaOmer) — nonetheless, already at the Minchah of the eve of Lag BaOmer the matters connected with Lag BaOmer begin, and simply: the reason Tachanun is not said on it is because of the rejoicing of Rashbi (Lag BaOmer).'
And there are Chabad rabbis who permitted based on the sicha of the night of Lag BaOmer 57499, in which the Rebbe mentioned that he was shortening the sichos because of preparations for a wedding, and they wrote that the Rebbe was speaking about weddings that took place there on the night of Lag BaOmer10.
> In practice, there are Chabad rabbis who permit holding marriages on the night of Lag BaOmer11, and there are those who permit only on the day of Lag itself. [And seemingly, as we saw the words of the Rebbe regarding the importance of advancing the time of the wedding (so that, when there is no possibility of marriage on the day of Lag, and as a result of avoiding a wedding on the night of Lag BaOmer the wedding would be delayed for a long time), one should ask a rav whether there is room to permit holding it on the night of Lag. (And particularly when it concerns the marriage of one who has not fulfilled procreation, and as we saw that there is a side to be lenient in this in halacha number 1068).]
Notes:
1 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 493, se'ifim 5–7 ↩
2 Shulchan Menachem, part 6, pp. 155–156 ↩
3 Igros Kodesh, part 8, p. 318 ↩
4 Sichos Kodesh 5737, p. 703 ↩
5 See Shiurei Halacha L'Maaseh, OC siman 65, pp. 365–366. Shulchan Aruch with Dover Shalom, Pesach part 6, p. 124, note 42. ↩
6 And see also Berur Minhogim (Friedman), p. 63 onward. Siddur of the Alter Rebbe (Raskin), part 1, p. 398, and in Iyunei HaSiddur, note 1065. ↩
7 In addition, the Rebbe mentions there further on that because of the occurrence of Lag BaOmer on the eve of Shabbos it creates halachic discussions regarding a wedding held mostly on the day of Lag BaOmer or toward evening and not on the night before it; and behold, according to their understanding the conclusion of the sicha is that one may l'chatchilah hold the wedding on the night of Lag BaOmer, and if so there is no need to enter into all the aforementioned discussion (and this itself could have been the practical difference of the sicha, yet nonetheless the Rebbe mentioned only the non-saying of Tachanun). ↩
8 Toras Menachem, part 3, p. 1713 ↩
9 Toras Menachem, part 3, p. 178 ↩
10 However, some wrote (see Asif Minhogim VeHanhagos (Vahava), ch. 20, note 85, and Siddur Raskin there) that it refers to weddings that took place the next day, and this still requires study and clarification. ↩
11 And see what Rabbi Levin wrote there, to discuss whether the main concern is that the chuppah or the seudah be at night. ↩
[ז] (Halacha 1073)
The Three Weeks and the Nine Days
In the previous halachos we saw that there are various minhogim among the Jewish people regarding the days on which the custom is not to hold marriages, on account of mourning.
Question: May a person who, according to the minhag of his community, may not hold marriages on these days, participate [or, for a rav, officiate] in a wedding held in a community that permits [it] on these days, with musical instruments, dancing, and celebration?
Answer: The Chasam Sofer1 wrote: 'My eyes saw the wording of the proclamation that was proclaimed here in the name of the Gaon our teacher Rav Meshulam z"l, and there it is stated: since it is customary here to hold marriages on Rosh Chodesh Iyar and Lag BaOmer, and they also hold marriages on the three days of Hagbalah, and this should not be done, for it is two contradictory [practices] — therefore from now on it shall be a fixed statute to forbid marriages on the three days of Hagbalah. And what appears from these words is that he objected only to the fact that they had the custom to marry in one year at both times, and it was two things contradicting each other simultaneously, as is understood — for in a large community such as here, may God bless them, it would occur every single year that there would be two marriages at the two times, as your honor knows is truly the case; but it is possible that in a small place, where marriages are few, if a wedding occurs on Rosh Chodesh Iyar it will not occur on the days of Hagbalah, and as the bearer of this [letter] told me that for several years there were no marriages in his city on those days — then there is no [case of] two contradictions simultaneously, and it is possible that there is not so much concern .. But here, this one who marries a woman on the three days of Hagbalah did not contradict himself, for he never married a woman on Rosh Chodesh Iyar; [the concern is] only because of "lo sisgodedu," that a divided [community] rules [differently], etc., and this does not apply, for here and now there is no one who ruled so, and there is no contradiction at all, and no change because of dispute — so it appeared to me at first glance. But according to this, the one arranging the kiddushin, or one of the members of the chuppah, should not be one of those who were at another chuppah this year on the day of Rosh Chodesh Iyar or Lag BaOmer, even in another city, for it is two contradictory [practices]. All this I wrote according to what our teacher wrote, that he built his doubt upon the prohibition of the Gaon our teacher Meshulam z"l, and there he mentioned only that they contradict each other regarding marriages, as above.'
And in the Igros Moshe2 he wrote: 'Behold, the Chasam Sofer there at first wrote: "But according to this, the one arranging the kiddushin, or one of the members of the chuppah, should not be one of those who were at another chuppah this year in a manner that is two contradictory [practices], even in another city," see there. And this is astonishing, for certainly the one arranging the kiddushin and all the invited guests are permitted to be at a chuppah of the minhag of the Mechaber and at a chuppah of the minhag of the Rema, for the prohibition is not upon the invited guests who rejoice at the marriage, for behold, they make marriage seudos all seven days when one married on Rosh Chodesh Iyar and on Lag BaOmer, even though they are during the days of the counting; and though for the groom and bride there is no prohibition because it is their Yom Tov and there is an obligation of rejoicing, but for the others, for whom it is not their Yom Tov and there is no obligation of rejoicing upon them, how do they rejoice at the marriage seudos during the days of the counting? Rather, certainly the prohibition is only upon the groom and bride alone, and when they are permitted, there is consequently no prohibition at all upon the one arranging the kiddushin and the guests. And it is implied that even where one transgressed and married, the guests are permitted to rejoice with him, for it is [stated] in the Shulchan Aruch se'if 1 that if one jumped ahead and married he is not punished, and if it were forbidden to go to the seudos and rejoice with him, there would be no greater punishment than this. And consequently, since in this city it was permitted — because there is no [case of] two contradictions for the groom and bride to hold the chuppah on Rosh Chodesh Iyar — and in the other city it was permitted to hold [it] on the days of Hagbalah because there is no [case of] two contradictions there, there is no room to forbid the one arranging the kiddushin and the guests from being at both chuppos. Therefore one must say that even the Chasam Sofer did not say this as a final ruling in law .. and it turns out that even he permits, according to his conclusion, that same one arranging the kiddushin and those same guests to be at both chuppos. And it turns out that in New York and the like, where they are permitted to hold marriages even in a manner that is two contradictory [practices], since they are like two cities where one need not be stringent even according to the Gaon Rav Meshulam, that same one arranging the kiddushin and those same guests are permitted to be at both.'
And he repeated his words3: 'And regarding the dancing and the hearing of musical instruments, there is no prohibition at all, since they are part of the rejoicing of the marriage; for behold, even when they hold a wedding on Lag BaOmer or on the eve of Rosh Chodesh Iyar, they make rejoicing all seven days of the feast, also with dancing and musical instruments, and every person is permitted to be there and rejoice in their rejoicing; and so it is also in this [case], since the groom was permitted to marry — also with all the matters of rejoicing, also with dancing and musical instruments, every person is permitted to be there and rejoice in their rejoicing.'
And likewise in the Yabia Omer4 he wrote: 'And the reason he wrote that in communal mourning there is room for concern because of the invitees and the guests, for regarding them there is no necessity at all — if because of this, it is not so, for since it was permitted to hold the marriage because of the necessity that he has no one to serve him, or that he has not fulfilled procreation, the guests who come to gladden the groom and bride are performing a mitzvah, and "in the multitude of people is the King's glory" .. And see the Rema in a gloss (siman 551:10), that although the custom is not to eat meat and drink wine from Rosh Chodesh Av, at a seudas mitzvah such as an engagement seudah and a bris milah they eat meat and drink wine, all who belong to the seudah .. And at a groom's seudah too, since they are invited and go innocently, for it is a mitzvah to gladden groom and bride, and there is no rejoicing without eating and drinking.'
In the Shevus Yaakov5 he wrote: 'Regarding a certain widower who wished to marry during the Three Weeks, who had not yet fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation — whether we permit him or not .. And apart from this reason, it appears to me to distinguish in another matter: that specifically in individual mourning are we lenient for him because he has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation or has no one to serve him — we are lenient for him alone; whereas on these days, which are communal mourning, even though it is fitting to be lenient for him, nonetheless through the marriage the other invitees and guests too will come to be lenient; therefore, to this extent we are not lenient for the many against the minhag, since for them there is no necessity at all, and I recall that once a certain scholar was lenient regarding marriage during the days of the counting against the minhag, and their union did not turn out well; therefore it appears to me that one who guards his soul should keep far from marriage on such days, even though there would be many grounds to be lenient, for the danger is more severe than the prohibition, and one should not nullify the minhag in public.'
And some derived from his words to be stringent6, as the Minchas Yitzchak7 wrote in response to a question regarding a Sephardic young man who wished to marry an Ashkenazic girl on Lag BaOmer — for Ashkenazim it is permitted only on Lag BaOmer itself and not afterward, and for Sephardim only from the 34th of the Omer onward — and the questioner proposed that they hold the chuppah on Lag BaOmer toward evening and the seudah at night: 'However, all this will not help regarding the relatives and the other invited guests at the celebration who are Ashkenazim, for whom the heter of the woman does not apply, that she is drawn after him; and this too is one of the reasons that the Shevus Yaakov was concerned about, to be stringent regarding marriage after Lag BaOmer even if he has not fulfilled procreation and has no one to serve him, as above .. likewise in the matter of the minhag of each and every community, each individual in his home follows his community, and it is forbidden to hold a marriage there not according to the minhag of his community .. And because of mourning, though regarding him one could say that it is permitted in such a case, being no worse than individual mourning — nonetheless there is no heter for the relatives and the other invitees to participate in the celebration, as above; however, if only the chuppah will be on the day of Lag BaOmer, then regarding what pertains to his own rejoicing, it is permitted because of the mitzvah, as above; and regarding the relatives and invitees, one could say that with the chuppah alone, if he does not enter the house in which there is the mingling of groom and bride, but only under the chuppah, there is no prohibition, even in other mourning — see the responsum of the Riva (siman 20); and regarding the seudah held at night, if we say that part of the night suffices, as above (but this is not clear, as mentioned), then again there is no prohibition even for them; and as for "the matter does not augur well," there is none, if we say as above.'
> In practice, it appears that at a wedding held in a permitted manner according to the minhag of the groom, even a rav whose minhag is not to marry at this time may arrange the kiddushin, and it is permitted for the invitees to participate and to gladden the groom and bride8.
Notes:
1 Responsa, OC siman 142 ↩
2 Responsa, OC part 1, siman 159 ↩
3 OC part 2, siman 95 ↩
4 Responsa part 5, OC siman 38, and likewise in Chazon Ovadiah, Bein HaMetzarim, p. 153 ↩
5 Responsa part 2, siman 35 ↩
6 And see MiBeis HaLevi, booklet 3, Nissan 5753, p. 38. Responsa Shraga HaMeir part 6, siman 91:3, os 3. ↩
7 Responsa part 4, siman 84 ↩
8 And so ruled Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Halichos Shlomo, Moadim, Laws of Sefiras HaOmer 11:9, and in Shulchan Shlomo part 1, siman 271, note 19). And see also Ashrei HaIsh part 3, page 457. ↩
[ח] (Halacha 1075)
The Three Weeks and the Nine Days
Question: May one marry during the Three Weeks?
Answer: The Gemara in Tractate Yevamos1 states: 'We learned: [during] the week in which the Ninth of Av falls, it is forbidden to take a haircut and to launder, but on Thursday it is permitted, in honor of Shabbos; and it was taught: before this time, the people diminish their affairs — [refraining] from buying and selling, from building and planting; and one may betroth but not consummate the marriage, and one does not make an engagement seudah — when that [baraisa] was taught, it is [referring to] "before the before," [and Rashi explained: 'before the before — before the week in which the Ninth of Av falls, for there it is permitted to launder; but during the week, just as it is forbidden to launder, so too it is forbidden to betroth, and there is no kal vachomer.']'.
Therefore, according to this braisa it is permitted to betroth from Rosh Chodesh, but it is forbidden to make a betrothal seudah, [and further on the Gemara2 brings a braisa suggesting that this may be a dispute among the Tannaim: 'It is [a matter of] Tannaim, as it was taught: From Rosh Chodesh until the fast, the people reduce their business — from buying and selling, from building and planting, and from betrothing and marrying; during the week in which Tisha B'Av falls — it is forbidden to cut hair and to launder (and it is forbidden to betroth); and some say: the entire month is forbidden.' This implies that betrothal too is forbidden from Rosh Chodesh, except that R' Ashi explains that perhaps the intent is not to forbid the betrothal itself, but only the betrothal seudah, while marriage is forbidden even without a seudah. ['Perhaps it is making a betrothal seudah that is forbidden, but to betroth is perfectly permissible; if so, "from marrying" — to marry [should] also [be permitted]; [rather,] it is making a marriage seudah that is forbidden, but to marry is perfectly permissible? How can you compare — granted, a marriage without a seudah has joy, but a betrothal without a seudah, is there any joy?'.]
And in the Talmud Yerushalmi3 it states: 'Shmuel said: even on Tisha B'Av one may betroth, so that another does not precede him'.
And the Rambam4 wrote: 'It is permitted to betroth on any weekday, even on Tisha B'Av, whether by day or by night'.
Now, although the Gemara and the Rishonim speak of the Nine Days, Rabbeinu Meir HaMe'ili of Narbonne5 wrote: 'And so too one may say regarding the custom not to cut hair and not to marry a woman from the seventeenth of Tammuz until Tisha B'Av, that it is not fitting to treat it lightly'.
This minhag is also cited in Sefer HaMinhogim (Tyrnau)6: 'And one does not cut hair from the 17th of Tammuz until after Tisha B'Av. And there are those who do not eat meat [and do not] and drink wine [from the 17th of Tammuz] until Shabbos Nachamu. And one does not marry women'.
As a matter of halacha, the Mechaber7 wrote: 'And one does not marry women and one does not make a betrothal seudah, but to betroth without a seudah is permitted, and even on Tisha B'Av itself it is permitted to betroth, so that another does not precede him'.
And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And the custom is to be stringent not to marry from the 17th of Tammuz onward, until after Tisha B'Av'.
> Therefore, the Mechaber ruled according to the essential law of the Gemara that the prohibition of marriage applies only from Rosh Chodesh Av, while the Rema wrote that the custom is to be stringent already from the 17th of Tammuz.
However, we find that this minhag also spread among several Sephardic communities8, as written in the responsa Pri HaAdamah9 regarding the minhag of Izmir.
And so wrote the Ben Ish Chai10: 'Although by law marriage is forbidden only from Rosh Chodesh until Tisha B'Av, nonetheless the custom is to forbid from the 17th of Tammuz'.
But in Yabia Omer11 he wrote: 'As for what the Ben Ish Chai wrote, that the custom is to forbid making marriages from the 17th of Tammuz, I heard from the great Gaon R' Salman Chugi Aboudi [z"l], who was Av Beis Din in Baghdad, that the Gaon R' Yosef Chaim was not precise in this, and that the simple custom was to make marriages until Rosh Chodesh Av. End of quote'.
And so wrote Ohr L'Tzion12: 'It is permitted for Sephardim to marry a woman until Rosh Chodesh Av'. And he wrote in a note: 'And indeed there are Sephardic communities that had the custom to follow the Rema's opinion not to marry a woman from the 17th of Tammuz .. however the minhag of Eretz Yisrael is to marry a woman until Rosh Chodesh Av, as the Rav Pri HaAdamah wrote in Vol. 4 folio 8, and so is the minhag of Sephardim today. And it appears that one should not be stringent in our times, because it is an inauspicious matter (lo masmena milsa), as the Gaon R' Chaim Palaggi wrote in the sefer Moed L'Chol Chai siman 9 os 26 and other Acharonim; and even bnei Torah should not postpone the marriage on account of this reason, and because in our generation there is a concern of mishap in this, and one may come to grave sins, and there is in this [a matter of] rescue from sin. (And it would almost be possible to rule to marry even on Tisha B'Av if there is a concern that they will stumble in a prohibition'.
Question: Is it permitted to make a l'chaim for a shidduch during the Nine Days?
Answer: Some have the custom not to make shidduchin during these days, as the Shiyarei Knesses HaGedolah13 wrote on the words of the Rema above: 'And the custom is to be stringent not to marry a woman from the 17th of Tammuz onward until Tisha B'Av. Sefer HaMapah. And our custom is not to betroth and not to make a shidduch'14.
But the Magen Avraham15 [cited by the Mishnah Berurah16] wrote: 'So that another does not precede him. And for this reason it is permitted to make shidduchin. Nevertheless, it appears to me that it is forbidden to make a seudah, even without dancing and merrymaking, and it is not comparable to the seudah of a bris milah in which there is no joy at all, unlike here; and it appears to me that even on Shabbos it is forbidden to make [one], for the Gemara teaches that from Rosh Chodesh until the fast it is forbidden, and it is impossible that there be no Shabbos among them. However, that which is customary — to eat various preserves at the time of the writing of the tenaim — is not called a seudah; and it appears to me that it is forbidden to hold dancing and merrymaking from the 17th of Tammuz onward'.
> Therefore, we have seen that shidduchim with the recital of a l'chaim are permitted even during the Nine Days, but without a seudah and excessive joy. And by law it is permitted to betroth even on Tisha B'Av, while marriage is forbidden from Rosh Chodesh; but the minhag of Ashkenaz [and so too some Sephardic communities practiced] is not to make marriages from the 17th of Tammuz, [and in the next halacha we will see whether this applies also to one who has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation].
--------------
Notes:
1 43a ↩
2 Ibid. b ↩
3 Taanis 1:8, and 4:6 ↩
4 Hilchos Ishus 10:14 ↩
5 Sefer HaMe'oros, Taanis folio 310 ↩
6 The month of Tammuz ↩
7 Shulchan Aruch OC siman 551:2 ↩
8 And see also Moed L'Chol Chai siman 9 os 26. Sdei Chemed vol. 4, Asifas Dinim, Bein HaMetzarim siman 1 os 14 ↩
9 Vol. 4, 8b ↩
10 Shanah Alef, Devarim, os 4 ↩
11 Responsa vol. 6, OC siman 43 ↩
12 Responsa vol. 3, ch. 25 — laws of Bein HaMetzarim, os 1 ↩
13 Hagahos HaTur, OC siman 551 os 5 ↩
14 And see also Ben Ish Chai there, but see what is written in Yabia Omer there ↩
15 Siman 551 se'if katan 10 ↩
16 Ibid. se'if katan 16 ↩
[9] (Halacha 1076)
The Three Weeks and the Nine Days
We saw in the previous halacha that it is forbidden to make marriages from Rosh Chodesh Av, and many have the custom not to marry already from the 17th of Tammuz.
Question: Do this prohibition and minhag apply also to one who has not yet fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation, for whom marriage is a great mitzvah?
Answer: Regarding the fasts for rain, it is stated in the Gemara in Maseches Taanis1: 'We learned in a Mishnah: if these passed and they were not answered, one reduces business dealings, and building and planting, and betrothal and marriage'.
And the Rambam2 wrote: 'If these passed and they were not answered, one reduces business dealings and building of joy, such as painting and ornamentation, and planting of joy, such as varieties of myrtle and varieties of aromatic trees, and one reduces betrothal and marriage, unless one has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation'.
The Ran3 wrote: 'And Rabbeinu Hai Gaon wrote: since we equate building, plantings, betrothal, and marriage to business dealings — just as business dealings, [when] optional, are forbidden, that being of joy, so too building and planting, betrothal and marriage, [when] optional, are forbidden when of joy; but one who has no wedding house at all and has no wife and children — this is certainly a matter of mitzvah, and even though it is joy, it is permitted'.
And so wrote the Meiri4: 'The Geonim of Spain wrote that even these were only forbidden where there is no aspect of mitzvah in them, but if one had no wedding house and wishes to marry a woman, it is permitted to build him a wedding house; and likewise betrothals and marriages are permitted to one who has no wife or children'.
The Beis Yosef5 cited the Ran, and wrote: 'And although [the Ran] speaks with regard to when the public fasts have passed and they were not answered, it apparently implies that the same law applies from Rosh Chodesh until Tisha B'Av, for these two periods are like one another, and the fact that the custom is not to marry a woman at all, even one who has no wife and children, is because it is an inauspicious matter for them (lo masmena leihu milsa); and even though it might be possible [to say] that Rav Hai spoke only regarding when the public fasts passed and they were not answered, but from Rosh Chodesh until Tisha B'Av is more stringent and even one who has no wife and children is forbidden — whether because at this time his mourning is more stringent, or because it is a short period and is not comparable to when the public fasts passed and they were not answered, which is a much longer period — nevertheless, Tosafos in the first chapter of Megillah6 wrote regarding when the public fasts passed that it is more stringent than Tisha B'Av, on which one may betroth'.
As a matter of halacha, the Mechaber7 wrote: 'From Rosh Chodesh until the fast one reduces business dealings and building of joy, such as a wedding house for one's son or building of painting and ornamentation, and planting of joy, such as a royal shade-tree (avurnaki) that is planted for shade to shelter in its shade, or varieties of myrtle and varieties of aromatic trees; and if his wall was leaning to fall, even though it is of joy, it is permitted to build'.
And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And for the purpose of a mitzvah, all is permitted'.
Afterward, the Mechaber wrote: 'And one does not marry women and one does not make a betrothal seudah, but to betroth without a seudah is permitted, and even on Tisha B'Av itself it is permitted to betroth, so that another does not precede him'.
And the Rema wrote in a gloss: 'And the custom is to be stringent not to marry from the 17th of Tammuz onward, until after Tisha B'Av'.
> Therefore, the Mechaber did not mention in the Shulchan Aruch the leniency of marriage for the purpose of a mitzvah, while the Rema mentioned the leniency for the purpose of a mitzvah but wrote it before the part dealing with marriage, and concluded that the custom is to be stringent; and the commentators are divided in [understanding] their words, as follows:
The Bach8 [cited by his student, the Ateres Zekeinim9] wrote: 'And that which appears in perek HaCholetz that beforehand — that is, from Rosh Chodesh, before the week in which [Tisha B'Av] falls — one betroths but does not make a betrothal seudah, as Rabbeinu wrote at the beginning of this siman and as ruled in the Shulchan Aruch se'if 2, this is only where there is no aspect of mitzvah, such as one who has a wife and children, but for the purpose of a mitzvah it is permitted even in the week in which Tisha B'Av falls, as the Ran wrote; however, nowadays the custom is to forbid even one who has no wife and children'.
And in Olas Shabbos10 he wrote that the Mechaber was stringent and the Rema disagreed with him: 'And that which was written, "and for the purpose of a mitzvah etc." — one is compelled to explain that this refers to when one has not yet fulfilled procreation, and so the Rambam wrote in ch. 3 regarding the fast for rain, and this is his language: one reduces betrothal and marriage unless one has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation etc., and so it implies from the words of the Ran. And the reason the Rav [Rema] did not write in the language of dispute upon the words of the Mechaber, who stated stringently without qualification, is because nowadays we are stringent even if one has not yet fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation, and so the Bach concludes, see there'.
And so [it was written] regarding the view of the Mechaber in the Kaf HaChaim11: 'And if one has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation, by law it is permitted to make a marriage since it is a mitzvah, except that the custom is that even so one does not marry, because it is an inauspicious matter (lo masmeni milsa). Chayei Adam, klal 133 os 11. And this is according to what was written in the gloss, that for the purpose of a mitzvah all is permitted, and it is possible that the Shulchan Aruch does not hold this way, since he did not copy this into the Shulchan Aruch, and so it implies from the words of the Olas Shabbos os 1; and so the Shulchan Gavoah wrote in os 9 on the words of the aforementioned gloss, that from the plain [reading] of the poskim it does not imply this, but rather anything that has joy in it, even if it is for the purpose of a mitzvah, is forbidden, and so it is reasonable, see there'.
> Therefore, according to them, the Mechaber did not permit marriages during the Nine Days even for a groom who has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation, but the Rema permitted it by law, and noted that in practice the custom is to forbid, already from the 17th of Tammuz.
But on the other hand, the Aruch HaShulchan12 inferred the opposite, that even the Rema did not permit marriage for the purpose of a mitzvah: 'And Rabbeinu the Rema wrote that for the purpose of a mitzvah all is permitted, end of his words .. but from the words of Rabbeinu the Rema, who wrote this only regarding work and not regarding marriage, we may infer that marriage in any case is forbidden before Tisha B'Av, though perhaps for the reason that it is not a good sign, and indeed even from the 17th of Tammuz one does not marry; and according to this it is well understood that some prepare the garments of the groom and bride in these days, and likewise if the matter is compelled — to marry in these days — there is [room] to permit according to this, but in the week in which Tisha B'Av falls it is certainly forbidden'.
And some have written that the Mechaber too permits, as written in Yabia Omer13: 'And that which the Shulchan Gavoah (siman 551 se'if katan 9) wrote on the words of the aforementioned Ran, that from the plain [reading] of the poskim it does not imply so, but rather every [form of] joy is forbidden, and the House of our God is worthy for us to forgo on its account nine days from building and planting and betrothing — and the Kaf HaChaim relied on him and wrote that such is the view of Maran the Shulchan Aruch, who omitted the words of the Ran .. that the reason of Maran the Shulchan Aruch, siman 551, that he did not bring the distinction between whether one has fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation or not, is that he relied on what he wrote in the Beis Yosef, that it is an inauspicious matter for them (lo masmena leihu milsa) to marry in these days, and that is because the days of Av are days of calamity for all Israel and a national disaster for the entire people. And in truth, from the essential law he holds that it is permitted, like the view of the Gaon and the Ran and the Meiri, and so the Rema wrote in a gloss that for the purpose of a mitzvah all is permitted, and that means marriage too, as written in Chayei Adam; and only because it is an inauspicious matter did they have the custom to refrain from marriage from Rosh Chodesh Av onward, when one reduces joy'.
And the Mishnah Berurah14 wrote: 'And the custom is to be stringent not to marry etc. — that is, even one who has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation'15.
> Therefore, we have seen that the poskim are divided as to whether a person who has not fulfilled the mitzvah of procreation is permitted marriage during the Nine Days, and that in practice the custom is not to marry.
Notes:
1 12b ↩
2 Hilchos Taaniyos 3:8 ↩
3 Taanis 5b in the pages of the Rif ↩
4 Taanis 14b ↩
5 OC siman 551 ↩
6 5b s.v. Mema'atin ↩
7 OC siman 551:2 ↩
8 OC ibid. ↩
9 Ibid. se'if katan 3 ↩
10 Ibid. se'if katan 1 ↩
11 Ibid. se'if katan 33 ↩
12 Ibid. se'if 7 ↩
13 Vol. 6, OC siman 43 ↩
14 Ibid. se'if katan 18 ↩
15 And the Shaar HaTziyun wrote in se'if katan 25: 'Derech HaChaim; and from the Shulchan Aruch there is no proof for his ruling, and perhaps he found it in some place' ↩
[10] (Halacha 1077)
Friday
Question: Is there a problem with marrying on Friday?
Answer: The Gemara in Maseches Kesubos1 says regarding marriage on Motzaei Shabbos and Erev Shabbos: 'Mar said: either way, he should not consummate neither on Erev Shabbos nor on Motzaei Shabbos .. Rather, Rabbi Zeira said: it is a decree lest he slaughter a fowl [on Shabbos for the needs of Motzaei Shabbos, that he be preoccupied and forget that it is Shabbos. Rashi'] .. Now that you have arrived at this, Erev Shabbos too, it is a decree lest he slaughter a fowl'.
And in the Yerushalmi Taanis2 it is written: 'Rabbi Ba bar Kohen said before Rabbi Yasa [in the name of] R' Acha in the name of R' Yaakov bar Idi: it is forbidden to betroth a woman on Erev Shabbos — this that you say is [only] not to make a betrothal seudah, but to betroth, he may betroth'.
And the Rishonim are divided as to whether the aforementioned Gemara, which is concerned about desecration of Shabbos — 'lest he slaughter a fowl' — is halacha in practice, for the Rambam3 wrote: 'One does not marry women, neither on Erev Shabbos nor on Sunday, a decree lest one come to desecration of Shabbos in the preparation of the seudah, for the groom is preoccupied with his seudah'4.
That is, according to the Rambam this is the halacha in practice; however, the Rif5 wrote: 'They inquired: what is [the law regarding] consummating in the first instance on Shabbos? And the conclusion is: the halacha is that it is permitted to consummate in the first instance'.
And the Ran explained: 'The halacha is that it is permitted to consummate in the first instance on Shabbos, for there is no concern either for [the wound of] the opening or for a bruise, on account of the reasons stated in the Gemara. And from this we learn that we do not hold like that which was stated in the Gemara upon the braisa, which teaches "either way he should not consummate, neither on Erev Shabbos nor on Motzaei Shabbos," and they gave the reason "lest he slaughter a fowl" — that is, that out of his preoccupation he will forget that it is Shabbos and slaughter it — and since we conclude that it is permitted to consummate, evidently we are not concerned about a fowl; and this is the view of the Rif z"l, who did not mention at all in [his] Halachos the concern of a fowl, and therefore they had the custom to make seudos on Shabbos nights and on Motzaei Shabbos. And it is possible to reject [this] and say that when it is permitted to consummate in the first instance on Shabbos, that is where he had already brought her in beforehand, for it is at the time of entering the chuppah that we are concerned about a fowl, since then they make a seudah; and this is the view of the Rambam z"l, who wrote in ch. 10 of Hilchos Ishus: "but one does not marry women, neither on Erev Shabbos nor on Sunday, a decree lest one come to desecration of Shabbos in the preparation of the seudah," end [of quote]; and this is the opposite of our custom, that we are accustomed to bring in [the bride] on the sixth [day]; and the Ramban z"l wrote that that which they had the custom to bring in on the sixth [day] is an ignorant custom, except that they did not protest against them6; and so wrote the Rav R' Yosef HaLevi z"l, end [of quote]'.
The Ria"z7 wrote: 'Even when an unavoidable circumstance arose, he should not bring in [the bride] on Erev Shabbos from Mincha time onward, for he needs to eat the marriage seudah on Shabbos night. And likewise he should not bring in [the bride] on Motzaei Shabbos, lest he see some deficiency in his seudah and slaughter fowl and the like on Shabbos; and all the more so he should not bring in [the bride] on Shabbos itself, as explained in Kuntres HaRe'ayos in proof 5. But if he wishes to bring in [the bride] on Erev Shabbos at the beginning of the day with the intention of eating the marriage seudah on that same day, it is permitted'.
And the Mordechai8 wrote: 'However, now they bring in [the bride] on the sixth day, as we say further on: in a place where courts sit fixed every day, a woman is married on any day, and although one does not judge on Erev Shabbos, nevertheless they had the custom to marry a woman on Erev Shabbos, for we have no fixed courts, and therefore one should seat three [judges] and they judge before them; and moreover, because of the ordinance for the poor they had this custom; and in perek Naarah we read: alternatively, he handed her over on the eves of Shabbosos and on the eves of Yamim Tovim, and not like Maimon [the Rambam] at the end of the tenth chapter of Ishus'.
And so ruled the Rosh9: 'And it concludes: the halacha is that it is permitted to consummate on Shabbos, and we are not concerned lest he slaughter a fowl, and upon this we rely to make a seudah, whether on Shabbos or on Motzaei Shabbos'.
As a matter of halacha, the Mechaber10 wrote: 'Some say that one does not marry women, neither on Erev Shabbos nor on Sunday, a decree lest one come to desecration of Shabbos in the preparation of the seudah. And some permit. And so the custom has spread, to marry women on Erev Shabbos11, provided that he toils in the marriage seudah three days before the marriage'.
And in the Aruch HaShulchan12 he wrote: 'And nowadays the custom is not to be exacting even in this, and it appears to me the reason [is]: for [although] it is true that Chazal said thus — "the Sages were diligent for the welfare of the daughters of Israel, that he toil in the seudah three days" — this was all in their times, when the groom would make the seudah; but nowadays our custom is that the bride makes the seudah, [so] we are not concerned for desecration of Shabbos, for specifically regarding the groom are we concerned that he will wish to satisfy the bride by increasing the portions, since women are particular about this; but since the bride makes the seudah we are not concerned for desecration of Shabbos, for the groom is not particular about this. And so it is explained from the language of the Rambam, who concludes "for the groom is preoccupied with the seudah" — that is, since the groom is preoccupied with the seudah for her benefit, we are concerned for desecration of Shabbos; and according to this our custom is correct even according to the Rambam. Nevertheless, our eyes see that in the winter days it is very correct not to make a chuppah on Erev Shabbos, for the days are short and they delay the chuppah, but we have no power to protest'.
And indeed it was an accepted custom to hold weddings on Fridays13, [and therefore we find various halachos that the poskim wrote regarding chuppos held on Friday with respect to the seudah14, the candle-lighting of the women participating15, proper yichud before Shabbos16, and the musical instruments that were [played] on Shabbos night17]. And in the community of Krakow, in which the Rema served as rav, a wedding was planned for Friday, but in practice, due to a dispute over the dowry, the chuppah was delayed and was held in the evening after the onset of Shabbos [and the Rema elaborated in a responsum18 to explain his conduct]; and the Aruch HaShulchan19 wrote: 'And with Rabbeinu the Rema himself there was such an incident in Krakow when he was Av Beis Din, concerning an orphan girl, which extended about two hours into the night, and he himself arranged the kiddushin and the chuppah, as he wrote in [his] responsum, and the whole country reviled him; and he elaborated there to explain that great is human dignity and the distress of a groom and bride. And we have heard that from this incident they made an ordinance in Krakow not to hold any chuppah on Erev Shabbos, and it is a fine ordinance, for many mishaps come about through this and they come to desecration of Shabbos, and especially in the winter days when the days are short; and in every place where it is possible to institute so, their reward from Heaven is great, and in any event, even when it is impossible to institute so, the obligation is upon all who fear God to see to advance the chuppah as much as possible'.
And note the words of the Rebbe20 [on] Shabbos Parshas Teitzei, 14 Elul 5748: 'See Shulchan Aruch EH siman 64:3: "the custom has spread to marry women on Erev Shabbos"; and to note that several marriages among the Chabad Rebbeim were on Friday (Sefer HaSichos 5703 p. 153)'.
> Therefore, in practice it was a widespread custom among the Jewish people to marry even on Friday, and so too we find among our Rebbeim, our Nesi'im; however, [with] a wedding held on Friday one must be careful that there not result from it desecration of Shabbos21.
Notes:
1 4b - 5a ↩
2 1:8 ↩
3 Hilchos Ishus 10:14 ↩
4 See Hagahos Maimoniyos on the Rambam there, os mem. And the Aruch HaShulchan, EH siman 62:11, wrote: 'And in the Yerushalmi, beginning of Kesubos, it is explained that one does not marry women, neither on Erev Shabbos nor on Motzaei Shabbos, out of the honor of Shabbos, see there; and this is the source of the Rambam, and I wonder that they did not cite this, and it requires great study (tzarich iyun gadol)' ↩
5 Kesubos 2a ↩
6 And the Magid Mishneh on the Rambam there wrote: 'And nowadays in our places they had the custom to marry a woman on the sixth [day], and I do not know on what they relied in this, and certainly the claim of the Sages is fulfilled with them, that they come to desecration of Shabbos — whether [in matters] they cease on their own or [in] work [done] by a non-Jew' ↩
7 In [his] Piskei, Kesubos 1:1 os 9 ↩
8 Kesubos, remez 129. And see Hagahos Maimoniyos on the Rambam there, os mem, in the name of the Ravyah. Bartenura, Kesubos ch. 1 mishnah 1 ↩
9 Kesubos ch. 1 siman 10 ↩
10 Shulchan Aruch EH siman 64:3 ↩
11 And see also Toras HaShlamim siman 192 se'if katan 4 ↩
12 Cited above in note 4 ↩
13 See what is cited in the kuntres Shabbos Braileft, in the introduction, note 2. And see in the Magen Avraham, OC siman 546 se'if katan 4: *'And in our lands they had the custom to marry on Erev Shabbos close to nightfall'* ↩
14 See in the words of the Alter Rebbe, siman 249:6 ↩
15 The Alter Rebbe, siman 263:11 ↩
16 The Alter Rebbe, siman 339:8 ↩
17 The Alter Rebbe, siman 338:3 ↩
18 Responsa of the Rema, siman 125, and as he also ruled in siman 339:4, and see in halacha number 1066 ↩
19 OC siman 339:14 ↩
20 Toras Menachem vol. 4 p. 265 note 36 and in the footnote ↩
21 And see also the Mishnah Berurah siman 339 se'if katan 19: 'And therefore how very correct it is for one who has the ability, not to hold the marriage at all on Erev Shabbos, and especially close to nightfall, for even if the marriage be at its proper time, in any event several other mishaps branch out from this, as above.' And also today it is among the ordinances of the rabbis in Eretz Yisrael not to hold a chuppah on Friday afternoon. And see also in Tochachas Chaim (Palaggi), Parshas Bereishis, 14, 1 onward. And in his responsa Chaim V'Shalom vol. 2 siman 31 ↩
From the 'Shoneh Halacha' project — a daily halacha with reasons and sources
Link to the (silent) group: 'Shoneh Halacha — Chabad Minhogim'
Join the WhatsApp groupMarriage in the Second Half of the Month
[It shall be clarified - that as brought there, in our times it is fitting to advance the wedding and not delay it, due to setting the date in the second half of the month] (Halacha 1074)
> Setting the time of the wedding - the second half of the month.
Question: Does this minhag apply to all the months?
Answer: In this halacha we will go through the order of the months and see in which months they are particular about this:
Tishrei:
Even among those who follow this minhag, there are months in which they did not observe it, as the Aruch HaShulchan writes1: 'And there are months in which they have the custom not to be particular about this: in Elul, Tishrei, and Adar'.
But in the Sefer HaMinhagim2 it is written: 'It seems that also in the month of Tishrei our minhag is to hold a chuppah only in the first half of the month'.
Kislev:
In the Sefer HaMinhagim there it is written: 'And in place of holding a chuppah in the month of Cheshvan, it is held in the month of Kislev, also in the second half of the month of Kislev'.3
Adar and Elul:
We saw above the words of the Aruch HaShulchan that also in the month of Adar and Elul they are not particular about not marrying in the second half of the month.
And so writes the Sdei Chemed4 regarding the month of Adar and Elul: 'And some years ago, in a letter that my friend, the eminent rav near this country, sent me, namely the great rav Moharar Schneur Zalman Pinsker5 the Av Beis Din of Cherson, may his Maker protect and preserve him. I saw that he excluded from this rule (marriage during the time of the waning of the moon) the month of Adar and the month of Elul, for in both of them there is none who is concerned about the matter of the waning of the moon, and he testified that many times it happens that they marry women in the kallah of Adar, and in the kallah of Elul, even on the days of the waning: and he testified so in the name of the great rabbanim in large towns, and he, may his light shine, said that it appears to him that the reason they were lenient with them is because regarding the month of Adar it is said והחדש אשר נהפך להם מיגון לשמחה ומאבל ליו"ט ("and the month which was turned for them from sorrow to joy and from mourning to a yom tov"), and the whole month is implied, and when Adar enters one increases in joy, and a member of Israel who has a case in [court] etc. for his fortune is strong'.
In the continuation of his words the Sdei Chemed mentioned again and wrote: 'And behold the great rav R' Schneur Zalman, may his light shine, the Gaon Av Beis Din of Cherson, wrote to him to testify that he saw an actual case where in the months of Adar and Elul they marry throughout the whole month and even among the great rabbanim he saw that they are not particular about this, and the aforementioned great rav gave a sound reason that regarding the month of Adar it is said והחודש אשר נהפך להם מיגון לשמחה כו' ("and the month which was turned for them from sorrow to joy" etc.) and the conclusion of his words: hold this rule in your hand, all the minhogim of the chosson and of the kallah we learn from the giving of the Torah, end of the words of the great rav Moharar Sh.Z., may his light shine. And behold, even though the superiority of the months of Adar and Elul with regard to marriage during the days of the waning of the moon is not mentioned in the poskim, nevertheless the great rav Moharar Sh.Z., may his light shine, is trustworthy to us, and his words are words of reason and good sense.
And so it is written in the Sefer HaMinhagim there: 'In the month of Adar and likewise in the month of Elul the chuppah is held on all the days of the month'.
The month of Adar I:
Rav Gavriel Tziner, the author of the Nitei Gavriel, asked the Rebbe regarding what is written in the Sefer HaMinhagim whether the intention is also to the days of the month of Adar I, and the Rebbe answered him6: 'I have not heard this explicitly. And in my humble opinion - in our times, whoever advances the wedding according to the law of Moshe and Israel is praiseworthy. And especially after there have already been 'tenaim' (and even - a decision regarding this and the drawing-close that comes through it). And our Sages said that the completion of the 'souls in the body' also brings the son of Dovid, the true and complete redemption'.
And based on this he wrote in his sefer7 that also in Adar I one should hold marriages on all the days of the month.
Iyar:
They marry on Lag BaOmer even though it is in the second half of the month8 [but lechatchilah it is preferable on Lag BaOmer during the day, see Halacha number 1071].
> If so, we have seen that even for those who have the custom not to marry women in the second half of the month, in the month of Adar one may marry throughout the whole month, and likewise in the month of Adar I throughout all of it, and likewise in the month of Elul. (And likewise on Lag BaOmer)
Notes:
1 אהע"ז סי' סד סי"ג ↩
2 עמ' 76 ↩
3 להעיר שהב"ח בסי` תקעג כתב: '..אף בכ"ח בכסליו שהוא ג"כ אחד מן הימים שמתענין בהם ולא עדיף מר"ח ניסן ג"כ מתענה בו ביום חופתו והא דלא הזכירו הרב הוא לפי שאין רגילין לעשות נישואין בסוף החודש', נראה מדבריו שפשוט שבחודש כסלו גם נהוג לא לעשות בחציו השני ↩
4 ח"ו ע' א'רנו מערכת חתן וכלה אות כא ד"ה ולפני ↩
5 מחסידי הרבי הצ"צ והרבי מהר"ש והספיק להיות מאלו שהפצירו ברבי הרש"ב לקבל על עצמו את הנשיאות ↩
6 מענה מיום י' בשבט תשמ"ו, הובא בספרו נטע"ג נישואין ח"א פמ"ח הע' נא ↩
7 פמ"ח אות כב ↩
8 וראה הנישואין כהלכתם פ"ה הע' 167 ↩