Psak Reaction
I wrote that two weeks ago I ruled that the shul wouldn't say tachanun in reaction to the death of Arafat. While most of the congregation applauded the loss of tachanun, if not the loss of our enemy, there was some opposition. One member asked me for the sources of the halakha and I have spent the time since shoring up the halakhic support for the psak.
First of all, the Shulchan Arukh is very clear in Orech Chaim 575:11-13 that when we fast for rain, and the rain falls, we can say Hallel. Siman 576 then expands the need to fast to all difficult situations - including a feared enemy.
In any case, every shul Rav I've spoken to agrees that we have the power to suspend tachanun for a communal simcha, but that wasn't enough for the textually minded. Two poskim - one black, one white - ruled on the matter. Rav Nachum Rabinovich, the Rosh Yeshiva of Maale Adumim, agreed with my decision (said that I did the right thing) and said that since tachanun was a minhag, I as Maara d'Atra could make that decision.
Rav Ephraim Greenblatt (the famed Rivevot Ephraim, whom I know from Memphis) was less enthusiastic about my ruling but said that I had halakhic grounding, specifically the Chaya Adam, klal 155, siman 41.
Rav Greenblatt pointed out that people associate omitting tachanun with the death of a tzadik and thus my psak was difficult. I explained that the omission of tachanun is only with the yahrzeit of a tzadik - the death of a tzadik (according to the Shulchan Arukh) requires everyone who hears to tear kriah! However, the death of an enemy requires rejoicing and the yahrzeit is forgotten (because of the yimach-shemo stuff)
Since then, it was pointed out to me that there were those in Israel who ruled the same as I: see this story from (ugh) Arutz-7.
It's gratifying to know that my halakhic-intuition was on the mark.
First of all, the Shulchan Arukh is very clear in Orech Chaim 575:11-13 that when we fast for rain, and the rain falls, we can say Hallel. Siman 576 then expands the need to fast to all difficult situations - including a feared enemy.
In any case, every shul Rav I've spoken to agrees that we have the power to suspend tachanun for a communal simcha, but that wasn't enough for the textually minded. Two poskim - one black, one white - ruled on the matter. Rav Nachum Rabinovich, the Rosh Yeshiva of Maale Adumim, agreed with my decision (said that I did the right thing) and said that since tachanun was a minhag, I as Maara d'Atra could make that decision.
Rav Ephraim Greenblatt (the famed Rivevot Ephraim, whom I know from Memphis) was less enthusiastic about my ruling but said that I had halakhic grounding, specifically the Chaya Adam, klal 155, siman 41.
Rav Greenblatt pointed out that people associate omitting tachanun with the death of a tzadik and thus my psak was difficult. I explained that the omission of tachanun is only with the yahrzeit of a tzadik - the death of a tzadik (according to the Shulchan Arukh) requires everyone who hears to tear kriah! However, the death of an enemy requires rejoicing and the yahrzeit is forgotten (because of the yimach-shemo stuff)
Since then, it was pointed out to me that there were those in Israel who ruled the same as I: see this story from (ugh) Arutz-7.
It's gratifying to know that my halakhic-intuition was on the mark.
This entry was posted
on Wednesday, November 24, 2004 at 11/24/2004 05:17:00 PM.
» Post a Comment