The gaon R' Avrohom Grodzinsky zt'l, the menahel
ruchani of Yeshivas Slobodke in Lithuania, once visited
relatives in Warsaw. In the middle of talking to them R'
Avrohom abruptly looked at his watch. After noticing the
time, he suddenly started singing and then dancing. He did
this for a whole hour while his family was simply
flabbergasted, unable to unravel the riddle behind this
apparently out-of-place simcha.
When R' Avrohom finally sat down he explained: "Right now the
chasuna of a Slobodke talmid is taking place. I
cannot make him happy, because I am far away from the
wedding, but I can enjoy his simcha here, since it is
my simcha too" (cited in Toras Avrohom, pg.
13).
An act that can be strictly defined as "sharing his fellow's
yoke" ("Nosei be'ol chaveiro -- Ovos 6:6) is not a
mitzvah bein odom lechavero but rather an obligation
of a Jew towards Hashem (bein odom lamokom). We must
"feel" another person's feelings even when that person does
not know anything of it.
Another anecdote. This time about R' Simcha Zissel, the Alter
of Kelm zt'l. The Alter's face would always shine on
Shabbos Kodesh with the splendor of kedushas
Shabbos. One Shabbos his talmidim noticed that his
countenance was just as it was during the week -- the luster
of Shabbos was completely absent from his face from Shabbos
night until motzei Shabbos. After havdoloh the
Alter zt'l sighed and said: "Peretz Smolenskin [one of
the `enlightened' Jews of that generation, who was famous for
his blind hatred for Torah and its students] has died. Who
can imagine, who can comprehend, the suffering of his
neshomoh when it comes to the World of Truth and is
judged?" (Cited in Alei Shur, II, pg. 210, in the name
of R' Yeruchom zt'l).
This story illustrates to us to what degree we must share
another person's suffering -- even for a rosho who is
being punished. The Ramban writes (Bereishis 18:19)
that when Avrohom Ovinu heard from HaKodosh Boruch Hu
about the punishment of the Sodomites he beseeched Hashem to
save them. The Midrash (Bereishis Rabbah 49:40)
explicitly writes that from Noach until Avrohom there were
ten generations, "and with none of them did I speak except
with you." This is all because Avrohom sacrificed himself for
the sake of the Sodomites. (HaRav Yechezkel Levenstein
zt'l writes about this at length in Or Yechezkel,
Middos, pg. 104.)
Tachanun is Not Said When a Chosson is in Shul
We find something extraordinary in Hilchos Nefilas
Apayim. The Shulchan Oruch (131:4) rules that we
do not say tachanun in a shul where there is a
chosson. The Mishnah Berurah (par. 23) writes:
"Since it is a mitzvah to rejoice with him, the simcha
extends to all those who accompany him."
Let us picture for ourselves an enormous shul
containing thousands of people, and one of the thousands
happens to be a chosson within the seven days of
sheva brochos. For this one and only person,
tachanun is deferred for the whole mass of people
davening there. The Be'eir Heiteiv (131:11)
cites the reason: "Since the chosson is important, the
whole kohol follows him." The above-mentioned
Mishnah Berurah explains the halachic rationale
differently: Because of the mitzvah to rejoice with
the chosson, the simcha encompasses
everyone.
In a similar vein the gaon HaRav Moshe Mordechai
Epstein zt'l, the rosh yeshiva of Yeshivas
Hebron in Yerushalayim, writes in the introduction to his
sefer the Levush Mordechai on Bovo Kama:
"Since the chosson is in the shul it is a
yom tov for the entire holy congregation there at that
time. How can they bring grief upon themselves when they
should be rejoicing? Since it is a Jewish obligation to
rejoice in the simcha of a Jewish brother, when
someone celebrates, others must, in his presence, join him
too . . . Even when there are thousands in the beis
hamedrash, the tachanun and hazkoras
neshomos of all those davening there is suspended
for one chosson since it is a yom tov of the
whole community." (HaRav M. M. Epstein zt'l explains
there why, when yizkor is said, all those who do not
need to say it leave the shul).
HaRav Arye Leib Baron cites (Mesamchei Lev, chap. 44)
what he once heard in a drosho from R' Elchonon
Wassermann zt'l on the occasion of a Mirrer Yeshiva
talmid's wedding. Rav Huna (Brochos 6b) speaks
about "everyone who enjoys the wedding feast of a
chosson and does not gladden him . . . " What does
"everyone" include? It includes even an eminent person, who
is also obligated to make the chosson happy. The
chidush is that we do not say that because of the
chosson's delight in the participation of that eminent
person in his wedding, his obligation of making the
chosson happy is already fulfilled, although we rule
that way about kiddushin (Kiddushin 7a,
regarding an eminent person's receiving a present being
considered as if he has actively given the kesef
kiddushin).
This again shows that the mitzvah to rejoice together with
the chosson (wherein each person has his own
obligation to rejoice) is a mitzvah with regard to one's
personal commitment to Hashem. Therefore it would not help if
the chosson is delighted with that person coming to
his wedding. That would be sufficient if the obligation were
merely to make the chosson happy. But since the
important person must also be happy, this being his
simcha too, he must take an active part in the
simcha. (The Tzlach (Brochos 47b) writes,
"Simchas chosson is considered a mitzvah
derabim since everyone is happy together with him and it
is one mitzvah of simchas nisu'in." I was zoche
to show this comment of the Tzlach to Maran the Kehillas
Yaakov zt'l.)
Accordingly, if we do not say tachanun when there is a
chosson in the shul, besides the Be'eir
Heiteiv's pshat that this is because the whole community
follows the chosson and that they are doing it for the
chosson and for his benefit, we can now say a further
reason: that the simcha is relevant to everyone and it
is a yom tov for the whole community. They are not
saying tachanun because their own obligation to be in
simcha does not allow them to say it. And on this
basis we have a new understanding of what it is to be
"nosei be'ol chaveiro."
Sharing the Yoke of a Niftar
Maran R' Yechezkel Levenstein zt'l would regularly
stress the importance of sharing the yoke of a niftar.
Doing so is included in the mitzvah of gemilus chesed shel
emes.
Or Yechezkel (Middos, pg. 105) cites what the
Alter of Kelm zt'l was accustomed to say: that the
whole significance of aveilus is sharing the yoke of
the departed person, to make his burden lighter. This is why
the Torah was so stringent about the duties of mourning
during the shiva and the sheloshim.
After the petirah of HaRav Arye Lipshitz zt'l,
the mashgiach demanded: "We should reflect about
how we are acting. Do we feel that we are sharing the yoke of
the niftar z'l? Not doing so shows the quality of
cruelty within us. Only at a person's death do we feel a
little sorrow, and even this stems from what the Chovos
HaLevovos writes: that because of man's nature it is hard
for him to listen to sorrows. At that time a person awakens
and can even cry. That is, however, something external -- the
trait of cruelty still remains within a person. A few days
later he reverts to the way he used to act.
"The true baal chesed does not rest. Shmuel continued
to mourn his whole life, for his sorrow did not just
disappear after a day or two. The eventual fading of anguish
shows that even one's initial grief was not a true sharing of
our fellow's yoke, which should have especially been so in a
case of a true ben Torah's misfortune, one who died in
such a strange way. This surely should have stimulated us.
This is surely so since the niftar must report all he
did during his life. It is not at all easy for a deceased
person to reach his proper rest. When a person shares the
yoke with the niftar he makes his punishment lighter.
A person must think about this during the aveilus --
that he wants to make somewhat lighter the suffering and
punishments that are happening to the niftar."
The Mashgiach zt'l adds that from Chazal's teaching
(cited in Reishis Chochmah) we see to what degree we
must share the yoke of the departed. "It happened that when
R' Akiva was in the cemetery he met a [departed] person . . .
He said to him: `My son! Did you hear whether you have a way
to ameliorate your condition?' He said: `I heard that if I
have a son who stands before the public and says "Borechu es
Hashem hamevoroch" that would save me from retribution.' R'
Akiva had great anguish . . . and fasted forty days that [the
son] might study Torah . .. A Bas Kol descended and
asked: `Are you fasting for this person?' He answered
`Yes.' " This is an example of sharing the yoke of the
niftar. R' Akiva went from town to town, from country
to country, to be mezakeh the niftar although
he was a complete rosho -- a person about whom the
Bas Kol questioned why R. Akiva was fasting for him.
This is all included in `you shall love your brother like
yourself' (Vayikro 18:19). [Chazal explained that this
is the end of all men, and a person should help his brethren
to prevent himself from eventual sorrow.] If we possess the
attribute of rachmonus we will arouse ourselves and
think how to make nachas ruach for our niftar,
each one according to his capability, by studying
Mishnayos and the like.
In the continuation of the shmuess the Mashgiach
pointed out that we are all advised to "share one another's
yoke" by thinking when saying the Tehillim that we say
at length in the yeshiva after davening, that we
really want the sick person to return to good health and are
praying to Hashem for it. By continuing to think in such a
way the level of "sharing another's yoke" will be ingrained
in our souls.
Gedolei Yisroel Who Shared the Public's Yoke
The gaon, the Divrei Chaim zt'l, the son-in-law
of R' Boruch Te'omim-Frankel the author of the Boruch
Taam, related the following incident: Once the city's
mikveh attendant became seriously ill, and his
sickness lingered without any letup in sight. His hope of
recovery was bleak. R' Boruch was moved by the man's
hardship. At that time he walked by the house's kitchen and
he found his daughter chattering and laughing with the family
housemaid. The Boruch Taam shuddered and cried out in horror:
"The mikveh attendant is on his deathbed and you are
laughing? Don't you feel the pain of a sick person?"
A rich person visited R' Boruch with the aim of marrying one
of his children. When he saw R' Boruch's great depression he
asked what the reason was. After hearing why he was
astounded. "Why does the Rav need to be so grief-stricken
over the sickness of such a simple person?" the wealthy
person asked. After the Boruch Taam heard that reaction he
refused to have that person marry into his family. Even if he
was a respectable person his heart lacked a feeling of pity
for people (Margenisa DeRav, the biography of R'
Boruch Taam).
The next story happened in Kovno: A woman whose son had been
kidnapped came on Shabbos to the shul where R' Yisroel
of Salant zt'l davened, stopped the prayers, and did
not allow them to read the Torah. Some people tried to push
her away from the aron kodesh so that they could take
out the sefer Torah, but R' Yisroel came to the
woman's aid. He was enraged and rebuked those people harshly
for having hearts of stone and not feeling the sorrow of
others. Some say that after they took out the sefer
Torah R' Yisroel left the shul and finished his
tefilla privately -- without a minyan. R'
Yisroel said that tefilla at that time in the
shul was forbidden! (Tenuas HaMussar, pg. 502,
cited in Me'oros HaGedolim, pg. 40).
In The Chofetz Chaim -- His Life and Achievements (pg.
390) is told how the Chofetz Chaim it acted during World War
I (in the year 5674-1914): "When we reflected about how the
Chofetz Chaim conducted himself during those years we
understood the full significance of what Chazal write, `A
tzaddik is the heart of the world.' His countenance,
which in the past had been full of vivacity, suddenly became
old and on its wrinkles were riveted the full measure of the
world's pain. Everything he said or did was permeated with
sorrow and his body was like one large heart that felt the
anguish and suffering of the people . . . here Jews were sent
away from their homes, there they were hanged or shot, the
elderly and children were killed cruelly, conditions were
terrible, truly unbearable. The heart was wrung and dripped
blood.
"One night the Chofetz Chaim's wife woke up and to her
immense astonishment she discerned that her husband was not
sleeping in his bed. She immediately hastened to search for
him and found him sleeping on a bench with his hands
underneath his head. The Chofetz Chaim answered her question
why he had left his soft bed and went to sleep on the hard
bench: "When our Jewish brethren who are refugees are roaming
in the streets and are tormented with hunger and cold, when
our young children are at the front and death hovers over
them, how can I enjoy the pleasure of sleeping on my bed in
peace and comfort?' "
About Maran HaRav Chaim Soloveitchik zt'l is told in
Marbitzei Torah VeMussar (I, pg. 117) the following:
Anyone who did not see his efforts and his personal
involvement for the sake of the Jews of Brisk after the great
fire in the year 5655 (1875) never saw pity in his life. R'
Chaim did not rest during the day nor during the night. He
invested all his power into rehabilitating the families whose
homes were burnt down. After the fire he did not sleep in his
house. He went to the old shul's sloping corridor and
slept there on the floor. All of his family's entreaties that
he should rest at home on his bed were in vain. "I cannot
sleep on a bed," he answered, "when there are so many Jews
without a roof over their heads."
About R' Boruch Ber Lebovitz, the author of Bircas
Shmuel, it is narrated that after Hitler ym'sh
took control of the German government and bitter news
about the developing fate of the Jews began to arrive, he
stopped listening to the news. When asked why he was doing so
at a time when the condition was so grave, and that now one
should certainly listen to the news, he answered: "When I
hear of the misfortunes plaguing the Jews I share the sorrow
of those who are suffering. Since I cannot help them I am
doubtful if I am fulfilling my obligation to them. It is
therefore preferable that I should not hear at all about what
is happening" (cited in Taam Vodaas, parshas
Shemos).
This article was written le'ilui nishmas my father
R' Moshe Yitzchok Aharon ben R' Alter Yehuda
zt'l.
