Mourning an Adoptive Parent
June 24, 2008 Continuing last week’s theme related to conversion, this morning we studied a question that came to Kollel Eretz Hemdah from New York. The questioner wrote that he had been approached by a former student who discussed the situation of his father, who was critically ill and not excepted to recover. The man who was ill was not the young man’s biological father, but rather his adoptive father. The young man had been adopted, and converted to Judaism, as an infant. He sees his adoptive father as his father in every sense of the term, and it disturbs him that he would not mourn his father as a true son would. The questioner told the young man that Rav Soloveitchik (1903-93) advised adopted children to observe a voluntary mourning process for their adoptive parents.
The questioner added that he felt it difficult, however, to exempt the young man from positive commandments during the period of aninut, between the father’s death and burial. The young man argued that he should have the laws of an onen (i.e., a mourner during the period of aninut), because (i) the father would be in the category of a meit mitzvah, where there is no one else to bury him and the son is obligated to care for his burial above all other mitzvot, (ii) the son would inherit from the father, and (iii) the father is in the category of a rav muvhak (primary teacher) because, though he was not a scholar, he taught the son mitzvot and fear of heaven, and everything else that the son learned flowed from this. The response was divided into three parts. (1) The questioner should encourage the young man to observer the laws of mourning, except that he should not refrain from studying Torah as a manifestation of such mourning. Footnote 1: That the young man may mourn for his adoptive father is supported, according to R. Moshe Sternbuch, by the story of Rabban Gamliel accepting consolation upon the death of his outstanding servant, Tevi (Berachot 37b), who was not his relative or even Jewish, but beloved as a son. A fortiori, the principle should apply where the adoptive father raised the young man as a son. What is more, the Nishmat Avraham wrote that it is permissible to sit shiva for adoptive parents as a form of hakarot hatov (gratitude), even though the child is not obligated from the Biblical standpoint of kibud av va’em (honoring one’s parents). Footnote 2: The Nishmat Avraham cited Rabbi Akiva Eiger (1761-1837) as ruling that one who takes voluntary mourning upon himself should not refrain from the study of Torah or relations with his wife on the night that she goes to the mikvah. (2) The young man should say Kaddish for his adoptive parents. Footnote 3: The Nishmat Avraham cited Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (1910-95) to this effect. The Chasam Sofer (1762-1839) ruled, however, that he should not say Kaddish to the expense of actual mourners (e.g., in a circumstance where a synagogue permits only one mourner to recite each Kaddish), and Rabbi Kermaier added that, presumably, the young man would not be permitted to displace an actual mourner from davening for the amud. (3) The young man is not exempt from putting on tefillin during the period before burial, but he should put on tefillin privately. Footnote 4: The teshuva cites Rav Sternbuch and Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach. That the young man learned from his adoptive father (the rav muvhak argument) does not exempt him from mitzvot, as demonstrated by the Shulchan Aruch. Footnote 5: The teshuva again cites Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach for the proposition that tefillin should be put on privately. The teshuva concludes with the prayer that the adoptive father will be healed and the discussion of mourning academic.
|
