(ו) מִקְדַּש מֶלֶךְ עִיר מְלוּכָה. קוּמִי צְאִי מִתּוךְ הַהֲפֵכָה.
רַב לָךְ שבֶת בְּעֵמֶק הַבָּכָא. וְהוּא יַחֲמול עָלַיִךְ חֶמְלָה.
Royal sanctuary, royal city, arise and go forth from your overturned state
Too long have you dwelt in the valley of tears; God will have compassion on you
How long is "too long" to sit in the "valley of tears?" Each of us has some experience working with people recovering from grief and loss - how do we advise them about this, or "diagnose" when they are suffering from "prolonged" grief?
(ה) הַקּוֹבֵר אֶת מֵתוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים קֹדֶם לָרֶגֶל, בָּטְלָה הֵימֶנּוּ גְּזֵרַת שִׁבְעָה. שְׁמֹנָה, בָּטְלָה הֵימֶנּוּ גְּזֵרַת שְׁלֹשִׁים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאָמְרוּ, שַׁבָּת עוֹלָה וְאֵינָהּ מַפְסֶקֶת, רְגָלִים מַפְסִיקִין וְאֵינָן עוֹלִין:
(5) One who buries his deceased relative three days before a pilgrimage Festival has the decree of the seven-day period of mourning, i.e., the halakhot and prohibitions associated with that period, nullified for him by the Festival. He is not required to complete this seven-day mourning period after the Festival. If one buries his deceased relative eight days before a pilgrimage Festival, then the decree of thirty days is nullified for him. The restrictions that ordinarily apply during this thirty-day mourning period no longer apply after the Festival. This is because the Sages said a principle with regard to this issue: Shabbat counts as one of the days of mourning, although one may not mourn on it and it does not interrupt the mourning period, which continues after Shabbat. The pilgrimage Festivals, on the other hand, interrupt the mourning period, so that if one began mourning before such a Festival, then the mourning period is canceled by the Festival. They do not, however, count. If one did not begin mourning before the Festival, or if his relative died during the Festival, then he is required to complete his mourning period afterward, as the days of the Festival do not count toward the requisite days of mourning.
- Why does the mourner count the days?
- What is the meaning of counting Shabbat (the Sabbath) but not mourning on that day?
- Why do the pilgrimage festivals cancel, rather than suspend, the mourning?
(טז) שָׁל֣וֹשׁ פְּעָמִ֣ים ׀ בַּשָּׁנָ֡ה יֵרָאֶ֨ה כׇל־זְכוּרְךָ֜ אֶת־פְּנֵ֣י ׀ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֶ֗יךָ בַּמָּקוֹם֙ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִבְחָ֔ר בְּחַ֧ג הַמַּצּ֛וֹת וּבְחַ֥ג הַשָּׁבֻע֖וֹת וּבְחַ֣ג הַסֻּכּ֑וֹת וְלֹ֧א יֵרָאֶ֛ה אֶת־פְּנֵ֥י יְהֹוָ֖ה רֵיקָֽם׃
Who is included in this cancellation or suspension of mourning?
הָרַחֲמָן הוּא יִשְׁלַח לָֽנוּ אֶת־אֵלִיָּֽהוּ הַנָּבִיא זָכוּר לַטּוֹב, וִיבַשֶּׂר־לָֽנוּ בְּשׂוֹרוֹת טוֹבוֹת יְשׁוּעוֹת וְנֶחָמוֹת:
How does the meaning of the "appear before God" passage change with this alternate meaning of zakhur as "remembered" instead of "male?"
With the best of lambs,
And rams of Bashan, and he-goats;
With the very finest wheat—
And foaming grape-blood was your drink.
(15) So Jeshurun grew fat and kicked—
You grew fat and gross and coarse —
They forsook the God who made them
And spurned the Rock of their support.
How does our behavior toward the Divine change when we are satisfied with our lot compared to when we are in need? What is the antidote to this change?
(א) דיני אבלות ברגל בראש השנה וי"ט שני של גליות. ובו י"ד סעיפים:
הקובר מתו קודם הרגל בענין שחל עליו אבילות ונהג בו אפילו שעה אחת קודם הרגל הרגל מפסיק האבלות ומבטל ממנו גזרת שבעה וימי הרגל עולים לו למנין שלשים הרי שבעה לפני הרגל וימי הרגל ומשלים עליהם השלשים ודוקא שנהג אבלות באותה שעה אפילו לא נהג אלא דברים שבצינעא כגון ששמע שמועה קרובה ביום שבת שחל להיות בערב הרגל שאע"פ שאינו נוהג אלא דברים שבצינעא הרגל מפסיק אבל אם שגג (או) הזיד ולא נהג אבלות או שהיה קרוב לחשכה ולא היה יכול לנהוג אין הרגל מבטל האבלות וכ"ש אם לא ידע במיתת המת קודם הרגל שאין הרגל מבטלו אלא נוהג ברגל דברים שבצינעא ומונה שבעה אחר הרגל ובאותם השבעה מלאכתו נעשית ע"י אחרים ועבדיו ושפחותיו עושים בצינעה בתוך ביתו דכיון דכבר נתבטל בשבעת ימי הרגל ממלאכה אע"פ שלא נתבטל מחמת האבל אלא מחמת הרגל סוף סוף נהג בדין אבילות בענין מלאכה הילכך אין להחמיר בו כמו בשאר אבילות ומלאכתו נעשית ע"י אחרים וכל ימי הרגל רבים מתעסקים בו לנחמו הילכך אין מתעסקין בו לנחמו אחר הרגל ורגל עולה למנין שלשים שהרי דין שלשים דהיינו גיהוץ ותספורת נוהגים ברגל ולא מתורת רגל בלבד אסור בהם אלא אף מתורת אבל שהרי מתורת הרגל מותר ללבוש כלים מגוהצים חדשים ולבנים ונוטל צפרניו במספרים ושמח שמחת מריעות והבא ממדינת הים ומבית השביה והשאר שמנו חכמים מותרין לספר ולכבס. ומדין אבילות אסור בכלם כמו בחול:
(1) One who buries his dead before a Festival in a case where mourning takes effect upon him, and he observed [mourning rites] accordingly even one hour prior to the [advent of] the Festival, — [the law is that] the Festival interrupts the mourning and annuls for him the restrictions of the seven [days of mourning], and the Festival days are included for him in the counting of the thirty [days of mourning]; hence, there are seven [days] before the Festival and [in addition] the days of the Festival [proper], after which he completes the thirty [days]. This rule applies provided that he observed mourning rites at that moment, even if he observed only matters pertaining to private [mourning], e.g., [even if] he received near tidings on the Sabbath day which fell on the eve of the Festival, — [the law is that] although he observes [on the Sabbath] only matters pertaining to private mourning, the Festival interrupts [the seven and thirty days of mourning]. However, if inadvertently or wilfully he did not observe mourning [prior to the Festival], or it was close to nightfall, and [consequently], he was not able to observe [mourning rites], the Festival does not interrupt the mourning. And much more so if he was unaware of the person's death prior to the Festival, — [the law is] that the Festival does not interrupt [the mourning rites] save that he observes during the Festival matters pertaining to private [mourning] and [begins to] count the seven days [of mourning] after the Festival, and during those seven days his work is done [for him] by others, and his male and female servants do [work] privately indoors, for since he has already been suspended from work during the seven days of the Festival, although he was not suspended [from work] on account of the mourning, but [rather] because of the Festival, — yet, after all, [the fact is that] he [automatically] observed the law [similar to that] of mourning with respect to work [during mourning], — hence, we do not adopt any stringency in this matter as in the case of other mourning, and his work may be done [for him] by others; and throughout the Festival days the public busies itself with him to offer him comfort; hence, they do not busy themselves with him to offer him comfort after the Festival. However, the Festival enters into the counting of the thirty [days], for the law of thirty, viz., [with respect to the prohibition against] laundry work and hair-cutting, applies to the Festival [as well], and not only on account of the legal status of the Festival is he forbidden [to do] those things, but also because of the law of mourning, — for as far as the legal status of the Festival is concerned, he is permitted to put on new white laundried garments and he may cut his nails with a scissors [on Hol ha-Moed], and may rejoice at social gatherings, and [likewise] one arriving from beyond the sea or coming out of captivity and the others whom the Sages enumerated and permitted to cut the hair and to wash garments [on Hol ha-Moed], but with respect to the law of mourning one is prohibited against doing all these things as on a weekday.
Karo (pronounced Car-oh, not like the corn syrup) explains the nullification of mourning by the arrival of the festival, but does he really explain why we don't pick up where we left off afterward, the way we do with Shabbat?
(א) הַכֹּל חַיָּבִין בָּרְאִיָּה, חוּץ מֵחֵרֵשׁ, שׁוֹטֶה וְקָטָן, וְטֻמְטוּם, וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס, וְנָשִׁים, וַעֲבָדִים שֶׁאֵינָם מְשֻׁחְרָרִים, הַחִגֵּר, וְהַסּוּמָא, וְהַחוֹלֶה, וְהַזָּקֵן, וּמִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לַעֲלוֹת בְּרַגְלָיו. אֵיזֶהוּ קָטָן, כֹּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לִרְכּוֹב עַל כְּתֵפָיו שֶׁל אָבִיו וְלַעֲלוֹת מִירוּשָׁלַיִם לְהַר הַבַּיִת, דִּבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמַּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, כֹּל שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לֶאֱחֹז בְּיָדוֹ שֶׁל אָבִיו וְלַעֲלוֹת מִירוּשָׁלַיִם לְהַר הַבַּיִת, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמות כג) שָׁלֹשׁ רְגָלִים:
(1) All are obligated on the three pilgrim Festivals in the mitzva of appearance, i.e., to appear in the Temple as well as to sacrifice an offering, except for a deaf-mute, an imbecile, and a minor; and a tumtum, and a hermaphrodite, and women, and slaves who are not emancipated; and the lame, and the blind, and the sick, and the old, and one who is unable to ascend to Jerusalem on his own legs. Who has the status of a minor with regard to this halakha? Any child who is unable to ride on his father’s shoulders and ascend from Jerusalem to the Temple Mount; this is the statement of Beit Shammai. And Beit Hillel say: Any child who is unable to hold his father’s hand and ascend on foot from Jerusalem to the Temple Mount, as it is stated: “Three times [regalim]” (Exodus 23:14). Since the term for feet is raglayim, Beit Hillel infer from here that the obligation to ascend involves the use of one’s legs.
This source builds on the original translation of zakhur that we saw above, emphasizing masculinity, rather than memory. How might the ruling change if we went by the other definition?
In an empty howling waste.
[God] engirded them, watched over them,
Guarded them as the pupil of God’s eye.
(11) Like an eagle who rouses its nestlings,
Gliding down to its young,
So did [God] spread wings and take them,
Bear them along on pinions;
(12) יהוה alone did guide them,
No alien god alongside.
(13) [God] set them atop the highlands,
To feast on the yield of the earth;
Nursing them with honey from the crag,
And oil from the flinty rock,
(ב) כָּל הַנִּכְנָסִין לְהַר הַבַּיִת נִכְנָסִין דֶּרֶךְ יָמִין וּמַקִּיפִין וְיוֹצְאִין דֶּרֶךְ שְׂמֹאל, חוּץ מִמִּי שֶׁאֵרְעוֹ דָבָר, שֶׁהוּא מַקִּיף לִשְׂמֹאל. מַה לְּךָ מַקִּיף לִשְׂמֹאל, שֶׁאֲנִי אָבֵל, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יְנַחֲמֶךָּ. שֶׁאֲנִי מְנֻדֶּה, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבָּם וִיקָרְבוּךָ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. אָמַר לוֹ רַבִּי יוֹסֵי, עֲשִׂיתָן כְּאִלּוּ עָבְרוּ עָלָיו אֶת הַדִּין. אֶלָּא, הַשּׁוֹכֵן בַּבַּיִת הַזֶּה יִתֵּן בְּלִבְּךָ וְתִשְׁמַע לְדִבְרֵי חֲבֵרֶיךָ וִיקָרְבוּךָ:
(2) All who entered the Temple Mount entered by the right and went round [to the right] and went out by the left, save for one to whom something had happened, who entered and went round to the left. [He was asked]: “Why do you go round to the left?” [If he answered] “Because I am a mourner,” [they said to him], “May He who dwells in this house comfort you.” [If he answered] “Because I am excommunicated” [they said]: “May He who dwells in this house inspire them to draw you near again,” the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose to him: you make it seem as if they treated him unjustly. Rather [they should say]: “May He who dwells in this house inspire you to listen to the words of your colleagues so that they may draw you near again.”
What do the last two texts contibute to our understanding of who may participate in the festival? What do they tell us about why these festivals were important enough to supersede mourning?
- If the festivals are important enough to require someone to move on from their current level of grief, are there other events in life that are similarly compelling?
- How do we know which ones meet that standard?
- How long must someone have mourned before that takes effect (see Karo's suggestion that even observing an hour of shiva counts as having completed that stage before the festival)?
- What is the long-term effect of this early progression through the phases of mourning on a person's ability to find closure?
- How do our current professional and societal norms, institutional policies, and clinical practices reflect or ignore the teachings we've shared here today?
- Would it be possible to study this in concrete, data-driven terms that would allow us to measure the benefits and harms of interrupted grieving vs. prolonged grieving?