This past Sunday, Kikar Shabbat and the Yeshiva World reported that the Prime Minister of Israel was not allowed to eulogize Rav Ovadiah Yoseph zt”l at the funeral. A number of readers of the article questioned whether this was halachically appropriate – to deny the Prime Minister of Israel the opportunity to eulogize this great sage. So, the question is: Are there halachic criterion for who may or may not eulogize, and if there are – what are the parameters for any exceptions to this rule?
CRITERION FOR THE EULOGIZER
In Moed Kattan (25a) we find that Rav Ashi made inquiries regarding his own eulogy arrangements (Bar Kipuk and Bar Abin were the eulogizers) prior to his death, and was unsatisfied. This indicates that there certainly are requirements and criterion for who may eulogize. This is particularly true for a Torah sage.
PURPOSE OF THE EULOGY
In general, however, it might be a good idea to understand the nature and purpose of a eulogy. The Yaaros Dvash explains that the essential purpose of a hesped is to say things that awaken us to both repent and achieve greater fear of Heaven (Drush 12 of Volume I). Indeed, when the Hesped causes us to do a decidedly complete Teshuva – it then allows the death of the righteous Tzaddik to achieve atonement for us (Drush 4 Vol. I).
Another purpose is to make us realize that the earlier sages have now gone and we must extend ourselves to provide for other Torah scholars who have not reached the level of the previous scholars – so that they can reach this level – so that the people of Israel not be bereft and orphaned of scholars and sages (Drush 4 vol. I).
The spirit of the deceased binds itself to the soul of those left in the world – but only if their hearts are opened in sincere Teshuvah brought about by the eulogy of that sage. (Drush 7 vol. I).
Finally, the Talmud (Brachos 6b) states that the essential reward of the eulogizer lay in his ability to cause the listeners to genuinely cry. The clear implication is that they will thus be able to open the gates of heaven in Teshuvah.
PUNISHMENT FOR NOT EULOGIZING CORRECTLY
It is now understood why in tractate Shabbos (105b) we find Rav Yehudah saying in the name of Rav that if someone is not alacritous while delivering a eulogy for a sage – he should be buried alive. The Mahari explains that the Gemorah did not simply state “if someone is not alacritous in eulogizing a sage” because the eulogizer has to do Teshuvah while he is in the midst of delivering the eulogy itself.
HALACHIC REQUIREMENTS
The Yaaros Dvash (YD 344) explains that any non-relative who is delivering the eulogy must be a Tzaddik a righteous individual in and of himself. Presumably, to fit this criterion – he must at least be Sabbath observant.
The Meshech Chochma as well explains that the person delivering the eulogy must know the essence of the person – his history and what the deceased was about. Otherwise, he will be in danger of minimizing the life of the individual which is a terrible bizayon – an act of disrespect to the deceased.
The overwhelming consensus of Poskim write that if these parameters are not adhered to – a grave danger exists for the eulogizer.
Much as we may admire the Prime Minister, his love of Eretz Yisroel and his gift of eloquence – he does not fit the above criterion. He does not identify with the essence of what Rav Ovadiah zatzal was all about. Hasmadah in Torah was a defining characteristic of this remarkable sage. Had Bibi eulogized Rav Ovadiah he would have been in danger of minimizing who Rav Ovadiah zatzal actually was.
While the Prime Minister is certainly an inspirational speaker, it is difficult to imagine that he could have successfully inspired the listeners toward a heightened level of Teshuvah and fear of G-d.
THE OBLIGATION TO SHOW RESPECT
While all this is true, there is also the important notion in Torah sources to show respect to the head of government – both a Jewish one and a gentile one. We find in the Midrash (Shmos Rabba 7:3) that Hashem commanded Moshe to show respect to the Egyptian head of government – even though Hashem planned to both judge him and punish him severely.
We find also regarding the evil king Yeravam that in Malachim Aleph (13:2) the language employed is “Behold a son will be born to the house of David, Josiah will be his name.. and human bones will they burn upon you.” The verse did not say, “And you will be burned – Yeravam.” The Midrash Tanchuma (Parshas Toldos 12) explains that this was on account of honor to the head of government.
There is more. The Gemorah in Brachos (58a) explains that the Malchus of the land is likened to the Malchus of Heaven. The Maharsha in Zvachim (102a) explains that one who disrespects the Malchus it is as if he has disrespected Hashem. Indeed, the Chasam Sofer in a responsa (OC #159) that the obligation to respect the king is, in fact, biblical in origin on account of the aforementioned command to Moshe Rabbeinu to respect Pharoah.
Based upon these sources and others, perhaps one could legitimately argue that the obligation to show respect may supersede the requirements of proper eulogy. It would seem, however, that this very question is addressed by Rashi on the verse in Mishlei 24:21. There the verse states, “My son, fear the L-rd and the king; do not mingle with dualists.” Rashi explains that when the honor accorded to the king undermines fear of G-d then we do not extend it so far. He writes: “Fear the king. But only if he does not remove you from fear of Hashem. And always, fear of Hashem comes first – if they are different.”
We see that the matter of who may eulogize is not so simple. It would seem that the decision of the Chevra Kadisha not to allow Prime Minister Netanyahu to eulogize Rav Ovadiah zt”l, was, in light of this last source, correct. It was a decision that, no doubt, was implemented respectfully and not made lightly.
(By Ovadiah Warshauer – YWN World Headquarters – NYC)
Join the official YWN WhatsApp status
13 Responses
“It would seem that the decision of the Chevra Kadisha not to allow Prime Minister Netanyahu to eulogize Rav Ovadiah zt”l, was, in light of this last source, correct.”
why speculate. perhaps they asked a shayla and followed the psak in which case it doesnt matter what sources anyone else (no pun intended) digs up.
Hopefully this puts all the ywn dayanim mumchim/commenters in their place and maybe a few public apologies to the chevra kadisha are in order.
did bibi offer to be maspid rav elyashiv zt”l? something tells me that not, so maybe this isn’t all about the hesped after all, but about political gains
If halacha dictates that something is forbidden, then not allowing one to perform that action is not disrespect. Thus, not allowing Bibi to eulogize was never an act of disrespect to begin with.
Netanyahu eulogizing Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l would be very hypocritical as he played a major role in causing him tremendous amount of agmat nefesh with his insisting on enlisting yeshiva bachurim and destroying Torah in order to satisfy Lapid and Bennett. Had he come out strongly against them, he might have had some merit.
“why speculate. perhaps they asked a shayla and followed the psak in which case it doesnt matter what sources anyone else (no pun intended) digs up.”
by your logic, why learn shas and poskim. just ask a shayla and follow the psak. it doesn’t matter what the gemara says!
first of all, you don’t even know if the chevra kadisha asked a shayla and followed the psak. second, maybe the chevra kadisha actually knows something about halacha and they could pasken for themselves without running to ask a shayla. and finally, even if there was a psak, why do you have a problem with looking up sources so you can also understand the psak?
With all of his faults I fail to see how Netanyahu is removing or even trying to remove us from fear of Hashem. The very fact that he wanted to eulogize Rav Ovadia, as opposed to certain American journalists, would seem to indicate the opposite – especially as this would add to the heat of the hot water he is in in that sector.
But a convicted fraudulent politician on the other hand will bring lots of honor…
Nu shoin, so Netanyahu was barred from eulogizing for his own protection, because he is not a Tzaddik, whereas Deri, who is a well known Tzaddik, was allowed to eulogize. It wasn’t political at all. Glad to have had that clarified.
#8 Unlike most people convicted, he was convicted by a secular anti religious government not for fraud but for money he received for helping the poor and yeshivot. He never took any money for himself. On a Heavenly scale it would mean a big portion of Olam Haba.
#9 Yes, Deri with all his maasim tovim is a tzaddik. Rav Ovadia Yosef zt”l knew it( and was well aware of the corruption in the Zionist court system and their anti religious bias). That’s why he promised him his post back as head of Shas and fulfilled it.
“Nu shoin, so Netanyahu was barred from eulogizing for his own protection” min Hashamayim, for eulogizing someone he caused so much suffering to and still has not repented, would have been quite dangerous for him since the neshamah of the tzaddik could retaliate.
Why talk about Deri? The question about netanyahu being maspid is pure nonsense as there is absolutely no evidence that this event even occurred at all. But suppose he does get up and is maspid, as Prime Minister, he would be representing millions of Jews, many Tzadikim and simple people, who like himself were not fortunate to have a Torah Chinuch i am not sure if your simple cursory reading of the Shulchan Aruch applies here.
#10, taking bribes to help a “yeshiva” get benefits to which it is not entitled means a big portion in Olam HaBa? Would you at least put up a plaque for a Jewish gangster who gave a big donation?