The pasuk in
Vayigash says that Yaakov brought korbanos to the G-d of his father
Yitzchak. Rashi explains that it says in the name of his father
Yitzchak and not his grandfather Avraham since he is obligated in the
honor of his father more than he is obligated in the honor of his
grandfather. His source is the medrash [94/5] and is cited by the
Rema [Yo”d 240 24].
Asked the
Ramban, that we find elsewhere that the grandfather is mentioned
BEFORE the father. When Yaakov davened to be saved from Esav [Parshas
Vayishlach] he said אל-הי
אבי אברהם ואל-הי
אבי יצחק -
Avraham the grandfather precedes Yitzchak!:-). Similarly, when Yaakov
ran away from Lavan [Parshas Vayeitzei] he says לולי
א-להי
אבי אברהם ופחד יצחק.
Avraham before Yitzchak. Ahhhaaaa!!!!
The sefer
Livyas Cheyn [written by the grandson of the Bach cited in the
Tshuvos of Rebbi Akiva Eiger Kamma 68] answers based on the gemara in
Kiddushin [31a] that R' Eliezer was asked: If the father says give me
water and the mother also asks for water – which parent comes
first? R' Eliezer answers that the father comes first because both
the mother and the child are obligated to honor the father [see the
mishna at the end of Krisus that a woman is obligated to honor her
husband. There is a machlokes if this obligation is biblical or
rabbinic. אכמ"ל
בזה].
According to
this, says the Livyas Cheyn, in an instance where there is a conflict
between a father and a grandfather, the grandfather should come first
because both the grandson and the father are obligated to honor the
grandfather.
He says
further that in the Maseches Kiddushin case there is a difference: If the mother is
still alive then we say that the mother is also obligated to honor
the father. But if the mother is no longer alive then she is no
longer obligated to honor the father and if so then it is comparable
to the case in the gemara where the parents are divorced and thus the
father has no preference over the mother.
According to
that, when Yitzchak was still alive, Yitzchak was obligated to honor
Avraham [and even after Avraham's death, because a child is obligated
to honor his parents even after their death]. That explains the
instances where Yaakov mentioned Avraham first – since Yitzchak was
still alive and thus also obligated to honor his father Avraham,
Yaakov mentioned Avraham first. However in Parshas Vayigash, where
Yitzchak had already passed away, Yitzchak has no obligation to honor
Avraham and there is no longer an obligation to mention Avraham. On
the contrary – only Yitzchak must be mentioned, as Rashi says –
one is obligated to honor his father [Yitzchak] more than his
grandfather.
The Beis
Yosef [Yo”d 376] says that it is a mitzva to say Kaddish for one's
mother in his father's lifetime. In the event that the father opposes
this practice, he must listen to the father even though the mother
specifically requested that the son say Kaddish, because the
obligation to honor the father takes precedence over the obligation
to honor the mother.
Asked R'
Akiva Eiger, that according to the Livyas Cheyn, we should apparently
tell the son that he may do as he wishes, since the mother is no
longer alive and thus not obligated to honor the father. [It is
similar to a case where the parents divorced and one parent doesn't
take precedence over the other.]
The Noda
Bi-yehuda [Tinyana 48] says that in a case where a father commanded
his son to do something and then died, and the mother is opposed, the
child should listen to the mother because honoring a living person
takes precedence over honoring a dead person. If so, certainly in our
case, the honor of the father [who is opposed to the son reciting
Kaddish] should take precedence over the wishes of the mother.
However, R'
Akiva Eiger notes that this logic is not adopted by the Beis Yosef,
for he explains that one must listen to the father because his honor
trumps that of the mother and DIDN'T write [as the Noda Bi-yehuda
opined] that honor of the living comes before honor of the dead.
The Divrei
Malkiel [2 – 137/5] explains that in the case of the Beis Yosef
there is a special reason to listen to the father. Namely, that the
recital of Kaddish will cause him anguish and it is a disgrace to the
father. But this is difficult because the LACK of recital will cause
the mother anguish, so why is the fathers pain more significant in
our eyes?!
The Haflaah
[in his Givas Pinchas simman 3] wonders, that for another reason the
son should not recite Kaddish even if we equate the parents: If he
says Kaddish then he will have transgressed the will of his father
ACTIVELY, while if he refrains from doing so then he will only have
transgressed the will of his mother PASSIVELY. It is definitely
preferable to do an aveira בשב
ואל תעשה and
not בקום ועשה.
But once
again – this reason was not mentioned by the Beis Yosef [maybe
because he chose the simple path – that both the son and mother are
obligated to honor the father. But in principle he would agree].
[עפ"י
דברי הגר"א
גנחובסקי זצ"ל
והרחיבו והאריכו בזה במקומות רבים – עי'
בסוף ח"ב
ילקוט יוסף על הל'
כיבוד אב ואם,
מנחת אשר ויגש ובמיוחד
בדברים הנפלאים של הכלי חמדה פרשת ויגש
עיי"ש
ותמצא נחת]
לזכות ר' שמואל צבי בן ר' דוד עקיבא לרגל יום הולדתו!
