There is a prevalent custom that the groom wears a white “kittel” (robe also worn on High Holy Days, mainly used as burial shrouds.) One of the explanations for this beautiful custom appear in the siddur of Rav Ya’akov Emden – “to remind the groom of the day of death in order that he repent and return to God.”

In fact the Gemara in Masechet B’rachot records that when Rav Himnuna Zuta was asked to begin singing before the bride and groom, he sang:

“Woe to us, for we die; woe to us, for we die.”

(B’rachot 31a)

It would see that the custom is based on this Gemara.

In any event, the connection between the groom and mourning or death does not end here.

In his laws of mourning, the Rambam begins as follows:

“It is a positive Torah commandment to mourn for one’s relatives, as the verse states: ‘If I had eaten the sin offering, would it have been right in God’s eyes?’ (Vayikra 10,19.) Mourning is only required by the Torah on the First day which is the day of death and burial, but the remaining seven days are not of Torah requirement. Even though the verse states: “And he observed a seven day mourning period for his father,” (Bereshit 50:10,) the Torah was given, and (then) the Halacha was innovated.”

(Rambam, Hilchot Avel 1:1)

Thus far the Rambam has taught us that mourning is a positive Torah commandment, and that its focus is the first day. But then the Rambam adds the following:

“And Moshe Rabbenu instituted the seven days of mourning and the seven days of mishte (feasting) for Yisra’el.”

(ibid.)

Superficially this addendum seems unclear – why does the Rambam mention the seven days of mourning and the seven days of mish’te here, are these the only two laws that Moshe instituted for Yisra’el? Why did the Rambam see it fitting to specifically mention the institution of the seven days of mishte here?

Another interesting fact is the manner in which the Shulchan Aruch (Code of Jewish Law, R’ Yosef Caro) concludes his laws of Kiddushin (Betrothal):

“A bridal procession which comes upon a burial procession – the corpse is removed from before the bride in order to give way to her.”

(Shulchan Aruch, Even ha’Ezer 65:4)

Once more we see the motif of death in the context of the rejoicing of the bride and groom, and again we must understand the similarities and internal conection between the two.

But first let us further examine the connection between mourning and the rejoicing of the bride and groom.

We know that the “Sheva B’rachot” – the seven blessings recited under the wedding canopy, and then at every festive meal during the first week of the marriage – are termed “Birkat Chatanim” – “The blessing of bridegrooms” – by our Sages. The custom of the Sheva B’rachot when recited during the ensuing week following the chupa is to be recited at the conclusion of a meal. There is an additional fascinating aspect to these b’rachot in that the Halacha and literature of the Rishonim (earlier Sages) indicate that the connection between the Sheva B’rachot and the meal is of a fundamental nature. In other words, (aside from under the chupa at the moment of the marriage,) there is no such thing as Sheva B’rachot without a se’uda (festive meal.)

The Shulchan Aruch decides this as the halacha:

“The Birkat Chatanim are recited in the bridal house (ie. where the se’uda is being held) after Birkat ha’Mazon (Grace after Meals) after each and every se’uda is eaten there.”

(ibid. 62:5)

Thus we see that the Sheva B’rachot are conditional upon the meal.

In order to complete the picture we will bring the words of the Rambam from his Laws of B’rachot:

“The order of Birkat ha’Mazon is as follows: the first (b’racha) is Birkat ha’Zan (Blessing of He who sustains,) the second is Birkat ha’Aretz (Blessing of Eretz Yisra’el,) the third is Bo’ne Yerushalayim (Blessing of He Who builds Jerusalem,) and the fourth is ha’Tov u’Meitiv (He Who is good and bestows good.)

Moshe Rabbenu instituted the first b’racha, Yehoshu’a instituted the second, the third was instituted by David and Sh’lomo

(Rambam, Hilchot B’rachot 2:1)

The Rambam then explains the content of each of the b’rachot of Birkat ha’Mazon.

Then the Rambam moves on to write:

“In the bridal house the Birkat Chatanim is recited after these four B’rachot, at each and every meal that they eat there…”

(ibid. 2:9)

From the Rambam’s terminology we learn that it is not simply that the Sheva B’rachot are recited in close proximity to the meal, but rather that they are an integral and fundamental aspect of the laws of Birkat ha’Mazon.

The Rambam continues, explaining the following:

“These are the Sheva B’rachot:

Blessed are You Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who creates man

Blessed are You Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who created everything for His glory.”

Blessed are You Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who created man in His image, in the image of his likeness; and prepared for him an eternal building from himself. Blessed are You Hashem, Who created man.

Bring intense joy and exultation to the barren one through the ingathering of her children amidst her in happiness. Blessed are You Hashem, Who gladdens Zion through her children.

Gladden the beloved companions as You gladdened your creature in the Garden of Eden in the past. Blessed are You Hashem, Who gladdens groom and bride.

Blessed are You Hashem, our God, King of the universe, Who created joy and gladness, groom and bride, mirth, glad song, pleasure, delight, love, brotherhood, peace and companionship. Hashem, our God, let there soon be heard in the cities of Yehuda and the streets of Yerushalayim the sound of joy and the sound of gladness, the voice of the groom and the voice of the bride, the sound of grooms’ jubilance from their Chupot (Wedding canopies) and of youths from the songs. Blessed are You Hashem, Who gladdens the groom with the bride.”

(ibid. 2:11)

Once more I must emphasize that the Rambam records this in the laws of B’rachot.

In order to complete the picture, let us see the words of the Rambam in his Laws of Mourning:

“When (Birkat ha’Mazon) is recited in the mourner’s house, he says in the fourth b’racha: ‘He is the living King Who is good and Who bestows good , God of truth, Judge of truth, Who judges with righteousness, Who rules His universe to do with it as He wishes, and we are His nation and His servant,. For everything we are obliged to thank Him and bless Him.”

(ibid. 2:8)

 

Let us note that “Birkat A’velim” – “The Mourners’ Blessing” – has two aspects to it:

- “Birkat R’chava” – “The Expansive Blessing” – which is recited when the mourners leave the cemetery;

- Birkat A’velim inserted into Birkat ha’Mazon, and it is this that the Rambam refers to.

It is interesting to note that the Birkat A’velim inserted into Birkat ha’Mazon entirely alters the content of the fourth b’racha, and it is not considered a mere ‘insertion’ or ‘addition’ to the Birkat ha’Mazon.

Thus we see how the Rambam dedicates specific discussion to both the Birkat A’velut and Birkat Chatanim – specifically related to and found in the laws of Birkat ha’Mazon. In addition we note the existence of a connection (which we have yet to define) between these two b’rachot, Birkat A’velim and Birkat Chatanim.

One final note before begin our examination of these issues which is also relates the rejoicing of the bride and groom with the concept of food and mourning is to be found in the Tur. He writes:

“It is a great mitzva to delight the bride and groom, and to dance before her; whoever partakes of the groom’s feast and does not delight him transgresses five ‘sounds,’ as it states: “The sound of joy and the sound of gladness, the sound (voice) of the groom and the sound (voice) of the bride, the sound of grooms’ jubilance from their Chupot and of youths from the songs.”

(Tur, Even ha’Ezer 65:1)

(The source of this is in the Gemara in B’rachot 6b.)

Why is the emphasis placed on the feast? Why is it that “whoever partakes of the groom’s feast” transgresses if he does not help with the rejoicing of the bride and groom? Why does the halacha not state that whoever participates in the rejoicing of the bride and groom but does not delight them transgresses five ‘sounds?’

This leads us to concluded that the rejoicing and festivities of the bride and groom are linked to food and eating. This may sound surprising, but when we understand what the significance of food is we will understand that what transpires during the Birkot Nis’uin (The Wedding Blessings,) and God forbid what occurs when matters move in the contrasting direction, ie. at death – then we will understand the deep connection between marriage and eating.

We must also be aware that the consumption of food plays an integral part on the Seder night. We eat matzot, drink wine, eat Karpas (vegetable dipped in salt water at the start of the night,) eat the Afikoman (the final matza concluding the night) once already satiated. (Eating once satiated is only permitted – and in fact an obligation – on the seder night. It is generally forbidden to eat more than the body requires, ie. once one has become satiated.)

Now let us analyze these issues, setting our sights on understanding the concept of eating, and how this is linked to Pesach , and to the rejoicing of the bride and groom, and mourning with which we began this shi’ur.

As is well known, the only positive commandment that Adam was commanded in the Garden of Eden was to eat from all the fruits of the trees in the Garden. And the only negative commandment that he was commanded was a prohibition against eating from the “Etz ha’Da’at” – the “Tree of Knowledge.”

Before we establish the distinction between the Etz ha’Da’at and the other trees in the Garden of Eden let us understand the concept of eating and food consumption.

Rav Ya’akov Tzvi, in his work the “K’tav v’ha’Kabbala” deals with the root of the word “a’chila” – “eating.”

Clearly we would expect that the root of the word is “alef, chaf, lamed - a’chal” – eat. This is correct if the word “a’chila” is solely the conjugation of that root. However if we were to find another word that indicates eating, yet that does not contain all the letters of the root “a’chal” – we would then understand that the root is in fact different: shorter and contracted.

The K’tav v’ha’Kabbala writes as follows:

“And you shall eat and be satiated, (Devarim 8:10) – analyses of the root of the word and its composition: ‘a’chila’ indicates consumption of food as well as consumption in the manner of destruction and obliteration, (“The land of your enemies will destroy [“v’ach’la”] you, [Vayikra 26:38]”) for the act of eating is the obliteration of the entity of the foodstuff, the separation of its parts, and their destruction.”

According to this approach then, the root of the word “a’chila” is “kaf, lamed, hey – ka’le” (and “K’li’ya” – “obliteration”) and not “a’chal.” The proof for this is:

“For the alef is not (part of) the basic root, as we find it without the alef: ‘Yoch’lu atikim’ - ‘the pillars took up space from them,’ (Y’chezkel 42:5); ‘ma’colet l’ve’to’ - ‘sustenance for his household,” (Melachim I 5:25.)”

This verse appears in Yechezkel:

“Yoch’lu atikim” – “The pillars took up space” – this describes the vision that Yechezkel saw in his prophecy of the Third Temple. He sees the Temple composed of various chambers, while under each of these chambers there are structures called “atikim” – “pillars.” These atikim are long, and took up space – literally ‘eat,’ ‘consume’ – part of the chambers that they border.

Thus when the prophet chooses to use an expression of “a’chila” - eating or consumption – he says “yoch’lu” (yud, vav, chaf, lamed, vav,) without the letter alef. Hence it seems that the alef does not make up the root.

The root of the word “a’chila” is kaf, kamed, hey – “ka’le” – destruction, annihilation.

We can however explain this in another manner, as the K’tav v’ha’Kabbala writes:

“Yet I do not agree with their explanation that the initial basis of the term ‘a’chila’ – ‘eating’ regarding food stems from the ‘kilayon’ – destruction - and annihilation of that which is being eaten.

To the contrary – it is from the root ‘ka’le’ which indicates termination and completion… ‘the House was completed (‘kala’) according to all its particulars,” (M’lachim 6:38); ‘unless he concludes (‘ki’la’) the matter today,’ (Rut 3:18.)

For prior to reaching its conclusion, an issue is incomplete; when it is concluded it reaches its desired perfection. So too prior to being eaten food is incomplete, and once eaten it reaches its perfection desired from the moment of its creation.”

Thus, according to the K’tav v’ha’Kabbala eating is not about destruction and annihilation, but rather about elevation and advancement. Eating and the consumption of the food brings the foodstuff to its end.

When we consider this, we will see that eating does in fact entail an act of elevation; for when an animal eats vegetation, the animal itself then develops. The foliage absorbed in the animal’s body turns into a living being from the vegetative growth that it was.

Hence we can define the above dilemma as follows:

Is the act of eating an act of destruction and annihilation, or an act of elevation and advancement?

The distinction between these two extremes of eating can be found in the words of Rav Y. M. Charlap:

“Prior to Adam’s sin when the command was given: ‘From all the trees of the Garden you meet, but from the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Bad you may not eat,’ (Bereshit 2:16,17,) eating then was not as eating is now. All eating now involves ‘destruction of the essence.’”

“Destruction of the essence,” (“m’chalya karna”) is a concept from the civil legal system which is applied metaphorically here. It denotes “destruction of the essence” – that is to say that contemporary eating affects a result of destruction on the food, something which did not occur prior to Adam’s sin in the Garden of Eden.

“For their eating was in a manner whereby the essence was not destroyed. In a similar vein to the law that there is no me’ila with regard aroma (Pesachim 26b) for the essence is not affected by the act of smelling.”

In other words, just as one who derives benefit from the aroma of an object that was dedicated to the Temple does not transgress the prohibition of me’ila, (unintentional misconduct towards that which has been dedicated to the Temple,) for the essence has not been diminished, (and thus me’ila is not applicable,) so too the act of eating then, before Adam’s sin, did not detract from the essence of the food. For then the food’s core remained unchanged, unlike today when the food is destroyed and consumed.

Despite this fact, even then, prior to Adam’s sin, eating also involved consumption, as Rav Charlap continues:

“Only eating from the Tree of Knowledge was in the manner of the consumption of the essence. Therefore man was commanded not to eat from it, in order that man should not descend into the world that we know which is replete with dispute, destruction, and the consumption of the essence. Each person rages at his fellow, and almost all the livelihood of each individual is that which destroys his fellow. Fire burns, and water extinguishes; the worm destroys the tree, and all acts of eating that life is dependent upon are the eating of the destruction of the essence.”

The act of eating from the Tree of Knowledge is an act of eating which destroys – eating which benefits the one who eats while destroying that which is being eaten. The act of eating from the Tree of Knowledge also resulted in one feeling greater than his fellow.

Now Adam’s response to God’s question becomes clearer.

God asks:

“Did you eat of the tree which I told you not to eat from?”

(Bereshit 3:11)

Adam replies:

“The woman whom you gave to be with me – she gave me from the tree…”

(ibid. v. 12)

In other words: “I am not to blame, the woman, she is to blame.”

Thus a momentous opportunity as missed, for Adam was the only creature created complete – and when he woke from his comatose state he saw his completion standing before him, the woman – Eve. He understands that he is the bridegroom and she is the bride. He recognizes that both he and she are lacking, and that it is their responsibility and purpose to reach mutual completion together. But then they falter.

An interesting expression which completes the picture we have before us is the description of Yosef in Potiphar’s house.

The verse states:

“He left all his affairs in Yosef’s hands, except for the bread that he himself ate. He did not concern himself with anything Yosef did.”

(Bereshit 39:6)

What is this “bread that he himself ate?” Rashi answers that this is a euphemism for his wife.

We may add that the significance of this is as follows:

Yosef says to Potiphar’s wife: “You desire that we join together in a bond of destruction! It is your wish that we embody the concept of ‘eating that destroys!’ But I, Yosef, desire the bond of ‘eating’ that does not destroy, but that rather leads to completion and perfection.”

Let us return to our discussion of the bridegroom and bride.

“Husband and wife who are not meritorious – fire consumes them” – this is a bond that destroys. If however “they are meritorious” and elevated – “the Sh’china (Divine Presence) rests between them.” (cf. Yalkut Shim’oni, Bereshit 24.)

In other words the Divine Presence is among them - the bond between them becomes an elevating rather than destructive one.

This, then, is the meaning of the term “she’ha’simcha bim’o’no” – ‘in Whose abode is this celebration” - which is added to the zimun (introductory invitation to Birkat ha’Mazon) when there is a bride and groom at the meal (during the first week following the wedding.) We may say that now that the husband and wife have come together to attain their mutual perfection – hence there is a certain area wherein the Divine may appear.

This is the bond that could have existed between Adam and his wife without the sin. When Eve attempts to explain herself she says:

“The snake seduced (“hi’si’ani”) me and I ate (it).”

(Bereshit 3:13)

Our Sages expounded that the word “hi’si’ani” refers to “ni’su’in” – marriage. Thus the first marriage of Adam and Eve, that marriage of completion and perfection which is described as eating that uplifts and elevates has ended, and now the destructive eating appears – marriage and union with a third party, the snake.

We may suggest that this is indeed the concept of the Se’udat Mitzva – feast of a mitzva. A meal at which we eat and drink in a manner of elevation and upliftment.

This is the appreciation of the connection between eating and marriage.

When man and woman marry, the complete human is formed, and when they are meritorious – the Sh’china dwells amongst them. Therefore Rav Himnuna says “Woe to us, for we die” – how sad is the fact that we have yet to reach the level of eating that does not destroy, we have yet to obtain that bond that progressively elevates and ascend. How sad is it death is still a part of the world – in other words, the world has not yet reached its objective.

How sad is it that still in our world and age in order to survive we must consume our fellow…

Let us now return to the connection between mourning and the rejoicing of the bridegroom and bride. When in a state of mourning one may not attend festive meals for if death still exists in the world it is a sign that we have yet to reach the desired perfection.

However it is here that the Rambam notes that Moshe instituted the seven days of rejoicing of the bridegroom and bride. In other words this perfection in fact exists – in the rejoicing of the bridegroom and bride, and therefore the Shulchan Aruch states:

“A bridal procession which comes upon a burial procession – the corpse is removed from before the bride in order to give way to her.”

(Shulchan Aruch, Even ha’Ezer 65:4)

The corpse represents that which is deficient and lacking in the world – whereas the bride represents the path to perfection that still exists. The bridegroom and bride represent the hope that remains.

This is also the significance of eating the Afikoman only once satiated – for this is constructive, productive eating, not the whereby one desires to consume his fellow. This is not the eating as it occurred in Egypt whereby the mighty consumed the weak, where the firstborn consumed his siblings – this is eating which does not destroy but that brings to perfection.

We still have to reach a world like this, a world wherein the “wolf dwells with the lamb and the leopard pastures with the kid,” (Y’sha’yahu 11:6) – when we reach this we will then know that “a’chila” – eating – has been restored and elevated.

Thus, through the consumption of the Afikoman once satiated, together with the extra protection that we have on Pesach, the “night of guarding,” (Sh’mot 12:42,) this type of eating will not harm us, but rather elevate and uplift us, as we recite the b’racha and elevate everything to its roots.

Translated by Sholem Hurwitz

Copyright Keren Yishai/Rav M. Elon