May Multiple People Say Kaddish Simultaneously?

Aryeh Lebowitz

  1. Introduction. Very often, one who loses a close relative will make an extra effort to honor their deceased loved one. In Judaism, the honor given to the dead is most evident in the recitation of kaddish during the period of mourning. People make great sacrifices in order to ensure that kaddish is recited on behalf of their relative. Due to the highly sensitive emotions associated with this prayer, people tend to become very defensive of their rights and obligation to recite the kaddish. Indeed, anecdotal evidence points to many incidents of people becoming agitated as a result of the limitation of reciting kaddish being perceived as a slight to the honor of their deceased relative. The prevalent custom in most shuls is to allow all of the mourners to recite kaddish simultaneously and in unison. In this essay we will explore possible reasons to reject this practice and carefully analyze its halachic viability.
  2. The Initial Custom. The earliest source for the mourner’s recitation of kaddish seems to be a passage in Masechet Sofrim (19:9) where mention is made of a mourner reciting kaddish at the very end of davening.It should be noted, though, that the common practice of a mourner reciting kaddish only began at the earliest in the middle ages. In fact, the Shulchan Aruch makes no mention of this practice. The Rema, on the other hand, does explicitly mention that the prevalent custom in his time was for a mourner to recite kaddish during the year of mourning. (Yoreh Deah 376:4)
  3. The Effect of Kaddish.The Ohr Zarua cites an episode where a very dejected and distressed individual visited Rabi Akiva and informed him that he had been dead for many years, but has been suffering terribly in the world to come as a result of his many sins. The man told Rabi Akiva that he has been forced to chop wood for a fire in which he himself was consumed. When Rabi Akiva asked if there was any way to save him the man replied that he had heard that if only he had left a son who would stand in front of a congregation and call out barchu (thereby causing the congregation to respond with “baruch Hashem ha’Mevorach etc.”) orYisgadal v’Yiskadash (so that the people can respond “yehei shmei rabba etc.”) he would be released from punishment. The man proceeded to inform Rabi Akiva that he had no son but had left a pregnant wife behind. The man expressed regret that even if his wife had a boy, there was nobody to teach the child. When Rabi Akiva heard this he took it upon himself to teach the man’s child to recite barchuand kaddish and the man was finally spared the judgment of gehinnom.
  4. How Many Mourners Would Traditionally Recite Kaddish? The Biur Halacha (132) has an extensive discussion of who has precedence to recite kaddishfor the congregation, strongly indicating that the prevalent custom was for only one person to recite kaddish at a time. The Chasam Sofer (Responsa Yoreh Deah II:345) records that the Sefardic practice has traditionally been for all of the mourners to recite kaddish in unison. Indeed, Rav Yakov Emden (Siddur Yavetz) approves of the Sefardic practice and may have even initiated that practice in his own minyan for the Kaddish d’Rabanan. In fact, Rav Emden writes that he sees no reason to bother expounding the laws of precedence in reciting kaddish because the entire matter should be irrelevant if everybody says kaddish together. (See Responsa Chasam Sofer Orach Chaim #159 who vehemently disagrees with Rav Emden, and argues that it is rather audacious to suggest that extensive discussions of Rishonim are halahically unnecessary.)
  5. The Problem. While allowing all of the mourners to recite every kaddish would seem to solve any potential disputes over who should recite any given kaddish, this approach may introduce its own problems. The Gemara (Rosh Hashana 27a) points out that two voices cannot be heard simultaneously. In fact, the gemara derives from the slight change in wording in the formulation of the mitzvah of Shabbos between the first and second versions of the Aseres Hadibros that the two versions (zachor and shamor) were said simultaneously. The gemara notes that under normal circumstances it is “impossible for the mouth to speak [two things simultaneously] and impossible for the ear to hear…” There are many applications of this rule. For instance, the Gemara (Megillah 21b) says that two people cannot read from the torah out loud together because two voices cannot be heard. Furthermore, Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 284:5) rules that two people may not read the maftir from the Navi simultaneously. Finally, theKitzur Shulchan Aruch (135:6) rules that multiple men should not recite Kiddush simultaneously if there are people listening who need to hear the Kiddush in order to fulfill their mitzvah. The gemara notes, however, that there are some exceptions to the idea that one cannot hear two voices simultaneously. When the voices are saying something that is particularly beloved to the listener (e.g. Hallel, Megillah, Shofar) it is possible to hear even when two voices are speaking simultaneously.

What emerges from this discussion is that one who is in a shul where many people are reciting kaddish simultaneously cannot be said to have heard kaddish at all. It would therefore seem that such a kaddish is ineffective. Obviously, such a conclusion would be a condemnation of the practice of the majority of world Jewry. It is therefore critical to try to find some justification for the common practice.

  1. Reasons for Recitation of Kaddish. In order to analyze the propriety of any practice relating to the recitation of kaddish it is necessary to understand the reason for the custom for mourners to recite kaddish in the first place.
  2. The poskim refer to four distinct reasons that we customarily recite kaddish for the deceased:
  1. Rabbi Yechiel Michel Tukitchinsky (Gesher Hachaim I:30:4) writes that the recitation is a fulfillment of the Talmudic dictum “bruh Mezake Abba” (a son gives his father merit). Rabbi Eliezer Waldenberg (Responsa Tzitz Eliezer XIV:13:4) explains, based on the writings of the Arizal, that the merit of publicly sanctifying the name of God aids the parent in accruing merit and consequently rising to higher levels of olam haba.
  2. The Chasam Sofer (Orach Chaim I:159) writes that the primary merit accrued on behalf of the deceased is not in the actual recitation of kaddish, but in causing the congregation to respond with “Amen Ye’hei Shmei Rabba etc.” By serving as the impetus for the congregation to recite these special words, the mourner achieves merit which in turn reflects well on his parents in Olam haba.
  3. Rabbi Waldenberg (ibid.) cites Sefer Hachaim (authored by the brother of the Maharal of Prague) as having understood a totally different purpose for the mourner’s kaddish. In the view of the Sefer Hachaim, most deaths may be attributed to the sin of desecrating God’s name because that is the only sin that only death can atone for. As such, when the person dies, painful as it may be, there is an element of Divine Justice and an implicitKiddush Hashem. When the mourner joins in sanctifying God’s name publicly it is a form of tziduk hadin, acknowledging the righteousness of God’s judgment.
  4. Rabbi Tukitchinsky (ibid. 30:4:1) cites a similar explanation for the mourner’s kaddish. In Rabbi Tukitchinsky’s kaddish is also a form of tziduk hadin, but is not related to an implicitKiddush Hashem that is caused by the death. Rather, it is a defensivemeasure to encourage the mourner not to question the ways of God and due to his loss think of God as unjust. In order to reaffirm and acknowledge the integrityof God’s judgment, the mourner publicly sanctifies God’s name.[1]
  5. Applying these Reasons. Whether or not it is necessary for a mourner to recite kaddish alone may well depend on what the reason is for reciting the kaddish at all. If one were to assume that the purpose of kaddish is a form of tziduk hadin it does not seem necessary for the mourner to have his voice heard distinctly. If the purpose is to merit the deceased by causing the congregation to say “Yehei Shmei Rabba etc.” it would seem that the mourner should ensure that he alone is the cause of the response. In fact, the Chasam Sofer (Responsa Orach Chaim #159) writes that only the loudest or first person to reach the responsive sections of kaddish would be the true cause of the congregation’s response, while all other mourners would not be accomplishing anything. Knowing this may lead to somewhat of a “competitive kaddish” where each mourner tries to recite the prayer louder or faster than everybody else. If the response of the congregation would have been forthcoming even without his participation it would seem that the mourner has not accomplished anything. If, however, the purpose of the kaddish is to merit the deceased by the public sanctification of God’s name it may be argued that as long as people realize what the mourner is saying, even if every word they cannot be heard precisely, the goal has been accomplished. Nevertheless, it would seem that one should try to fulfill all possible rationales for the recitation of kaddish, which, based on the above analysis, can only be done if recited alone.
  1. Two Additional Reasons for Leniency.
  2. PerhapsKaddishis Considered “Beloved”? As we have previously noted, the gemara assumes that two voices may be heard simultaneously if the subject matter is “beloved.” It would therefore seem that if we can definitively mark kaddish as a “beloved” prayer, it shouldn’t make a difference how many people recite it simultaneously, as the congregation can hear the prayer just the same. The gemara (Berachos 3a) records an episode where Eliyahu Hanavi informed R’ Yosi that whenever the Jewish people recite “Yehei Shmei Rabba etc.” God expresses regret for the destruction of the Beis Hamikdash and comments on how fortunate a king would be if He were praised in his home (Beis Hamikdash) in this way. Tosafos ad. Loc. cite a commonly held belief that we recite kaddish in Aramaic in order that the angels should not understand the prayer (see Shabbos 12b) and get jealous of our recitation of such a beautiful and wonderful prayer. Tosafos clearly assumes that kaddish is unique amongst prayers, and may very well be labeled a “beloved prayer”. Though Tosafos offer another explanation for the recitation of kaddish in Aramaic, they do maintain that it has a unique status, especially in light of the passage in Masheches Sotah 49a that attributes the continued existence of the world to the recitation of Yehei Shmei Rabba etc. On the other hand it may be argued that the status of “beloved” relates to how people commonly view the material rather than it’s halachic significance. While kaddish may be a very significant prayer, even beloved to God and the angels, an informal survey of contemporary shuls will likely reveal that most Jews may not share this enthusiasm for kaddish.Halakhic significance may not correlate with being a “beloved” prayer. In fact, the gemara (Berachos 2b) assumes that one is less likely to neglect reading the megillah than he is to neglect reciting kerias shema, because megillah is more beloved to the person, even though kerias shema being a biblical commandment is the more halachically important of the two. Apparently, the definition of “beloved” depends more on the popular view than the intrinsic significance of the prayer.If people don’t demonstrate a love for kaddish they will not be motivated to listen carefully enough to hear kaddish when multiple people are saying it simultaneously.
  3. Does being “beloved” necessarily help? The Rishonim debate why we may assume that one is capable of hearing two voices simultaneously when the subject matter is beloved. The Ran (Megillah) writes that when the subject matter is precious to us we are able to focus so intently that we can actually hear both voices even as they come simultaneously. If this explanation is correct, there is no reason to assume that the same should not hold true for hearing two people reciting kaddish. The Meiri, however, maintains that when the subject matter is of particular interest to us we focus more intently on the shaliach tzibbur, whose voice we are supposed to hear, and are more capable of blocking out other voices that may be interfering. If this is true, it may be argued that when mourners recite kaddish, the absence of a clear leader, or single person whose kaddish we are trying intently to hear, still leaves us unable to hear any kaddish, regardless of the beloved nature of the subject matter.
  4. Understanding the Difference Between Sefardic and Ashkenazic practice. Interestingly, Rabbi Yakov Ettlinger (Responsa Binyan Tziyon 122) explains that while he can’t be certain what the Sefardic practice of allowing large groups to recite kaddish together is based on, he posits that it may relate to a fundamental variance in the general style of prayer between Ashkenazic and Sefardic Jews. The gemara states that on beloved subject matter two voices can be heard because the listener pays careful attention. Rabbi Ettlinger suggests that whenever there is a reason to believe that the listener is paying careful attention, regardless of subject matter, he may hear the voice clearly. Sefardim have the practice of reciting their entire prayer service out loud and in unison. Nobody goes any faster or slower that the shaliach tzibbur. As such, they are naturally trained to pay attention to a group of voices, and are far more likely to be able to hear when ten people are reciting kaddish simultaneously. Ashkenazim, on the other hand, have no such training, and are therefore not capable of discerning the sound of kaddish from a sea of voices. That is why the traditional Ashkenazic practice had been, and remains in the German Jewish community, to only allow one person to say kaddish at a time.
  5. PerhapsKaddish need not be heard.
  6. Even assuming that two voices cannot be heard simultaneously, it may be argued that kaddish may be recited by a group of people together. Unlike the examples provided in the gemara (Shofar, Megillah etc.), there is no formal requirement to hearkaddish. The requirement is to answer to a kaddish that is being recited. One may argue that it is similar to a beracha where as long as you know that the person is reciting the beracha, even if you can’t hear exactly what he is saying, you should respond with an Amen. This is evident from the report in the gemara Sukkah (51b) that in the large beis Haknesses in Alexandria the congregation was too large to hear the shaliach tzibbur so they would wave flags to signal when it was time to respondAmen. Apparently it was unnecessary to hear the blessing at all in order to respond to it. One can reasonably suggest that when multiple people recite kaddish we can certainly respond at the appropriate times.
  7. There are sources, however, that indicate a requirement to actually hear the words of kaddish. The Beis Yosef (Orach Chaim 56) writes that the listener if required to hear the entire kaddish until it’s conclusion. The Magen Avraham (Orach Chaim 56:9) adds that we limit the length of the response of the congregation in order to ensure that they will be able to listen to the entire kaddish.
  8. Change in Practice and Reaction.
  9. The early suggestions of change. As noted earlier, Rav Yakov Emden suggested that we follow the Sefardic practice of having all of the mourners recite kaddish together, but was met with significant criticism from the Chasam Sofer. The Chasam Sofer argues that we cannot change ancient Ashkenazic practice and suggesting such a simple solution would imply that the extensive discussions in earlier sources relating to who has precedence in reciting kaddish were all misguided – a charge not easily leveled against the torah giants of previous centuries. Similarly, Rav Yakov Etlinger (Responsa Binyan Tziyon #122) was asked about a community that had merged many shuls with different customs and the rabbi decided that in order to preserve peace all of the mourners would be permitted to recite kaddish together. Quite proud of his idea, the rabbi presented it to Rabbi Ettlinger. Rabbi Ettlinger’s reaction was fierce: “How can you refer to changing a custom that has been observed in all Ashkenazic countries for more than 300 years as a ‘great and appropriate’ idea? You are following closely on the heels of the revolutionary thinkers of our time who have changed various customs relating to tefillah!”
  10. Contemporary Times. As noted previously, in contemporary shuls it is very common for all of the mourners to recite kaddish simultaneously. This is clearly not the traditional Ashkenazic practice and it is not entirely clear when the practice changed. While contemporary poskim do not demand reverting back to the ancient practice,[2] they do remain sensitive to the concern of not being able to hear two voices simultaneously. Rav Moshe Shternbuch (Responsa Teshuvos V’hanhagos Orach Chaim II:42) writes that when multiple people are saying kaddish in a single shul, they should gather at a central location in the shul so that they can be sure to say the words together without any variance in pace, thereby ensuring that the listener will be able to make out each word. On the other hand, Responsa Mishnah Sachir suggests that it is best to spread the mourners out throughout the shul so that those standing in each section can hear the individual voice of the person reciting kaddish in their section of the shul ensuring that his voice is not drowned out by the voices of the other mourners.
  11. Conclusion. While some customs are difficult to justify from a conceptual or historical perspective, it is evident that the custom of all mourners reciting kaddish has gained strong footing in many communities and cannot easily be changed. The reason for the development of this practice is most likely the interest of preserving a sense of peace in the community, certainly a noble goal. It has also been suggested that in large communities that had only one big shul, many situations arose where a rotation would have left many mourners without the ability to recite kaddish at all during their entire year of mourning. This was particularly difficult in places where most people were unable to go to shul during the week where there were consequently fewer chances for saying kaddish (see Responsa Mateh Levi II:3). While we may not be able to alter long held communal customs and ask for other mourners to refrain from reciting kaddish when one person is already reciting it, we can certainly make very effort to limit other distractions, such as needless talk and the like, during the mourners recitation of kaddish. It is also important that mourners make every effort to recite kaddish in unison whether gathered in a single place or spread throughout the congregants.

[1] Regardless of the reason suggested, it seems strange that some mourners should have precedence over others. After all, if the purpose is to either accrue merit for the deceased or acknowledge the righteousness of God’s judgment, why should a mourner still in shloshim gain precedence over a mourner in the year of mourning. Chasam Sofer (Orach Chaim #159 and Yoreh Deah #345) suggests that all shul issues follow the rules of partnerships. It is understood that the mourner in the year of mourning forgoes his own right in favor of the more recent mourner, because as an equal partner he would want to ensure that when his children are mourning him, they will be guaranteed the opportunity to say kaddish in the early stages.