[Avodah] standing for chasan and kallah

[Elazar M. Teitz]

     R. Aryeh Stein, quoting R.Moshe Yehuda Gluck's remark

<<I don't recall _ever_ being at a Chasunah Minyan that said Tachanun, even when the Chasan was _not_ Davening then>>, comments

<According to RSZA (in Halichos Shlomo), when davening mincha in a hall during a seudas bar mitzvah or pidyon haben, tachanun is omitted.  R' Shmuel Salant would omit tachanun on any day on which he was receiving a chashuva guest.  While we are not noheg like R' SS, in the situation of the bar mitzvah or pidyon haben, it is vadai a zman simcha.  (ad kan divrei Halichos Shlomo)     Al achas kamah v'kamah, at a Chasunah Minyan - regardless of whether the chasan is present or not.>

     I don't believe there is any machlokes that at a chasuna itself, whether or not the chasan is in the room at the time, tachanun is omitted. It is, after all, part of the ma'amad of the chasuna. I  wonder, though, if it would be such a certainty if early-arriving guests would form a minyan before the chasan arrived -- if, say, the wedding was in a hotel and the chasan had not yet left his room.

     However, although afar ani tachas kappos raglav shel RSZA, but what is the makor for not saying tachanun for _any_ simcha?  The din mentions chasuna and bris milah, but no other simcha.  I doubt that anyone would omit tachanun at shacharis if the father of a b'chor or the kohein were davening there on the day the pidyon would  subsequently take place.  If they are not ba'aley simcha enough then to be equated with the bris principals, why does the occasion itself  suddenly rise to the level of equality?  

     And would the exemption hold at a siyum masechta as well?  After all, it should be no less than a bar-mitzva.  Also, since Av Harachamim is omitted when tachanun would have been skipped had it been a weekday, why is Av Harachamim universally said at a minyan in which a bar-mitzva is being celebrated?

EMT