[Avodah] Rav Moshe Shternbuch: Do Adopted Children Sit Shiva For Their Step Parents?

[Micha Berger]

On Mon, May 07, 2012 at 11:54:47AM -0400, Prof. Levine wrote:
> From http://revach.net/article.php?id=1529
>
> Although they are technically not related or considered family, Rav  
> Moshe Shternbuch says (3:374) that if an adopted child grew up with his 
> step parents and considered them to be his parents he should sit Shiva 
> and keep all halachos of Aveilus upon their death...

Linguistic issue: An adoptive parent is (usually) not a step parent. An
adoptive parent is a parent, just as parents by C Section are. A step
parent is a parent's spouse, where they did not adopt their spouse's
children. <http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/stepparent> A similar
mistake is also made about foster parenting, which is parenting someone
else's child just so that they can get their act back together. An
adoptive parent is as permanent as any other parent, and thus not a
foster parent.

The adjective is instead put on the genetic parents who do not raise the
child. These are "birth parents", to distinguish them from the adoptive,
ie real parents, the ones who raise the child.

To quote R' Meir Simcha haKohen miDvinsk, MC Devarim 28:61 (tr mine):
    Even his creation on the physical level, we find in the Torah
    that it is for the intent of his preserving the species on a
    spiritual level. As Hashem (blessed be He) said [of His selection
    of Abraham], "For I know him, that he will teach his children after
    him..." (Bereishis 18:19) Similarly, it says in "Yeish Nochalin"
    [Bava Basra 116a, quoting Yirmiyahu 22:10] "'Weep for the one who
    goes...' Rav Yehudah said that Rav said: the one who goes with no
    male children. Rav Yehoshua ben Levi said: it is one who goes without
    a student." Both preserve the species and to the same effect.

For similar reasons, I do not believe RMS is quoted here as giving a
chiddush. One sits shiv'ah for a rebbe muvhaq, and certainly an adoptive
parent qualifies.

On a tangent, I think some of you might enjoy the three posts I wrote
translating and gilding the lilly of that MC.
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2012/04/torah-sefer-torah.shtml
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2012/04/learning-and-teaching-1.shtml
    http://www.aishdas.org/asp/2012/04/learning-and-teaching-2.shtml

In it he makes a powerful argument against Nefesh haChaim cheileq
4, and (thus) much of the philosophical underpinning of the Yeshiva
Movement. (IOW, I wouldn't call RMShKmD "yeshivish" in the contemporary
sense of the word, but no one thought all acharonim held identically
anyway.)

To quote (still my translation):
    It was explained in the beginning that a person exists in his
    intellectual soul, like all the lofty people and like the heavenly
    causes. Before he was created, a person was also a seikhel nivdal
    [separated intellect; i.e. a pure intellect with no body, like
    angels; metaphysical] which grasped its Creator. As it says in Niddah
    pg. 30. [The soul] had personal existence and descended into the
    lower world in order to do mitzvos maasios which require material
    substance. Like Moshe's answer to the angels [when they asked
    that Hashem leave the Torah with them rather than give it to us at
    Sinai], "Do theft etc... have meaning for you?" Therefore they said,
    "One who learns but not in order to do, would have been pleasanter
    that his umbilical cord would have prolapsed in front of his face
    [and he never came into the world." (Yerushalmi ch. "Hayah Qorei"
    [I found it elsewhere -- Shabbos 1:2, vilna 7b -- micha]) Because then
    [before birth] too he was a seikhel nivdal who grasped his Creator,
    may He be blessed. (Qorban Aharon, introduction) Similarly if he
    teaches others then his learning has a purpose, which is to preserve
    the species on a spiritual level. Therefore also, the one who learns
    but not for the sake of teaching they thus said, "it would have been
    pleasanter for him not to have been created."

The MC argues against the concept of "Torah lishmah" as advocated by RCV
because someone can learn for its own sake or the pure joy of learning
more easily without a body than with. If that's the goal of life, why
be born?

Tir'u baTov!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             Today is the 30th day, which is
micha at aishdas.org        4 weeks and 2 days in/toward the omer.
http://www.aishdas.org   Gevurah sheb'Hod: When does capitulation
Fax: (270) 514-1507                  result in holding back from others?