<html>
<body>
<font size=3>At 11:47 AM 12/9/2011, R. Micha wrote:<br><br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">On Thu, Dec 08, 2011 at
06:20:38PM -0500, Prof. Levine wrote:<br>
> Tonight I raised the issue of why we do not use the singular when we
say <br>
> Hamakom when she is the only one sitting. Someone said that
this was <br>
> raised when some rabbi was present and he said that one should use
the <br>
> plural "since the Neshama of the deceased is also
present."...<br><br>
I have heard that too, but I think it's a general issue. Do you say<br>
"Shalom Aleikhem" even to just one person?<br><br>
Besides, what if you're at a daughter mourning her mother, do you
say<br>
"eskhen" instead of "-em"? (For that matter,
"neshamah" is lashon<br>
neqeivah, maybe if the niftar was a man as well...)<br><br>
I think that either<br>
1- we simply don't customize such matbei'os, or<br>
2- we address "you and yours". Perhaps there is a general
notion about<br>
blessing people as part of the community more than as individuals.
We<br>
are even pretentious enough to say "Selach lanu", admitting
others'<br>
guilt rather than to stand alone...<br>
</blockquote><br>
Someone familiar with German minhagim whom I asked about this sent me the
following:<br><br>
</font><font size=2 color="#0000FF">The minhag is to use the singular
when indicated. The sign used by KAJ states the use of
both.</font><font size=3> <br>
</font><font size=2 color="#0000FF">However, I have heard what the Rabbi
said regarding the inclusion of the Neshama. <br>
I guess that custom has spread and taken hold.</font><font size=3>
<br><br>
If the neshama of the deceased is present in the home in which he
lived, then, if there are no relatives to mourn and hence no
aveilim and a minyan is held in the house of the nifter, should those who
are at the minyan say Ha Makom even though there is no Avel
present?<br><br>
Suppose only one of the aveilim accompanies the nifter to EY for burial
and sits for a time in EY before returning to the US. Is the
neshama there also and hence one would say eschem according to this
reasoning. Or is the neshama just in the home where the nifter
lived and hence one should use only the singular if there is only one
Avel sitting for a time in EY?<br><br>
I really do not understand what it means to say "the Neshama of the
deceased is also present." Why does the Neshama need
comforting and what does it mean to comfort a Neshama? YL<br>
</font></body>
<br>
</html>