Moed Katan 25b: Rabbi Chanin, son-in-law of the Nasi, had no children. He prayed for children and got one, but on the day his son was born, he died. The eulogizer said, “Happiness was turned into sorrow, rejoicing and sadness joined together. At the time of his joy he sighed, at the time that he was graced, his grace went lost.” They named him Chanin after him.

מועד קטן כה ע”ב: רבי חנין חתניה דבי נשיאה הוה, לא קא הוו ליה בני, בעא רחמי והוו ליה. ההוא יומא דהוה ליה ־ נח נפשיה. פתח עליה ההוא ספדנא: שמחה לתוגה נהפכה, ששון ויגון נדבקו, בעת שמחתו נאנח, בעת חנינתו אבד חנינו. אסיקו ליה חנן על שמיה.

A husband in Bnei Brak went to shul the Shabbos after his wife had given birth to a baby girl – their 12^th child. “What should we name her?” he asked. “Whatever you want – surprise me!” said his wife. The husband decided that Rivka would be a beautiful and fitting name. The Mi Shebeirach was said, the name was given, and davening ended.

Coming in the door of his apartment, he announced the new name in a loud voice. “Rivka?” his wife looked at him, puzzled. “But we already have a Rivka!” Suddenly it dawned on the husband as well. He had so many children that he had forgotten the name of one of his older daughters, and reused it!

He went and asked Rabbi Yitzchok Zilberstein, who showed him a similar story about the author of the Nesivos Hamishpat, printed recently in the Sefer Zikaron Olas Shlomo. The Nesivos’s father, Reb Yaakov, was a great lamdan, famous for his hasmada and deep concentration in learning. At the bris, when the mohel turned to him, Reb Yaakov, in the midst of a sugya, thought he was asking for his name, so he responded, “Yaakov.” Thus the baby was named “Yaakov ben Yaakov.”

Apparently, the Nesivos’s father didn’t mind, and took no steps to change his baby’s name. On the contrary, it would be a Kiddush Hashem, leading to more dedication to learning. Whenever people heard the Nesivos being called up for an aliyah as “Yaakov ben Yaakov” they would recall how the story happened and they would be reminded of what true hasmada is.

Here too, perhaps having two daughters with the same name would lead to people remarking, “Wow, they raised such a large family that they could sometimes forget their own children’s names. We too should aspire to bring more children into the world!”

Source: Tuvcha Yabiu, v. 1 p. 37, quoted in Veyikarei Shmo Beyisroel p. 459

Moed Katan 19b: How do we know that a mourner is forbidden to get a haircut for 30 days? We learn it out from nazir using the word “pera”. Just as a nazir must go 30 days without a haircut, a mourner must do the same.

מועד קטן יט ע”ב: שלשים יום מנלן? ־ יליף פרע פרע מנזיר: כתיב הכא (ויקרא י׳) ראשיכם אל תפרעו וכתיב התם (במדבר ו׳) גדל פרע שער ראשו, מה להלן שלשים ־ אף כאן שלשים.

Rabbi Moshe Heinemann told the following story: There was a religious Jew who served in the US Army in World War 2, and rose to the rank of major. He attributed his survival to his wearing an amulet written by Rabbi Akiva Eiger, guaranteeing that no weapons would harm him. His superiors were all killed, and so he kept getting promoted to take their places, until he reached major.

After the war, he went into business. Business was not going so well for him, but then the army offered him a contract for $3 million, which would have kept his business alive for a couple of years and helped him very much. The problem was that the army officers in charge of the contract invited him to a cocktail party where he was supposed to say that he was interested in the contract. He was sure that if he went, he would get the contract, but ten days before this party, his father died. This party was to take place during his shloshim, when it is forbidden to shave. And being unshaven is an unforgivable sin in the army. He knew he would have to shave in order to attend.

He went and asked his rav if it was allowed to pay someone $10,000 for the honor of being the sandek at his son’s bris, in order to be able to shave. (The Chasam Sofer in Orach Chaim teshuva 158 permitted a man in his shloshim to shave in preparation for a meeting with a government official where a large amount of money was at stake. He required two other mitigating factors: the day of the shave would have to be Rosh Chodesh, and he would have to serve as a sandek that day.)

This rav, who was known to be a machmir, thought about it and, after some time, said that he would be lenient if two other rabbonim would be lenient as well. He did not want to take responsibility for paskening this shailah all by himself. The man realized that this must be a serious shailah, and so he decided not to pursue it further. He didn’t ask two other rabbonim; he simply decided that he would not shave, not go to the party, and the Ribono shel Olam would send him the yeshua in some other way. His business continued steadily downhill until it was finished.

“What is the moral of the story?” concluded Rav Heinemann. “A person is not really in a position to decide what is a midas chasidus and what is not a midas chasidus. The rav said he would allow shaving if two other rabbonim were to concur with his heter. It is true that maybe the great loss involved was part of the heter, but if that is the din of the Torah, why should you be more machmir? We do find the concept one should be stringent and not eat from an animal that was the subject of a rav’s psak (Chullin 37). But he should have returned to his rav and asked, ‘Do you think that it is the right thing for me to be machmir?’ If the rav had said that he should be machmir, then he would have known he was doing the right thing.”

Source: Ma Nomar, Hilchos Chol Hamoed, page 55

[What is the source for being lenient in the laws of aveilus in order to save a large amount of money? Rav Heinemann contends that it is linked to the concept that one need not give up more than a fifth of his income in order to fulfill a positive mitzvah (Rema Orach Chaim 656:1). Despite the fact that the laws of aveilus are stated as prohibitions, the Chasam Sofer evidently considered them to be positive in nature, enacted by Chazal in order to give honor to the departed.]

Moed Katan 2a: We may fix roads and town squares and mikvaos, we may take care of all public needs, and we may mark graves.

Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim 544:1: Public needs may be taken care of on Chol Hamoed, for example, fixing the roads and removing potential dangers from them, marking graves so that the kohanim stay away, and fixing mikvaos. Rema: This heter is only for things like the above that are needs of the body, but other public needs, such as a shul, are forbidden to build on Chol Hamoed. And the same goes for any mitzvah needs – it is forbidden to do professional work for them.

Mishnah Berurah: This means even a shul that is needed to daven in with a minyan on Chol Hamoed, and even if they have no other place to hold the minyan, it is still forbidden, since this is not a bodily need. And even if they already began construction, and it just needs to be finished on Chol Hamoed, it is forbidden, since this is a professional job. However, the poskim (the Beis Yosef in Bedek Habayis) say that nowadays, building a shul is a davar ha’aved, because we fear that if we wait until after the Moed, the non-Jewish workers will refuse to continue building. The Maamar Mordechai says that the answer to this shailah varies depending on the time and place, and every rav must pasken as he sees fit.

מועד קטן ב ע”ב: ומתקנין את הדרכים ואת הרחובות ואת מקוות המים, ועושין כל צורכי הרבים, ומציינין את הקברות.

שולחן ערוך אורח חיים תקמד,א: צרכי רבים מותר לעשותה בחול המועד כגון לתקן הדרכים ולהסיר מהם המכשולות ולציין הקברות כדי שיזהרו מהם הכהנים ולתקן המקואות: הגה ודוקא צרכי רבים כאלו שהם צריכים לגוף האדם אבל שאר צרכי רבים כגון בנין בית הכנסת (ב״י בשם תשובת הרשב״א) אסור לעשות במועד וה״ה דלשאר צרכי מצוה אסור לעשות מלאכת אומן במועד (ריב״ש סימן רנ״ו)

משנה ברורה: כגון בנין ביהכ״נ. לרבותא נקט דאפילו בנין ביהכ״נ שהוא מצוה כדי להתפלל בו במועד בעשרה ואפילו אין להם מקום אחר להתפלל בעשרה ג״כ אסור שזה אין צורך לגוף האדם ואפילו התחילו מכבר לבנותו וא״צ במועד אלא להשלימו אסור מפני שהוא צריך מעשה אומן לזה. כתבו הפוסקים דבזה״ז הוי בנין ביהכ״נ דבר האבד דחיישינן שאם ימתין עד אחר המועד יעכבו העכו״מ מלבנותו. ובספר מאמר מרדכי כתב דהכל לפי המקום והזמן ואין לדיין אלא מה שעיניו רואות ע״ש.

When Rabbi Moshe Heinemann and his kehillah built the Agudah building on Park Heights in Baltimore, they chose the cheapest contractor, who was $60,000 cheaper than his competitors. But in the middle of the construction he went bankrupt. It was Chol Hamoed, and the workers were not willing to sit and wait. Now it was a question of davar ha’aved – if the Agudah didn’t pay the workers to keep working, they would leave and find other employers to work for. The Agudah would then have to find a new contractor, which would cost them a lot more, since the contractor would know they were stuck. Therefore, based on the Mishnah Berurah, Rabbi Heinemann permitted the shul to pay the workers and continue the construction on Chol Hamoed.

Source: Kuntres Mah Nomar, Hilchos Chol Hamoed, p. 7

[Why is a mikvah considered a physical need while a shul is considered a mitzvah need? One answer could be that in those days people didn’t have private bathrooms, and they had to bathe in the public bathhouse. A mikvah is simply a bathhouse that is made according to the halachos of mikvaos. Since they would need it anyway to get clean, it is considered a physical need. According to this, nowadays it would be forbidden to build a mikvah on Chol Hamoed.

Alternatively, we could say that a mikvah is really for physical needs – to permit husbands and wives. The same reasoning would explain why it is allowed to mark graves: because otherwise kohanim would have difficulty getting around, so this is considered a physical need.]    

Moed Katan 15b: A mourner is forbidden to bathe, as it says, “Do not anoint with oil” (Shmuel II 14:2) – and bathing is included in anointing.

Yoreh Deah 381:1. Rema: By law, this is only forbidden during shiva, but the custom today is to forbid bathing for the whole shloshim. And we should not change this custom, since it is an old custom, established by great rabbis.

מועד קטן טו ע”ב: אבל אסור ברחיצה, דכתיב (שמואל ב׳ י״ד) ואל תסוכי שמן, ורחיצה בכלל סיכה.

יו”ד סימן שפא,א: רחיצה כיצד, אסור לרחוץ כל גופו אפילו בצונן, אבל פניו ידיו ורגליו בחמין אסור בצונן מותר, ואם היה מלוכלך בטיט וצואה רוחץ כדרכו ואינו חושש: הגה וכל זה מדינא אינו אסור רק שבעה אבל אח״כ מותר ברחיצה אלא שנהגו האידנא לאסור כל רחיצה כל ל׳ יום ואפי׳ לחוף הראש אסור ואין לשנות המנהג כי מנהג קדום הוא ונתייסד על פי ותיקין.

One day in 1876, a guest was sitting with R’ Yitzchok Elchonon Spector, when a man came in and asked, “Rabbi, I am a mourner. Am I permitted to go to the bathhouse?” Without hesitation, he answered him, “You are permitted.”

The questioner was not satisfied with this instant response, and spoke again: “Rabbi, I am in mourning for my father.” “Permitted, you are permitted,” the rav answered, using a double expression.

But this still did not settle the mind of the questioner, who asked a third time, “Only to sweat, or even to wash in hot water?” The rav answered him with a friendly smile, but also with surprise: “I just told you that you are permitted, and I said it without adding any details or qualifications. If so, go without delay, before I change my mind!”

After the man left, the rav looked at the guest, noticing his amazement, and guessing his thoughts. How and why could he rule leniently, contrary to the ruling of the Rema, who cites an enactment of the early rabbis? He said jokingly, “My guest will go on his way and tell people that the head of the Beis Din of Kovno gives hasty, mistaken rulings.” The guest also responded in jest, “Certainly I will.”

“If so,” said the rav, “let me ask you: do you know the Maharshal’s reason for forbidding bathing?” The guest answered: “Because of the prohibition against having a haircut; for the usual way is to have a haircut in the bathhouse.” “In that case,” continued R’ Yitzchok Elchonon, “why are we allowed to bathe during Chol Hamoed? That is also a period when we are forbidden to have a haircut! I know that this is the problem posed by the Taz on Yoreh Deah 381:1, and he answers that since everyone is forbidden to have a haircut then, we do not worry that one might forget.” He smiled, “Here too, today is one of the days of Sefiras Haomer, when the custom is to forbid haircuts. So why would this man forget and get a haircut? Therefore, he is allowed to bathe.

“I urged the questioner to go immediately, because it looked like he wanted to argue against my ruling. He wanted to object that the prohibition on haircuts during Chol Hamoed is a real Rabbinic prohibition, while during Sefirah it is only a minhag. I did not want to enter into a detailed discussion with him, so I did not point out to him that the prohibition against bathing in hot water after shivah is also only a minhag.”

Source: Mourning in Halacha, p. 211

[His last point is that the questioner could have objected that perhaps people will take the minhag of Sefirah lightly and get haircuts in the bathhouse during Sefirah. R’ Yitzchok Elchonon’s response is that the minhag not to bathe during shloshim was not set up for such people who take minhagim lightly, because then why would they respect this minhag in the first place? Rather the “minhag vasikin” brought by the Rema was aimed at carefully observant Jews, and such people would never come to take a haircut in Sefirah.]

Moed Katan 25b: Rabbi Chanin, son-in-law of the Nasi, had no children. He prayed for children and got one, but on the day his son was born, he died. The eulogizer said, “Happiness was turned into sorrow, rejoicing and sadness joined together. At the time of his joy he sighed, at the time that he was graced, his grace went lost. They named him Chanin after him.

מועד קטן כה ע”ב: רבי חנין חתניה דבי נשיאה הוה, לא קא הוו ליה בני, בעא רחמי והוו ליה. ההוא יומא דהוה ליה ־ נח נפשיה. פתח עליה ההוא ספדנא: שמחה לתוגה נהפכה, ששון ויגון נדבקו, בעת שמחתו נאנח, בעת חנינתו אבד חנינו. אסיקו ליה חנן על שמיה.

On 28 Sivan 5701 (June 23, 1941) the German army marched into Lithuania, murdering most of the Jews in its path and herding the rest into ghettos. Among those in the Kovna ghetto was the Lieberman family. The husband had gone to Vilna for a few days, leaving his pregnant wife and young daughter at home, when the Germans attacked. From then on, all communication was cut off between Vilna and Kovna, and Mrs. Lieberman had no idea whether her husband had survived or not.

One day, however, a friend of her husband came from Vilna and said that he and several hundred other Jews, including her husband, had tried to escape from Vilna on foot. In the middle of the road from Vilna to Kovna, German airplanes flew over them and rained down upon them deadly fire, killing many of them. From then on he did not see her husband, and so he assumed he was among the dead. Hearing this, the young wife cried uncontrollably over her husband. Left alone in the world with a young orphan daughter and a baby soon to be born, she would not be consoled and declared that she would go to her grave mourning for her husband.

With Hashem’s kindness, she was able to survive the war hiding out among the gentiles. After the liberation, to her shock, her husband came back from the plains of Russia, where he had fled and survived. The couple’s happiness was boundless. But then the husband noticed his wife calling their young boy by his name. “I named him in memory of you, thinking that you had died,” she explained. He refused to accept this. “One cannot name after a living person. We must change the boy’s name, and even his official documents, so that no one ever calls him by my name again.” The couple came to Rabbi Ephraim Oshry, posek of the Kovna ghetto, to ask what they should do. 

He began by proving that in the time of Chazal, they did indeed name children after living people. When Rabbi Nosson advised a mother on how to do bris milah safely, she named the baby Nosson (Shabbos 134a). When Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon paskened that 60 women were ritually clean, they named their babies Elazar (Bava Metzia 84b).

That is when they named after a gadol hador. As far as naming after an ancestor, we find the Tanna Rabbi Prata son of R’ Eliezer, son of R’ Prata the Great (Gittin 33b). Either the grandfather was already deceased and we would say that they only named after dead ancestors, not live ones; or the grandfather was still alive and we would see from here that although they named after live ancestors, they did not name after fathers, only grandfathers.

[Similarly, we find that the line of Hillel’s dynasty was Hillel, Shimon, Gamliel (Hazakein), Shimon, Gamliel (of Yavneh), Shimon, Rebbi Yehuda Hanasi. If the grandfathers were alive, we would see from here than they named after the living, but not a father.]

The Sephardim carried on this custom, but the Ashkenazim today name only after the dead. If an Ashkenazi were to name after a living grandfather, we would leave the name, since he followed a valid custom. But naming a son after a father was never done in any Jewish community. The only time we find this in Chazal was in the case of a father who died just as his son was born: Rabbi Chanin (Moed Katan 25b).

As to the reason why sons were never named after fathers, Rabbi Oshry proposes that when the father calls his son, he would look crazy in the eyes of others. Also, among Ashkenazim, the father would feel that a son named after him was a bad sign for him.

Furthermore, R’ Yehuda Hachasid wrote in his Tzavaah that one should not marry a girl whose father has the same name as him, or a girl whose name is the same as his mother’s. Presumably the reason for this is that if the young couple lives with their parents, one would not be able to call the other by name (as the Rambam says in Mamrim 6:3). If the son and the father had the same name, it would similarly lead to disrespect for the father when other members of the family call the child.

Therefore, Rabbi Oshry ruled that the name of the boy should be changed, both in everyday life and on official documents.

Source: Shailos Uteshuvos Mimaamakim v. 5 Siman 13