Naming a Baby - Rabbi Shimon Meir Biton shlita

00:02 Speaker 1 You’re listening to “Lema’an Yishme’u,” a podcast from Machon Halacha Chabad.

00:09 Speaker 2 Hello and welcome. Here’s a question we were asked in the beis din. A couple was blessed with a daughter, and the father and mother disagreed. After the mazel tov comes their first disagreement. What happened? The father wants to name their daughter Liron, and the mother wants to name her Maayan. They asked whose preference should prevail. Usually, in situations like this, a compromise is possible, but here they couldn’t reach one, so they came to the beis din. The beis din considered who, under Torah law, has the first right to name the daughter. We searched the sources and found a discussion in Daas Zekeinim of the Baalei HaTosafos, on Parshas Vayeishev in Bereishis, concerning Yehudah’s sons Er and Onan. The Torah says, “And he called his name Er.” So who named the first child? The father. There’s our verse: apparently, the Torah already gives the father the first right to name a child. Then it says, “And she called his name Onan.” So who has the right to name the second child? The mother: “And she called his name.” Then the Torah says, “She conceived again and bore a son, and she called his name Shelah.” Wait, how can that be? The first time, “he called his name Er”; the second time, “she called his name Onan”; and the third time, who named him? Why? It should have gone from him to her and then back to him. The Torah says that she called the third child Shelah because “he was in Keziv when she bore him.” Our sages explain that, quite simply, he wasn’t physically there when she gave birth. Where was he? In Keziv. Since he was in Keziv, the son still needed a name. It was his turn to name the child, but because he wasn’t there, she did it. So it would seem that, under Torah law, the order for naming children is the father, then

02:00 Speaker 2 the mother, and then back to the father. Fine. There is, however, a story told about the Ramban. The Ramban did not accept this interpretation, saying that it had no basis at all in Jewish custom. Even though, in the Ramban’s view, this interpretation does not fit the verse, a story about the underlying idea is told. The Ramban and Rabbeinu Yonah were in-laws: the Ramban’s son had married Rabbeinu Yonah’s daughter. They were blessed with a son, a grandson to both Rabbeinu Yonah and the Ramban. But Rabbeinu Yonah had passed away around that time. The Ramban came to his son and said, “Don’t name him after me. Name him after the one who passed away, to give him that honor and merit.” And that child indeed became a great figure among the Jewish people. In other words, even the Ramban, who rejected the explanation given by Daas Zekeinim of the Baalei HaTosafos, deriving it from Yehudah and Tamar, still recognized the basic idea: in practice, the father has precedence in naming a son or daughter. Some of the later authorities, though, discussed the question and suggested that it really depends on custom. What custom? We find a case brought by the author of Sedei Haaretz: a mother wanted to name a child after her father, while her husband wanted to name the child after his father. They came to the author of Sedei Haaretz, who searched and searched and said that he had found in the holy books that, on the contrary, the husband should name the child first. Why? Because of the terrible tragedy involving Nadav and Avihu. Who were Nadav and Avihu? They were the children of Aharon and Elisheva, daughter of Aminadav. What happened there? Nadav—Elisheva, daughter of Aminadav. Whom was Nadav named after? His grandfather. On whose side? Elisheva’s father, Aminadav. And Avihu, the second son—whom was he named after? After Aharon’s father: Avihu, “my father is he.” And because they gave precedence to the wife’s father, Aminadav—Elisheva was the daughter of Aminadav, and Nadav and Avihu—

04:22 Speaker 2 because the first son was named for him, what happened, happened. Hashem have mercy, Nadav and Avihu passed away because they gave precedence to someone who should not have come first. The author of Sedei Haaretz therefore ruled that it is proper for the father to name the first child after his own father. That is the right order, because it honors one’s parents, and so on. But Melitzei Eish cites the gaon Rabbi Chaim Yosef Sonnenfeld, who writes that Ashkenazi custom is not for the man—sorry, not for the woman; rather, it is the woman who names the first child after her father. She has precedence, and it follows the custom. As for those verses and midrashim, we have not found them. We have only the citation in Sedei Haaretz, and we certainly cannot rely on something like that. So we see evidence that customs differ on this question. Some maintain that the right belongs to the father, and others maintain that it belongs to the mother. In light of “Do not forsake your mother’s teaching,” we should indeed follow the established custom. But I saw one of the dayanim raise a question about where this whole discussion is taking us. He wants to make a fundamental distinction between the four sections of the Shulchan Aruch: Orach Chaim, Yoreh De’ah, Even HaEzer, and Choshen Mishpat. In Orach Chaim and Yoreh De’ah, honoring one’s parents, “Do not forsake your mother’s teaching,” and Jewish custom are part of the halachic foundation. And so, since the custom is—and we have also seen support for it from the early authorities—that a child is named after the father, meaning the grandfather, as a way of honoring him, we should continue that custom, with each

06:25 Speaker 2 community following its own custom. By the way, let’s open a parenthesis here. In Toras Menachem, Parshas Mikeitz 5733, the Rebbe discusses whether a child may be named after someone who is alive or only after someone who has passed away. The Rebbe says explicitly that it depends on Ashkenazi and Sephardi customs. As is well known, among Sephardim it is customary, and considered an honor, to name a child after a living grandfather. According to Ashkenazi custom, one does not name a child after a living grandfather. The Rebbe emphasizes that this is the custom and that one should not change it. Now, let’s return to our question. According to this principle, the whole discussion would seem to apply specifically where honoring one’s parents is involved. When that is the case, the husband should name the child after his father. But here they want to name the child—whether a boy or a girl—Maayan or Eliran, names that have nothing to do with honoring parents. So the whole basis of “Do not forsake your mother’s teaching,” and of continuing the custom and tradition of naming children after one’s parents to honor them—and of the husband or wife having precedence, depending on Ashkenazi or Sephardi custom, as we have just discussed—applies only when they want to name the child after a parent, meaning the child’s grandfather. If they don’t want to name the child after a grandfather but simply want modern names, then we follow the principle that a person acts with the prevailing understanding in mind. In matters of Choshen Mishpat, you and I married according to the custom of the place and the custom of the time. So among the traditional community or the broader public, where people give general names rather than necessarily naming children after our Rebbeim—though the Rebbe also spoke about names drawn from our Rebbeim. There is a story the Rebbe discusses, in which the Alter Rebbe named a grandson after Rabbi Avraham the Malach, who had been his teacher, and after Reb Chaim, the grandfather

08:27 Speaker 2 of, of his mother’s father. The child was ill, and Reb Avraham the Malach came to him in a dream and said, “Why aren’t you praying for the child?” He answered, “Because the grandfather is upset with me for not putting his name first and for subsuming his name.” So we see from this story that the Alter Rebbe did it out of respect. There are circumstances in which one must honor the mother’s father, and one must also honor one’s teachers, because in matters of honor, one’s teachers take precedence over one’s parents. So there are circumstances in which a child is named after our Rebbeim, and circumstances in which a child is named after a father out of respect. But here, where respect is not a factor, there is no continuation of heritage or tradition, and “Do not forsake your mother’s teaching” does not apply at all. All those halachic considerations move aside. Here we’re talking about a modern name—Liran, Eliron, and all sorts of names like that. Here, it would seem, no one has precedence. No one has precedence according to the early authorities we mentioned at the beginning; all of that falls away. And this fits with what the Rebbe writes in Igros Kodesh, volume 5, page 127. The Rebbe writes that when it comes to names, even if I say the husband should be asked first, that does not mean the husband decides on his own. It has to be by agreement. So what does it mean to turn to the husband? The Rebbe says it means the husband is the first to suggest a name. After he suggests a name, the wife and husband discuss it: What do you think of this name? It does not mean he has, so to speak, a veto. So let’s go one step further, to entirely modern names. Since this has nothing to do with the laws of tradition, it is like

10:06 Speaker 2 questions in Choshen Mishpat. In Choshen Mishpat, there is the principle that a person acts with certain understandings in mind. You and I did not marry with any tradition in mind about choosing a modern name, so we are equal in this. That, it would seem, is how we can distinguish between traditional names, such as names after our Rebbeim, where there is a rule of precedence; names after grandfathers and grandmothers, depending on Ashkenazi and Sephardi custom; and a third category, modern names. But this entire halachic discussion has to begin and end with the point the Rebbe made: there must always be agreement. There is no need to fight over names, and the parents must always be asked. That is how the Rebbe explains it: ask the parents. Why? Because they are given prophecy in this matter, and the angel appointed over names and souls wants to hear what was declared below. He then brings the soul corresponding to that name. That is what the Rebbe says. So we’ll conclude, with Hashem’s help, with the verse “A good name is better than fine oil.” May there always be good names, meaningful names, names that bring good things, and not, G-d forbid, names that hurt or embarrass a child when they grow up. We know this from our work with the community. So we should focus on names according to Torah and Jewish custom, with each community following its custom. And we, with Hashem’s help, will name children after our Rebbeim. May we hear good news very soon, may the Geulah come. Amen.