מועד קטן דף כב

הלך גדול הבית לבית הקברות, מהו?

If the principal member of the household went with the remains of the deceased to the cemetery and did not return for several days, what is the halakha? If another mourner came to the house of mourning during his absence, does he follow the principal member of the household and count from the time of the burial, or does he count from the time that the funeral procession departed, like the other members of the household?

תא שמע, דאמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן: אפילו הלך גדול הבית לבית הקברות — מונה עמהן. מונה עמהן? והתניא מונה לעצמו!

The Gemara answers: Come and hear that which Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Even if the principal member of the household went to the cemetery, the mourner who comes home during his absence counts with them, i.e., the other members of the household who did not go to the cemetery. The Gemara asks: Does he really count and complete his mourning with them? But isn’t it taught otherwise in a baraita, that he counts seven days on his own?

לא קשיא: הא דאתא בגו תלתא, והא דלא אתא בגו תלתא. כי הא דאמר להו רב לבני הצלבוני: דאתו בגו תלתא — לימנו בהדייכו,

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This statement, that he counts with them, is referring to a case where the principal member of the household came home within three days. And the other ruling, that he counts on his own, is referring to a case where he did not come home within three days. This conclusion is similar to what Rav said to the sons of Hatzleponi when they were in mourning: Those who come home within three days should count with you; whereas those who do not come home within three days should count on their own.

דלא אתו בגו תלתא — לימנו לנפשיהו.

אמר להו רבא לבני מחוזא: אתון דלא אזליתו בתר ערסא, מכי מהדריתו אפייכו מבבא דאבולא — אתחילו מנו.

Rava said to the people of Meḥoza: Those of you who do not follow the coffin all the way to the place of interment should begin counting your days of mourning from when you turn your faces from the city gates to return home. Since the dead were commonly transported long distances and buried far away, most of the mourners did not accompany their deceased relatives to the actual site of burial.

רבי שמעון אומר: אפילו בא ביום השביעי ממקום קרוב — מונה עמהן. אמר רבי חייא בר גמדא אמר רבי יוסי בן שאול אמר רבי:

§ The Gemara cites the baraita taught above: Rabbi Shimon says: Even if one of the mourners came on the seventh day from a nearby place, he counts with the other mourners and completes the seven-day period of mourning with them. Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Gamda said that Rabbi Yosei ben Shaul said that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: And this is the halakha, provided that he came and found consolers still present in the house.

והוא שבא ומצא מנחמין אצלו.

בעי רב ענן: ננערו לעמוד ולא עמדו, מהו? תיקו.

§ Rav Anan asks: If the consolers had already stirred themselves to stand up and leave but did not yet actually stand up and leave, what is the halakha? Is it considered as if the consolers have already left or not? This question was not answered, and the dilemma stands unresolved.

גמירי חבריה דרבי אבא בר חייא מרבי אבא, ומנו — רבי זירא, ואמרי לה: חבריה דרבי זירא מרבי זירא, ומנו — רבי אבא בריה דרבי חייא בר אבא,

The Gemara relates that a colleague of Rabbi Abba bar Ḥiyya learned the following principle as a tradition from Rabbi Abba. The Gemara asks: And who was this colleague? It was Rabbi Zeira. And some say a different version of this tradition: A colleague of Rabbi Zeira learned a tradition from Rabbi Zeira. The Gemara asks: And who is this colleague? It was Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba: Rabbi Yoḥanan said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with regard to an animal that is unsuitable for human consumption because of severe organic disease or congenital defect, making it a tereifa, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon with regard to the halakhot of mourning.

אמר רבי יוחנן: הלכה כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל בטריפות, והלכה כרבי שמעון באבל.

כרבי שמעון באבל — הא דאמרן. כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל בטריפות — דתנן: בני מעים שניקבו וליחה סותמתן — כשרה, דברי רבן שמעון בן גמליאל.

The Gemara explains: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon with regard to mourning, concerning that which we just said about a mourner who arrives on the seventh day. The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with regard to defects in animals that render them tereifa concerning that which we learned in a baraita: If the animal’s intestines became perforated, but the hole was stopped up by mucus, so that nothing comes out of this hole, the animal is fit. Unlike an ordinary hole in the intestines, this hole does not render the animal a tereifa and make it unfit for consumption. This is the statement of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

מאי ליחה? אמר רב כהנא: שירקא דמעיא דנפיק אגב דוחקא. אמר מאן דהוא: איזכי ואיסק ואגמרה לשמעתא מפומיה דמריה,

The Gemara asks: What is this mucus? Rav Kahana said: The fat [shirka] of the intestines that comes out under pressure. Someone whose name was not given said: May I merit to go up to Eretz Yisrael and learn this halakha from the mouth of its author.

כי סליק, אשכחיה לרבי אבא בריה דרבי חייא בר אבא. אמר ליה: אמר מר: הלכה כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל בטריפות? אמר ליה: אנא ״אין הלכה״ אמרי.

When he went up from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael, he found Rabbi Abba, son of Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba, and said to him: Did the Master say that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with regard to defects that render the animal a tereifa? He said to him: I said just the opposite, namely, that the halakha is not in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, and therefore such a hole in the animal’s intestine makes it unfit for eating.

כרבי שמעון באבל, מאי? אמר ליה: פלוגתא נינהו, דאיתמר, רב חסדא אמר: הלכה, וכן אמר רבי יוחנן: הלכה. רב נחמן אמר: אין הלכה.

He asked him again: What about the other ruling reported in your name, that the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon with regard to mourning? Is this accurate? He said to him: This issue is subject to dispute, as it was stated: Rav Ḥisda said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, and similarly Rabbi Yoḥanan said: It is the halakha. But Rav Naḥman said: It is not the halakha.

ואין הלכה כרבן שמעון בן גמליאל בטריפות, והלכה כרבי שמעון באבל. דאמר שמואל: הלכה כדברי המיקל באבל.

The Gemara concludes: The halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel with regard to the aforementioned issue of tereifa, and the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Shimon with regard to mourning, as Shmuel stated a principle: The halakha follows the opinion of the more lenient authority in matters relating to mourning.

על כל המתים כולן מדחה מטתו — הרי זה משובח. על אביו ועל אמו — הרי זה מגונה, היה ערב שבת או ערב יום טוב

§ It was taught in a baraita: With regard to all other deceased relatives, it is praiseworthy for one to be quick in taking the bier out for burial. But in the case of one’s father or mother, acting in this manner is condemnable, as one should draw out the period of acute mourning for his parent. If, however, it was Friday or the eve of a Festival, then one is praiseworthy for expediting his parent’s burial because he does this only out of respect for his father or mother, as he does not want them to remain unburied for the duration of Shabbat or the Festival.

— הרי זה משובח, שאינו עושה אלא לכבוד אביו ואמו.

על כל המתים כולן, רצה — ממעט בעסקו, רצה — אינו

With regard to all other dead, if the mourner wishes he may reduce his business due to mourning. If, however, he wishes not to do so, he need not

ממעט, על אביו ועל אמו — ממעט.

reduce it. In the case of his father or mother, he must always reduce his business.

על כל המתים כולן, רצה — חולץ, רצה — אינו חולץ. על אביו ועל אמו — חולץ.

With regard to all other deceased relatives, if the mourner wishes, he may remove his garment from one of his shoulders, and if he wishes not to remove it, he need not remove it. However, in the case of his father or mother, he must always remove his garment from one of his shoulders.

ומעשה בגדול הדור אחד שמת אביו וביקש לחלוץ, וביקש גדול הדור אחר שעמו לחלוץ, ונמנע ולא חלץ.

There was an incident when the father of a leading authority of his generation died, and the authority wished to remove his garment from one shoulder. Another leading authority of the generation also wished to remove his own garment together with him, in order to join him in his mourning, but due to this the first person refrained and did not remove his garment, so that his colleague would not remove his garment as well.

אמר אביי: גדול הדור — רבי, גדול הדור שעמו — רבי יעקב בר אחא. ואיכא דאמרי: גדול הדור — רבי יעקב בר אחא, גדול הדור שעמו — רבי.

Abaye said: The leading authority of the generation mentioned here is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and the leading authority of the generation who was with him was Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa. And some say: The leading authority of the generation was Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa, and the leading authority of the generation who was with him was Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.

בשלמא למאן דאמר גדול הדור שעמו — רבי, היינו דנמנע ולא חלץ,

The Gemara examines this issue: Granted, according to the one who said that the leading authority of the generation who was with him was Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, this is the reason that he refrained and did not remove his garment from his shoulder. That is to say, Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa refrained from doing so because he did not wish to cause the Nasi to remove his own garment.

אלא למאן דאמר רבי יעקב בר אחא, אמאי נמנע ולא חלץ? רבן שמעון בן גמליאל נשיא הוה, וכולי עלמא מיחייבי למיחלץ! קשיא.

But according to the one who said that it is Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa who was the leader of the generation with him, why did Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi refrain and not remove his garment from his shoulder? Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, the father of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, was also the Nasi, and everyone is required to remove his garment from his shoulder for him, as was the accepted practice. Therefore, Rabbi Ya’akov bar Aḥa would also have been required to bare his shoulder. Why, then, did Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi prevent him from doing so? The Gemara concludes: Indeed this is difficult.

על כל המתים כולן מסתפר לאחר שלשים יום, על אביו ועל אמו — עד שיגערו בו חבריו. על כל המתים כולן נכנס לבית השמחה לאחר שלשים יום,

§ The Gemara returns to the continuation of the baraita: With regard to all deceased relatives except for parents, one may cut his hair after thirty days. In the case of one’s father or mother, one may not cut his hair until his colleagues have rebuked him for his hair being too long. With regard to all other deceased relatives, he may enter a place where a joyous celebration is taking place after thirty days; in the case of his father or mother, he may enter such a place only after twelve months.

על אביו ועל אמו — לאחר שנים עשר חדש.

אמר רבה בר בר חנה: ולשמחת מריעות. מיתיבי: ולשמחה ולמריעות שלשים יום. קשיא.

Rabba bar bar Ḥana said: The ruling that a mourner may enter a house of joy after thirty days applies specifically to a joyous social gathering, that is to say, to the joyous meals that a group of friends would eat together, each taking a turn hosting. But this ruling does not apply to a large joyous occasion, such as a wedding feast. The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita which adds: And also for joyous social gatherings, thirty days. This implies that when the baraita speaks of joyous celebrations without further specification, it is not referring to joyous social gatherings, but even to weddings and other joyous occasions. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, it is difficult.

אמימר מתני הכי, אמר רבה בר בר חנה: ולשמחת מריעות מותר ליכנס לאלתר. והא תניא: לשמחה שלשים, ולמריעות שלשים!

Ameimar taught the previous discussion as follows: Rabba bar bar Ḥana said an alternative version of the discussion: For a joyous social gathering one is permitted to enter immediately. The Gemara poses a question: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: For joyous celebrations and for joyous social gatherings, one must wait thirty days?

לא קשיא: הא באריסותא, הא בפורענותא.

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This ruling, of the baraita, is referring to an initial gathering, when the mourner is the first in the group of friends to host. The baraita teaches that in such a situation the mourner is required to wait thirty days before doing so. That ruling, of Rabba bar bar Ḥana, is referring to a reciprocal gathering. The mourner’s friends have already hosted these gatherings, and now it is his turn to host. Since he is required to host such a gathering for his colleagues, he need not postpone it. Rather, he may host the group immediately.

על כל המתים כולן קורע טפח, על אביו ועל אמו עד שיגלה את לבו. אמר רבי אבהו, מאי קרא: ״ויחזק דוד בבגדיו ויקרעם״, ואין אחיזה פחות מטפח.

The baraita continues: With regard to all other deceased relatives, one rends his garment the length of a handbreadth, and that suffices. In the case of his father or mother, he must rend his garment until he reveals his heart. Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the verse that teaches that the rent must be a handbreadth? “And David took hold of his clothes and rent them” (II Samuel 1:11), and taking hold cannot be done for a garment less than a handbreadth.

על כל המתים כולן אפילו לבוש עשרה חלוקין — אינו קורע אלא עליון, על אביו ועל אמו — קורע את כולן. ואפיקרסותו אינה מעכבת.

The baraita teaches further: With regard to all other deceased relatives, even if he is wearing ten garments, one on top of the other, he rends only his outer garment. But in the case of his father or mother, he must rend them all. Failure to rend his undergarment, however, does not invalidate the fulfillment of the mitzva.

אחד האיש ואחד אשה. רבי שמעון בן אלעזר אומר: האשה קורעת את התחתון ומחזירתו לאחוריה, וחוזרת וקורעת את העליון.

Both a man and a woman are required to rend their garments. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: A woman first rends her inner garment and turns it around, so that the tear is on her back. And only afterward does she rend her outer garment, so that she does not expose her chest.

על כל המתים כולן, רצה — מבדיל קמי שפה שלו, רצה — אינו מבדיל. על אביו ועל אמו — מבדיל.

With regard to all other deceased relatives, if one wishes he may rip apart his garment on the hem, rather than merely expanding the neck hole, so that the tear stands out distinctly from the opening of the garment. If he wishes not to do this, he does not rip apart the hem in this manner. That is to say, one may simply enlarge the neck hole, although rending a garment in this way makes the tear less prominent. In the case of one’s father or mother, however, he must always rip apart the hem.

רבי יהודה אומר: כל קריעה שאינו מבדיל קמי שפה שלו — אינו אלא קרע של תיפלות. אמר רבי אבהו: מאי טעמא דרבי יהודה, דכתיב:

Rabbi Yehuda says: Any rending that does not rip apart his garment on the hem of the garment is nothing other than a frivolous rent of no significance, as it must be evident that one has rent his garment in mourning and that the rent is not merely an imperfection in the garment. Rabbi Abbahu said: What is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda’s opinion? As it is written: “And he took hold of his own clothes and he rent them in two pieces” (II Kings 2:12). From that which is stated: “And he rent,” do I not know that he rent them in two? Rather, these words teach that the rent clothes must appear as if they were torn into two pieces, i.e., the tear must be obvious and visible.

״ויחזק בבגדיו ויקרעם לשנים קרעים״, ממשמע שנאמר ״ויקרעם״ איני יודע שהן לשנים? אלא שנראין קרועים כשנים.

על כל המתים כולן שולל לאחר שבעה, ומאחה לאחר שלשים. על אביו ועל אמו — שולל לאחר שלשים ואינו מאחה לעולם. והאשה שוללתו לאלתר מפני כבודה.

The baraita continues: With regard to all other deceased relatives, one may tack the tear with rough stitches after seven days, and one may join the edges more carefully after thirty days. But in the case of one’s father or mother, he may tack the tear only after thirty days, and he may never again join the edges more carefully. A woman, however, may tack the tear immediately, due to her honor, for it would be dishonorable for her to be seen with torn garments.

כי אתא רבין אמר רבי יוחנן: על כל המתים, רצה — קורע ביד, רצה — קורע בכלי. על אביו ועל אמו — ביד.

When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia, he said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to all other deceased relatives, if one wishes, he may rend his garment with his hand; and if he wishes, he may rend it with a utensil in a way that will preserve it. But in the case of his father or mother, he must rend his garment with his hand in a manner that will utterly ruin it.

ואמר רבי חייא בר אבא אמר רבי יוחנן: על כל המתים כולן — מבפנים, על אביו ועל אמו — קורע מבחוץ. אמר רב חסדא: וכן לנשיא.

And Rabbi Ḥiyya bar Abba said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: With regard to all other deceased relatives, one rends his garment on the inside, meaning, he rends his inner garment and not necessarily his outermost garment. In the case of one’s father or mother, however, he must rend the garment on the outside, i.e., the outermost garment. Rav Ḥisda said: And likewise, over a Nasi, one is required to rend his garment as he does over his father.

מיתיבי: לא הושוו לאביו ולאמו אלא לאיחוי בלבד.

The Gemara raises an objection from a baraita in which it was taught: The halakhot of rending for the death of other people referred to in the baraita, e.g., a Nasi, a president of the court, or one’s teacher, were likened to the halakhot of rending for one’s father or mother only with regard to the issue of carefully rejoining the edges of the rent, as in all of these cases it is prohibited to mend one’s garment with precise stitches.

מאי לאו, אפילו לנשיא? לא, לבר מנשיא.

What, is this baraita not also referring even to one who rends his garment for the Nasi? The Gemara rejects this: No, the baraita is referring to the other people, aside from one who rends his garment for the Nasi, as rending for the Nasi is the same as rending for one’s father with regard to all aspects of the rending.

נשיאה שכיב, אמר ליה רב חסדא לרב חנן בר רבא: כפי אסיתא וקום עלה, ואחוי קריעה לעלמא.

It was related that the Nasi died, and Rav Ḥisda said to Rav Ḥanan bar Rava: Turn the mortar over and stand on it, and show the rent to everyone. Everyone will then rend his garment in this manner, as everyone is required to rend his garment over the death of the Nasi.

על חכם חולץ מימין, על אב בית דין משמאל, על נשיא מכאן ומכאן.

§ It was further taught: For mourning a Sage, one removes his garment from the right shoulder. For the president of the court he removes his garment from the left shoulder. For the Nasi he removes his garment from here and from here, from both shoulders.

תנו רבנן: חכם שמת — בית מדרשו בטל, אב בית דין שמת — כל בתי מדרשות שבעירו בטילין. ונכנסין לבית הכנסת ומשנין את מקומן:

The Sages taught the following baraita: When a Sage dies, his study hall ceases its regular study as a sign of mourning over him. When the president of the court dies, all of the study halls in his city cease their regular study, and everyone enters the synagogue and changes their places there as a sign of mourning over him. Those who ordinarily sit in the north should sit in the south, and those who ordinarily sit in the south should sit in the north. When a Nasi dies, all study halls cease their regular study. On Shabbat, the members of the synagogue enter the synagogue for public Torah reading, which requires a congregation of ten,

היושבין בצפון — יושבין בדרום, היושבין בדרום — יושבין בצפון. נשיא שמת — בתי מדרשות כולן בטילין, ובני הכנסת נכנסין לבית הכנסת