Moed Katan 23b (כג:) — the Talmud in English

говорят: ![](pamud.bmp "

to the side

and eats. And he does not recline and eat, but sits and eats .

the zimmun blessing , since he is exempt from all the mitzvot, as he is commanded at that time to occupy himself with the burial of the dead .

others do not recite a blessing on his behalf

to discharge him from his obligation ,

and they do not include him in a zimmun,

for he does not join them for a zimmun.

And he is exempt from reciting the Shema, from prayer, and from tefillin

, and from all the mitzvot stated in the Torah .

And

if his dead lay before him

on Shabbat—

he

reclines and eats, eats meat, and drinks wine

, and recites a blessing, and leads the zimmun, and others recite a blessing and lead the zimmun on his behalf.

And he is obligated in reciting the Shema and in prayer,

[and in tefillin] ,

and in all the mitzvot stated

in the Torah .

Rabban Gamaliel says: Since he became obligated in

these

mitzvot that are stated, he

became obligated

What, then, is the difference between them? Do they not disagree over this:

of them all.

And Rabbi Yohanan said: Conjugal relations

on Shabbat when he is an onen

is the difference between them: for Rabban Gamaliel it is permitted, whereas for the first tanna it is prohibited, and therefore he permitted only the mitzvot that are listed .

What? Is it not concerning this that they dispute:

For he said:

the first tanna

holds that there is mourning on Shabbat,

and therefore, while he is an onen on Shabbat, he must refrain from marital relations.

And as for the one who said:

Rabban Gamliel

holds

that

there is no mourning on Shabbat,

and therefore marital relations are permitted to an onen on Shabbat.

And we infer:

From where

do we know that the dispute concerning an onen is connected to the question of whether there is mourning on Shabbat?

Perhaps the first tanna said there

that an onen is prohibited from marital relations

only because his deceased is lying before him,

and it is because of his state of aninut that he must refrain from marital relations, and not because of his mourning.

But here,

in the case of a mourner on Shabbat,

where his deceased is not lying before him—

no,

mourning is not in effect on Shabbat.

And perhaps Rabban Gamliel said there

that marital relations are permitted to him only because

mourning has not yet taken effect upon him,

as the obligation of mourning begins only from the time of burial.

But here,

in the case of mourning on Shabbat,

where mourning has taken effect upon him—

it is indeed so:

mourning is in effect on Shabbat, and he will be prohibited from marital relations.