Moed Katan 24a — the Talmud in English

Rabbi Yohanan asked Shmuel:

whether

there is mourning on Shabbat or there is no mourning on Shabbat?

He said to him:

Shmuel:

There is no mourning on Shabbat .

The Sages were sitting before Rav Pappa, and they were saying in the name of Shmuel: A mourner who had marital relations during his mourning—

is liable to death

at the hands of Heaven .

Rav Pappa said to them:

a. “

It is forbidden

merely to have relations,”

it was stated,

and not that he is liable to death if he had relations .

b.

And

this law

was stated in the name of Rabbi Yohanan,

and not in the name of Shmuel.

c.

And if you heard it in the name of Shmuel—

this is how you heard it:

Rav Tahlifa bar Avimi said in the name of Shmuel: A mourner who did not uncover

the hair of his head

and did not tear

his garment—

is liable to death.

As it is stated

regarding the sons of Aaron, who were commanded not to mourn the death of Nadav and Avihu [Leviticus 10]:

“Do not uncover your heads, and do not tear your garments”—

“and you shall not die!”

And from here one may infer:

but

another mourner

who did not uncover and did not tear—

is liable to death .

Rafram bar Pappa said: A tanna in

the tractate

Mourning Rabbati taught: A mourner is forbidden to have marital relations during his mourning.

And an incident occurred involving one who had marital relations during his mourning, and pigs tore away his body.

Shmuel said:

The laws of mourning on Shabbat are as follows:

Peh-Zayin—

obligation; Nun-Tav-Resh—

permission.

And as will be explained immediately.

Peh-Zayin obligation; this is its meaning:

uncovering the head,

removing the covering, which is practiced during his mourning on a weekday .

Returning the tear behind him

on Shabbat, so that the tear will not be visible on Shabbat.

Raising the bed

instead of turning it over on a weekday.

All these are

an obligation

when Shabbat arrives.

Nun-Tav-Resh, permission—its meaning is:

Wearing the sandal,

to wear it on Shabbat and not walk barefoot.

Marital relations

on Shabbat.

Washing the hands and feet in hot water in the evening,

before the entrance of Shabbat .

These are

permission.

And Rav said: Even uncovering the head

on Shabbat is

permission.

And

we challenged

Shmuel: What is different about wearing the sandal

on Shabbat,

that

it is

permission

according to him, and not an obligation? Because the failure to wear a sandal does not make his mourning recognizable, since

not everyone is accustomed to finish putting on his sandals,

for not everyone is accustomed to put on footwear on Shabbat, and the mourning is not recognizable when he does not wear footwear on Shabbat .

If so,

uncovering the head also,

there is no obligation to uncover his head on Shabbat, for his mourning is not recognizable through covering his head on Shabbat, since

not everyone is accustomed to uncover his head!

And we answer:

Shmuel

follows

his position.

For Shmuel said: a.

a.

Any tear that is not made at the time of fervor,

close to the death, at the time when the pain begins—

is not a tear.

b.

And any covering that is not like the covering of the Ishmaelites—

is not a covering.

He demonstrated

the demonstration

Rav Nahman

and showed how the covering is made: he covers his entire head all around,

up to the hollows of the beard,

the hollows of the cheek beneath his mouth, from which the beard grows.

And since only mourners practice covering the head in this manner—for ordinary people who cover their heads do not cover it in such a fashion—if the mourner continues this covering on Shabbat, it will be recognizable that he is observing mourning on Shabbat. Therefore Shmuel said that he must uncover this special covering before Shabbat .

Rabbi Yaakov said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: They taught

that he must uncover his head, so that he will reveal his mouth and nose, which are covered during his mourning,

only

in one

who does not have footwear on his feet,

for then, if he does not reveal his covering, he appears to be a mourner.

But if he has footwear on his feet—

his footwear demonstrates concerning him

that he is not observing mourning on Shabbat, for a mourner removes his footwear, and he has no need to uncover his head .

The Gemara now explains what Shmuel said: “

Any tear that is not made at the time of fervor is not a tear” .

And we inquire:

But they said to Shmuel: “Rav has died,”

Rav has departed! And nevertheless

Shmuel tore

over him

over Rav

twelve garments,

even though he did so over several days .

He said

concerning Rav’s death:

“The man whom I feared has departed,”

whom I was afraid of

him.

For Shmuel feared Rav’s questions directed at him.

And this also occurred when

they said to Rabbi Yohanan: “Rabbi Hanina has died.” He tore over him thirteen silk garments

silk garments.

He said: “The man whom I feared has departed.”

And we answer:

The Sages are different, for since at every moment their teachings are recalled

are remembered

their teachings

among the Sages at all times, even after a long while—

it is considered like the time of fervor.

He said to him

he challenged

Ravin bar Adda to Rava

concerning Shmuel’s words:

“Your student Rav Amram taught: A mourner, throughout all seven—

tears it

his tearing

in front of him,

for the tear must be visible when it is before him.

And if he comes to change

his garment—

he changes it, and tears

the garment that he changed into, despite the fact that the time of fervor has already passed.

And

on Shabbat—

he tears it,

his tear must be found

behind him

, and if he comes to change

a garment for the honor of Shabbat,

he changes it, but does not tear

it!

It is proven from this beraita, which says that one tears at the time he changes his garment, against Shmuel, who said that one tears only at the time of fervor! And we answer:

The Gemara now discusses whether

When that was taught

that one tears at the time of changing the garment, even though it is not the time of fervor, it was

with regard to the honor of his father and mother .

after the mourning period ends, or may not be mended? The father of Rav Oshaya and bar Kappara disagreed about this. One said that they may not be mended, and one said that they may be mended . And the Gemara proves: It can be established and proven that the father of Rav Oshaya said that they may not be mended.

The Gemara now discusses the question whether

those tears

that one tears over the dead not at the time of fervor

may be mended

after the end of the period of mourning,

or may not be mended?

The father of Rav Oshaya and Bar Kappara disputed this.

One said: They may not be mended, and one said: They may be mended .

And the Gemara proves:

Conclude

prove

that it was the father of Rav Oshaya who said that they may not be mended.

For Rav Oshaia said: They are not joined.

From whom did he hear it

from Rav Oshaia this law—whether

not from his father,

did he not hear it from his father?

And the Gemara rejects this:

No,

he did not hear it from his father, but

from Bar Kappara, his teacher,

his teacher

heard it.

Rava said: A mourner may walk

on Shabbat

in an unkeli

in his torn robe

within his house,

for within his house this is considered private, and it is permitted to practice mourning privately on Shabbat .

Abaye found

him

Rav Yosef

during his mourning on Shabbat,

for he had spread a cloth over his head,

for his head was wrapped like that of a mourner,

and he was walking back and forth in his house,

and he went and came within his house.

He said to him

Abaye to Rav Yosef rhetorically:

Is it not

that is, is it not so that

the Master holds

the halakha that

there is no mourning on Shabbat!?

He said to him

Rav Yosef:

This is what Rabbi Yohanan said: One observes matters done privately.

And what I am practicing within my house is private .

We learned in the Mishna:

Rabbi Eliezer says: Since the Temple was destroyed, Atzeret is like Shabbat.

Rabban Gamaliel says: Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur are like festivals.

Rav Giddel bar Menashya said in the name of Shmuel: The halakha is in accordance with Rabban Gamaliel .

And there are those who teach this statement of Rav Giddel bar Menashya with regard to this:

an infant,

throughout all thirty days

from his birth, is not treated like an adult, but

“an infant goes in the arms.”

That is, an infant who dies within thirty days is not carried in a coffin; rather, he is carried to the cemetery in the arms .

And

if a small number of men and women go out to bury him, one must avoid the prohibition of seclusion, since the cemetery is outside the city, in a place where there are no other people. Therefore he

is buried in the

presence of

one woman and two men,

for then this is not seclusion.

But

he is

not

buried

in the

presence of

one man and two women.

For this matter is prohibited because of seclusion .