Moed Katan 26b (כו:) — the Talmud in English

Rav Ḥisda said:

with Alexandrian stitching,

which is a good stitch, so that the sewing is not discernible.

The Sages taught: One who tears from among the gathered threads, from among the woven threads, from among the patches, or from among the ladder-stitches—

has not fulfilled his obligation.

But one who tears

from within the stitching—

has fulfilled his obligation.

Rav Ḥisda said: And

what was stated to fulfill the obligation when tearing from within the stitching applies

to Alexandrian stitching,

for since it is a complete stitch, this act is considered tearing.

The Sages taught: He may turn it

to the garment’s

lower part, and stitch it

the tear while it is turned downward.

Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar prohibits stitching it

altogether; he may not even turn it over and stitch it at the bottom.

Just as the seller

who is a mourner

is prohibited from stitching it,

so

too

the purchaser

who buys it from the mourner

is prohibited from stitching it.

Therefore, a seller,

who is a mourner, when he sells his garment to another person,

must inform the purchaser

that the tear in his garment is a tear made for mourning, and that he is prohibited from stitching it.

The Sages taught: The initial tear is a handbreadth, and the addition

to the tear, for an additional deceased relative, is

three fingerbreadths; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Yehuda says: The initial tear is three fingerbreadths

, and the addition is any amount.

Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Meir with regard to the initial tear, and the halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda with regard to the addition.

It was also taught so in a beraita: Rabbi Yosei says: The initial tear is a handbreadth, and the addition is any amount .

The Sages taught: They told him that his father died, and he tore, and then his son died, and he added

to the tear. The

lower tear can be stitched,

but the

upper tear,

which he made for his father and mother,

cannot be stitched.

If his son died and he tore, and then his father died and he added,

the

upper tear can be stitched, but the lower tear cannot be stitched.

If his father died, his mother died, his brother died, and his sister died, he makes one tear for all of them .

Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: For all of them he makes one tear.

And

for his father and mother

he makes another

tear.

Because one does not add to the tear for his father and mother,

but rather makes a separate tear for them.

What is the reason?

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Because they are not subject to an addition,

as an expression of honor; rather, one must make a separate tear for them.

Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira.

And we raise an objection:

Did Shmuel actually say this?

But Shmuel said: The halakha follows the lenient opinion in matters of mourning!

And we answer:

Mourning is one matter, and tearing is another.

How far does he tear?

He tears

to his navel.

And some say: To his heart.

Although there is no proof for the matter—

there is an allusion to it, as it is stated [Joel 2]: “

And rend your hearts and not your garments.”

“Tear your hearts and not your garments.”

If

the tear

reaches his navel ,

and another deceased relative dies,

he moves three fingerbreadths away and tears.

If

his garment becomes filled with tears

in front, he

turns it

to the side of the torn garment

behind him, and thereafter tears the back side, which is now in front.

and from then on tears the back side, which is now on the front.

If

the garment becomes filled with tears

at the top,

he turns it over from the bottom.

He stitches its lower side until it becomes the neck opening, and tears at the top.

But one who tears at the bottom or at the sides has not fulfilled his obligation.

Except that the High Priest tears at the bottom.

Rav Mattana and Mar Ukva disputed this matter, and both stated it in the name of Shmuel’s and Levi’s father.

One said:

If another deceased relative dies,

throughout the seven days he tears,

he is obligated to make another tear for that relative. But if the relative dies

after seven days,

it is sufficient for him to

add

to the initial tear.

And one said: Throughout thirty days he tears; after thirty days he adds.

Rabbi Zeira challenged: According to the one who says that throughout the seven days he

tears—

why

is it not sufficient for him to add to his tear for the additional deceased relative?

This is because

it cannot be closed

during the seven days. Therefore, if he adds to it for the second deceased relative, the addition to the tear is not discernible; rather, everything appears to be one tear. But after the seven days, once it has been closed, the addition is discernible in the closed tear.

Rather, this is what the Master said: A woman may immediately gather it together

to make a tear

immediately—

Here too,

when another deceased person dies for her, she can add to the tear that was gathered together, and she need not make another tear. And why, then, did they state categorically that within seven days one must make a tear, implying that even a woman must make a tear!?

And we answer:

There,

the fact that a woman gathers it together immediately is not based on the law, but only

because of the honor of the woman.

There is another difficulty:

According to the one who says that throughout the thirty days one makes a tear

and does not add to it for another deceased person,

why?

Is it not because

it may not be stitched

the tear within thirty days ?

Rather, with regard to his father and mother, for whom it may never be stitched—

Here too,

one should always make a tear for another deceased person, and it is impossible to add to their tears. Why, then, did we not make this distinction?

And we answer:

There,

the fact that he never stitches the tear made for his father and mother is not based on the law, but only

because of the honor of his father and mother;

therefore, he may add to their tear after it has been gathered together, since it is considered as though it had been stitched.

The Sages taught:

A mourner who does not wish to ruin his garment,

who goes before the deceased wearing a torn garment,

and deceives those who see him, making them think that the torn garment he is wearing is the garment that he tore in honor of the deceased—

he robs the dead,

because he did not tear for them,

and the living,

because he deceived them .

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: One who says to his fellow: Lend me your garment, and I will go and visit my father, who is ill,

thereby hints to him that he might tear it if his father dies. Therefore, if his fellow lent him the garment,

and he went and found that his father had died—

he tears it and may stitch it .

And when he comes to his home, he returns his garment to him and gives him the value of the tear.

And if he did not inform him—

he may not touch it.

The Sages taught: If a sick person has a deceased relative—

he is not informed that his relative has died,

his relative,

lest he lose his reason over it .

And

likewise

the relatives of the deceased do not make a tear

in their garments

in his presence, and they silence the

weeping of the

women before him.

And they make a tear for a minor

whose relative died, although he is not obligated to tear,

because of the distress it causes,

so that those who see it will weep and the honor of the deceased will be increased .

And one tears for his father-in-law and mother-in-law

when they die

because of the honor of his wife.

And Rav Pappa said: It was taught in

the tractate called “

Avel Rabbati”:

A mourner

during his mourning

should not place a baby in his lap, because this leads him to laughter, and he will thereby disgrace himself in the eyes of people .

We learned in the Mishna:

And one does not provide the mourner’s first meal on upright beds.

The Sages taught: One who goes to the house of a mourner—if he was close to him,

meaning that he knew him and was his friend,

the mourner’s first meal is provided for him

for an acquaintance and friend,

on overturned beds,

turned upside down.

But if not,

if he is not his friend and acquaintance—

the mourner’s first meal is provided for him on upright beds .

An incident of misfortune occurred to Rava,

meaning that he became a mourner and observed shiva.

Abba bar Marta entered his presence,

he came to him to comfort him,

Abba bar Marta, who was Abba bar Minyumi.

Rava—

stood the bed upright,

the bed so that Abba bar Marta’s first meal could be provided on it, since he was not close to him.

But

Abba bar Marta,

who had come to comfort him and considered himself Rava’s friend,

overturned

the bed so that the mourner’s first meal would be provided for him as for a friend.

Rava said,

Rava:

How lacking in understanding is this Torah scholar,

for I do not consider him one with whom I am close, yet he does not realize this and acts contrary to my intention.