In the very middle pesukim of the Torah, Moshe and Aharon argue over the laws of aninut, the period between the loss and the burial of a loved one: Moshe thinks Aharon and his sons should eat the korban hatat meat in the aftermath of the death of Nadav and Avihu, but Aharon disagrees and has already gone ahead and burned it. Aharon’s approach becomes our north star for the laws of aninut. But what is the character of aninut exactly? How does it differ from shiva, for example?
Zevachim 101
Questions? Comments? Email dinanddaf@gmail.com
- ויקרא י – מיתות נדב ואביהוא
א וַיִּקְח֣וּ בְנֵֽי־אַ֠הֲרֹ֠ן נָדָ֨ב וַאֲבִיה֜וּא אִ֣ישׁ מַחְתָּת֗וֹ וַיִּתְּנ֤וּ בָהֵן֙ אֵ֔שׁ וַיָּשִׂ֥ימוּ עָלֶ֖יהָ קְטֹ֑רֶת וַיַּקְרִ֜יבוּ לִפְנֵ֤י יְ-הֹוָה֙ אֵ֣שׁ זָרָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֧ר לֹ֦א צִוָּ֖ה אֹתָֽם׃
Now Aaron’s sons Nadab and Abihu each took his fire pan, put fire in it, and laid incense on it;
and they offered before God alien fire, which had not been enjoined upon them.
ב וַתֵּ֥צֵא אֵ֛שׁ מִלִּפְנֵ֥י יְ-הֹוָ֖ה וַתֹּ֣אכַל אוֹתָ֑ם וַיָּמֻ֖תוּ לִפְנֵ֥י יְ-הֹוָֽה׃
And fire came forth from God and consumed them; thus they died at the instance of God.
…
ו וַיֹּ֣אמֶר מֹשֶׁ֣ה אֶֽל־אַהֲרֹ֡ן וּלְאֶלְעָזָר֩ וּלְאִֽיתָמָ֨ר ׀ בָּנָ֜יו רָֽאשֵׁיכֶ֥ם אַל־תִּפְרָ֣עוּ ׀ וּבִגְדֵיכֶ֤ם לֹֽא־תִפְרֹ֙מוּ֙ וְלֹ֣א תָמֻ֔תוּ וְעַ֥ל כׇּל־הָעֵדָ֖ה יִקְצֹ֑ף וַאֲחֵיכֶם֙ כׇּל־בֵּ֣ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל יִבְכּוּ֙ אֶת־הַשְּׂרֵפָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֖ר שָׂרַ֥ף יְ-הֹוָֽה׃
And Moses said to Aaron and to his sons Eleazar and Ithamar, “Do not bare your heads and do not rend your clothes, lest you die and anger strike the whole community. But your kin, all the house of Israel, shall bewail the burning that God has wrought.
ז וּמִפֶּ֩תַח֩ אֹ֨הֶל מוֹעֵ֜ד לֹ֤א תֵֽצְאוּ֙ פֶּן־תָּמֻ֔תוּ כִּי־שֶׁ֛מֶן מִשְׁחַ֥ת יְ-הֹוָ֖ה עֲלֵיכֶ֑ם וַֽיַּעֲשׂ֖וּ כִּדְבַ֥ר מֹשֶֽׁה׃ {פ}
And so do not go outside the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, lest you die, for God’s anointing oil is upon you.” And they did as Moses had bidden.
…
יב וַיְדַבֵּ֨ר מֹשֶׁ֜ה אֶֽל־אַהֲרֹ֗ן וְאֶ֣ל אֶ֠לְעָזָ֠ר וְאֶל־אִ֨יתָמָ֥ר ׀ בָּנָיו֮ הַנּֽוֹתָרִים֒ קְח֣וּ אֶת־הַמִּנְחָ֗ה הַנּוֹתֶ֙רֶת֙ מֵאִשֵּׁ֣י יְ-הֹוָ֔ה וְאִכְל֥וּהָ מַצּ֖וֹת אֵ֣צֶל הַמִּזְבֵּ֑חַ כִּ֛י קֹ֥דֶשׁ קׇֽדָשִׁ֖ים הִֽוא׃
Moses spoke to Aaron and to his remaining sons, Eleazar and Ithamar: Take the meal offering that is left over from God’s offerings by fire and eat it unleavened beside the altar, for it is most holy.
יג וַאֲכַלְתֶּ֤ם אֹתָהּ֙ בְּמָק֣וֹם קָד֔וֹשׁ כִּ֣י חׇקְךָ֤ וְחׇק־בָּנֶ֙יךָ֙ הִ֔וא מֵאִשֵּׁ֖י יְ-הֹוָ֑ה כִּי־כֵ֖ן צֻוֵּֽיתִי׃
You shall eat it in the sacred precinct, inasmuch as it is your due, and that of your sons, from God’s offerings by fire; for so I have been commanded.
ידוְאֵת֩ חֲזֵ֨ה הַתְּנוּפָ֜ה וְאֵ֣ת ׀ שׁ֣וֹק הַתְּרוּמָ֗ה תֹּֽאכְלוּ֙ בְּמָק֣וֹם טָה֔וֹר אַתָּ֕ה וּבָנֶ֥יךָ וּבְנֹתֶ֖יךָ אִתָּ֑ךְ כִּֽי־חׇקְךָ֤ וְחׇק־בָּנֶ֙יךָ֙ נִתְּנ֔וּ מִזִּבְחֵ֥י שַׁלְמֵ֖י בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃
But the breast of elevation offering and the thigh of gift offering you [and your wife], and your sons and daughters with you, may eat in any pure place, for they have been assigned as a due to you and your sons from the Israelites’ sacrifices of well-being.
טו שׁ֣וֹק הַתְּרוּמָ֞ה וַחֲזֵ֣ה הַתְּנוּפָ֗ה עַ֣ל אִשֵּׁ֤י הַחֲלָבִים֙ יָבִ֔יאוּ לְהָנִ֥יף תְּנוּפָ֖ה לִפְנֵ֣י יְ-הֹוָ֑ה וְהָיָ֨ה לְךָ֜ וּלְבָנֶ֤יךָ אִתְּךָ֙ לְחׇק־עוֹלָ֔ם כַּאֲשֶׁ֖ר צִוָּ֥ה יְ-הֹוָֽה׃
Together with the fat of fire offering, they must present the thigh of gift offering and the breast of elevation offering, which are to be elevated as an elevation offering before God, and which are to be your due and that of your sons with you for all time—as God has commanded.
טזוְאֵ֣ת ׀ שְׂעִ֣יר הַֽחַטָּ֗את דָּרֹ֥שׁ דָּרַ֛שׁ מֹשֶׁ֖ה וְהִנֵּ֣ה שֹׂרָ֑ף וַ֠יִּקְצֹ֠ף עַל־אֶלְעָזָ֤ר וְעַל־אִֽיתָמָר֙ בְּנֵ֣י אַהֲרֹ֔ן הַנּוֹתָרִ֖ם לֵאמֹֽר׃
Then Moses inquired about the goat of sin offering, and it had already been burned! He was angry with Eleazar and Ithamar, Aaron’s remaining sons, and said,
יז מַדּ֗וּעַ לֹֽא־אֲכַלְתֶּ֤ם אֶת־הַחַטָּאת֙ בִּמְק֣וֹם הַקֹּ֔דֶשׁ כִּ֛י קֹ֥דֶשׁ קׇֽדָשִׁ֖ים הִ֑וא וְאֹתָ֣הּ ׀ נָתַ֣ן לָכֶ֗ם לָשֵׂאת֙ אֶת־עֲוֺ֣ן הָעֵדָ֔ה לְכַפֵּ֥ר עֲלֵיהֶ֖ם לִפְנֵ֥י יְ-הֹוָֽה׃
“Why did you not eat the sin offering in the sacred area? For it is most holy, and it is what was given to you to remove the guilt of the community and to make expiation for them before God.
יח הֵ֚ן לֹא־הוּבָ֣א אֶת־דָּמָ֔הּ אֶל־הַקֹּ֖דֶשׁ פְּנִ֑ימָה אָכ֨וֹל תֹּאכְל֥וּ אֹתָ֛הּ בַּקֹּ֖דֶשׁ כַּאֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוֵּֽיתִי׃
Since its blood was not brought inside the sanctuary, you should certainly have eaten it in the sanctuary, as I commanded.”
יט וַיְדַבֵּ֨ר אַהֲרֹ֜ן אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה הֵ֣ן הַ֠יּ֠וֹם הִקְרִ֨יבוּ אֶת־חַטָּאתָ֤ם וְאֶת־עֹֽלָתָם֙ לִפְנֵ֣י יְ-הֹוָ֔ה וַתִּקְרֶ֥אנָה אֹתִ֖י כָּאֵ֑לֶּה וְאָכַ֤לְתִּי חַטָּאת֙ הַיּ֔וֹם הַיִּיטַ֖ב בְּעֵינֵ֥י יְ-הֹוָֽה׃
And Aaron spoke to Moses, “See, this day they brought their sin offering and their burnt offering before God, and such things have befallen me! Had I eaten sin offering today, would God have approved?”
כ וַיִּשְׁמַ֣ע מֹשֶׁ֔ה וַיִּיטַ֖ב בְּעֵינָֽיו׃ {פ}
And when Moses heard this, he approved.
- זבחים קא.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״כִּי כֵן צֻוֵּיתִי״, ״כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוֵּיתִי״, ״כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה׳״; ״כִּי כֵן צֻוֵּיתִי״ – בַּאֲנִינוּת יֹאכְלוּהָ, ״כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוֵּיתִי״ – בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה אָמַר לָהֶן, ״כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה ה׳״ – לֹא מֵאֵלַיי אֲנִי אוֹמֵר.
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: On the eighth day of the inauguration of the Tabernacle, on which two of Aaron’s sons died, Moses spoke to Aaron and his sons using three different forms of the word command: “For so I am commanded [tzuveiti]” (Leviticus 10:13), “as I commanded [tziveiti]” (Leviticus 10:18), and “as the Lord has commanded [tziva]” (Leviticus 10:15). Moses said to Aaron: “And you shall eat it…for so I am commanded,” to teach that Aaron and his remaining sons shall partake of the offerings even in acute mourning. The statement: “You should certainly have eaten it…as I commanded,” Moses said to them at the time of the incident, when Aaron and his sons burned the sin offering for the New Moon. Moses said: “As the Lord has commanded,” to emphasize that it is not of my own initiative that I say this, but it is from the word of God.
וּרְמִינְהִי: מִפְּנֵי אֲנִינוּת נִשְׂרְפָה, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: ״כָּאֵלֶּה״!
And the Sages raise a contradiction from another baraita: The sin offering was burned due to the acute mourning of Aaron and his sons, since they felt they could not partake of it. Therefore, it is stated in Aaron’s explanation: “There have befallen me such things as these; and if I had consumed the sin offering today, would it have been good in the eyes of the Lord?” (Leviticus 10:19). Moses conceded to Aaron that he was correct (see Leviticus 10:20), indicating that it was not permitted for Aaron to partake of the sin offering in acute mourning.
- Background on bi’ur and vidui maaserot:
- דברים כו: יב-טו
יב כִּ֣י תְכַלֶּ֞ה לַ֠עְשֵׂ֠ר אֶת־כׇּל־מַעְשַׂ֧ר תְּבוּאָתְךָ֛ בַּשָּׁנָ֥ה הַשְּׁלִישִׁ֖ת שְׁנַ֣ת הַֽמַּעֲשֵׂ֑ר וְנָתַתָּ֣ה לַלֵּוִ֗י לַגֵּר֙ לַיָּת֣וֹם וְלָֽאַלְמָנָ֔ה וְאָכְל֥וּ בִשְׁעָרֶ֖יךָ וְשָׂבֵֽעוּ׃
When you have set aside in full the tenth part of your yield—in the third year, the year of the tithe —and have given it to the [family of the] Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, that they may eat their fill in your settlements,
יג וְאָמַרְתָּ֡ לִפְנֵי֩ יְ-הֹוָ֨ה אֱ-לֹהֶ֜יךָ בִּעַ֧רְתִּי הַקֹּ֣דֶשׁ מִן־הַבַּ֗יִת וְגַ֨ם נְתַתִּ֤יו לַלֵּוִי֙ וְלַגֵּר֙ לַיָּת֣וֹם וְלָאַלְמָנָ֔ה כְּכׇל־מִצְוָתְךָ֖ אֲשֶׁ֣ר צִוִּיתָ֑נִי לֹֽא־עָבַ֥רְתִּי מִמִּצְוֺתֶ֖יךָ וְלֹ֥א שָׁכָֽחְתִּי׃
you shall declare before your God the Lord: “I have cleared out the consecrated portion from the house; and I have given it to the [family of the] Levite, the stranger, the fatherless, and the widow, just as You commanded me; I have neither transgressed nor neglected any of Your commandments:
יד לֹא־אָכַ֨לְתִּי בְאֹנִ֜י מִמֶּ֗נּוּ וְלֹא־בִעַ֤רְתִּי מִמֶּ֙נּוּ֙ בְּטָמֵ֔א וְלֹא־נָתַ֥תִּי מִמֶּ֖נּוּ לְמֵ֑ת שָׁמַ֗עְתִּי בְּקוֹל֙ יְ-הֹוָ֣ה אֱ-לֹהָ֔י עָשִׂ֕יתִי כְּכֹ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר צִוִּיתָֽנִי׃
I have not eaten of it while in mourning, I have not cleared out any of it while I was impure, and I have not deposited any of it with the dead. I have obeyed my God the Lord; I have done just as You commanded me.
טו הַשְׁקִ֩יפָה֩ מִמְּע֨וֹן קׇדְשְׁךָ֜ מִן־הַשָּׁמַ֗יִם וּבָרֵ֤ךְ אֶֽת־עַמְּךָ֙ אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאֵת֙ הָאֲדָמָ֔ה אֲשֶׁ֥ר נָתַ֖תָּה לָ֑נוּ כַּאֲשֶׁ֤ר נִשְׁבַּ֙עְתָּ֙ לַאֲבֹתֵ֔ינוּ אֶ֛רֶץ זָבַ֥ת חָלָ֖ב וּדְבָֽשׁ׃ {ס}
Look down from Your holy abode, from heaven, and bless Your people Israel and the soil You have given us, a land flowing with milk and honey, as You swore to our fathers.”
- משנה ברכות ג:א
מַתְנִי׳ מִי שֶׁמֵּתוֹ מוּטָּל לְפָנָיו — פָּטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע וּמִן הַתְּפִלָּה וּמִן הַתְּפִילִּין, וּמִכָּל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה.
MISHNA: One whose deceased relative is laid out unburied before him is exempt from the recitation of Shema, from the Amida prayer, and from the mitzva to don phylacteries, as well as all positive mitzvot mentioned in the Torah, until the deceased has been buried.
נוֹשְׂאֵי הַמִּטָּה וְחִלּוּפֵיהֶן, וְחִלּוּפֵי חִלּוּפֵיהֶן, אֶת שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמִּטָּה, וְאֶת שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמִּטָּה. אֶת שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַמִּטָּה צוֹרֶךְ בָּהֶם — פְּטוּרִין, וְאֶת שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַמִּטָּה צוֹרֶךְ בָּהֶם — חַיָּיבִין. וְאֵלּוּ וָאֵלּוּ פְּטוּרִים מִן הַתְּפִלָּה.
With regard to the pallbearers and their replacements and the replacements of their replacements, those located before the bier who have not yet carried the deceased and those located after the bier. Those before the bier who are needed to carry the bier are exempt from reciting Shema; while those after the bier, even if they are still needed to carry it, since they have already carried the deceased, they are obligated to recite Shema. However, both these and those are exempt from reciting the Amida prayer, since they are preoccupied and are unable to focus and pray with the appropriate intent.
- ירושלמי ברכות ג:א, כב.
אָמַר רִבִּי בּוּן כְּתִיב לְמַעַן תִּזְכּוֹר אֶת יוֹם צֵאתְךָ מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם כֹּל יְמֵי חַיֵּיךָ. יָמִים שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹסֵק בָּהֶן בַּחַיִּים. וְלֹא יָמִים שֶׁאַתְּ עוֹסֵק בָּהֶן בַּמֵּתִים.
Rebbi Abun said: It is written (Deut. 16:3) “So that you should remember the day of your exodus from Egypt the totality of the days of your living;” the days when you are occupied with the living, not the days that you are occupied with the dead *The verse deals with the celebration of Passover but is used to indicate that any obligation of remembrance, and tefillin is one of them, are only for living and are invalid once one has to care for the dead. Rebbi Abun here follows the opponents of Ben Zoma in the first chapter who read כֹל֩, “the entirety” and not “all”. The verse gives a complete justification for the Mishnah, viz., that the entire first day is not for tefillin, even after the burial..
תַּנִּי אִם רָצָה לְהַחֲמִיר עַל עַצְמוֹ אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ. לָמָּה מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹדוֹ שֶׁל מֵת. אוֹ מִשּׁוּם שֶׁאֵין לוֹ מִי שֶׁיִּשָּׂא מַשּׂוֹאוֹ. מַה [נָפִיק] מִבֵּינֵיהֹן הָיָה לוֹ מִי שֶׁיִּשָּׂא מַשּׂוֹאוֹ. וְאִין תֵּימַר מִפְּנֵי כְבוֹדוֹ שֶׁל מֵת אָסוּר. וְאִם תֹּאמַר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵין לוֹ מִי שֶׁיִּשָּׂא מַשּׂוֹאוֹ הֲרֵי יֵשׁ לוֹ מִי שֶׁיִּשָּׂא מַשּׂוֹאוֹ.
It was stated: If he wants to be more stringent with himself one does not listen to him. Why? Because of the honor of the deceased or because he has nobody to carry his load? What is the difference between them? If he has someone who is carrying his load; if you say because of the honor of the deceased it is forbidden, but if you say because he has nobody to carry his load, here he has somebody to carry his load.
- מסכת שמחות י:א
אבל כל זמן שמתו מוטל לפניו פטור מקריאת שמע ומן התפילה ומכל מצות האמורות בתורה ואם רצה להחמיר על עצמו הרי זה לא יחמיר מפני כבוד המת
A mourner, as long as his dead is lying before him, is exempt from reading the Shema‘ and Tefillah and from all the commandments prescribed in the Torah. Even if he desires to place himself under greater restrictions [than the law requires] he should not do so out of respect for the dead.
- רש”י ברכות יז:
מי שמתו כו’ פטור מלקרות ק”ש – לפי שהוא טרוד במחשבת קבורתו והויא דומיא דחתן דפטור משום טירדא דמצוה:
- ברכות יז:-יח.
וּרְמִינְהִי: מִי שֶׁמֵּתוֹ מוּטָּל לְפָנָיו — אוֹכֵל בְּבַיִת אַחֵר, וְאִם אֵין לוֹ בַּיִת אַחֵר — אוֹכֵל בְּבֵית חֲבֵירוֹ, וְאִם אֵין לוֹ בֵּית חֲבֵירוֹ — עוֹשֶׂה מְחִיצָה וְאוֹכֵל, וְאִם אֵין לוֹ דָּבָר לַעֲשׂוֹת מְחִיצָּה — מַחֲזִיר פָּנָיו וְאוֹכֵל. וְאֵינוֹ מֵיסֵב וְאוֹכֵל. וְאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר וְאֵינוֹ שׁוֹתֶה יַיִן, וְאֵינוֹ מְבָרֵךְ, וְאֵינוֹ מְזַמֵּן.
The Gemara raises a contradiction from a baraita: One whose deceased relative is laid out before him eats in another room. If he does not have another room, he eats in the house of a friend. If he does not have a friend’s house available, he makes a partition between him and the deceased and eats. If he does not have material with which to make a partition, he averts his face from the dead and eats. And in any case, he does not recline while he eats, as reclining is characteristic of a festive meal. Furthermore, he neither eats meat nor drinks wine, and does not recite a blessing before eating, and does not recite the formula to invite the participants in the meal to join together in the Grace after Meals [zimmun], i.e., he is exempt from the obligation of Grace after Meals.
י״ח א
וְאֵין מְבָרְכִין עָלָיו, וְאֵין מְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו, וּפָטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע וּמִן הַתְּפִלָּה וּמִן הַתְּפִילִּין וּמִכׇּל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. וּבְשַׁבָּת מֵיסֵב וְאוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר וְשׁוֹתֶה יַיִן, וּמְבָרֵךְ וּמְזַמֵּן, וּמְבָרְכִין עָלָיו וּמְזַמְּנִין עָלָיו, וְחַיָּיב בְּכָל הַמִּצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁנִּתְחַיֵּיב בְּאֵלּוּ — נִתְחַיֵּיב בְּכוּלָּן.
And there is no need for others to recite a blessing beforehand on his behalf, nor do others invite him to join in Grace after Meals, as he cannot be a member of the quorum of three required to recite the formula. He is exempt from the recitation of Shema, from the Amida prayer and from phylacteries, and from all mitzvot mentioned in the Torah. On Shabbat, however, he reclines at the meal as per his custom, and eats meat and drinks wine, and recites blessings and recites the formula to invite the participants in the meal to join together in the Grace after Meals, and others may recite blessings on his behalf and invite him to join in Grace after Meals, and he is obligated in all mitzvot mentioned in the Torah. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: Just as he is obligated on Shabbat to fulfill these mitzvot associated with Shabbat meals, he is obligated to fulfill all mitzvot.
וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ — תַּשְׁמִישׁ הַמִּטָּה אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the practical difference between the apparently identical statements of Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel and the first tanna? The practical difference between them is with regard to conjugal relations. The first tanna holds that although there is no mourning on Shabbat, since refraining from addressing his wife’s conjugal rights would not be a public display of mourning, conjugal relations are prohibited. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel holds that since there is no mourning on Shabbat, he must fulfill the mitzva of addressing his wife’s conjugal rights.
קָתָנֵי מִיהַת פָּטוּר מִקְּרִיאַת שְׁמַע וּמִן הַתְּפִלָּה וּמִן הַתְּפִילִּין וּמִכׇּל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה! אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: תַּרְגְּמָא אַמַּחֲזִיר פָּנָיו וְאוֹכֵל. רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: כֵּיוָן שֶׁמּוּטָּל עָלָיו לְקוֹבְרוֹ, כְּמוּטָל לְפָנָיו דָּמֵי. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיָּקׇם אַבְרָהָם מֵעַל פְּנֵי מֵתוֹ״, וְנֶאֱמַר: ״וְאֶקְבְּרָה מֵתִי מִלְּפָנָי״, כָּל זְמַן שֶׁמּוּטָּל עָלָיו לְקוֹבְרוֹ כְּמוּטָל לְפָנָיו דָּמֵי.
In any event, the baraita teaches that one is exempt from the recitation of Shema, from the Amida prayer and from phylacteries, and from all mitzvot mentioned in the Torah. This is an apparent contradiction of our mishna which states that one is exempt only when the deceased is laid before him. To resolve this contradiction, Rav Pappa said: Explain the baraita as applicable only to the particular case when one turns his face away and eats, with the deceased laid out before him. In the other cases, when he is in a different room, he is obligated in all mitzvot. Rav Ashi says: The phrase: The deceased is laid out before him, is not to be taken literally, but rather, since it is incumbent upon him to bury the deceased, and he is not yet buried, it is as if he is laid out before him, as it is stated: “And Abraham rose up from before his dead” (Genesis 23:3), and when Abraham speaks with the Hittites, it is stated: “So that I may bury my dead from before me” (Genesis 23:4). As long as it is incumbent upon him to bury him, it is as he is laid out before him.
- משנה סנהדרין ו:ו
…וְלֹא הָיוּ מִתְאַבְּלִין, אֲבָל אוֹנְנִין, שֶׁאֵין אֲנִינוּת אֶלָּא בַלֵּב:
…And the relatives of the executed man would not mourn him with the observance of the usual mourning rites, so that his unmourned death would atone for his transgression; but they would grieve over his passing, since grief is felt only in the heart.
- Rabbi Shmuel Hain, “The Law Follows the Lenient View in Mourning”: The History and Reconsideration of a Talmudic Principle,” in Emet le-Ya‘akov: Facing the Truths of History: Essays in Honor of Jacob J. Schacter, eds. Zev Eleff and Shaul Seidler-Feller, 65-66
…we identify in rabbinic texts a broader distinction between the laws governing immediate responses to death and those following burial when shiv‘ah begins. Perhaps the most
significant, albeit subtle, evidence of this essential distinction is the separate placement, within the Talmudic corpus, of the laws governing one who has a deceased relative before him and the mourning laws beginning with shiv‘ah. The former, also known as the laws of aninut, are primarily addressed in the third chapter of Berakhot, while the latter are detailed in the third chapter of Mo‘ed katan. This decoupling of the sugyot of aninut and avelut reflects a fundamental distinction between the two stages of bereavement. The actions taken
between the time of death and interment constitute symbolic expressions of the instinctual, emotional responses to death (or news of death). The laws of avelut, by contrast, constitute the formal, ceremonial laws of mourning commencing with shiv‘ah.
M. Sanhedrin 6:6 also projects the view that the two stages are conceptually distinct when it prohibits avelut for relatives of those who receive capital punishment but acknowledges that aninut happens: “And [the relatives of the executed man] would not mourn him [mit’abbelin], but they would grieve [onenin], since grief takes place only in the heart.”14
In addition to constituting natural, immediate responses to death, the laws of aninut are conceptually distinct from the formal laws of avelut by dint of another essential question: which individual is the primary concern of these laws? Aninut focuses exclusively on honoring the dead and their needs. The onen is exempt from all positive commandments in order to ensure that the burial takes place in a timely and dignified fashion (m. Berakhot 3:1). The normative halakhic view, based on the Jerusalem Talmud (j. Berakhot 3:1 [5d]), forbids grieving relatives from opting to observe these commandments so as to ensure the honor of the deceased.
This requirement to refrain from observing commandments highlights the nonnegotiable value of respecting the dead, a responsibility primarily borne by the deceased’s close relatives but also shared by the community at large. The Babylonian Talmud (b. Berakhot 17a–18b) expands the exemption from certain commandments prior to interment to community members who are involved in the burial preparations, including those who guard the deceased.15 Similarly, b. Mo‘ed katan 27b forbids all the inhabitants of a city or village from engaging in work until the deceased has been buried, based on the requirement for all community members to escort the dead. When it comes to honoring the dead, the circle expands beyond the immediate family…
In contrast to the laws of aninut and keri‘ah, the laws of avelut are primarily designed to guide the mourner from the most acute stages of grief through full reentry into society. These laws commence after the deceased has been properly buried. As such, they are characterized by their focus on the mourner’s needs.20 The laws choreographing shiv‘ah visits highlight this emphasis on the mourner. Upon arrival, visitors are not supposed to engage the mourner until the mourner speaks or recognizes them (b. Mo‘ed katan 28b). Similarly, once the mourner nods his head, signaling that he no longer wants to be comforted by the visitor, the visitor should stand and conclude her visit (27b). An additional indication of the centrality of the mourner’s experience is the requirement that those relatives of the mourner who are not themselves sitting shiv‘ah must observe mourning practices in the mourner’s presence (20b)…
