Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

July 10, 2022 | 讬状讗 讘转诪讜讝 转砖驻状讘

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the Refuah Shlemah of Naama bat Yael Esther.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Ketubot 4

Today’s daf is sponsored by Rebecca Samson in loving memory of her father, Shea Berger, Yehoshua Heschel ben Ephraim Yisroel HaLevi, on his second yahrzeit. Yihei Zichro Baruch.聽

Today鈥檚 daf is sponsored by Tamara Katz in memory of the yahrzeit of “my great grandmother Chaya bat Kayla Bracha and in appreciation of my mother who listened to my regular yevamot updates with patience – even when I wasn’t always clear.”

A braita had mentioned that in a case of “oness“one can marry even on Monday. One possibility brought to explain what the case was, suggested it was when the father of the groom or mother of the bride died just before the wedding. If the food was already prepared they would allow the couple to get married and have conjugal relations and then bury the parents, have seven days of celebration, followed by seven days of mourning. The couple would sleep separately during that time. Why did it specifically mention the father of the groom and not the mother, the mother of the bride and not the father? Rav Chisda limits it to a case of when the water was already poured on the meat, as it will be a loss as it cannot be sold. Others limit Rav Chisda’s statement: in the city, even if they put water, it can still be sold, in the villages even if they didn’t put water, it can’t be sold. If so, in what type of place was Rav Chisda’s limitation meant for? A braita is brought in support of Rav Chisda. The braita states as we saw earlier that the couple separated after consummating the marriage and also in a case where a woman was in nidda at the wedding, and this supports Rabbi Yochanan who held that aveilut in private is practiced even in a case like this where aveilut is pushed off because of the wedding celebrations. Rav Yosef quoted Rava as saying the couple separates only if they didn’t have relations. How does that make sense if the braita stated that they had relations? They distinguish between the case of aveilut (they separate in any case) and if the bride is a nidda (they separate only if they did not have conjugal relations). The reason is that the couple will very careful if she is a nidda not to have relations, but if it is aveilut, they may not. A braita is brought to raise a difficulty against that distinction, but it is resolved in two different ways.

讜讘讜注诇 讘注讬诇转 诪爪讜讛 讜驻讜专砖 讜谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讛诪砖转讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讗讘讬诇讜转 讜讻诇 讗讜转谉 讛讬诪讬诐 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪讜谞注讬谉 转讻砖讬讟讬谉 诪谉 讛讻诇讛 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐

And the groom then engages in intercourse with the bride to fulfill the mitzva, and then he withdraws from his wife, and the corpse is buried. And the groom then observes the seven days of the wedding feast, which are a personal festival for him, when the obligation of mourning rites does not take effect, and thereafter he observes the seven days of mourning. And throughout those days of rejoicing and mourning, the groom sleeps among the men, and the bride sleeps among the women, and they are not permitted to enter into seclusion. And in the event of mourning, one does not withhold jewels from the bride for the entire thirty-day period after the wedding, so that she not be undesirable to her husband.

讜讚讜拽讗 讗讘讬讜 砖诇 讞转谉 讗讜 讗诪讛 砖诇 讻诇讛 讚诇讬讻讗 讗讬谞讬砖 讚讟专讞 诇讛讜 讗讘诇 讗讬驻讻讗 诇讗

And the wedding takes place and is followed by seven days of feasting and seven days of mourning, specifically if it is the father of the groom or the mother of the bride who died, as in that case there is no other person who would exert themselves for them. They are the ones responsible for the wedding preparations, and therefore the preparations that were completed must be utilized. However, if the opposite takes place, i.e., the mother of the groom or the father of the bride dies, no, the practice is different. The corpse is buried immediately, the seven-day mourning period is observed, and only afterward is the couple married.

讗诪专 专驻专诐 讘专 驻驻讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 讗讘诇 诇讗 谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 诪讝讚讘谉

Rafram bar Pappa said that Rav 岣sda said: The Sages taught that they are married immediately only if one already placed water on the meat. In that case, it will be impossible to sell it to others, and if it is not cooked immediately it will spoil and a significant loss will be incurred, potentially resulting in cancellation of the wedding feast. However, if he did not place water on the meat, it can be sold. No significant loss will be incurred, so the mourning period need not be postponed.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讜讘讻专讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 诪讝讚讘谉 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讜讘讻驻专 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 诇讗 诪讝讚讘谉 讜讗诇讗 讚专讘 讞住讚讗 讛讬讻讬 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻讙讜谉 诪转讗 诪讞住讬讗 讚诪驻拽讗 诪讻专讱 讜诪驻拽讗 诪讻驻专

Rava said: And in a city, where there are typically many buyers, even if he placed water on the meat it can be sold, and the mourning period need not be postponed. Rav Pappa said: And in a village, even if he did not place water on the meat, it cannot be sold, because no buyers can be found to purchase a quantity of meat that great. Based on the statements of Rava and Rav Pappa, whether or not water was placed on the meat is irrelevant both in a large city and in a village. The Gemara asks: Where do you find a case where the statement of Rav 岣sda applies? Rav Ashi says: It can be found in a place like his city of Mata Me岣sya, which is removed from the category of a city, as it is too small, and removed from the category of a village, as it is too large.

转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘 讞住讚讗 讛专讬 砖讛讬讛 驻转讜 讗驻讜讬讛 讜讟讘讞讜 讟讘讜讞 讜讬讬谞讜 诪讝讜讙 讜谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 讜诪转 讗讘讬讜 砖诇 讞转谉 讗讜 讗诪讛 砖诇 讻诇讛 诪讻谞讬住讬谉 讗转 讛诪转 诇讞讚专 讜讗转 讛讞转谉 讜讗转 讛讻诇讛 诇讞讜驻讛 讜讘讜注诇 讘注讬诇转 诪爪讜讛 讜驻讜专砖 讜谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讛诪砖转讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讗讘讬诇讜转 讜讻诇 讗讜转谉 讛讬诪讬诐 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐

The following baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rav 岣sda: If one鈥檚 bread was baked, and his animal slaughtered, and his wine diluted, and he placed water on the meat, and the father of the groom or the mother of the bride died, one moves the corpse into a room, and the bride and groom are ushered to the wedding canopy, and they are married. The groom then engages in intercourse with the bride to fulfill the mitzva, and he then withdraws from his wife, and the corpse is buried. And the groom then observes the seven days of the wedding feast, and thereafter observes the seven days of mourning. And throughout those days of feast and mourning, the groom sleeps among the men, and his wife sleeps among the women, and they are not permitted to be alone together.

讜讻谉 诪讬 砖驻讬专住讛 讗砖转讜 谞讚讛 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪讜谞注讬谉 转讻砖讬讟讬谉 诪谉 讛讻诇讛 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 诇讗 讬讘注讜诇 诇讗 讘注专讘 砖讘转 讜诇讗 讘诪讜爪讗讬 砖讘转

And likewise, a groom whose wife began to menstruate at the time of the wedding, he sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women, until she becomes ritually pure. However, the Sages do not withhold jewels from the bride while she is in mourning for the entire thirty-day period after the wedding. In any event, the groom may not engage in intercourse with his virgin bride, neither on Shabbat evening, as he will thereby inflict a wound, nor at the conclusion of Shabbat.

讗诪专 诪专 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 讗讘讬诇讜转 讘诪讜注讚 讗讘诇 讚讘专讬诐 砖诇 爪讬谞注讗 谞讜讛讙

The Gemara proceeds to analyze the baraita. The Master said: He sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women. This supports the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan, as Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Although they stated that there is no mourning observed on a Festival, yet one observes matters of privacy, i.e., mourning practices not apparent to onlookers. Therefore, the groom and the bride may not engage in relations during the seven days of rejoicing, as the legal status of those days is like that of a Festival for them.

讚专砖 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖诇讗 讘注诇 讗讘诇 讘注诇 讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 注诪讜

Rav Yosef, son of Rava, taught in the name of Rava: They taught the halakha that if the bride began menstruating, the bride and groom may not be alone together, only if he did not engage in intercourse with her. However, if he engaged in intercourse with her, and afterward she begins menstruating, his wife sleeps with him, and there is no concern that this will lead to their engaging in forbidden relations.

讜讛讗 讛讻讗 讚讘讘注诇 注住拽讬谞谉 讜拽转谞讬 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗驻讬专住讛 讗砖转讜 谞讚讛

The Gemara asks: But here, with regard to mourning, we are dealing with a case where he already engaged in intercourse that was permitted prior to the funeral, and yet the tanna teaches: He sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women. The Gemara answers: When he states the ruling that if they already engaged in intercourse she sleeps with him, it was concerning only a case where his wife began menstruating, and it is not a case of mourning.

讛讗 讜讻谉 拽转谞讬

The Gemara asks: But doesn鈥檛 it state: And likewise, indicating that the legal status of the mourner and the legal status of the groom whose wife is menstruating are the same?

讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讜讻谉 诪讬 砖驻讬专住讛 讗砖转讜 谞讚讛 讜诇讗 讘注诇 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐

This is what the tanna is saying: And likewise, with regard to a groom whose wife began to menstruate, and he had not yet engaged in intercourse with her, he sleeps among the men, and his wife sleeps among the women. However, in the case of a mourner, even if they already engaged in sexual relations, he sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women.

诇诪讬诪专讗 讚讗讘讬诇讜转 拽讬诇讗 诇讬讛 诪谞讚讛

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that the prohibition against relations during mourning is more lenient in his opinion than the prohibition against relations with a menstruating woman? That is apparently the case, as after engaging in the initial intercourse, he may enter into seclusion with his menstruating wife but not with his wife when either of them is in mourning.

讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讞谞讬谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻诇 诪诇讗讻讜转 砖讗砖讛 注讜砖讛 诇讘注诇讛 谞讚讛 注讜砖讛 诇讘注诇讛 讞讜抓 诪诪讝讬讙转 讛讻讜住 讜讛爪注转 讛诪讟讛 讜讛专讞爪转 驻谞讬讜 讬讚讬讜 讜专讙诇讬讜 讜讗诇讜 讙讘讬 讗讘讬诇讜转 转谞讬讗 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 专砖讗讬 诇讻讜祝 讗转 讗砖转讜 诇讛讬讜转 讻讜讞诇转 讜诇讛讬讜转 驻讜拽住转 讘讗诪转 讗诪专讜 诪讜讝讙转 诇讜 讛讻讜住 讜诪爪注转 诇讜 讛诪讟讛 讜诪专讞爪转 诇讜 驻谞讬讜 讬讚讬讜 讜专讙诇讬讜

The Gemara continues: But didn鈥檛 Rav Yitz岣k bar 岣nina say that Rav Huna said: All tasks that a woman typically performs for her husband, a menstruating woman performs for her husband, except for pouring his drink into the cup; arranging his bed; and washing his face, hands, and feet, as these actions are particularly intimate. Whereas with regard to mourning, it is taught in a baraita: Although they said that a man may not compel his mourning wife, to paint her eyes blue or to rouge [pokeset] her face, in truth they said that she may pour his drink into the cup; arrange his bed; and wash his face, hands, and feet. Apparently, the concern lest they come to engage in relations while in mourning is less pressing than the concern while she is menstruating.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讬讛 讻讗谉 讘讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讛

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where the Sages required them to sleep apart, it is in a case of the husband鈥檚 mourning; there, where the Sages allowed her to pour his drink and perform other intimate activities, it is in a case of the wife鈥檚 mourning. The prohibition against relations when one is mourning is not perceived to be as severe as the prohibition against relations with a menstruating woman. However, when his wife is mourning, even were he unable to restrain himself, his wife would not be complicit. Therefore, the Sages did not restrict their interaction.

讜讛讗 讗讘讬讜 砖诇 讞转谉 讗讜 讗诪讛 砖诇 讻诇讛 拽转谞讬 讻讬 拽转谞讬 讗砖讗专讗

The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 it taught in that baraita: The father of the groom and the mother of the bride? This indicates that it makes no difference which of them was in mourning. When the tanna teaches that there is no distinction between which of them was in mourning, it was concerning the rest of the mourning practices cited there, not with regard to prohibiting their seclusion.

讜诪讬 砖讗谞讬 讘讬谉 讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讬讛 诇讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讛 讜讛转谞讬讗 诪讬 砖诪转 讞诪讬讜 讗讜 讞诪讜转讜 讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇讻讜祝 讗转 讗砖转讜 诇讛讬讜转 讻讜讞诇转 讜诇讛讬讜转 驻讜拽住转 讗诇讗 讻讜驻讛 诪讟转讜 讜谞讜讛讙 注诪讛 讗讘讬诇讜转 讜讻谉 讛讬讗 砖诪转 讞诪讬讛 讗讜 讞诪讜转讛 讗讬谞讛 专砖讗讛 诇讛讬讜转 讻讜讞诇转 讜诇讛讬讜转 驻讜拽住转 讗诇讗 讻讜驻讛 诪讟转讛 讜谞讜讛讙转 注诪讜 讗讘讬诇讜转

The Gemara asks: And do the Sages distinguish between his mourning and her mourning? But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: With regard to one whose father-in-law or mother-in-law died, he may not compel his wife to paint her eyes blue or to rouge her face. Rather, he overturns his bed, as was the practice among mourners, and observes the mourning period with her. And likewise, if a wife鈥檚 father-in-law or mother-in-law dies, she is not allowed to paint her eyes blue or to rouge her face. Rather, she overturns her bed and observes the mourning period with him. There is no mention in the context of his mourning that he must not be alone with his wife.

转谞讬 讘讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讬讛 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讛讗 讜讻谉 拽转谞讬 讻讬 拽转谞讬 讗讻讬讞讜诇 讜讗驻讬专讻讜住 讜讛讗 注诪讜 拽转谞讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 注诪讜 讘诪讟讛 诇讗 注诪讜 讘讘讬转 讜讻讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诇讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讘讗驻讛 谞讛讜讙 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚诇讗 讘讗驻讛 诇讗 转谞讛讜讙 讗讘讬诇讜转讗

The Gemara emends the baraita. Teach with regard to his mourning: He sleeps among the men and his wife sleeps among the women. The Gemara asks: But doesn鈥檛 the tanna teach: And likewise? This indicates that there is no difference between the two cases. The Gemara answers: When the tanna teaches that there is no distinction between which of them is mourning, it is with regard to painting and rouge. The Gemara asks: But doesn鈥檛 the tanna teach: With him? What, does it not mean with him together in bed, and there is no concern that it will lead to sexual relations? No, it means with him at home, and it is as that which Rav said to 岣yya, his son, when his wife鈥檚 father died: Before her, observe mourning practices; not before her, do not observe mourning practices. Understood in this context, the term: With him, means in his presence.

专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪讬 拽诪讚诪讬转 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚讛讻讗 诇讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚注诇诪讗 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚注诇诪讗 讞诪讬专 讜诇讗 讗转讬 诇讝诇讝讜诇讬 讘讬讛 讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讛讻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讗拽讬诇讜 专讘谞谉 讗转讬 诇讝诇讝讜诇讬 讘讬讛

Rav Ashi said that the question was based on a mistaken premise: Can you compare the mourning here with mourning in general? Mourning in general is stringent, and one will not come to take it lightly. However, with regard to mourning here, immediately following the wedding, since the Sages were lenient, one will come to take it lightly.

诪讗讬 拽讜诇讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚拽转谞讬 讘讜注诇 讘注讬诇转 诪爪讜讛 讜驻讜专砖 讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 讞诇 注诇讬讜 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讗讬 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 注讚 砖讬爪讗 诪驻转讞 讛讘讬转 讗讬 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 注讚 砖讬住转诐 讛讙讜诇诇

What leniency did the Sages enact in this case? If we say it is that which the tanna teaches: The groom engages in the initial intercourse with the bride to fulfill the mitzva and then he withdraws from his wife, then there, where the corpse is placed into a room in the house, it is due to the fact that mourning has not yet taken effect upon him. Consequently, there is no leniency with regard to mourning practices. If it is according to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, mourning does not take effect until the corpse emerges from the entrance of the house for burial. If it is according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, mourning does not take effect until the covering of the grave is sealed.

讗诇讗 讚拽转谞讬 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讛诪砖转讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讗讘讬诇讜转

Rather, the leniency is that which the tanna teaches: And the groom then observes the seven days of feast following the wedding, and thereafter he observes the seven days of mourning. Since the Sages were lenient and allowed him to observe the wedding feast, despite the fact that he is a mourner, they prohibited his being alone with his wife so he would be less likely to practice additional leniencies in his mourning.

讗诪专 诪专 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 诇讗 讬讘注讜诇 诇讗 讘注专讘 砖讘转 讜诇讗 讘诪讜爪讗讬 砖讘转 讘砖诇诪讗 讘注专讘 砖讘转 诪砖讜诐 讞讘讜专讛 讗诇讗 讘诪讜爪讗讬 砖讘转 讗诪讗讬 诇讗

The Master said in the baraita: In any event, the groom may not engage in intercourse with his virgin bride, neither on Shabbat evening, nor at the conclusion of Shabbat. Granted, on Shabbat evening he may not engage in intercourse due to the prohibition against inflicting a wound on Shabbat. However, at the conclusion of Shabbat, why may he not engage in intercourse with his virgin bride?

讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗

Rabbi Zeira said:

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the Refuah Shlemah of Naama bat Yael Esther.

  • Masechet Ketubot is sponsored by Erica and Rob Schwartz in honor of the 50th wedding anniversary of Erica's parents Sheira and Steve Schacter.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

learn daf yomi one week at a time with tamara spitz

Ketubot: 2-6 – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

As we begin a new Masechet, we will review the concept of the Ketuva, its obligations, and its purpose. We...
Gefet with Rabbanit Yael Shimoni

When and Why Do We Marry? Gefet 40

The first pages of Tractate Ketubot deal with the question of when to get married. In today's Gefet we will...
talking talmud_square

Ketubot 4: Sad on Your Wedding Day

When the time of severe mourning or a "chuppat niddah" changes the wedding night. Similarly, how her standing as a...
WhatsApp Image 2022-07-06 at 7.23.39 PM

Introduction to Masechet Ketubot

This shiur is sponsored by Valerie Adler. "Delighted to dedicate this introduction in honor of Ayelet and Adi Libson who...

Ketubot 4

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Ketubot 4

讜讘讜注诇 讘注讬诇转 诪爪讜讛 讜驻讜专砖 讜谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讛诪砖转讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讗讘讬诇讜转 讜讻诇 讗讜转谉 讛讬诪讬诐 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪讜谞注讬谉 转讻砖讬讟讬谉 诪谉 讛讻诇讛 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐

And the groom then engages in intercourse with the bride to fulfill the mitzva, and then he withdraws from his wife, and the corpse is buried. And the groom then observes the seven days of the wedding feast, which are a personal festival for him, when the obligation of mourning rites does not take effect, and thereafter he observes the seven days of mourning. And throughout those days of rejoicing and mourning, the groom sleeps among the men, and the bride sleeps among the women, and they are not permitted to enter into seclusion. And in the event of mourning, one does not withhold jewels from the bride for the entire thirty-day period after the wedding, so that she not be undesirable to her husband.

讜讚讜拽讗 讗讘讬讜 砖诇 讞转谉 讗讜 讗诪讛 砖诇 讻诇讛 讚诇讬讻讗 讗讬谞讬砖 讚讟专讞 诇讛讜 讗讘诇 讗讬驻讻讗 诇讗

And the wedding takes place and is followed by seven days of feasting and seven days of mourning, specifically if it is the father of the groom or the mother of the bride who died, as in that case there is no other person who would exert themselves for them. They are the ones responsible for the wedding preparations, and therefore the preparations that were completed must be utilized. However, if the opposite takes place, i.e., the mother of the groom or the father of the bride dies, no, the practice is different. The corpse is buried immediately, the seven-day mourning period is observed, and only afterward is the couple married.

讗诪专 专驻专诐 讘专 驻驻讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 讗讘诇 诇讗 谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 诪讝讚讘谉

Rafram bar Pappa said that Rav 岣sda said: The Sages taught that they are married immediately only if one already placed water on the meat. In that case, it will be impossible to sell it to others, and if it is not cooked immediately it will spoil and a significant loss will be incurred, potentially resulting in cancellation of the wedding feast. However, if he did not place water on the meat, it can be sold. No significant loss will be incurred, so the mourning period need not be postponed.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讜讘讻专讱 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 诪讝讚讘谉 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讜讘讻驻专 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖诇讗 谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 诇讗 诪讝讚讘谉 讜讗诇讗 讚专讘 讞住讚讗 讛讬讻讬 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻讙讜谉 诪转讗 诪讞住讬讗 讚诪驻拽讗 诪讻专讱 讜诪驻拽讗 诪讻驻专

Rava said: And in a city, where there are typically many buyers, even if he placed water on the meat it can be sold, and the mourning period need not be postponed. Rav Pappa said: And in a village, even if he did not place water on the meat, it cannot be sold, because no buyers can be found to purchase a quantity of meat that great. Based on the statements of Rava and Rav Pappa, whether or not water was placed on the meat is irrelevant both in a large city and in a village. The Gemara asks: Where do you find a case where the statement of Rav 岣sda applies? Rav Ashi says: It can be found in a place like his city of Mata Me岣sya, which is removed from the category of a city, as it is too small, and removed from the category of a village, as it is too large.

转谞讬讗 讻讜讜转讬讛 讚专讘 讞住讚讗 讛专讬 砖讛讬讛 驻转讜 讗驻讜讬讛 讜讟讘讞讜 讟讘讜讞 讜讬讬谞讜 诪讝讜讙 讜谞转谉 诪讬诐 注诇 讙讘讬 讘砖专 讜诪转 讗讘讬讜 砖诇 讞转谉 讗讜 讗诪讛 砖诇 讻诇讛 诪讻谞讬住讬谉 讗转 讛诪转 诇讞讚专 讜讗转 讛讞转谉 讜讗转 讛讻诇讛 诇讞讜驻讛 讜讘讜注诇 讘注讬诇转 诪爪讜讛 讜驻讜专砖 讜谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讛诪砖转讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讗讘讬诇讜转 讜讻诇 讗讜转谉 讛讬诪讬诐 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐

The following baraita was taught in accordance with the opinion of Rav 岣sda: If one鈥檚 bread was baked, and his animal slaughtered, and his wine diluted, and he placed water on the meat, and the father of the groom or the mother of the bride died, one moves the corpse into a room, and the bride and groom are ushered to the wedding canopy, and they are married. The groom then engages in intercourse with the bride to fulfill the mitzva, and he then withdraws from his wife, and the corpse is buried. And the groom then observes the seven days of the wedding feast, and thereafter observes the seven days of mourning. And throughout those days of feast and mourning, the groom sleeps among the men, and his wife sleeps among the women, and they are not permitted to be alone together.

讜讻谉 诪讬 砖驻讬专住讛 讗砖转讜 谞讚讛 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讜讗讬谉 诪讜谞注讬谉 转讻砖讬讟讬谉 诪谉 讛讻诇讛 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 诇讗 讬讘注讜诇 诇讗 讘注专讘 砖讘转 讜诇讗 讘诪讜爪讗讬 砖讘转

And likewise, a groom whose wife began to menstruate at the time of the wedding, he sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women, until she becomes ritually pure. However, the Sages do not withhold jewels from the bride while she is in mourning for the entire thirty-day period after the wedding. In any event, the groom may not engage in intercourse with his virgin bride, neither on Shabbat evening, as he will thereby inflict a wound, nor at the conclusion of Shabbat.

讗诪专 诪专 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 讗讘讬诇讜转 讘诪讜注讚 讗讘诇 讚讘专讬诐 砖诇 爪讬谞注讗 谞讜讛讙

The Gemara proceeds to analyze the baraita. The Master said: He sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women. This supports the opinion of Rabbi Yo岣nan, as Rabbi Yo岣nan said: Although they stated that there is no mourning observed on a Festival, yet one observes matters of privacy, i.e., mourning practices not apparent to onlookers. Therefore, the groom and the bride may not engage in relations during the seven days of rejoicing, as the legal status of those days is like that of a Festival for them.

讚专砖 专讘 讬讜住祝 讘专讬讛 讚专讘讗 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖诇讗 讘注诇 讗讘诇 讘注诇 讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 注诪讜

Rav Yosef, son of Rava, taught in the name of Rava: They taught the halakha that if the bride began menstruating, the bride and groom may not be alone together, only if he did not engage in intercourse with her. However, if he engaged in intercourse with her, and afterward she begins menstruating, his wife sleeps with him, and there is no concern that this will lead to their engaging in forbidden relations.

讜讛讗 讛讻讗 讚讘讘注诇 注住拽讬谞谉 讜拽转谞讬 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讛讬讗 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗驻讬专住讛 讗砖转讜 谞讚讛

The Gemara asks: But here, with regard to mourning, we are dealing with a case where he already engaged in intercourse that was permitted prior to the funeral, and yet the tanna teaches: He sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women. The Gemara answers: When he states the ruling that if they already engaged in intercourse she sleeps with him, it was concerning only a case where his wife began menstruating, and it is not a case of mourning.

讛讗 讜讻谉 拽转谞讬

The Gemara asks: But doesn鈥檛 it state: And likewise, indicating that the legal status of the mourner and the legal status of the groom whose wife is menstruating are the same?

讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讜讻谉 诪讬 砖驻讬专住讛 讗砖转讜 谞讚讛 讜诇讗 讘注诇 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐

This is what the tanna is saying: And likewise, with regard to a groom whose wife began to menstruate, and he had not yet engaged in intercourse with her, he sleeps among the men, and his wife sleeps among the women. However, in the case of a mourner, even if they already engaged in sexual relations, he sleeps among the men and she sleeps among the women.

诇诪讬诪专讗 讚讗讘讬诇讜转 拽讬诇讗 诇讬讛 诪谞讚讛

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that the prohibition against relations during mourning is more lenient in his opinion than the prohibition against relations with a menstruating woman? That is apparently the case, as after engaging in the initial intercourse, he may enter into seclusion with his menstruating wife but not with his wife when either of them is in mourning.

讜讛讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 讘专 讞谞讬谞讗 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讻诇 诪诇讗讻讜转 砖讗砖讛 注讜砖讛 诇讘注诇讛 谞讚讛 注讜砖讛 诇讘注诇讛 讞讜抓 诪诪讝讬讙转 讛讻讜住 讜讛爪注转 讛诪讟讛 讜讛专讞爪转 驻谞讬讜 讬讚讬讜 讜专讙诇讬讜 讜讗诇讜 讙讘讬 讗讘讬诇讜转 转谞讬讗 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗诪专讜 讗讬谉 讗讚诐 专砖讗讬 诇讻讜祝 讗转 讗砖转讜 诇讛讬讜转 讻讜讞诇转 讜诇讛讬讜转 驻讜拽住转 讘讗诪转 讗诪专讜 诪讜讝讙转 诇讜 讛讻讜住 讜诪爪注转 诇讜 讛诪讟讛 讜诪专讞爪转 诇讜 驻谞讬讜 讬讚讬讜 讜专讙诇讬讜

The Gemara continues: But didn鈥檛 Rav Yitz岣k bar 岣nina say that Rav Huna said: All tasks that a woman typically performs for her husband, a menstruating woman performs for her husband, except for pouring his drink into the cup; arranging his bed; and washing his face, hands, and feet, as these actions are particularly intimate. Whereas with regard to mourning, it is taught in a baraita: Although they said that a man may not compel his mourning wife, to paint her eyes blue or to rouge [pokeset] her face, in truth they said that she may pour his drink into the cup; arrange his bed; and wash his face, hands, and feet. Apparently, the concern lest they come to engage in relations while in mourning is less pressing than the concern while she is menstruating.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 讘讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讬讛 讻讗谉 讘讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讛

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here, where the Sages required them to sleep apart, it is in a case of the husband鈥檚 mourning; there, where the Sages allowed her to pour his drink and perform other intimate activities, it is in a case of the wife鈥檚 mourning. The prohibition against relations when one is mourning is not perceived to be as severe as the prohibition against relations with a menstruating woman. However, when his wife is mourning, even were he unable to restrain himself, his wife would not be complicit. Therefore, the Sages did not restrict their interaction.

讜讛讗 讗讘讬讜 砖诇 讞转谉 讗讜 讗诪讛 砖诇 讻诇讛 拽转谞讬 讻讬 拽转谞讬 讗砖讗专讗

The Gemara asks: But isn鈥檛 it taught in that baraita: The father of the groom and the mother of the bride? This indicates that it makes no difference which of them was in mourning. When the tanna teaches that there is no distinction between which of them was in mourning, it was concerning the rest of the mourning practices cited there, not with regard to prohibiting their seclusion.

讜诪讬 砖讗谞讬 讘讬谉 讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讬讛 诇讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讛 讜讛转谞讬讗 诪讬 砖诪转 讞诪讬讜 讗讜 讞诪讜转讜 讗讬谞讜 讬讻讜诇 诇讻讜祝 讗转 讗砖转讜 诇讛讬讜转 讻讜讞诇转 讜诇讛讬讜转 驻讜拽住转 讗诇讗 讻讜驻讛 诪讟转讜 讜谞讜讛讙 注诪讛 讗讘讬诇讜转 讜讻谉 讛讬讗 砖诪转 讞诪讬讛 讗讜 讞诪讜转讛 讗讬谞讛 专砖讗讛 诇讛讬讜转 讻讜讞诇转 讜诇讛讬讜转 驻讜拽住转 讗诇讗 讻讜驻讛 诪讟转讛 讜谞讜讛讙转 注诪讜 讗讘讬诇讜转

The Gemara asks: And do the Sages distinguish between his mourning and her mourning? But isn鈥檛 it taught in a baraita: With regard to one whose father-in-law or mother-in-law died, he may not compel his wife to paint her eyes blue or to rouge her face. Rather, he overturns his bed, as was the practice among mourners, and observes the mourning period with her. And likewise, if a wife鈥檚 father-in-law or mother-in-law dies, she is not allowed to paint her eyes blue or to rouge her face. Rather, she overturns her bed and observes the mourning period with him. There is no mention in the context of his mourning that he must not be alone with his wife.

转谞讬 讘讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讬讚讬讛 讛讜讗 讬砖谉 讘讬谉 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讜讗砖转讜 讬砖谞讛 讘讬谉 讛谞砖讬诐 讛讗 讜讻谉 拽转谞讬 讻讬 拽转谞讬 讗讻讬讞讜诇 讜讗驻讬专讻讜住 讜讛讗 注诪讜 拽转谞讬 诪讗讬 诇讗讜 注诪讜 讘诪讟讛 诇讗 注诪讜 讘讘讬转 讜讻讚讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 诇讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讘讗驻讛 谞讛讜讙 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚诇讗 讘讗驻讛 诇讗 转谞讛讜讙 讗讘讬诇讜转讗

The Gemara emends the baraita. Teach with regard to his mourning: He sleeps among the men and his wife sleeps among the women. The Gemara asks: But doesn鈥檛 the tanna teach: And likewise? This indicates that there is no difference between the two cases. The Gemara answers: When the tanna teaches that there is no distinction between which of them is mourning, it is with regard to painting and rouge. The Gemara asks: But doesn鈥檛 the tanna teach: With him? What, does it not mean with him together in bed, and there is no concern that it will lead to sexual relations? No, it means with him at home, and it is as that which Rav said to 岣yya, his son, when his wife鈥檚 father died: Before her, observe mourning practices; not before her, do not observe mourning practices. Understood in this context, the term: With him, means in his presence.

专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 诪讬 拽诪讚诪讬转 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚讛讻讗 诇讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚注诇诪讗 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讚注诇诪讗 讞诪讬专 讜诇讗 讗转讬 诇讝诇讝讜诇讬 讘讬讛 讗讘讬诇讜转 讚讛讻讗 讻讬讜谉 讚讗拽讬诇讜 专讘谞谉 讗转讬 诇讝诇讝讜诇讬 讘讬讛

Rav Ashi said that the question was based on a mistaken premise: Can you compare the mourning here with mourning in general? Mourning in general is stringent, and one will not come to take it lightly. However, with regard to mourning here, immediately following the wedding, since the Sages were lenient, one will come to take it lightly.

诪讗讬 拽讜诇讗 讗讬诇讬诪讗 讚拽转谞讬 讘讜注诇 讘注讬诇转 诪爪讜讛 讜驻讜专砖 讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讚诇讗 讞诇 注诇讬讜 讗讘讬诇讜转讗 讗讬 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 注讚 砖讬爪讗 诪驻转讞 讛讘讬转 讗讬 诇专讘讬 讬讛讜砖注 注讚 砖讬住转诐 讛讙讜诇诇

What leniency did the Sages enact in this case? If we say it is that which the tanna teaches: The groom engages in the initial intercourse with the bride to fulfill the mitzva and then he withdraws from his wife, then there, where the corpse is placed into a room in the house, it is due to the fact that mourning has not yet taken effect upon him. Consequently, there is no leniency with regard to mourning practices. If it is according to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, mourning does not take effect until the corpse emerges from the entrance of the house for burial. If it is according to the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua, mourning does not take effect until the covering of the grave is sealed.

讗诇讗 讚拽转谞讬 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讛诪砖转讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 谞讜讛讙 砖讘注转 讬诪讬 讗讘讬诇讜转

Rather, the leniency is that which the tanna teaches: And the groom then observes the seven days of feast following the wedding, and thereafter he observes the seven days of mourning. Since the Sages were lenient and allowed him to observe the wedding feast, despite the fact that he is a mourner, they prohibited his being alone with his wife so he would be less likely to practice additional leniencies in his mourning.

讗诪专 诪专 讘讬谉 讻讱 讜讘讬谉 讻讱 诇讗 讬讘注讜诇 诇讗 讘注专讘 砖讘转 讜诇讗 讘诪讜爪讗讬 砖讘转 讘砖诇诪讗 讘注专讘 砖讘转 诪砖讜诐 讞讘讜专讛 讗诇讗 讘诪讜爪讗讬 砖讘转 讗诪讗讬 诇讗

The Master said in the baraita: In any event, the groom may not engage in intercourse with his virgin bride, neither on Shabbat evening, nor at the conclusion of Shabbat. Granted, on Shabbat evening he may not engage in intercourse due to the prohibition against inflicting a wound on Shabbat. However, at the conclusion of Shabbat, why may he not engage in intercourse with his virgin bride?

讗诪专 专讘讬 讝讬专讗

Rabbi Zeira said:

Scroll To Top