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

Today's Daf Yomi

February 7, 2022 | 讜壮 讘讗讚专 讗壮 转砖驻状讘

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Moed Katan 26

Today鈥檚 daf is sponsored by Erica Kolatch in loving memory of her mother鈥檚 6th yahrzeit, the Honorable Constance Glube, Chaya Rachel bat Shmuel z”l. 鈥淚n later years she downplayed her brilliant career, but always lived by Tzedek Tzedek Tirdoff.鈥

Today鈥檚 daf is sponsored by Gitta and David Neufeld for the refuah shleima of Rachel bat Golda Mariam.

For what relationships/situations does one tear kriya and is not allowed to properly fix it after? What is the source that one needs to rend one’s garment in each situation? If one has more than one situation that requires rending one’s garments, in what cases can one add to a tear that is already there and in what cases does one have to make a new tear in a different place? What is the requisite amount for the tear and for the added tear? It is a subject of debate whether one is allowed to add onto a tear torn over the loss of one’s parent. If one keeps adding to a tear, how far can one go before needing to start a new tear in a different place? Can one only add to the tear after the shiva or after the shloshim? This too is a subject of debate. What is the root of the debate? If one borrows clothes and their relative dies, under what circumstances can they rend their friend’s garments? If one is sick, we do not tell them of the death of a close relative as it may negatively affect their health. A few other laws regarding rending garments, mourning practices and the seudat havraa are brought.

 

讜讗诇讜 拽专注讬谉 砖讗讬谉 诪转讗讞讬谉 讛拽讜专注 注诇 讗讘讬讜 讜注诇 讗诪讜 讜注诇 专讘讜 砖诇讬诪讚讜 转讜专讛 讜注诇 谞砖讬讗 讜注诇 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜注诇 砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 讜注诇 讘专讻转 讛砖诐 讜注诇 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖谞砖专祝 讜注诇 注专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜注诇 讛诪拽讚砖 讜注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜拽讜专注 注诇 诪拽讚砖 讜诪讜住讬祝 注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐

And these are the rents of mourning that may never be properly mended: One who rends his garments for the death his father, or for his mother, or for his teacher who taught him Torah, or for the Nasi, or for the president of the court; or upon hearing evil tidings; or hearing God鈥檚 name being blessed, which is a euphemism for hearing God鈥檚 name being cursed; or when a Torah scroll has been burned; or upon seeing the cities of Judea that were destroyed or the destroyed Temple or Jerusalem in ruins. This is the way one conducts himself when approaching Jerusalem when it lies in ruin: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem.

讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 讜专讘讜 砖诇讬诪讚讜 转讜专讛 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讗诇讬砖注 专讗讛 讜讛讜讗 诪爪注拽 讗讘讬 讗讘讬 专讻讘 讬砖专讗诇 讜驻专砖讬讜 讗讘讬 讗讘讬 讝讛 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 专讻讘 讬砖专讗诇 讜驻专砖讬讜 讝讛 专讘讜 砖诇讬诪讚讜 转讜专讛

The Gemara elaborates upon the halakhot mentioned in this baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for his father, his mother, and his teacher who taught him Torah? As it is written with regard to the prophet Elijah, when he ascended to Heaven in a tempest: 鈥淎nd Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and their horsemen鈥 (II聽Kings 2:12). The Gemara interprets this verse as follows: 鈥淢y father, my father鈥; this comes to teach that one must rend his garments for the death of his father or mother. 鈥淭he chariots of Israel and their horsemen鈥; this comes to include also one鈥 teacher who taught him Torah.

诪讗讬 诪砖诪注 讻讚诪转专讙诐 专讘 讬讜住祝 专讘讬 专讘讬 讚讟讘 诇讛讜谉 诇讬砖专讗诇 讘爪诇讜转讬讛 诪专转讬讻讬谉 讜驻专砖讬谉

The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this is referring to one鈥檚 teacher? The Gemara explains: As the verse was translated by Rav Yosef: My teacher, my teacher, who was better for the protection of the Jewish people with his prayers than an army with chariots and horsemen.

讜诇讗 诪转讗讞讬谉 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讞讝拽 讘讘讙讚讬讜 讜讬拽专注诐 诇砖谞讬诐 拽专注讬诐 诪诪砖诪注 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽专注诐 讗讬谞讬 讬讜讚注 砖诇砖谞讬诐 讗诇讗 诪诇诪讚 砖拽专讜注讬诐 讜注讜诪讚讬诐 诇砖谞讬诐 诇注讜诇诐

And from where do we derive that these rents are never to be properly mended? As it is written: 鈥淎nd he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces鈥 (II聽Kings 2:12). From the fact that it is stated: 鈥淎nd he rent them,鈥 do I not know that he rent them in two pieces? Rather, when the verse adds that they were torn into two pieces, it teaches that they must remain torn in two pieces forever. Accordingly, this rent must never be properly mended.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诇讬讛讜 讞讬 讛讜讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜诇讗 专讗讛讜 注讜讚 诇讙讘讬 讚讬讚讬讛 讻诪转 讚诪讬

Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yo岣nan: But isn鈥檛 Elijah still alive? Why, then, did Elisha rend his garments for him? He said to him: Since it is written: 鈥淎nd he saw him no more鈥 (II聽Kings 2:12), Elijah was considered dead from Elisha鈥檚 perspective, and so Elisha rent his clothing for him.

谞砖讬讗 讜讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讞讝拽 讚讜讚 讘讘讙讚讬讜 讜讬拽专注诐 讜讙诐 讻诇 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讗砖专 讗转讜 讜讬住驻讚讜 讜讬讘讻讜 讜讬爪讜诪讜 注讚 讛注专讘 注诇 砖讗讜诇 讜注诇 讬讛讜谞转谉 讘谞讜 讜注诇 注诐 讛壮 讜注诇 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讻讬 谞驻诇讜 讘讞专讘

From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for the death of the Nasi or the president of the court and upon hearing evil bad tidings? As it is written, when David heard about the defeat of Israel and the death of Saul and his sons: 鈥淭hen David took hold of his clothes, and rent them; and likewise all the men that were with him: And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until evening, for Saul and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the Lord, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword鈥 (II聽Samuel 1:11鈥12).

砖讗讜诇 讝讛 谞砖讬讗 讬讛讜谞转谉 讝讛 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 注诇 注诐 讛壮 讜注诇 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讗诇讜 砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转

The Gemara explains how the aforementioned halakhot are derived from the verse: 鈥淪aul鈥; this is a reference to the Nasi, as Saul was king of Israel. 鈥淛onathan鈥; this is a reference to the president of the court. 鈥淔or the people of the Lord, and for the house of the Israel鈥; these are a reference to evil tidings.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讘专 砖讘讗 诇专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜讗讬诪讗 注讚 讚讛讜讜 讻讜诇讛讜 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诇 注诇 讛驻住讬拽 讛注谞讬谉

Rav bar Shaba said to Rav Kahana: But perhaps you can say that one need not rend his clothing until all these calamities occur together, and that rending clothing is performed only over a tragedy of this magnitude. He said to him: The repetition of the word 鈥渇or鈥: 鈥淔or Saul,鈥 鈥渇or Jonathan,鈥 and 鈥渇or the people of the Lord鈥 divides the matter and teaches that each individual misfortune is sufficient cause to rend one鈥檚 garments.

讜诪讬 拽专注讬谞谉 讗砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 讜讛讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇砖诪讜讗诇 拽讟诇 砖讘讜专 诪诇讻讗 转专讬住专 讗诇驻讬 讬讛讜讚讗讬 讘诪讝讬讙转 拽住专讬 讜诇讗 拽专注 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗诇讗 讘专讜讘 爪讘讜专 讜讻诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛

The Gemara asks: But do we actually rend our clothing upon hearing evil tidings? But didn鈥檛 they say to Shmuel: King Shapur killed twelve thousand Jews in Mezigat Caesarea, and Shmuel did not rend his clothing?The Gemara answers: They said that one must rend his clothing upon hearing evil tidings only in a case where the calamity involved the majority of the community of Israel and resembles the incident that occurred when Saul was killed and the entire nation of Israel suffered defeat.

讜诪讬 拽讟诇 砖讘讜专 诪诇讻讗 讬讛讜讚讗讬 讜讛讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讘讜专 诪诇讻讗 诇砖诪讜讗诇 转讬转讬 诇讬 讚诇讗 拽讟诇讬 讬讛讜讚讬 诪注讜诇诐 讛转诐 讗讬谞讛讜 讙专诪讬 诇谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 诇拽诇 讬转讬专讬 讚诪讝讬讙转 拽住专讬 驻拽注 砖讜专讗 讚诇讜讚拽讬讗

The Gemara tangentially asks: Did King Shapur really kill Jews? But didn鈥檛 King Shapur say to Shmuel: I have a blessing coming to me, for I have never killed a Jew? The Gemara answers: King Shapur never instigated the killing of Jews; there, however, they brought it upon themselves, as Rabbi Ami said in an exaggerated manner: Due to the noise of the harp strings of Mezigat Caesarea, the walls of Laodicea were breached, for the residents of the city celebrated when they rebelled against King Shapur. Because they rebelled against him and threatened his rule, he was forced to kill them.

注诇 讘专讻转 讛砖诐 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讘讗 讗诇讬拽讬诐 讘谉 讞诇拽讬讛 讗砖专 注诇 讛讘讬转 讜砖讘谞讗 讛住讜驻专 讜讬讜讗讞 讘谉 讗住祝 讛诪讝讻讬专 讗诇 讞讝拽讬讛讜 拽专讜注讬 讘讙讚讬诐

搂 The Gemara continues its analysis of the baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon hearing God鈥檚 name being blessed, i.e., cursed? As it is written with regard to the blasphemous words said by Rab-shakeh: 鈥淭hen came Eliakim, son of Hilkiya, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, son of Asaph, the recorder, to Hezekiah with their clothes rent鈥 (II聽Kings 18:37).

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讞讚 讛砖讜诪注 讜讗讞讚 讛砖讜诪注 诪驻讬 讛砖讜诪注 讞讬讬讘 诇拽专讜注 讜讛注讚讬诐 讗讬谞谉 讞讬讬讘讬谉 诇拽专讜注 砖讻讘专 拽专注讜 讘砖注讛 砖砖诪注讜

The Sages taught a baraita with regard to this issue: Both one who actually hears the curse and one who hears from the mouth of the one who heard the curse are obligated to rend their garments. But the witnesses who testify against the person who uttered the blasphemy are not obligated to rend their clothing when they testify as to what they heard because they already rent their clothing when they heard the curse the first time.

讘砖注讛 砖砖诪注讜 诪讗讬 讛讜讬 讛讗 拽讗 砖诪注讬 讛砖转讗 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讻砖诪讜注 讛诪诇讱 讞讝拽讬讛讜 讜讬拽专注 讗转 讘讙讚讬讜 讛诪诇讱 拽专注 讜讛诐 诇讗 拽专注讜

The Gemara asks: What difference does it make that they rent their garments when they heard the curse the first time? Didn鈥檛 they hear it again now? The Gemara rejects this argument: This will not enter your mind, as it is written: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his clothes鈥 (II聽Kings 19:1). This indicates that the king rent his garments, but those who reported the blasphemy to him did not rend theirs, as they had already rent their garments the first time.

讜诇讗 诪转讗讞讬谉 诪谞诇谉 讗转讬讗 拽专讬注讛 拽专讬注讛

And from where do we derive that these rents may not be properly mended? This is derived by way of a verbal analogy between the verb rending used here with regard to Hezekiah and the verb rending used in the case of Elijah and Elisha.

住驻专 转讜专讛 砖谞砖专祝 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讻拽专讗 讬讛讜讚讬 砖诇砖 讚诇转讜转 讜讗专讘注讛 讜讬拽专注讛 讘转注专 讛住讜驻专 讜讛砖诇讱 讗诇 讛讗砖 讗砖专 讗诇 讛讗讞 讜讙讜壮 诪讗讬 砖诇砖 讚诇转讜转 讜讗专讘注讛

From where do we derive that one must rend his garments when a Torah scroll has been burned? As it is written: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he would cut it with a penknife, and cast it into the fire that was in the brazier鈥 (Jeremiah 36:23). With regard to the verse itself the Gemara asks: What is meant by 鈥渢hree or four leaves,鈥 and why did he cut the book only at that point?

讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇讬讛讜讬拽讬诐 讻转讘 讬专诪讬讛 住驻专 拽讬谞讜转 讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪讛 讻转讬讘 讘讬讛 讗讬讻讛 讬砖讘讛 讘讚讚 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讻讛 转讘讻讛 讘诇讬诇讛 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗 讙诇转讛 讬讛讜讚讛 诪注讜谞讬 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗 讚专讻讬 爪讬讜谉 讗讘诇讜转 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗

The Gemara explains: They said to Jehoiakim: Jeremiah has written a book of Lamentations over the future downfall and destruction of Jerusalem. He said to them: What is written in it? They read him the first verse: 鈥淗ow does the city sit solitary鈥 (Lamentations 1:1). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the second verse: 鈥淪he weeps sore in the night鈥 (Lamentations 1:2). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the third verse: 鈥淛udah is gone into exile due to affliction鈥 (Lamentations 1:3). He said to them: I am king. They read to him: 鈥淭he ways of Zion do mourn鈥 (Lamentations 1:4). He said to them: I am king. These are the four leaves, or verses, that he read first.

讛讬讜 爪专讬讛 诇专讗砖 讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪讗谉 讗诪专讛 讻讬 讛壮 讛讜讙讛 注诇 专讜讘 驻砖注讬讛 诪讬讚 拽讚专 讻诇 讗讝讻专讜转 砖讘讛 讜砖专驻谉 讘讗砖 讜讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜诇讗 驻讞讚讜 讜诇讗 拽专注讜 讗转 讘讙讚讬讛诐 诪讻诇诇 讚讘注讜 诇诪讬拽专注

They read him an additional verse: 鈥淗er adversaries have become the chief鈥 (Lamentations 1:5), i.e., the reigning king will be removed from power. Once he heard this, he said to them: Who said this? They said to him: This is the continuation of the verse: 鈥淔or the Lord has afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions鈥 (Lamentations 1:5). Immediately, he cut out all the names of God from the book and burned them in fire. This is as it is written: 鈥淵et they were not afraid, nor rent their garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words鈥 (Jeremiah 36:24). By inference, this shows that they were required to rend their clothing when they saw this.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗讘讬讬 讗讬诪专 诪砖讜诐 砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖诪讜注讜转 专注讜转 讘讛讛讬讗 砖注转讗 诪讬 讛讜讜

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Perhaps you can say that they should have rent their garments due to the evil tidings contained in the scroll and not because of the destruction of the book? Abaye said to him: Were they evil tidings at that time? This was a prophecy and not an account of current events.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛专讜讗讛 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖谞拽专注 讞讬讬讘 诇拽专讜注 砖转讬 拽专讬注讜转 讗讞讚 注诇 讛讙讜讬诇 讜讗讞讚 注诇 讛讻转讘 砖谞讗诪专 讗讞专讬 砖专讜祝 讛诪诇讱 讗转 讛诪讙诇讛 讜讗转 讛讚讘专讬诐

Rabbi 岣lbo said that Rav Huna said: One who sees a Torah scroll that was torn is obligated to make two rents, one for the parchment that was damaged and one for the writing, as it is stated: 鈥淭hen the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after the king had burned the scroll and the words鈥 (Jeremiah 36:27). This implies that a separate rent must be made for each of them, both the parchment and the writing.

专讘讬 讗讘讗 讜专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞讬讬讗 讛讜讜 讬转讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘注讗 诇讗驻谞讜讬讬 砖拽诇讬讛 诇讟讜讟驻转讬讛 讗讞转讬讛 讗讘讬 住讚讬讗 讗转讗讬 讘转 谞注诪讬转讗 讘注讗 诇诪讬讘诇注讬讛

It was related that Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar 岣yya were sitting before Rabbi Abba. Rabbi Abba needed to relieve himself. He removed his phylacteries from his head and placed them on the cushion on which he was sitting. An ostrich came and wanted to swallow the phylacteries.

讗诪专 讛砖转讗 讗讬讞讬讬讘讬谉 诇讬 砖转讬 拽专讬注讜转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪谞讗 诇讱 讛讗 讜讛讗 讘讚讬讚讬 讛讜讛 注讜讘讚讗 讜讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 诪转谞讛 讜诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讛 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讛讻讬 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗诇讗 讘讝专讜注 讜讻诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛

He said: Now, had it succeeded to swallow it, I would have been obligated to make two rents. He said to him: From where do you derive this? There was an incident in which I was involved and I came before Rav Mattana asking what to do, but he did not have an answer readily available. I then came before Rav Yehuda, and he said to me: Shmuel said as follows: They said that one is obligated to rend his clothing only when a Torah scroll or some other sacred book is torn by force, and it resembles the incident that occurred with Jehoiakim.

注专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讘讗讜 讗谞砖讬诐 诪砖讻诐 诪砖讬诇讜 讜诪砖诪专讜谉 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讗讬砖 诪讙讜诇讞讬 讝拽谉 讜拽专讜注讬 讘讙讚讬诐 讜诪转讙讜讚讚讬诐 讜诪谞讞讛 讜诇讘讜谞讛 讘讬讚诐 诇讛讘讬讗 讘讬转 讛壮 讜讙讜壮

From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon seeing the cities of Judea in ruin? As it is written: 鈥淭here came certain men from Shechem, from Shiloh, and from Samaria, eighty people, their beards shaven, and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves, with offerings and incense in their hand, to bring to the house of the Lord鈥 (Jeremiah 41:5). This indicates that they rent their garments upon seeing the destruction.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讘讬专讗讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讛专讜讗讛 注专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讞讜专讘谞谉 讗讜诪专 注专讬 拽讚砖讱 讛讬讜 诪讚讘专 讜拽讜专注 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讘讞讜专讘谞讛 讗讜诪专 爪讬讜谉 诪讚讘专 讛讬转讛 讬专讜砖诇诐 砖诪诪讛 讜拽讜专注 讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讘讞讜专讘谞讜 讗讜诪专 讘讬转 拽讚砖谞讜 讜转驻讗专转谞讜 讗砖专 讛诇诇讜讱 讗讘讜转讬谞讜 讛讬讛 诇砖专讬驻转 讗砖 讜讻诇 诪讞诪讚讬谞讜 讛讬讛 诇讞专讘讛 讜拽讜专注

Rabbi 岣lbo said that Ulla Bira鈥檃 said that Rabbi Elazar said: One who sees the cities of Judea in their desolation says: 鈥淵our sacred cities are become a wilderness鈥 (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees Jerusalem in its desolation says: 鈥淶ion is a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation鈥 (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees the Temple in its desolation says: 鈥淥ur sacred and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised You, is burned with fire; and all our pleasant things are laid waste鈥 (Isaiah 64:10), and then rends his garments.

拽讜专注 注诇 诪拽讚砖 讜诪讜住讬祝 注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜专诪讬谞讛讜 讗讞讚 讛砖讜诪注 讜讗讞讚 讛专讜讗讛 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讬注 诇爪讜驻讬诐 拽讜专注 讜拽讜专注 注诇 诪拽讚砖 讘驻谞讬 注爪诪讜 讜注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讘驻谞讬 注爪诪讛

It was taught in the baraita: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem. And they raise a contradiction from another baraita that states: Both one who hears that Jerusalem is in ruin and one who sees the destruction, once he reaches Mount Scopus [Tzofim], rends his garments. And he rends his garments for the Temple separately and for Jerusalem separately.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚驻讙注 讘诪拽讚砖 讘专讬砖讗 讛讗 讚驻讙注 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讘专讬砖讗

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita, which states that instead of making a separate rent for Jerusalem one may extend the first rent that he had made for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached the Temple first, before seeing the rest of Jerusalem, and saw it in ruin. That baraita, which states that one must make separate rents for Jerusalem and for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached Jerusalem first, and only afterward the Temple.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜讻讜诇谉 专砖讗讬谉 诇砖讜诇诇谉 讜诇诪讜诇诇谉 讜诇诇讜拽讟谉 讜诇注砖讜转谉 讻诪讬谉 住讜诇诪讜转 讗讘诇 诇讗 诇讗讞讜转谉

The Sages taught the following baraita: And all of these rents, one may tack them together with loose stitches, and hem them, and gather them, and fix them with imprecise ladder-like stitches. But one may not mend them with precise stitches.

讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗

Rav 岣sda said:

讜讘讗讬讞讜讬 讗诇讻住谞讚专讬

And the reference here is to the Alexandrian method of mending, a type of sewing performed in Alexandria, which is considered to be of exceptional quality and after which the tear is no longer visible.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛拽讜专注 诪转讜讱 讛砖诇诇 诪转讜讱 讛诪诇诇 诪转讜讱 讛诇拽讟 诪转讜讱 讛住讜诇诪讜转 诇讗 讬爪讗 诪转讜讱 讛讗讬讞讜讬 讬爪讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讜讘讗讬讞讜讬 讗诇讻住谞讚专讬

The Sages taught the following baraita: One who rends his garment in a place that had been loosely tacked together, or from the hem of the garment, or on the gathering, or on the ladder-like stiches has not fulfilled his obligation to rend it. But if he rends it in a place that had been carefully mended, he has fulfilled his obligation, because such a garment is regarded as whole. Rav 岣sda said: And here, too, the reference is to the Alexandrian method of mending and not to ordinary sewing.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 专砖讗讬 诇讛讜驻讻讜 诇诪讟讛 讜诇讗讞讜转讜 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜住专 诇讗讞讜转讜 讜讻砖诐 砖讛诪讜讻专 讗住讜专 诇讗讞讜转讜 讻讱 讛诇讜拽讞 讗住讜专 诇讗讞讜转讜 讜诇驻讬讻讱 诪讜讻专 爪专讬讱 诇讛讜讚讬注讜 诇诇讜拽讞

The Sages taught another baraita: One is permitted to turn a garment that was rent on the upper edge upside down and then mend it in a precise fashion. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar prohibits careful mending in this case as well. And if one wishes to sell a garment that he had previously rent in mourning, just as the seller, who had rent the garment, is prohibited from carefully mending the garment, so too the buyer, who purchases it from him, is prohibited from mending it. The seller must therefore inform the buyer that the rent was made on account of mourning and may not be mended.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 转讞讬诇转 拽专讬注讛 讟驻讞 讜转讜住驻转 砖诇砖 讗爪讘注讜转 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 转讞讬诇转 拽专讬注讛 砖诇砖 讗爪讘注讜转 讜转讜住驻转 讻诇 砖讛讜

The Sages taught a baraita: The initial rending is a handbreadth in length,and the extension, if one is obligated to rend his garment for other deceased relatives and he wishes to use the same rent for this purpose, is three fingerbreadths; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: The initial rending is three fingerbreadths in length, and its extension is any amount, with no minimum measure.

讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讘拽专讬注讛 讜讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘转讜住驻转 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 转讞讬诇转 拽专讬注讛 讟驻讞 讜转讜住驻转 讻诇 砖讛讜

Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir that the initial rending is one handbreadth in length, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that an extension can be any length. The Gemara comments: That is also taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei says: The initial rending is one handbreadth, and the size of the extension is any minimal amount. By tradition, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei when he disagrees with any one of his colleagues.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗诪专讜 诇讜 诪转 讗讘讬讜 讜拽专注 诪转 讘谞讜 讜讛讜住讬祝 转讞转讜谉 诪转讗讞讛 注诇讬讜谉 讗讬谞讜 诪转讗讞讛

The Sages taught the following baraita: If they first said to a person that his father died, and he rent his garment, and afterward they told him that his son died, and he added to the same rent, in such a case the lower portion of the rent that had been made for his son may be mended. The is because, after completing the period of mourning, one is permitted to mend a rent made for relatives other than one鈥檚 parents. However, the upper portion of the rent may not be mended, as a tear made for one鈥檚 father may never be carefully sewn back together.

诪转 讘谞讜 讜拽专注 诪转 讗讘讬讜 讜讛讜住讬祝 注诇讬讜谉 诪转讗讞讛 转讞转讜谉 讗讬谞讜 诪转讗讞讛

If, on the other hand, they said to him first that his son died, and he rent his garment, and afterward they told him that his father died, and he added to the same rent, then in that case the upper portion of the rent, which that had been made for his son, may be mended, but the lower portion of the rent, which had been made for his father, may not be mended.

诪转 讗讘讬讜 诪转 讗诪讜 诪转 讗讞讬讜 诪转讛 讗讞讜转讜 拽讜专注 拽专注 讗讞讚 诇讻讜诇谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛 讗讜诪专 注诇 讻讜诇谉 拽专注 讗讞讚 注诇 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 拽专注 讗讞讚 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 注诇 拽专注 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜

If they said to him all at one time that his father died, his mother died, his brother died, and his sister died, then he may make one rent for all of them. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: For all of his other relatives he makes one rent, and for his father and mother he makes another rent, as one must not add to a rent made for his father and mother.

诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞谉 讘转讜住驻转

The Gemara asks: What is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira鈥檚 opinion that one may not add to the rent torn for a mother or father? Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said: Because they cannot be added; one has only one father and one mother and cannot add others.

讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛 讜诪讬 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻讚讘专讬 讛诪讬拽诇 讘讗讘诇 讗讘讬诇讜转 诇讞讜讚 拽专讬注讛 诇讞讜讚

Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. The Gemara asks: And did Shmuel actually say this? But didn鈥檛 Shmuel say the principle is that the halakha is in accordance with the statement of the lenient Sage with regard to mourning; yet here he rules in accordance with the more stringent opinion. The Gemara answers: The halakhot of mourning are discrete and the halakhot of rending are discrete, and it is only with regard to the halakhot of mourning that Shmuel rules consistently in accordance with the lenient opinion.

注讚 讛讬讻谉 拽讜专注 注讚 讟讬讘讜专讜 讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 注讚 诇讘讜 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诇讚讘专 讝讻专 诇讚讘专 砖谞讗诪专 讜拽专注讜 诇讘讘讻诐 讜讗诇 讘讙讚讬讻诐

It was taught in a baraita: Until where may he rend his garment, if he continues to rend the same garment for additional relatives? He may continue rending until the point where the garment covers his navel. Some say: Until the point where the garment covers his heart. Although there is no absolute proof for the matter that one may rend the garment until this point, there is an allusion to this matter, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd rend your hearts, and not your garments鈥 (Joel 2:13), thereby intimating that one may extend the rent in his garment only until he reaches the point where the garment covers his heart.

讛讙讬注 诇讟讬讘讜专讜 诪专讞讬拽 砖诇砖 讗爪讘注讜转 讜拽讜专注 谞转诪诇讗 诪诇驻谞讬讜 诪讞讝讬专讜 诇讗讞讜专讬讜 谞转诪诇讗 诪诇诪注诇讛 讛讜驻讻讜 诪诇诪讟讛 讜讛拽讜专注 诪诇诪讟讛 讜诪谉 讛爪讚讚讬谉 诇讗 讬爪讗 讗诇讗 砖讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 驻讜专诐 诪诇诪讟讛

If he tore his garment until he reached the point where it covers his navel, he should not continue rending in the same place. Instead, he should move away a space of three fingerbreadths from the first rent and make a new rent. If the garment became full of rents in the front, he should turn the garment front to back and make a rent on the other side. If it became full of rents above, he should turn it top to bottom and make a rent on what used to be the bottom. But one who rends his garment at the bottom or at the sides has not fulfilled his obligation, as rending may be done only at the top of the garment. The High Priest, however, who is prohibited from rending his garments in mourning, may tear his garment at the bottom to mark his mourning in a symbolic manner.

驻诇讬讙讜 讘讛 专讘 诪转谞讛 讜诪专 注讜拽讘讗 讜转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪砖诪讬讛 讚讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讜诇讜讬 讞讚 讗诪专 讻诇 砖讘注讛 拽讜专注 诇讗讞专 砖讘注讛 诪讜住讬祝 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 拽讜专注 诇讗讞专 砖诇砖讬诐 诪讜住讬祝

Rav Mattana and Mar Ukva disagreed about the following issue, and both of them stated their respective opinions in the name of Shmuel鈥檚 father and Levi. One said: During all seven days of mourning, if the mourner hears that another relative of his passed away, he makes a new rent; after seven days of mourning he merely adds to the first one. And one said: During all of the first thirty days he makes a new rent; after thirty days he merely adds to the first one.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻诇 砖讘注讛 拽讜专注 讗诪讗讬 讚诇讗 谞讬转谉 诇砖讜诇诇讜 讗诇讗 讛讗 讚讗诪专 诪专 讛讗砖讛 砖讜诇诇转讜 诇讗诇转专 讛讻讗 谞诪讬

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this: According to the one who said that during all seven days of mourning he makes a new rent, why is it not enough to add to the first one? It is because he may not tack it until the end of the seven-day period of mourning, and therefore if he adds to the rent it will look like a continuation of the previous tear. But then, with regard to that which the Master said in the baraita: After a woman rends her garment, she may tack the tear immediately, would you say that here also she may add to the first rent for a new bereavement during the seven-day period of mourning?

讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚 讗砖讛 讛讜讗

The Gemara answers: There the woman is permitted to tack the rent due to the woman鈥檚 honor, as it would be dishonorable for her to be seen wearing torn garments. However, halakhically the rent is considered as if it still exists, and therefore she must make a new rent for a new bereavement and not merely add to the previous one.

诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 拽讜专注 讗诪讗讬 讚诇讗 谞讬转谉 诇讗讞讜转讜 讗诇讗 诇讗讘讬讜 讜诇讗诪讜 讚诇讗 谞讬转谉 诇讗讞讜转讜 诇注讜诇诐 讛讻讬 谞诪讬

Rabbi Zeira asked further: According to the one who said that all thirty days of mourning one must make a new rent rather than add to the existing tear, why does he say this? It is because during the thirty days one is not given permission to properly mend the garment, and so it still appears to be torn. But then, in a case of a rent made for one鈥檚 father or mother, for which he is not given permission to ever properly mend it, would you say that he should so too be forever barred from adding to the rent for a new bereavement and is instead obligated to make a new rent?

讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 讛讜讗

The Gemara answers: There he may not properly mend the rent due to the honor due to his father and mother. Essentially, however, the tear is considered as if it had been sewn up after the thirty-day period, and therefore the son may extend it in the case of a new bereavement.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讬讜爪讗 讘讘讙讚 拽专讜注 诇驻谞讬 讛诪转 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讜讝诇 讗转 讛诪转讬诐 讜讗转 讛讞讬讬诐

The Sages taught the following baraita: One who goes out before the deceased in a rent garment that he had previously torn over another bereavement, thereby giving the appearance of having rent his garment for him, steals from the dead, as he did not rend a garment for him. And he similarly steals from the living, who see him and think that he made the tear in honor of the deceased, when in reality he is deceiving them.

专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讛讗讜诪专 诇讞讘讬专讜 讛砖讗讬诇谞讬 讞诇讜拽讱 讜讗诇讱 讜讗讘拽专 讗转 讗讘讗 砖讛讜讗 讞讜诇讛 讜讛诇讱 讜诪爪讗讜 砖诪转 拽讜专注 讜诪讗讞讜 讜讻砖讬讘讗 诇讘讬转讜 诪讞讝讬专 诇讜 讞诇讜拽讜 讜谞讜转谉 诇讜 讚诪讬 拽专注讜 讜讗诐 诇讗 讛讜讚讬注讜 讛专讬 讝讛 诇讗 讬讙注 讘讜

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: In the case of one who says to his fellow: Lend me your cloak and I will go and visit my father because he is sick, and he goes and finds that his father has died, he rends the cloak and may then mend it in the proper manner. And when he returns home, he returns the cloak to his fellow and pays him the value of the rent, i.e., the depreciation in the value of the cloak that resulted from the tear. The assumption is that the lender considered the possibility that the sick father might die, and lent the garment anyway, understanding that he might have to tear it. But if one did not inform his fellow that he was going to visit his sick father, he must not touch it, as he was not granted permission to tear the garment belonging to someone else.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讞讜诇讛 砖诪转 诇讜 诪转 讗讬谉 诪讜讚讬注讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖诪转 砖诪讗 转讟专祝 讚注转讜 注诇讬讜 讜讗讬谉 诪拽专注讬谉 讘驻谞讬讜 讜诪砖转拽讬谉 讗转 讛谞砖讬诐 诪驻谞讬讜

The Sages taught the following baraita: When a relative of a sick person dies, those around him do not inform him that this relative died, lest he lose control of his mind due to his emotional state and his grief exacerbate his physical health. And other people may not rend their garments in his presence, so that he will not know that one of his relatives passed away. And we silence the women who weep in his presence, so that he will not know that his relative is no longer alive.

讜诪拽专注讬谉 诇拽讟谉 诪驻谞讬 注讙诪转 谞驻砖 讜拽讜专注讬谉 注诇 讞诪讬讜 讜注诇 讞诪讜转讜 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讗砖转讜

And the relatives rend the garment of a minor child when there is mourning in his family in order to arouse grief. Although a minor is not required to rend his garments, this will add to the grief of those who see that even the garments of children are rent. And one rends his garment for his father-in-law or mother-in-law, although he is not required to mourn for them, due to the honor of his wife, to show her that he joins in her mourning.

讜讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 转谞讗 讘讗讘诇 专讘转讬 讗讘诇 诇讗 讬谞讬讞 转讬谞讜拽 讘转讜讱 讞讬拽讜 诪驻谞讬 砖诪讘讬讗讜 诇讬讚讬 砖讞讜拽 讜谞诪爪讗 诪转讙谞讛 注诇 讛讘专讬讜转

And Rav Pappa said: A Sage taught in Evel Rabbati: A mourner should not place a young child in his lap because the child will bring him to laughter, and he will be disgraced in the eyes of other people because he laughed while in mourning.

讜讗讬谉 诪讘专讬谉 注诇 诪讟讜转 讝拽讜驻讜转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讛讜诇讱 诇讘讬转 讛讗讘诇 讗诐 讛讬讛 诇讘讜 讙住 讘讜 讬讘专讜讛讜 注诇 诪讟讜转 讻驻讜讬讜转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讬讘专讜讛讜 注诇 诪讟讜转 讝拽讜驻讜转

搂 The mishna taught: And the consolers provide the first meal after the burial only while the mourner sits on an upright bed and not on one that is overturned. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to one who goes to the house of the mourner, if he is confident in his friendship with him because they are close friends, they provide him with the meal of comfort while both he and the mourner sit on overturned beds. And if he is not confident in his friendship with him, both he and the mourner should be fed on upright beds.

专讘讗 讗讬转专注 讘讬讛 诪讬诇转讗 注诇 诇讙讘讬讛 讗讘讗 讘专 诪专转讗 讚讛讜讗 讗讘讗 讘专 诪谞讬讜诪讬 专讘讗 讝拽讬祝 讗讘讗 讘专 诪专转讗 讻驻讬 讗诪专 讻诪讛 诇讬转 讘讬讛 讚注转讗 诇讛讗讬 爪讜专讘讗 诪专讘谞谉

The Gemara relates that something unpleasant happened to Rava, i.e., one of his close relatives died, and Abba bar Marta, who was also known as Abba bar Minyomi, entered to visit him. Rava stood the bed upright, treating him like any other person who came to comfort him. Abba bar Marta overturned the bed because he saw himself as being on very familiar terms with Rava. Rava said: How lacking in sense is this Torah scholar. Rava had shown from the outset that he did not consider Abba bar Marta to be a close friend, yet the latter ignored this message and viewed himself as being exceptionally close to Rava.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讛讜诇讱 诪诪拽讜诐 诇诪拽讜诐

The Sages taught a baraita: If one who was going from place to place learned of the death of a close relative, so that he must now observe the rites of mourning,

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

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

Moed Katan: 21-29 + Siyum – Daf Yomi One Week at a Time

We continue to learn about the mourning rituals and customs. We will also learn about the different stages of the...
talking talmud_square

Moed Katan 26: When We Rend

Tearing keriya - rending one's clothes. For whom do we tear? Starting with father, mother, and teacher - as learned...

Moed Katan 26

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Moed Katan 26

讜讗诇讜 拽专注讬谉 砖讗讬谉 诪转讗讞讬谉 讛拽讜专注 注诇 讗讘讬讜 讜注诇 讗诪讜 讜注诇 专讘讜 砖诇讬诪讚讜 转讜专讛 讜注诇 谞砖讬讗 讜注诇 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜注诇 砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 讜注诇 讘专讻转 讛砖诐 讜注诇 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖谞砖专祝 讜注诇 注专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜注诇 讛诪拽讚砖 讜注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜拽讜专注 注诇 诪拽讚砖 讜诪讜住讬祝 注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐

And these are the rents of mourning that may never be properly mended: One who rends his garments for the death his father, or for his mother, or for his teacher who taught him Torah, or for the Nasi, or for the president of the court; or upon hearing evil tidings; or hearing God鈥檚 name being blessed, which is a euphemism for hearing God鈥檚 name being cursed; or when a Torah scroll has been burned; or upon seeing the cities of Judea that were destroyed or the destroyed Temple or Jerusalem in ruins. This is the way one conducts himself when approaching Jerusalem when it lies in ruin: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem.

讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 讜专讘讜 砖诇讬诪讚讜 转讜专讛 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讗诇讬砖注 专讗讛 讜讛讜讗 诪爪注拽 讗讘讬 讗讘讬 专讻讘 讬砖专讗诇 讜驻专砖讬讜 讗讘讬 讗讘讬 讝讛 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 专讻讘 讬砖专讗诇 讜驻专砖讬讜 讝讛 专讘讜 砖诇讬诪讚讜 转讜专讛

The Gemara elaborates upon the halakhot mentioned in this baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for his father, his mother, and his teacher who taught him Torah? As it is written with regard to the prophet Elijah, when he ascended to Heaven in a tempest: 鈥淎nd Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and their horsemen鈥 (II聽Kings 2:12). The Gemara interprets this verse as follows: 鈥淢y father, my father鈥; this comes to teach that one must rend his garments for the death of his father or mother. 鈥淭he chariots of Israel and their horsemen鈥; this comes to include also one鈥 teacher who taught him Torah.

诪讗讬 诪砖诪注 讻讚诪转专讙诐 专讘 讬讜住祝 专讘讬 专讘讬 讚讟讘 诇讛讜谉 诇讬砖专讗诇 讘爪诇讜转讬讛 诪专转讬讻讬谉 讜驻专砖讬谉

The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this is referring to one鈥檚 teacher? The Gemara explains: As the verse was translated by Rav Yosef: My teacher, my teacher, who was better for the protection of the Jewish people with his prayers than an army with chariots and horsemen.

讜诇讗 诪转讗讞讬谉 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讞讝拽 讘讘讙讚讬讜 讜讬拽专注诐 诇砖谞讬诐 拽专注讬诐 诪诪砖诪注 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬拽专注诐 讗讬谞讬 讬讜讚注 砖诇砖谞讬诐 讗诇讗 诪诇诪讚 砖拽专讜注讬诐 讜注讜诪讚讬诐 诇砖谞讬诐 诇注讜诇诐

And from where do we derive that these rents are never to be properly mended? As it is written: 鈥淎nd he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces鈥 (II聽Kings 2:12). From the fact that it is stated: 鈥淎nd he rent them,鈥 do I not know that he rent them in two pieces? Rather, when the verse adds that they were torn into two pieces, it teaches that they must remain torn in two pieces forever. Accordingly, this rent must never be properly mended.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诇专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讗诇讬讛讜 讞讬 讛讜讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讻讬讜谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜诇讗 专讗讛讜 注讜讚 诇讙讘讬 讚讬讚讬讛 讻诪转 讚诪讬

Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yo岣nan: But isn鈥檛 Elijah still alive? Why, then, did Elisha rend his garments for him? He said to him: Since it is written: 鈥淎nd he saw him no more鈥 (II聽Kings 2:12), Elijah was considered dead from Elisha鈥檚 perspective, and so Elisha rent his clothing for him.

谞砖讬讗 讜讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 讜砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讞讝拽 讚讜讚 讘讘讙讚讬讜 讜讬拽专注诐 讜讙诐 讻诇 讛讗谞砖讬诐 讗砖专 讗转讜 讜讬住驻讚讜 讜讬讘讻讜 讜讬爪讜诪讜 注讚 讛注专讘 注诇 砖讗讜诇 讜注诇 讬讛讜谞转谉 讘谞讜 讜注诇 注诐 讛壮 讜注诇 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讻讬 谞驻诇讜 讘讞专讘

From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for the death of the Nasi or the president of the court and upon hearing evil bad tidings? As it is written, when David heard about the defeat of Israel and the death of Saul and his sons: 鈥淭hen David took hold of his clothes, and rent them; and likewise all the men that were with him: And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until evening, for Saul and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the Lord, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword鈥 (II聽Samuel 1:11鈥12).

砖讗讜诇 讝讛 谞砖讬讗 讬讛讜谞转谉 讝讛 讗讘 讘讬转 讚讬谉 注诇 注诐 讛壮 讜注诇 讘讬转 讬砖专讗诇 讗诇讜 砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转

The Gemara explains how the aforementioned halakhot are derived from the verse: 鈥淪aul鈥; this is a reference to the Nasi, as Saul was king of Israel. 鈥淛onathan鈥; this is a reference to the president of the court. 鈥淔or the people of the Lord, and for the house of the Israel鈥; these are a reference to evil tidings.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讘专 砖讘讗 诇专讘 讻讛谞讗 讜讗讬诪讗 注讚 讚讛讜讜 讻讜诇讛讜 讗诪专 诇讬讛 注诇 注诇 讛驻住讬拽 讛注谞讬谉

Rav bar Shaba said to Rav Kahana: But perhaps you can say that one need not rend his clothing until all these calamities occur together, and that rending clothing is performed only over a tragedy of this magnitude. He said to him: The repetition of the word 鈥渇or鈥: 鈥淔or Saul,鈥 鈥渇or Jonathan,鈥 and 鈥渇or the people of the Lord鈥 divides the matter and teaches that each individual misfortune is sufficient cause to rend one鈥檚 garments.

讜诪讬 拽专注讬谞谉 讗砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 讜讛讗 讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇砖诪讜讗诇 拽讟诇 砖讘讜专 诪诇讻讗 转专讬住专 讗诇驻讬 讬讛讜讚讗讬 讘诪讝讬讙转 拽住专讬 讜诇讗 拽专注 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗诇讗 讘专讜讘 爪讘讜专 讜讻诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛

The Gemara asks: But do we actually rend our clothing upon hearing evil tidings? But didn鈥檛 they say to Shmuel: King Shapur killed twelve thousand Jews in Mezigat Caesarea, and Shmuel did not rend his clothing?The Gemara answers: They said that one must rend his clothing upon hearing evil tidings only in a case where the calamity involved the majority of the community of Israel and resembles the incident that occurred when Saul was killed and the entire nation of Israel suffered defeat.

讜诪讬 拽讟诇 砖讘讜专 诪诇讻讗 讬讛讜讚讗讬 讜讛讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖讘讜专 诪诇讻讗 诇砖诪讜讗诇 转讬转讬 诇讬 讚诇讗 拽讟诇讬 讬讛讜讚讬 诪注讜诇诐 讛转诐 讗讬谞讛讜 讙专诪讬 诇谞驻砖讬讬讛讜 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 诇拽诇 讬转讬专讬 讚诪讝讬讙转 拽住专讬 驻拽注 砖讜专讗 讚诇讜讚拽讬讗

The Gemara tangentially asks: Did King Shapur really kill Jews? But didn鈥檛 King Shapur say to Shmuel: I have a blessing coming to me, for I have never killed a Jew? The Gemara answers: King Shapur never instigated the killing of Jews; there, however, they brought it upon themselves, as Rabbi Ami said in an exaggerated manner: Due to the noise of the harp strings of Mezigat Caesarea, the walls of Laodicea were breached, for the residents of the city celebrated when they rebelled against King Shapur. Because they rebelled against him and threatened his rule, he was forced to kill them.

注诇 讘专讻转 讛砖诐 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讘讗 讗诇讬拽讬诐 讘谉 讞诇拽讬讛 讗砖专 注诇 讛讘讬转 讜砖讘谞讗 讛住讜驻专 讜讬讜讗讞 讘谉 讗住祝 讛诪讝讻讬专 讗诇 讞讝拽讬讛讜 拽专讜注讬 讘讙讚讬诐

搂 The Gemara continues its analysis of the baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon hearing God鈥檚 name being blessed, i.e., cursed? As it is written with regard to the blasphemous words said by Rab-shakeh: 鈥淭hen came Eliakim, son of Hilkiya, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, son of Asaph, the recorder, to Hezekiah with their clothes rent鈥 (II聽Kings 18:37).

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讞讚 讛砖讜诪注 讜讗讞讚 讛砖讜诪注 诪驻讬 讛砖讜诪注 讞讬讬讘 诇拽专讜注 讜讛注讚讬诐 讗讬谞谉 讞讬讬讘讬谉 诇拽专讜注 砖讻讘专 拽专注讜 讘砖注讛 砖砖诪注讜

The Sages taught a baraita with regard to this issue: Both one who actually hears the curse and one who hears from the mouth of the one who heard the curse are obligated to rend their garments. But the witnesses who testify against the person who uttered the blasphemy are not obligated to rend their clothing when they testify as to what they heard because they already rent their clothing when they heard the curse the first time.

讘砖注讛 砖砖诪注讜 诪讗讬 讛讜讬 讛讗 拽讗 砖诪注讬 讛砖转讗 诇讗 住诇拽讗 讚注转讱 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讻砖诪讜注 讛诪诇讱 讞讝拽讬讛讜 讜讬拽专注 讗转 讘讙讚讬讜 讛诪诇讱 拽专注 讜讛诐 诇讗 拽专注讜

The Gemara asks: What difference does it make that they rent their garments when they heard the curse the first time? Didn鈥檛 they hear it again now? The Gemara rejects this argument: This will not enter your mind, as it is written: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his clothes鈥 (II聽Kings 19:1). This indicates that the king rent his garments, but those who reported the blasphemy to him did not rend theirs, as they had already rent their garments the first time.

讜诇讗 诪转讗讞讬谉 诪谞诇谉 讗转讬讗 拽专讬注讛 拽专讬注讛

And from where do we derive that these rents may not be properly mended? This is derived by way of a verbal analogy between the verb rending used here with regard to Hezekiah and the verb rending used in the case of Elijah and Elisha.

住驻专 转讜专讛 砖谞砖专祝 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讛讬 讻拽专讗 讬讛讜讚讬 砖诇砖 讚诇转讜转 讜讗专讘注讛 讜讬拽专注讛 讘转注专 讛住讜驻专 讜讛砖诇讱 讗诇 讛讗砖 讗砖专 讗诇 讛讗讞 讜讙讜壮 诪讗讬 砖诇砖 讚诇转讜转 讜讗专讘注讛

From where do we derive that one must rend his garments when a Torah scroll has been burned? As it is written: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he would cut it with a penknife, and cast it into the fire that was in the brazier鈥 (Jeremiah 36:23). With regard to the verse itself the Gemara asks: What is meant by 鈥渢hree or four leaves,鈥 and why did he cut the book only at that point?

讗诪专讜 诇讬讛 诇讬讛讜讬拽讬诐 讻转讘 讬专诪讬讛 住驻专 拽讬谞讜转 讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪讛 讻转讬讘 讘讬讛 讗讬讻讛 讬砖讘讛 讘讚讚 讗诪专 诇讛讜 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗 讗诪专 诇讬讛 讘讻讛 转讘讻讛 讘诇讬诇讛 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗 讙诇转讛 讬讛讜讚讛 诪注讜谞讬 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗 讚专讻讬 爪讬讜谉 讗讘诇讜转 讗谞讗 诪诇讻讗

The Gemara explains: They said to Jehoiakim: Jeremiah has written a book of Lamentations over the future downfall and destruction of Jerusalem. He said to them: What is written in it? They read him the first verse: 鈥淗ow does the city sit solitary鈥 (Lamentations 1:1). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the second verse: 鈥淪he weeps sore in the night鈥 (Lamentations 1:2). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the third verse: 鈥淛udah is gone into exile due to affliction鈥 (Lamentations 1:3). He said to them: I am king. They read to him: 鈥淭he ways of Zion do mourn鈥 (Lamentations 1:4). He said to them: I am king. These are the four leaves, or verses, that he read first.

讛讬讜 爪专讬讛 诇专讗砖 讗诪专 诇讛讜 诪讗谉 讗诪专讛 讻讬 讛壮 讛讜讙讛 注诇 专讜讘 驻砖注讬讛 诪讬讚 拽讚专 讻诇 讗讝讻专讜转 砖讘讛 讜砖专驻谉 讘讗砖 讜讛讬讬谞讜 讚讻转讬讘 讜诇讗 驻讞讚讜 讜诇讗 拽专注讜 讗转 讘讙讚讬讛诐 诪讻诇诇 讚讘注讜 诇诪讬拽专注

They read him an additional verse: 鈥淗er adversaries have become the chief鈥 (Lamentations 1:5), i.e., the reigning king will be removed from power. Once he heard this, he said to them: Who said this? They said to him: This is the continuation of the verse: 鈥淔or the Lord has afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions鈥 (Lamentations 1:5). Immediately, he cut out all the names of God from the book and burned them in fire. This is as it is written: 鈥淵et they were not afraid, nor rent their garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words鈥 (Jeremiah 36:24). By inference, this shows that they were required to rend their clothing when they saw this.

讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗讘讬讬 讗讬诪专 诪砖讜诐 砖诪讜注讜转 讛专注讜转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 砖诪讜注讜转 专注讜转 讘讛讛讬讗 砖注转讗 诪讬 讛讜讜

Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Perhaps you can say that they should have rent their garments due to the evil tidings contained in the scroll and not because of the destruction of the book? Abaye said to him: Were they evil tidings at that time? This was a prophecy and not an account of current events.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讛专讜讗讛 住驻专 转讜专讛 砖谞拽专注 讞讬讬讘 诇拽专讜注 砖转讬 拽专讬注讜转 讗讞讚 注诇 讛讙讜讬诇 讜讗讞讚 注诇 讛讻转讘 砖谞讗诪专 讗讞专讬 砖专讜祝 讛诪诇讱 讗转 讛诪讙诇讛 讜讗转 讛讚讘专讬诐

Rabbi 岣lbo said that Rav Huna said: One who sees a Torah scroll that was torn is obligated to make two rents, one for the parchment that was damaged and one for the writing, as it is stated: 鈥淭hen the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after the king had burned the scroll and the words鈥 (Jeremiah 36:27). This implies that a separate rent must be made for each of them, both the parchment and the writing.

专讘讬 讗讘讗 讜专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专 讞讬讬讗 讛讜讜 讬转讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘讬 讗讘讗 讘注讗 诇讗驻谞讜讬讬 砖拽诇讬讛 诇讟讜讟驻转讬讛 讗讞转讬讛 讗讘讬 住讚讬讗 讗转讗讬 讘转 谞注诪讬转讗 讘注讗 诇诪讬讘诇注讬讛

It was related that Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar 岣yya were sitting before Rabbi Abba. Rabbi Abba needed to relieve himself. He removed his phylacteries from his head and placed them on the cushion on which he was sitting. An ostrich came and wanted to swallow the phylacteries.

讗诪专 讛砖转讗 讗讬讞讬讬讘讬谉 诇讬 砖转讬 拽专讬注讜转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 诪谞讗 诇讱 讛讗 讜讛讗 讘讚讬讚讬 讛讜讛 注讜讘讚讗 讜讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 诪转谞讛 讜诇讗 讛讜讛 讘讬讚讬讛 讗转讗讬 诇拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讗诪专 诇讬 讛讻讬 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诇讗 讗诪专讜 讗诇讗 讘讝专讜注 讜讻诪注砖讛 砖讛讬讛

He said: Now, had it succeeded to swallow it, I would have been obligated to make two rents. He said to him: From where do you derive this? There was an incident in which I was involved and I came before Rav Mattana asking what to do, but he did not have an answer readily available. I then came before Rav Yehuda, and he said to me: Shmuel said as follows: They said that one is obligated to rend his clothing only when a Torah scroll or some other sacred book is torn by force, and it resembles the incident that occurred with Jehoiakim.

注专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪谞诇谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讘讗讜 讗谞砖讬诐 诪砖讻诐 诪砖讬诇讜 讜诪砖诪专讜谉 砖诪讜谞讬诐 讗讬砖 诪讙讜诇讞讬 讝拽谉 讜拽专讜注讬 讘讙讚讬诐 讜诪转讙讜讚讚讬诐 讜诪谞讞讛 讜诇讘讜谞讛 讘讬讚诐 诇讛讘讬讗 讘讬转 讛壮 讜讙讜壮

From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon seeing the cities of Judea in ruin? As it is written: 鈥淭here came certain men from Shechem, from Shiloh, and from Samaria, eighty people, their beards shaven, and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves, with offerings and incense in their hand, to bring to the house of the Lord鈥 (Jeremiah 41:5). This indicates that they rent their garments upon seeing the destruction.

讗诪专 专讘讬 讞诇讘讜 讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讘讬专讗讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诇注讝专 讛专讜讗讛 注专讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘讞讜专讘谞谉 讗讜诪专 注专讬 拽讚砖讱 讛讬讜 诪讚讘专 讜拽讜专注 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讘讞讜专讘谞讛 讗讜诪专 爪讬讜谉 诪讚讘专 讛讬转讛 讬专讜砖诇诐 砖诪诪讛 讜拽讜专注 讘讬转 讛诪拽讚砖 讘讞讜专讘谞讜 讗讜诪专 讘讬转 拽讚砖谞讜 讜转驻讗专转谞讜 讗砖专 讛诇诇讜讱 讗讘讜转讬谞讜 讛讬讛 诇砖专讬驻转 讗砖 讜讻诇 诪讞诪讚讬谞讜 讛讬讛 诇讞专讘讛 讜拽讜专注

Rabbi 岣lbo said that Ulla Bira鈥檃 said that Rabbi Elazar said: One who sees the cities of Judea in their desolation says: 鈥淵our sacred cities are become a wilderness鈥 (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees Jerusalem in its desolation says: 鈥淶ion is a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation鈥 (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees the Temple in its desolation says: 鈥淥ur sacred and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised You, is burned with fire; and all our pleasant things are laid waste鈥 (Isaiah 64:10), and then rends his garments.

拽讜专注 注诇 诪拽讚砖 讜诪讜住讬祝 注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜专诪讬谞讛讜 讗讞讚 讛砖讜诪注 讜讗讞讚 讛专讜讗讛 讻讬讜谉 砖讛讙讬注 诇爪讜驻讬诐 拽讜专注 讜拽讜专注 注诇 诪拽讚砖 讘驻谞讬 注爪诪讜 讜注诇 讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讘驻谞讬 注爪诪讛

It was taught in the baraita: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem. And they raise a contradiction from another baraita that states: Both one who hears that Jerusalem is in ruin and one who sees the destruction, once he reaches Mount Scopus [Tzofim], rends his garments. And he rends his garments for the Temple separately and for Jerusalem separately.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讛讗 讚驻讙注 讘诪拽讚砖 讘专讬砖讗 讛讗 讚驻讙注 讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讘专讬砖讗

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita, which states that instead of making a separate rent for Jerusalem one may extend the first rent that he had made for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached the Temple first, before seeing the rest of Jerusalem, and saw it in ruin. That baraita, which states that one must make separate rents for Jerusalem and for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached Jerusalem first, and only afterward the Temple.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讜讻讜诇谉 专砖讗讬谉 诇砖讜诇诇谉 讜诇诪讜诇诇谉 讜诇诇讜拽讟谉 讜诇注砖讜转谉 讻诪讬谉 住讜诇诪讜转 讗讘诇 诇讗 诇讗讞讜转谉

The Sages taught the following baraita: And all of these rents, one may tack them together with loose stitches, and hem them, and gather them, and fix them with imprecise ladder-like stitches. But one may not mend them with precise stitches.

讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗

Rav 岣sda said:

讜讘讗讬讞讜讬 讗诇讻住谞讚专讬

And the reference here is to the Alexandrian method of mending, a type of sewing performed in Alexandria, which is considered to be of exceptional quality and after which the tear is no longer visible.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛拽讜专注 诪转讜讱 讛砖诇诇 诪转讜讱 讛诪诇诇 诪转讜讱 讛诇拽讟 诪转讜讱 讛住讜诇诪讜转 诇讗 讬爪讗 诪转讜讱 讛讗讬讞讜讬 讬爪讗 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讜讘讗讬讞讜讬 讗诇讻住谞讚专讬

The Sages taught the following baraita: One who rends his garment in a place that had been loosely tacked together, or from the hem of the garment, or on the gathering, or on the ladder-like stiches has not fulfilled his obligation to rend it. But if he rends it in a place that had been carefully mended, he has fulfilled his obligation, because such a garment is regarded as whole. Rav 岣sda said: And here, too, the reference is to the Alexandrian method of mending and not to ordinary sewing.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 专砖讗讬 诇讛讜驻讻讜 诇诪讟讛 讜诇讗讞讜转讜 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜住专 诇讗讞讜转讜 讜讻砖诐 砖讛诪讜讻专 讗住讜专 诇讗讞讜转讜 讻讱 讛诇讜拽讞 讗住讜专 诇讗讞讜转讜 讜诇驻讬讻讱 诪讜讻专 爪专讬讱 诇讛讜讚讬注讜 诇诇讜拽讞

The Sages taught another baraita: One is permitted to turn a garment that was rent on the upper edge upside down and then mend it in a precise fashion. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar prohibits careful mending in this case as well. And if one wishes to sell a garment that he had previously rent in mourning, just as the seller, who had rent the garment, is prohibited from carefully mending the garment, so too the buyer, who purchases it from him, is prohibited from mending it. The seller must therefore inform the buyer that the rent was made on account of mourning and may not be mended.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 转讞讬诇转 拽专讬注讛 讟驻讞 讜转讜住驻转 砖诇砖 讗爪讘注讜转 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 转讞讬诇转 拽专讬注讛 砖诇砖 讗爪讘注讜转 讜转讜住驻转 讻诇 砖讛讜

The Sages taught a baraita: The initial rending is a handbreadth in length,and the extension, if one is obligated to rend his garment for other deceased relatives and he wishes to use the same rent for this purpose, is three fingerbreadths; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: The initial rending is three fingerbreadths in length, and its extension is any amount, with no minimum measure.

讗诪专 注讜诇讗 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讘拽专讬注讛 讜讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘转讜住驻转 转谞讬讗 谞诪讬 讛讻讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 转讞讬诇转 拽专讬注讛 讟驻讞 讜转讜住驻转 讻诇 砖讛讜

Ulla said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir that the initial rending is one handbreadth in length, and the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda that an extension can be any length. The Gemara comments: That is also taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yosei says: The initial rending is one handbreadth, and the size of the extension is any minimal amount. By tradition, the halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei when he disagrees with any one of his colleagues.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗诪专讜 诇讜 诪转 讗讘讬讜 讜拽专注 诪转 讘谞讜 讜讛讜住讬祝 转讞转讜谉 诪转讗讞讛 注诇讬讜谉 讗讬谞讜 诪转讗讞讛

The Sages taught the following baraita: If they first said to a person that his father died, and he rent his garment, and afterward they told him that his son died, and he added to the same rent, in such a case the lower portion of the rent that had been made for his son may be mended. The is because, after completing the period of mourning, one is permitted to mend a rent made for relatives other than one鈥檚 parents. However, the upper portion of the rent may not be mended, as a tear made for one鈥檚 father may never be carefully sewn back together.

诪转 讘谞讜 讜拽专注 诪转 讗讘讬讜 讜讛讜住讬祝 注诇讬讜谉 诪转讗讞讛 转讞转讜谉 讗讬谞讜 诪转讗讞讛

If, on the other hand, they said to him first that his son died, and he rent his garment, and afterward they told him that his father died, and he added to the same rent, then in that case the upper portion of the rent, which that had been made for his son, may be mended, but the lower portion of the rent, which had been made for his father, may not be mended.

诪转 讗讘讬讜 诪转 讗诪讜 诪转 讗讞讬讜 诪转讛 讗讞讜转讜 拽讜专注 拽专注 讗讞讚 诇讻讜诇谉 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛 讗讜诪专 注诇 讻讜诇谉 拽专注 讗讞讚 注诇 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 拽专注 讗讞讚 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讜住讬驻讬谉 注诇 拽专注 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜

If they said to him all at one time that his father died, his mother died, his brother died, and his sister died, then he may make one rent for all of them. Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says: For all of his other relatives he makes one rent, and for his father and mother he makes another rent, as one must not add to a rent made for his father and mother.

诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 谞讞诪谉 讘专 讬爪讞拽 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞谉 讘转讜住驻转

The Gemara asks: What is the reason for Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira鈥檚 opinion that one may not add to the rent torn for a mother or father? Rav Na岣an bar Yitz岣k said: Because they cannot be added; one has only one father and one mother and cannot add others.

讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讘谉 讘转讬专讛 讜诪讬 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛讻讬 讜讛讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻讚讘专讬 讛诪讬拽诇 讘讗讘诇 讗讘讬诇讜转 诇讞讜讚 拽专讬注讛 诇讞讜讚

Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira. The Gemara asks: And did Shmuel actually say this? But didn鈥檛 Shmuel say the principle is that the halakha is in accordance with the statement of the lenient Sage with regard to mourning; yet here he rules in accordance with the more stringent opinion. The Gemara answers: The halakhot of mourning are discrete and the halakhot of rending are discrete, and it is only with regard to the halakhot of mourning that Shmuel rules consistently in accordance with the lenient opinion.

注讚 讛讬讻谉 拽讜专注 注讚 讟讬讘讜专讜 讜讬砖 讗讜诪专讬诐 注讚 诇讘讜 讗祝 注诇 驻讬 砖讗讬谉 专讗讬讛 诇讚讘专 讝讻专 诇讚讘专 砖谞讗诪专 讜拽专注讜 诇讘讘讻诐 讜讗诇 讘讙讚讬讻诐

It was taught in a baraita: Until where may he rend his garment, if he continues to rend the same garment for additional relatives? He may continue rending until the point where the garment covers his navel. Some say: Until the point where the garment covers his heart. Although there is no absolute proof for the matter that one may rend the garment until this point, there is an allusion to this matter, as it is stated: 鈥淎nd rend your hearts, and not your garments鈥 (Joel 2:13), thereby intimating that one may extend the rent in his garment only until he reaches the point where the garment covers his heart.

讛讙讬注 诇讟讬讘讜专讜 诪专讞讬拽 砖诇砖 讗爪讘注讜转 讜拽讜专注 谞转诪诇讗 诪诇驻谞讬讜 诪讞讝讬专讜 诇讗讞讜专讬讜 谞转诪诇讗 诪诇诪注诇讛 讛讜驻讻讜 诪诇诪讟讛 讜讛拽讜专注 诪诇诪讟讛 讜诪谉 讛爪讚讚讬谉 诇讗 讬爪讗 讗诇讗 砖讻讛谉 讙讚讜诇 驻讜专诐 诪诇诪讟讛

If he tore his garment until he reached the point where it covers his navel, he should not continue rending in the same place. Instead, he should move away a space of three fingerbreadths from the first rent and make a new rent. If the garment became full of rents in the front, he should turn the garment front to back and make a rent on the other side. If it became full of rents above, he should turn it top to bottom and make a rent on what used to be the bottom. But one who rends his garment at the bottom or at the sides has not fulfilled his obligation, as rending may be done only at the top of the garment. The High Priest, however, who is prohibited from rending his garments in mourning, may tear his garment at the bottom to mark his mourning in a symbolic manner.

驻诇讬讙讜 讘讛 专讘 诪转谞讛 讜诪专 注讜拽讘讗 讜转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪砖诪讬讛 讚讗讘讜讛 讚砖诪讜讗诇 讜诇讜讬 讞讚 讗诪专 讻诇 砖讘注讛 拽讜专注 诇讗讞专 砖讘注讛 诪讜住讬祝 讜讞讚 讗诪专 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 拽讜专注 诇讗讞专 砖诇砖讬诐 诪讜住讬祝

Rav Mattana and Mar Ukva disagreed about the following issue, and both of them stated their respective opinions in the name of Shmuel鈥檚 father and Levi. One said: During all seven days of mourning, if the mourner hears that another relative of his passed away, he makes a new rent; after seven days of mourning he merely adds to the first one. And one said: During all of the first thirty days he makes a new rent; after thirty days he merely adds to the first one.

诪转拽讬祝 诇讛 专讘讬 讝讬专讗 诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻诇 砖讘注讛 拽讜专注 讗诪讗讬 讚诇讗 谞讬转谉 诇砖讜诇诇讜 讗诇讗 讛讗 讚讗诪专 诪专 讛讗砖讛 砖讜诇诇转讜 诇讗诇转专 讛讻讗 谞诪讬

Rabbi Zeira strongly objects to this: According to the one who said that during all seven days of mourning he makes a new rent, why is it not enough to add to the first one? It is because he may not tack it until the end of the seven-day period of mourning, and therefore if he adds to the rent it will look like a continuation of the previous tear. But then, with regard to that which the Master said in the baraita: After a woman rends her garment, she may tack the tear immediately, would you say that here also she may add to the first rent for a new bereavement during the seven-day period of mourning?

讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚 讗砖讛 讛讜讗

The Gemara answers: There the woman is permitted to tack the rent due to the woman鈥檚 honor, as it would be dishonorable for her to be seen wearing torn garments. However, halakhically the rent is considered as if it still exists, and therefore she must make a new rent for a new bereavement and not merely add to the previous one.

诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讻诇 砖诇砖讬诐 拽讜专注 讗诪讗讬 讚诇讗 谞讬转谉 诇讗讞讜转讜 讗诇讗 诇讗讘讬讜 讜诇讗诪讜 讚诇讗 谞讬转谉 诇讗讞讜转讜 诇注讜诇诐 讛讻讬 谞诪讬

Rabbi Zeira asked further: According to the one who said that all thirty days of mourning one must make a new rent rather than add to the existing tear, why does he say this? It is because during the thirty days one is not given permission to properly mend the garment, and so it still appears to be torn. But then, in a case of a rent made for one鈥檚 father or mother, for which he is not given permission to ever properly mend it, would you say that he should so too be forever barred from adding to the rent for a new bereavement and is instead obligated to make a new rent?

讛转诐 诪砖讜诐 讻讘讜讚 讗讘讬讜 讜讗诪讜 讛讜讗

The Gemara answers: There he may not properly mend the rent due to the honor due to his father and mother. Essentially, however, the tear is considered as if it had been sewn up after the thirty-day period, and therefore the son may extend it in the case of a new bereavement.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讬讜爪讗 讘讘讙讚 拽专讜注 诇驻谞讬 讛诪转 讛专讬 讝讛 讙讜讝诇 讗转 讛诪转讬诐 讜讗转 讛讞讬讬诐

The Sages taught the following baraita: One who goes out before the deceased in a rent garment that he had previously torn over another bereavement, thereby giving the appearance of having rent his garment for him, steals from the dead, as he did not rend a garment for him. And he similarly steals from the living, who see him and think that he made the tear in honor of the deceased, when in reality he is deceiving them.

专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 讛讗讜诪专 诇讞讘讬专讜 讛砖讗讬诇谞讬 讞诇讜拽讱 讜讗诇讱 讜讗讘拽专 讗转 讗讘讗 砖讛讜讗 讞讜诇讛 讜讛诇讱 讜诪爪讗讜 砖诪转 拽讜专注 讜诪讗讞讜 讜讻砖讬讘讗 诇讘讬转讜 诪讞讝讬专 诇讜 讞诇讜拽讜 讜谞讜转谉 诇讜 讚诪讬 拽专注讜 讜讗诐 诇讗 讛讜讚讬注讜 讛专讬 讝讛 诇讗 讬讙注 讘讜

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: In the case of one who says to his fellow: Lend me your cloak and I will go and visit my father because he is sick, and he goes and finds that his father has died, he rends the cloak and may then mend it in the proper manner. And when he returns home, he returns the cloak to his fellow and pays him the value of the rent, i.e., the depreciation in the value of the cloak that resulted from the tear. The assumption is that the lender considered the possibility that the sick father might die, and lent the garment anyway, understanding that he might have to tear it. But if one did not inform his fellow that he was going to visit his sick father, he must not touch it, as he was not granted permission to tear the garment belonging to someone else.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讞讜诇讛 砖诪转 诇讜 诪转 讗讬谉 诪讜讚讬注讬谉 讗讜转讜 砖诪转 砖诪讗 转讟专祝 讚注转讜 注诇讬讜 讜讗讬谉 诪拽专注讬谉 讘驻谞讬讜 讜诪砖转拽讬谉 讗转 讛谞砖讬诐 诪驻谞讬讜

The Sages taught the following baraita: When a relative of a sick person dies, those around him do not inform him that this relative died, lest he lose control of his mind due to his emotional state and his grief exacerbate his physical health. And other people may not rend their garments in his presence, so that he will not know that one of his relatives passed away. And we silence the women who weep in his presence, so that he will not know that his relative is no longer alive.

讜诪拽专注讬谉 诇拽讟谉 诪驻谞讬 注讙诪转 谞驻砖 讜拽讜专注讬谉 注诇 讞诪讬讜 讜注诇 讞诪讜转讜 诪驻谞讬 讻讘讜讚 讗砖转讜

And the relatives rend the garment of a minor child when there is mourning in his family in order to arouse grief. Although a minor is not required to rend his garments, this will add to the grief of those who see that even the garments of children are rent. And one rends his garment for his father-in-law or mother-in-law, although he is not required to mourn for them, due to the honor of his wife, to show her that he joins in her mourning.

讜讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 转谞讗 讘讗讘诇 专讘转讬 讗讘诇 诇讗 讬谞讬讞 转讬谞讜拽 讘转讜讱 讞讬拽讜 诪驻谞讬 砖诪讘讬讗讜 诇讬讚讬 砖讞讜拽 讜谞诪爪讗 诪转讙谞讛 注诇 讛讘专讬讜转

And Rav Pappa said: A Sage taught in Evel Rabbati: A mourner should not place a young child in his lap because the child will bring him to laughter, and he will be disgraced in the eyes of other people because he laughed while in mourning.

讜讗讬谉 诪讘专讬谉 注诇 诪讟讜转 讝拽讜驻讜转 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讛讜诇讱 诇讘讬转 讛讗讘诇 讗诐 讛讬讛 诇讘讜 讙住 讘讜 讬讘专讜讛讜 注诇 诪讟讜转 讻驻讜讬讜转 讜讗诐 诇讗讜 讬讘专讜讛讜 注诇 诪讟讜转 讝拽讜驻讜转

搂 The mishna taught: And the consolers provide the first meal after the burial only while the mourner sits on an upright bed and not on one that is overturned. The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to one who goes to the house of the mourner, if he is confident in his friendship with him because they are close friends, they provide him with the meal of comfort while both he and the mourner sit on overturned beds. And if he is not confident in his friendship with him, both he and the mourner should be fed on upright beds.

专讘讗 讗讬转专注 讘讬讛 诪讬诇转讗 注诇 诇讙讘讬讛 讗讘讗 讘专 诪专转讗 讚讛讜讗 讗讘讗 讘专 诪谞讬讜诪讬 专讘讗 讝拽讬祝 讗讘讗 讘专 诪专转讗 讻驻讬 讗诪专 讻诪讛 诇讬转 讘讬讛 讚注转讗 诇讛讗讬 爪讜专讘讗 诪专讘谞谉

The Gemara relates that something unpleasant happened to Rava, i.e., one of his close relatives died, and Abba bar Marta, who was also known as Abba bar Minyomi, entered to visit him. Rava stood the bed upright, treating him like any other person who came to comfort him. Abba bar Marta overturned the bed because he saw himself as being on very familiar terms with Rava. Rava said: How lacking in sense is this Torah scholar. Rava had shown from the outset that he did not consider Abba bar Marta to be a close friend, yet the latter ignored this message and viewed himself as being exceptionally close to Rava.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讛讛讜诇讱 诪诪拽讜诐 诇诪拽讜诐

The Sages taught a baraita: If one who was going from place to place learned of the death of a close relative, so that he must now observe the rites of mourning,

Scroll To Top