Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day
Mamrim - Chapter 7, Avel - Chapter 1, Avel - Chapter 2
Mamrim - Chapter 7
INTRODUCTION
Deuteronomy 21:18-21 states:
If a person will have a wayward and rebellious son who does not heed the voice of his father or the voice of his mother and they chastise him, but he does not heed them. His father and mother shall take hold of him and bring him out to the elders of his city and to the gate of his place. They say to the elders of his city: "This son of ours is wayward and rebellious. He does not heed our voice; he is gluttonous and a lush." All of the men of his city will clout him with stones, killing him, and you shall remove evil from your midst. All Israel shall hear and fear.
Our Sages (primarily in Sanhedrin 68b ff) interpret this passage precisely, explaining how each term used in the passage teaches us a different concept. In the chapter that follows, the Rambam summarizes and organizes their teachings, giving us a clear-cut picture of the requirements of the mitzvah. It is important to emphasize that there is a difference of opinion among our Sages if the judgment of "a wayward and rebellious son" ever took place (Sanhedrin 71a). Some maintain that such a judgment was never issued. Indeed, from all the particulars mentioned by the Rambam, one can understand that it could be impossible for such a judgment to have been issued. Others maintain that they know of an instance where an individual was executed because of this transgression.
Sanhedrin 72a asks: Is eating the gluttonous meal (to be described by the Rambam) a sufficient cause for a person to be executed? In resolution, our Sages explain that the Torah considered the ultimate fate of such a person. He will be drawn after his natural tendencies and continue to steal and eat gluttonously. Ultimately, he will become a robber and slay people in order to support his habit. It is preferable, the Torah maintains, for him to be executed early in life, before he commits such severe sins.
It is explicitly stated that the "wayward and rebellious son" described in the Torah should be stoned to death. Now the Torah does not administer a punishment unless a warning was issued first. Where was the warning issued? In Leviticus 19:26: "Do not eat upon the blood," which can be interpreted to mean: "Do not partake of food that will lead to the shedding of blood." This refers to the meal eaten by the "wayward and rebellious son" who is executed only because of the hateful feast of which he partook as Deuteronomy 21:20 states: "He is gluttonous and a lush." According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this was interpreted to mean that he ate meat and drank wine in a ravenous manner.
אבֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה הָאָמוּר בַּתּוֹרָה הֲרֵי נִתְפָּרְשָׁה בּוֹ סְקִילָה וְלֹא עָנַשׁ הַכָּתוּב אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הִזְהִיר. וְהֵיכָן הִזְהִיר לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם לֹא תֹּאכַל אֲכִילָה הַמְּבִיאָה לִידֵי שְׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים וְזוֹ אֲכִילַת בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה שֶׁאֵינוֹ נֶהֱרָג אֶלָּא עַל אֲכִילָה מְכֹעֶרֶת שֶׁאָכַל. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא כ) "זוֹלֵל וְסֹבֵא" מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁזּוֹלֵל הוּא הָאוֹכֵל בָּשָׂר בְּרַעַבְתָּנוּת וְסוֹבֵא הַשּׁוֹתֶה יַיִן בְּרַעַבְתָּנוּת:
There are many particulars involved in the meal for which he is liable for eating. All of these are conveyed by the Oral Tradition. He is not liable for stoning until he steals from his father and buys meat and wine at a cheap price. He must then eat it outside his father's domain, together with a group that are all empty and base. He must eat meat that is raw, but not entirely raw, cooked but not entirely cooked, as is the practice of thieves. He must drink the wine as it is thinned as the alcoholics drink. He must eat a quantity of meat weighing 50 dinarim in one sitting, and drink half a log of this wine at one time.
If he stole from his father and partook of such a meal inside his father's domain, or stole from others and partook of this hateful meal in his father's domain or in another's domain, he is not liable. If the meal involves a mitzvah, even a mitzvah of Rabbinic origin, or the meal involves a transgression, even a transgression of Rabbinic origin, he is not liable. This may be inferred from the phrase (Ibid.): "He does not heed our voice"; i.e., through eating this meal, he violates only his parents' command. This excludes one who through this meal violates the words of the Torah or who partakes of it for the sake of a mitzvah.
What is implied? If he partook of such a hateful meal together with a wicked company for the sake of a mitzvah, or he partook of the second tithe in Jerusalem, even if they eat a meal comforting the bereaved which is a mitzvah of Rabbinic origin, he is not liable. Similarly, if he ate meat from animals that were not ritually slaughtered or which were trefe, teeming animals or crawling animals, and even if he ate on a communal fast day, a transgression of Rabbinic origin, he is not liable for execution.
באֲכִילָה זוֹ שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב עָלֶיהָ דְּבָרִים הַרְבֵּה יֵשׁ בָּהֶם וְהֵן כֻּלָּן הֲלָכָה מִפִּי הַקַּבָּלָה. אֵינוֹ חַיָּב סְקִילָה עַד שֶׁיִּגְנֹב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְיִקְנֶה בָּשָׂר בְּזוֹל וְיַיִן בְּזוֹל. וְיֹאכַל וְיִשְׁתֶּה חוּץ מֵרְשׁוּת אָבִיו בַּחֲבוּרָה שֶׁכֻּלָּן רֵיקָנִין וּפְחוּתִין. וְיֹאכַל הַבָּשָׂר חַי וְאֵינוֹ חַי מְבֻשָּׁל וְאֵינוֹ מְבֻשָּׁל כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהַגַּנָּבִים אוֹכְלִים. וְיִשְׁתֶּה הַיַּיִן מָזוּג כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהַגַּרְגְּרָנִים שׁוֹתִים. וְהוּא שֶׁיֹּאכַל מִשְׁקַל חֲמִשִּׁים דִּינָרִין מִבָּשָׂר זֶה בִּמְלוּגְמָא אַחַת וְיִשְׁתֶּה חֲצִי לוֹג מִיַּיִן זֶה בְּבַת אַחַת. גָּנַב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְאָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ בִּרְשׁוּת אָבִיו. אוֹ שֶׁגָּנַב מִשֶּׁל אֲחֵרִים וְאָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ הַמְכֹעֶרֶת בֵּין בִּרְשׁוּת אָבִיו בֵּין בִּרְשׁוּת אֲחֵרִים. הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר. וְכֵן אִם גָּנַב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְאָכַל אֲכִילָה מְכֹעֶרֶת כָּזוֹ בִּרְשׁוּת אֲחֵרִים וְהָיְתָה אֲכִילַת מִצְוָה אֲפִלּוּ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם [אוֹ אֲכִילַת עֲבֵרָה אֲפִלּוּ מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם] פָּטוּר שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא כ) "אֵינֶנּוּ שֹׁמֵעַ בְּקלֵנוּ" שֶׁאֵינוֹ עוֹבֵר בַּאֲכִילָה זוֹ אֶלָּא עַל קוֹלָם. יָצָא זֶה שֶׁעָבַר בָּהּ עַל דִּבְרֵי תּוֹרָה. אוֹ שֶׁאֲכָלָהּ בִּדְבַר מִצְוָה. כֵּיצַד. אָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ הַמְכֹעֶרֶת עִם הַחֲבוּרָה הָרָעָה שֶׁאוֹכֵל עִמָּהֶם בִּדְבַר מִצְוָה. אוֹ שֶׁאֲכָלוֹ מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם אֲפִלּוּ אֲכָלוֹ בְּתַנְחוּמֵי אֲבֵלִים שֶׁהִיא מִצְוָה מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר. וְכֵן אִם אֲכָלָהּ מִנְּבֵלוֹת וּטְרֵפוֹת שְׁקָצִים וּרְמָשִׂים. אֲפִלּוּ אָכַל בְּתַעֲנִית צִבּוּר שֶׁהִיא עֲבֵרָה מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם. הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר מִן הַמִּיתָה:
If he partook of any type of food, but did not partake of meat, even if he partook of fowl, he is not liable. If he partook of this meal from meat, but reached the sum of 50 dinarim by including fowl, he is liable. If he drank other beverages, but did not drink wine, he is not liable.
גאָכַל כָּל מַאֲכָל וְלֹא אָכַל בְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ מִבְּשַׂר הָעוֹף פָּטוּר. וְאִם אָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ מִבְּשַׂר בְּהֵמָה וְהִשְׁלִים הַחֲמִשִּׁים דִּינָרִים מִבְּשַׂר הָעוֹף חַיָּב. שָׁתָה כָּל מַשְׁקֶה וְלֹא שָׁתָה יַיִן פָּטוּר:
When he ate raw meat and undiluted wine, he is not liable. The rationale is that this is an occasional occurrence and not something that a person will be drawn after. Similarly, if he ate this meal of salted meat on the third day after it was salted, or drank fresh grape juice, he is not liable. For a person will not be drawn after such matters.
דאָכַל בָּשָׂר חַי וְשָׁתָה יַיִן חַי פָּטוּר שֶׁזֶּה קֶרִי הוּא וְאֵין אָדָם יָכוֹל לְהִמָּשֵׁךְ בָּזֶה. וְכֵן אִם אָכַל בָּשָׂר מָלִיחַ בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁלִישִׁי לִמְלִיחָתוֹ אוֹ שָׁתָה יַיִן מִגִּתּוֹ פָּטוּר שֶׁאֵין אָדָם יָכוֹל לְהִמָּשֵׁךְ בָּזֶה:
For this transgression, the Torah does not punish a child who has not come to the age where he is responsible for the observance of mitzvot. Similarly, a man who has matured and is independent is not stoned to death, because he ate and drank such a hateful meal.
What is implied? According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that this law concerns a youth of thirteen between the time he grew two pubic hairs and the time at which his entire male organ is surrounded by pubic hair. After the entire male organ is surrounded by pubic hair, he is considered as independent and is not executed by stoning.
הלֹא עָנַשׁ הַכָּתוּב קָטָן שֶׁלֹּא בָּא לִכְלַל הַמִּצְוֹת. וְכֵן אִישׁ שֶׁגָּדַל וַהֲרֵי הוּא בִּרְשׁוּת עַצְמוֹ אֵינוֹ נִסְקָל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁגָּנַב וְאָכַל וְשָׁתָה אֲכִילָה זוֹ הַמְכֹעֶרֶת. הָא כֵּיצַד. מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁאֵין דִּין זֶה אֶלָּא בְּבֶן שְׁלֹשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שָׁנָה וְיוֹם אֶחָד שֶׁהֵבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת עַד שֶׁיַּקִּיף כָּל הַגִּיד וְאַחַר שֶׁיַּקִּיף הַשֵּׂעָר כָּל הַגִּיד הֲרֵי הוּא בִּרְשׁוּת עַצְמוֹ וְאֵינוֹ נִסְקָל:
The entire period for which a "wayward and rebellious son" is liable is only three months from the time he manifests signs of physical maturity. For it is possible that his wife will conceive and her fetus will be recognizable within three months. This is derived from Deuteronomy 21:18: "If a person will have a 'wayward and rebellious son...'"; a son, and not a "wayward and rebellious father."
Thus one may conclude that if one's pubic hair surrounds the entire organ before the three months are completed, he is not liable.
וכָּל יָמָיו שֶׁל בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה אֵינָן אֶלָּא שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים מֵאַחַר שֶׁיָּבִיא שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת. לְפִי שֶׁאֶפְשָׁר שֶׁתִּתְעַבֵּר אִשְׁתּוֹ וְיִהְיֶה עֻבָּרָהּ נִכָּר בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים וְנֶאֱמַר (דברים כא יח) "כִּי יִהְיֶה לְאִישׁ בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה" וְלֹא אָב סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה הָא לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁאִם הִקִּיף הַשֵּׂעָר אֶת כָּל הַגִּיד קֹדֶם שֶׁיַּשְׁלִים שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר:
How is the judgment of a "wayward and rebellious son" adjudicated? First, his father and mother bring him to a court of three judges and tell them: "Our son is wayward and rebellious." They bring two witnesses who testify that he stole from his father and bought meat and wine with what he stole and partook of the meal described above after being warned. This is the first testimony.
He receives lashes as are administered to all of those who are obligated to be lashed, as Deuteronomy 21:20 states: "they chastise him, but he does not heed them." Should he steal from his father a second time and partake of such a meal, his father and mother bring him to a court of 23 judges. They bring two witnesses who testify that he stole and partook of this meal after being warned. This is the second testimony. It is acceptable if the first two witnesses also deliver the latter testimony.
After their testimony is heard, the youth is examined to see if his pubic hair surrounded his entire male organ. If that is not the case and it is not three months after he became thirteen, we complete the judgment against him as is done with all those executed by the court and he is stoned to death. He is not stoned to death unless the three judges who originally sentenced him to be lashed are present. This is implied by the phrase: "This son of ours," i.e., the one that was lashed in your presence.
זכֵּיצַד דָּנִין בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה. מְבִיאִין אוֹתוֹ אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ תְּחִלָּה לְבֵית דִּין שֶׁל שְׁלֹשָׁה וְאוֹמְרִין לָהֶן בְּנֵנוּ זֶה סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה. וּמְבִיאִין שְׁנֵי עֵדִים שֶׁגָּנַב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְקָנָה בָּשָׂר וְיַיִן בְּמַה שֶּׁגָּנַב וְאָכַל אוֹתָהּ אֲכִילָה הָאֲמוּרָה אַחַר הַהַתְרָאָה. וְזוֹ הִיא עֵדוּת הָרִאשׁוֹנָה וּמַלְקִין אוֹתוֹ כִּשְׁאָר חַיָּבֵי מַלְקוֹת. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא יח) "וְיִסְּרוּ אֹתוֹ וְלֹא יִשְׁמַע אֲלֵיהֶם". חָזַר וְגָנַב מִשֶּׁל אָבִיו וְאָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ. אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ מְבִיאִין אוֹתוֹ לְבֵית דִּין שֶׁל שְׁלֹשָׁה וְעֶשְׂרִים וּמְבִיאִין שְׁנֵי עֵדִים וּמְעִידִין עָלָיו שֶׁגָּנַב וְאָכַל אֲכִילָה זוֹ הָאֲמוּרָה אַחַר שֶׁהִתְרוּ בּוֹ. וְזוֹ הִיא עֵדוּת אַחֲרוֹנָה אֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ הַשְּׁנַיִם הָרִאשׁוֹנִים הֵם הָאַחֲרוֹנִים. וְאַחַר שֶׁמְּקַבְּלִין עֵדוּתָן בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁמָּא הִקִּיף הַשֵּׂעָר אֶת כָּל הַגִּיד. אִם לֹא הִקִּיף וְלֹא שָׁלְמוּ לוֹ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים גּוֹמְרִין דִּינוֹ כְּדֶרֶךְ כָּל הֲרוּגֵי בֵּית דִּין וְסוֹקְלִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאֵינוֹ נִסְקָל עַד שֶׁיְּהוּ שָׁם שְׁלֹשָׁה הָרִאשׁוֹנִים שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא כ) "בְּנֵנוּ זֶה" זֶהוּ שֶׁלָּקָה בִּפְנֵיכֶם:
If his father and his mother forgave him before he was sentenced, he is not liable.
חוְאִם מָחֲלוּ לוֹ אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּגָּמֵר דִּינוֹ פָּטוּר:
If he fled before he was sentenced to death and afterwards, his pubic hair surrounded his organ, he is not liable. If he fled after he was sentenced, even if he grows old, whenever he is discovered, he should be stoned to death. For whenever a person has been sentenced to death, it is as if he has already been slain and he has no blood.
טבָּרַח עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמַר דִּינוֹ וְאַחַר כָּךְ הִקִּיף הַשֵּׂעָר מִלְּמַטָּה פָּטוּר. וְאִם מִשֶּׁנִּגְמַר דִּינוֹ בָּרַח אֲפִלּוּ הִזְקִין כָּל עֵת שֶׁיִּמָּצֵא יִסָּקֵל שֶׁכָּל מִי שֶׁנִּגְמַר דִּינוֹ הֲרֵי הוּא כְּהָרוּג וְאֵין לוֹ דָּם:
If his father desires to convict him and his mother does not desire, or his mother desires and his father does not desire, he is not judged as a "wayward and rebellious son," as implied by Deuteronomy 21:19: "His father and mother shall take hold of him."
If one of the parents has had his arm amputated, was lame, dumb, blind, or deaf, the son is not judged as a "wayward and rebellious son." These concepts are derived as follows: "His father and mother shall take hold of him" - This excludes parents with amputated arms" "And bring him out" - this excludes the lame. "They say" - this excludes the dumb. "This son of ours" - This excludes the blind. "He does not heed our voice" - This excludes the dumb.
יהָיָה אָבִיו רוֹצֶה וְאִמּוֹ אֵינָהּ רוֹצָה אִמּוֹ רוֹצָה וְאָבִיו אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא יט) "וְתָפְשׂוּ בוֹ אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ". הָיָה אֶחָד מֵהֶן גִּדֵּם אוֹ חִגֵּר אוֹ אִלֵּם אוֹ סוּמָא אוֹ חֵרֵשׁ אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְתָפְשׂוּ בוֹ וְלֹא גִּדְּמִים. (דברים כא יט) "וְהוֹצִיאוּ אֹתוֹ" וְלֹא חִגְּרִים. (דברים כא כ) "וְאָמְרוּ" וְלֹא אִלְּמִים. (דברים כא כ) "בְּנֵנוּ זֶה" וְלֹא סוּמִים. (דברים כא כ) "אֵינֶנּוּ שֹׁמֵעַ בְּקלֵנוּ" וְלֹא חֵרְשִׁים:
There is a Scriptural decree that a "wayward and rebellious son" should be stoned to death. A daughter, by contrast, is not judged in this manner. The rationale is that she does not have the tendency to become habituated to eating and drinking. For this reason, the Torah states: "A son," i.e., and not a daughter. A tumtum and an adrogynus are also excluded.
יאגְּזֵרַת הַכָּתוּב הוּא שֶׁיִּסָּקֵל בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה. אֲבָל הַבַּת אֵינָהּ נִדּוֹנֵית בְּדִין זֶה שֶׁאֵין דַּרְכָּהּ לְהִמָּשֵׁךְ בַּאֲכִילָה וּשְׁתִיָּה כְּאִישׁ. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא יח) "בֵּן" וְלֹא בַּת וְלֹא טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוּס:
When an operation is performed on a tumtum and it is discovered that he is a male, he is not judged as a "wayward and rebellious son." The rationale is Deuteronomy 21:18 states: "If a person will have a wayward and rebellious son...." Implied is that he must be a son at the time he receives the warning.
יבטֻמְטוּם שֶׁנִּקְרַע וְנִמְצָא זָכָר אֵינוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים כא יח) "כִּי יִהְיֶה לְאִישׁ בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה" עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה בֵּן מִשְּׁעַת הַתְרָאָה:
An announcement must be made concerning the execution of a "wayward and rebellious son." What type of announcement is made? A declaration is written and sent to the entire Jewish people: "In this-and-this court, we stoned so-and-so because he was a 'wayward and rebellious son.'"
יגבֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה צָרִיךְ הַכְרָזָה. כֵּיצַד מַכְרִיזִין עָלָיו. כּוֹתְבִין לְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּבֵית דִּין פְּלוֹנִי סָקַלְנוּ פְּלוֹנִי מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָיָה בֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה:
A "wayward and rebellious son" is like all others executed by the court; their estate is inherited by their heirs. Even though the person's father caused him to be stoned to death, the father inherits all of his possessions.
ידבֵּן סוֹרֵר וּמוֹרֶה הֲרֵי הוּא כְּכָל הֲרוּגֵי בֵּית דִּין שֶׁמָּמוֹנָם לְיוֹרְשֵׁיהֶן שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָבִיו גָּרַם לוֹ סְקִילָה הֲרֵי הוּא יוֹרֵשׁ כָּל נְכָסָיו:
Blessed be God who grants assistance.
בְּרִיךְ רַחֲמָנָא דְּסַיְּעָן
Avel - Chapter 1
Introduction to Hilchos Avel
They include four mitzvot: one positive commandment and three negative commandments. They are:
1. To mourn for one's close relatives; even a priest must become impure and mourn for his close relatives. A person should not mourn for individuals executed by the court. For this reason, I have included these laws in this book, for they relate to the mitzvah of burying the dead on the day of their passing which is a positive commandment.
2. For a High Priest not to become impure because of his close relatives.
3. For him not to enter under the same shelter as a corpse.
4. For an ordinary priest not to become impure because of a corpse except for that of his close relatives.
These mitzvot are explained in the coming chapters.
הלכות אבל
יש בכללן ארבע מצות: אחת מצות עשה, ושלש מצות לא תעשה. וזה הוא פרטן:
(א) להתאבל על הקרובים ואפילו כהן מתטמא ומתאבל על הקרובים, ואין אדם מתאבל על הרוגי בית דין, ולפי זה כללתי הלכות אלו בספר זה שהן מעין קבורה ביום מיתה שהיא מצות עשה.
(ב) שלא יטמא כהן גדול לקרובים.
(ג) שלא יכנס עם המת באהל.
(ד) שלא יטמא כהן הדיוט לנפש אדם אלא לקרובים בלבד.
וביאור מצות אלו בפרקים אלו.
It is a positive commandment to mourn for one's close relatives, as implied by Leviticus 10:19: "Were I to partake of a sin offering today, would it find favor in God's eyes?" According to Scriptural Law, the obligation to mourn is only on the first day which is the day of the person's death and burial. The remainder of the seven days of mourning are not required by Scriptural Law. Although the Torah states Genesis 50:10: "And he instituted mourning for his father for seven days," when the Torah was given, the laws were renewed.
Moses our teacher ordained for the Jewish people the seven days of mourning and the seven days of wedding celebrations.
אמִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה לְהִתְאַבֵּל עַל הַקְּרוֹבִים. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא י יט) "וְאָכַלְתִּי חַטָּאת הַיּוֹם הַיִּיטַב בְּעֵינֵי ה'". וְאֵין אֲבֵלוּת מִן הַתּוֹרָה אֶלָּא בְּיוֹם רִאשׁוֹן בִּלְבַד שֶׁהוּא יוֹם הַמִּיתָה וְיוֹם הַקְּבוּרָה. אֲבָל שְׁאָר הַשִּׁבְעָה יָמִים אֵינוֹ דִּין תּוֹרָה. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בַּתּוֹרָה (בראשית נ י) "וַיַּעַשׂ לְאָבִיו אֵבֶל שִׁבְעַת יָמִים" נִתְּנָה תּוֹרָה וְנִתְחַדְּשָׁה הֲלָכָה. וּמשֶׁה רַבֵּנוּ תִּקֵּן לָהֶם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל שִׁבְעַת יְמֵי אֲבֵלוּת וְשִׁבְעַת יְמֵי הַמִּשְׁתֶּה:
From when is a person obligated to mourn? When the grave is covered. But until the corpse has been buried, a mourner is not bound by any of the prohibitions incumbent on a mourner. For this reason, King David washed and anointed himself when his son died, before he was buried.
במֵאֵימָתַי יִתְחַיֵּב אָדָם בָּאֵבֶל. מִשֶּׁיִּסָּתֵם הַגּוֹלֵל. אֲבָל כָּל זְמַן שֶׁלֹּא נִקְבַּר הַמֵּת אֵינוֹ אָסוּר בְּדָבָר מִן הַדְּבָרִים שֶׁהָאָבֵל אָסוּר בָּהֶן. וּמִפְּנֵי טַעַם זֶה רָחַץ דָּוִד וְסָךְ כְּשֶׁמֵּת הַיֶּלֶד טֶרֶם שֶׁיִּקָּבֵר:
When does the obligation to mourn and count the seven and the thirty days of mourning begin for people executed by the gentile authorities who they do not allow to be buried? When their relatives despair of asking permission from the king to bury them, even though they did not despair of stealing their corpses to bury them.
גהֲרוּגֵי מַלְכוּת שֶׁאֵין מְנִיחִין אוֹתָן לְהִקָּבֵר מֵאֵימָתַי מַתְחִילִין לְהִתְאַבֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן וְלִסְפֹּר שִׁבְעָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים מִשֶּׁיִּתְיָאֲשׁוּ לִשְׁאל לַמֶּלֶךְ לְקָבְרָן. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְיָאֲשׁוּ מִלִּגְנֹב אוֹתָן:
When a person drowned in a river or was consumed by a wild beast, we begin mourning for him when we despair of finding his corpse. If his corpse was found limb by limb, we do not begin counting the days of mourning until his head and the majority of his body is found or they despair of finding the remainder of his corpse.
דמִי שֶׁטָּבַע בַּנָּהָר אוֹ מִי שֶׁאֲכָלַתּוּ חַיָּה רָעָה. מִשֶּׁנִּתְיָאֲשׁוּ לְבַקֵּשׁ. מְצָאוּהוּ אֵיבָרִים אֵיבָרִים אֵין מוֹנִין לוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּמָּצֵא רֹאשׁוֹ וְרֻבּוֹ אוֹ יִתְיָאֲשׁוּ מִלְּבַקֵּשׁ:
When it is customary for people to send a corpse to another city to be buried and they do not know when the burial will take place, from the time they turn back from accompanying the corpse, they are obligated to count the seven and thirty days of mourning and begin mourning rites.
המִי שֶׁדַּרְכָּן לִשְׁלֹחַ הַמֵּת לִמְדִינָה אַחֶרֶת לְקָבְרוֹ וְאֵינָם יוֹדְעִים מָתַי יִקָּבֵר מֵעֵת שֶׁיַּחְזְרוּ פְּנֵיהֶן מִלְּלַוּוֹתוֹ מַתְחִילִין לִמְנוֹת שִׁבְעָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וּמַתְחִילִין לְהִתְאַבֵּל:
We do not mourn for stillborn infants. Whenever a human offspring does not live for 30 days, he is considered as stillborn. Even if he died on the thirtieth day, we do not mourn for him.
והַנְּפָלִים אֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עֲלֵיהֶן. וְכָל שֶׁלֹּא שָׁהָה שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם בָּאָדָם הֲרֵי זֶה נֵפֶל. אֲפִלּוּ מֵת בְּיוֹם שְׁלֹשִׁים אֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עָלָיו:
If we know for certain that he was born after a full nine months of pregnancy, we mourn for him even if he died on the day of his birth.
זוְאִם נוֹדַע בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁנּוֹלַד לְתִשְׁעָה חֳדָשִׁים גְּמוּרִים אֲפִלּוּ מֵת בַּיּוֹם שֶׁנּוֹלַד מִתְאַבְּלִים עָלָיו:
A fetus from a full term pregnancy that was stillborn, a child born in the eighth month of pregnancy who died even after living 30 days, or a fetus that emerged cut or crushed even though it endured a full term pregnancy is considered stillborn. We do not observe mourning rites for them and we do not engage in activity on their behalf.
חבֶּן תִּשְׁעָה חֳדָשִׁים שֶׁנּוֹלַד מֵת וּבֶן שְׁמוֹנָה שֶׁמֵּת אֲפִלּוּ לְאַחַר שְׁלֹשִׁים. וּמִי שֶׁיָּצָא מְחֻתָּךְ אוֹ מְרֻסָּס אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁכָּלוּ לוֹ חֳדָשָׁיו. הֲרֵי זֶה נֵפֶל וְאֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עֲלֵיהֶן וְלֹא מִתְעַסְּקִין עִמָּהֶם:
We observe mourning rites for all of those executed by the government, even when they were executed by the government's laws and the Torah granted it license to execute them. We don't withhold anything from them. Their estate is given to the government, but they are buried in their ancestral plots.
We do not, by contrast, observe mourning rites for those executed by the court. We do, however, observe the rites of bitter regret (aninut), for aninut is an expression of the feelings in one's heart. They are not buried with their ancestors until their corpses have decomposed. Their estate, however, is granted to their heirs.
טכָּל הֲרוּגֵי מַלְכוּת אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנֶּהֶרְגוּ בְּדִין הַמֶּלֶךְ וְהַתּוֹרָה נָתְנָה לוֹ רְשׁוּת לְהָרְגָן. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מִתְאַבְּלִין עֲלֵיהֶן וְאֵין מוֹנְעִין מֵהֶן כָּל דָּבָר. וּמָמוֹנָם לַמֶּלֶךְ. וְנִקְבָּרִין בְּקִבְרֵי אֲבוֹתֵיהֶן. אֲבָל כָּל הֲרוּגֵי בֵּית דִּין אֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עֲלֵיהֶן אֲבָל אוֹנְנִין. שֶׁאֵין אֲנִינוּת אֶלָּא בַּלֵּב. וְאֵין נִקְבָּרִין עִם אֲבוֹתֵיהֶן עַד שֶׁיִּתְאַכֵּל הַבָּשָׂר. וּמָמוֹנָם לְיוֹרְשֵׁיהֶם:
We do not conduct mourning rites for all those who deviate from the path of the community, i.e., people who throw off the yoke of the mitzvot from their necks and do not join together with the Jewish people in the observance of the mitzvot, the honoring of the festivals, or the attendance of synagogues and houses of study. Instead, they are like free and independent people like the other nations. Similarly, we do not mourn for heretics, apostates, and people who inform on Jews to the gentiles. Instead, their brothers and their other relatives wear white clothes, robe themselves in white, eat, drink, and celebrate for the enemies of the Holy One, blessed be He, have perished. Concerning them, Psalms 139:21 states: "Those who hate You, O God, will I hate."
יכָּל הַפּוֹרְשִׁין מִדַּרְכֵי צִבּוּר וְהֵם הָאֲנָשִׁים שֶׁפָּרְקוּ עֹל הַמִּצְוֹת מֵעַל צַוָּארָן וְאֵין נִכְלָלִין בִּכְלַל יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּעֲשִׂיַּת הַמִּצְוֹת וּבִכְבוֹד הַמּוֹעֲדוֹת וִישִׁיבַת בָּתֵּי כְּנֵסִיּוֹת וּבָתֵּי מִדְרָשׁוֹת אֶלָּא הֲרֵי הֵן כִּבְנֵי חוֹרִין לְעַצְמָן [כִּשְׁאָר הָאֻמּוֹת] וְכֵן הָאֶפִּיקוֹרוֹסִין [וְהַמּוּמָרִים] וְהַמּוֹסְרִין כָּל אֵלּוּ אֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עֲלֵיהֶן. אֶלָּא אֲחֵיהֶם וּשְׁאָר קְרוֹבֵיהֶם לוֹבְשִׁין לְבָנִים וּמִתְעַטְּפִים לְבָנִים וְאוֹכְלִים וְשׁוֹתִים וּשְׂמֵחִים שֶׁהֲרֵי אָבְדוּ שׂוֹנְאָיו שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא. וַעֲלֵיהֶם הַכָּתוּב אוֹמֵר (תהילים קלט כא) "הֲלוֹא מְשַׂנְאֶיךָ ה' אֶשְׂנָא":
When a person commits suicide, we do not engage in activity on their behalf at all. We do not mourn for him or eulogize him. We do, however, stand in a line to comfort the relatives, recite the blessing for the mourners and perform any act that shows respect for the living.
What is meant by a person who commits suicide? Not necessarily one who climbs up on a roof, falls, and dies, but rather, one who says: "I am going up to the top of the roof." If we see him climb up immediately in anger or know that he was distressed and see him fall and die, we presume such a person is one who committed suicide. If, however, we see him strangled and hanging from a tree or slain and lying on the back of his sword, we presume that he is like all other corpses. We engage in activity on his behalf and do not withhold anything from him.
יאהַמְאַבֵּד עַצְמוֹ לָדַעַת אֵין מִתְעַסְּקִין עִמּוֹ לְכָל דָּבָר וְאֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עָלָיו וְאֵין מַסְפִּידִין אוֹתוֹ. אֲבָל עוֹמְדִין עָלָיו בְּשׁוּרָה וְאוֹמְרִין עָלָיו בִּרְכַּת אֲבֵלִים וְכָל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא כָּבוֹד לַחַיִּים. וְאֵי זֶהוּ הַמְאַבֵּד עַצְמוֹ לָדַעַת. לֹא שֶׁעָלָה לַגַּג וְנָפַל וּמֵת אֶלָּא הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵינִי עוֹלֶה לְרֹאשׁ הַגַּג. רָאוּהוּ שֶׁעָלָה מִיָּד דֶּרֶךְ כַּעַס אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מֵצֵר וְנָפַל וּמֵת. הֲרֵי זֶה בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁאִבֵּד עַצְמוֹ לָדַעַת. אֲבָל אִם רָאוּהוּ חָנוּק וְתָלוּי בָּאִילָן אוֹ הָרוּג וּמֻשְׁלָךְ עַל גַּב סֵיפוֹ הֲרֵי זֶה בְּחֶזְקַת כָּל הַמֵּתִים וּמִתְעַסְּקִין עִמּוֹ וְאֵין מוֹנְעִין מִמֶּנּוּ דָּבָר:
Avel - Chapter 2
These are the relatives for whom a person is obligated to mourn according to Scriptural Law: His mother, his father, his son, his daughter, his paternal brother and paternal sister. According to Rabbinic Law, a man should also mourn for his wife if she dies while they are married. And a woman should mourn for her husband. Similarly, a person should mourn for a maternal brother and sister.
אאֵלוּ שֶׁאָדָם חַיָּב לְהִתְאַבֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן דִּין תּוֹרָה. אִמּוֹ וְאָבִיו בְּנוֹ וּבִתּוֹ וְאָחִיו וַאֲחוֹתוֹ מֵאָבִיו. וּמִדִּבְרֵיהֶם שֶׁיִּתְאַבֵּל הָאִישׁ עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ הַנְּשׂוּאָה. וְכֵן הָאִשָּׁה עַל בַּעְלָהּ. וּמִתְאַבֵּל עַל אָחִיו וְעַל אֲחוֹתוֹ שֶׁהֵן מֵאִמּוֹ:
Even a priest who does not become impure for his maternal brother and sister or for his paternal sister who is married, mourns for them. For his married paternal sister, he is required to mourn by Scriptural Law.
באֲפִלּוּ הַכֹּהֵן שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִתְטַמֵּא לְאָחִיו וַאֲחוֹתוֹ מֵאִמּוֹ וְלַאֲחוֹתוֹ הַנְּשׂוּאָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא מֵאָבִיו. מִתְאַבֵּל הוּא עֲלֵיהֶן. וְאִם הָיְתָה אֲחוֹתוֹ זוֹ הַנְּשׂוּאָה מֵאָבִיו הֲרֵי הוּא מִתְאַבֵּל עָלֶיהָ דִּין תּוֹרָה:
A person who has a son or a brother born by a maid-servant or a gentile woman should not mourn for them at all. Similarly, when a person and his sons convert or a person and his mother are freed from slavery, they do not mourn for each other.
Similarly, a person does not observe either the rites of aninut or the mourning rites for a wife whom he has consecrated, but not married. Similarly, she does not observe either of these rites for him.
גבְּנוֹ אוֹ אָחִיו הַבָּא מִן הַשִּׁפְחָה וּמִן הַנָּכְרִית אֵינוֹ מִתְאַבֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן כְּלָל. וְכֵן מִי שֶׁנִּתְגַּיֵּר הוּא וּבָנָיו אוֹ נִשְׁתַּחְרֵר הוּא וְאִמּוֹ אֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין זֶה עַל זֶה. וְכֵן אִשְׁתּוֹ אֲרוּסָה אֵינוֹ מִתְאַבֵּל עָלֶיהָ וְלֹא אוֹנֵן וְכֵן הִיא לֹא אוֹנֶנֶת וְלֹא מִתְאַבֶּלֶת עָלָיו:
Whenever a person is obligated to mourn for a relative, he also mourns with that relative in his presence according to Rabbinical Law.
What is implied? If a person's grandson, his son's maternal brother, or son's mother dies, he is obligated to rend his garments in the presence of his son and follow the mourning rites while in his presence. Outside his presence, he is not obligated. Similar laws apply with regard to other relatives.
דכָּל קְרוֹבִים שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב לְהִתְאַבֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן הֲרֵי זֶה מִתְאַבֵּל עִמָּהֶם בִּפְנֵיהֶם מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. כֵּיצַד. הֲרֵי שֶׁמֵּת בֶּן בְּנוֹ אוֹ אֲחִי בְּנוֹ אוֹ אֵם בְּנוֹ חַיָּב לִקְרֹעַ בִּפְנֵי בְּנוֹ וְלִנְהֹג אֲבֵלוּת בְּפָנָיו אֲבָל שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנָיו אֵינוֹ חַיָּב. וְכֵן בִּשְׁאָר הַקְּרוֹבִים:
With regard to a wife with whom one is married: Although one must mourn for her, he does not mourn together with her for her other relatives with the exception of her father and her mother. He observes the rites of mourning for them in her presence.
When a man's father-in-law or mother-in-law dies, he overturns his bed and observes the mourning rites together with his wife within her presence, but not outside her presence. Similarly, when a woman's father-in-law or mother-in-law dies, she observes the rites of mourning in her husband's presence. With regard to other relatives, by contrast, e.g., when the brother of one's wife or her son dies or when the brother of one's husband or his son dies, they do not observe the mourning rites in respect for each other.
Similarly, it appears to me that if the wife of a person's relative dies or the husband of one of his relatives, e.g., the wife of one's son or the husband of one's daughter, one need not observe mourning rites for them. Similar concepts apply in all analogous situations.
האִשְׁתּוֹ הַנְּשׂוּאָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מִתְאַבֵּל עָלֶיהָ אֵינוֹ מִתְאַבֵּל עִמָּהּ עַל שְׁאָר קְרוֹבִים אֶלָּא עַל אָבִיהָ וְעַל אִמָּהּ מִשּׁוּם כְּבוֹד אִשְׁתּוֹ נוֹהֵג אֲבֵלוּת עֲלֵיהֶן בְּפָנֶיהָ. כֵּיצַד. מִי שֶׁמֵּת חָמִיו אוֹ חֲמוֹתוֹ כּוֹפֶה מִטָּתוֹ וְנוֹהֵג אֲבֵלוּת עִם אִשְׁתּוֹ בְּפָנֶיהָ אֲבָל לֹא שֶׁלֹּא בְּפָנֶיהָ. וְכֵן הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁמֵּת חָמִיהָ אוֹ חֲמוֹתָהּ נוֹהֶגֶת אֲבֵלוּת בְּפָנָיו. אֲבָל שְׁאָר קְרוֹבִים כְּגוֹן שֶׁמֵּת אֲחִי אִשְׁתּוֹ אוֹ בְּנָהּ וְהָאִשָּׁה שֶׁמֵּת אֲחִי בַּעְלָהּ אוֹ בְּנוֹ אֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין זֶה עַל זֶה. וְכֵן יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁאִם מֵתָה אֵשֶׁת קְרוֹבוֹ אוֹ בַּעַל קְרוֹבָתוֹ כְּגוֹן שֶׁמֵּתָה אֵשֶׁת בְּנוֹ אוֹ בַּעַל בִּתּוֹ אֵינוֹ חַיָּב לְהִתְאַבֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
See how severe the mitzvah of mourning is! For the prohibition against ritual impurity is superseded so that a priest can tend to his relatives' burial and mourn for them, as Leviticus 21:2-3 states: "Except to one's flesh, to whom he is close, to his mother... to her shall he become impure." This is a positive commandment; if he does not desire to become impure, we force him to become impure against his will.
To whom does the above apply? To males who are commanded against contracting ritual impurity. Different rules apply to female members of the priestly family. Since they are not commanded against contracting ritual impurity, they are also not commanded to become impure when tending to their relatives' burial. If they desire, they may become impure and if not, they do not become impure.
וכַּמָּה חֲמוּרָה מִצְוַת אֲבֵלוּת. שֶׁהֲרֵי נִדְחֵית לוֹ הַטֻּמְאָה מִפְּנֵי קְרוֹבָיו כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּתְעַסֵּק עִמָּהֶן וְיִתְאַבֵּל עֲלֵיהֶן. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ב) "כִּי אִם לִשְׁאֵרוֹ הַקָּרֹב אֵלָיו לְאִמּוֹ" וְגוֹ' (ויקרא כא ג) "לָהּ יִטַּמָּא" מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה שֶׁאִם לֹא רָצָה לְהִטָּמֵא מְטַמְּאִין אוֹתוֹ עַל כָּרְחוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בִּזְכָרִים שֶׁהֻזְהֲרוּ עַל הַטֻּמְאָה אֲבָל הַכֹּהֲנוֹת הוֹאִיל וְאֵינָן מֻזְהָרוֹת עַל הַטֻּמְאָה כֵּן אֵינָן מְצֻוּוֹת לְהִתְטַמֵּא לַקְּרוֹבִים. אֶלָּא אִם רָצוּ מִתְטַמְּאוֹת וְאִם לָאו לֹא מִטַּמְּאוֹת:
A priest is forced to contract ritual impurity to tend to his deceased wife. This obligation is Rabbinic in origin. Our Sages had her considered as an unattended corpse. Since she has no other heir aside from him, there will be no one else to tend to her. He becomes impure only for a wife he has married. If he has merely consecrated her, he does not become impure for her.
זאִשְׁתּוֹ שֶׁל כֹּהֵן מִתְטַמֵּא לָהּ עַל כָּרְחוֹ. וְאֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ אֶלָּא מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. עֲשָׂאוּהָ כְּמֵת מִצְוָה. כֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵין לָהּ יוֹרֵשׁ אֶלָּא הוּא לֹא תִּמְצָא מִי שֶׁיִּתְעַסֵּק בָּהּ. וְאֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא אֶלָּא לִנְשׂוּאָהּ בִּלְבַד אֲבָל הָאֲרוּסָה אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ:
Similarly, a priest does not become impure for any of those individuals for whom we do not mourn as stated above: e.g., those executed by the court, those who deviate from the ways of the community, stillborn infants, and those who commit suicide.
Until when does the mitzvah to become impure apply? Until the grave is covered. Once the grave is covered, however, the graves of one's close relatives are like those of any other corpse. If a priest becomes impure for their sake, he should be punished by lashes.
חוְכֵן כָּל אוֹתָן שֶׁאָמְרוּ שֶׁאֵין מִתְאַבְּלִין עֲלֵיהֶן כְּגוֹן הֲרוּגֵי בֵּית דִּין וְשֶׁפָּרְשׁוּ מִדַּרְכֵי צִבּוּר וְהַנְּפָלִים וְהַמְאַבֵּד עַצְמוֹ לָדַעַת אֵין הַכֹּהֵן מִטַּמֵּא לָהֶן. וְעַד מָתַי מְצֻוֶּה לְהִתְטַמֵּא לִקְרוֹבָיו עַד שֶׁיִּסָּתֵם הַגּוֹלֵל. אֲבָל מֵאַחַר שֶׁנִּסְתַּם הַגּוֹלֵל הֲרֵי הֵן כִּשְׁאָר כָּל הַמֵּתִים שֶׁאִם נִטְמָא בָּהֶן לוֹקֶה:
A priest should not become impure for the sake of a wife whom he is forbidden to marry. Therefore if a woman heard a report that her husband died and hence remarried, and then her first husband came, neither husband should become impure for her sake, for she is forbidden to remain married to either of them.
A priest may, however, become impure for the sake of his mother, even though she is a challalah and he may become impure for the sake of his son, his daughter, his brother and his sister even though they are of tarnished lineage. Even if they are illegitimate, he should become impure for their sake.
טאִשְׁתּוֹ הַפְּסוּלָה אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ. לְפִיכָךְ מִי שֶׁשָּׁמְעָה שְׁמוּעָה שֶׁמֵּת בַּעְלָהּ וְנִשֵּׂאת וּבָא בַּעְלָהּ. שְׁנֵיהֶן אֵין מִטַּמְּאִין לָהּ שֶׁהֲרֵי הִיא פְּסוּלָה לִשְׁנֵיהֶן. אֲבָל מִטַּמֵּא הוּא לְאִמּוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא חֲלָלָה. וְכֵן מִטַּמֵּא לִבְנוֹ וּלְבִתּוֹ וּלְאָחִיו וְלַאֲחוֹתוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן פְּסוּלִין. אֲפִלּוּ הָיוּ מַמְזֵרִים מִטַּמֵּא לָהֶן:
When a priest's sister is married - even to another priest, he does not become impure for her sake, "as Leviticus 21:3 states: "his virgin sister who is close to him who has not been with a man." "Virgin" excludes a girl who has been raped or seduced. Should we also exclude a woman who attains majority or a woman who lost her signs of virginity because of reasons other than relations? The Torah teaches: "who has not been with a man," i.e., excluded is only one who lost her virginity because of a man. "Who has not been with a man" - this also excludes a sister who has been consecrated. He does not become impure, for her sake even if she is consecrated to a priest.
יאֲחוֹתוֹ הַנְּשׂוּאָה אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא נְשׂוּאָה לְכֹהֵן. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ג) "הַבְּתוּלָה הַקְּרוֹבָה אֵלָיו אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָיְתָה לְאִישׁ". הַבְּתוּלָה פְּרָט לַאֲנוּסָה וּמְפֻתָּה. יָכוֹל שֶׁאֲנִי מוֹצִיא אֶת הַבּוֹגֶרֶת וּמֻכַּת עֵץ תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָיְתָה לְאִישׁ מִי שֶׁהֲוָיָתָהּ בִּידֵי אִישׁ. אֲשֶׁר לֹא הָיְתָה לְאִישׁ פְּרָט לַאֲרוּסָה שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא אֲרוּסָה לְכֹהֵן:
If, however, a priest's sister is divorced after consecration, before marriage, he must become impure for her sake. The phrase "who is close to him" includes a sister divorced after consecration.
יאנִתְגָּרְשָׁה אֲחוֹתוֹ מִן הָאֵרוּסִין מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ג) "הַקְּרוֹבָה אֵלָיו" לְהָבִיא אֶת הַמְגֹרֶשֶׁת מִן הָאֵרוּסִין:
A priest does not become impure for the sake of his maternal brother and sister, as implied by Leviticus 21:2-3: "To his son and to his daughter, to his brother and to his sister." Just as we are speaking of a son who is fit to inherit his father's estate; so, too, he must be fit to inherit the estates of his brother and sister.
יבאָחִיו וַאֲחוֹתוֹ מֵאִמּוֹ אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהֶן. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ב) "וְלִבְנוֹ וּלְבִתּוֹ וּלְאָחִיו" (ויקרא כא ג) "וְלַאֲחֹתוֹ". מַה בְּנוֹ הָרָאוּי לִירֻשָּׁתוֹ אַף אָחִיו וַאֲחוֹתוֹ הָרְאוּיִים לִירֻשָּׁתוֹ:
A priest does not become impure for the sake of relatives whose family connection is doubtful, as implied by Leviticus 21:3: "to her shall he become impure." He becomes impure for those whose connection is definite and not for those whose connection is doubtful. Accordingly, in an instance where children become intermingled, there is a son concerning whom there is a question whether he was born after seven months from conception to his mother's later husband or after nine months to her first husband, and all the like, he does not become impure for their sake due to the doubt.
Similarly, in all cases concerning divorce that involve a question concerning the validity of the divorce or an invalid bill of divorce, , the priest does not become impure for the sake of his wife.
יגהַסְּפֵקוֹת אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהֶן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ג) "לָהּ יִטַּמָּא" מִטַּמֵּא הוּא עַל הַוַּדַּאי וְאֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא עַל הַסָּפֵק. לְפִיכָךְ הַוְּלָדוֹת שֶׁנִּתְעָרְבוּ וְהַבֵּן שֶׁהוּא סָפֵק בֶּן שִׁבְעָה לָאַחֲרוֹן אוֹ בֶּן תִּשְׁעָה לָרִאשׁוֹן וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהֶן מִסָּפֵק. וְכֵן כָּל הַמִּתְגָּרֶשֶׁת סְפֵק גֵּרוּשִׁין אוֹ בְּגֵט פָּסוּל אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהּ:
A priest may not become impure for the sake of a limb severed from his father while alive, nor for the sake of one of his father's bones. Similarly, when one's father's bones are being collected - even if his entire backbone is intact - a priest may not become impure for their sake.
ידאֵין הַכֹּהֵן מִטַּמֵּא לְאֵבֶר מִן הַחַי מֵאָבִיו וְלֹא לְעֶצֶם מֵעַצְמוֹת אָבִיו. וְכֵן הַמְלַקֵּט עַצְמוֹת אָבִיו אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לָהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהַשִּׁדְרָה קַיֶּמֶת:
If his father's head is decapitated, he may not become impure for his sake. This is implied by Leviticus 21:2: "To his father," i.e., at a time when his corpse is intact and not when it is impaired. Similar laws apply with regard to other relatives.
The prohibition against contact with ritual impurity is bypassed with regard to one's relatives; it is not released entirely. For this reason, a priest is forbidden to become impure for the sake of another corpse at the time he has become impure for the sake of his relatives. This is implied by Leviticus 21:3: "to her shall he become impure," i.e., to her alone. He does not become impure for the sake of others together with her. He should not say: "Since I became impure for the sake of my father, I will go gather so-and-so's bones" or "...touch so-and-so's grave."
Therefore when the relative of a priest dies, care must be taken to bury him at the edge of the cemetery, so that he will not have to enter the cemetery and become impure because of other graves when he buries his dead.
טונִקְטַע רֹאשׁוֹ שֶׁל אָבִיו אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ב) "לְאָבִיו" בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוּא שָׁלֵם וְלֹא בִּזְמַן שֶׁהוּא חָסֵר. וְכֵן שְׁאָר הַקְּרוֹבִים. הַטֻּמְאָה לַקְּרוֹבִים דְּחוּיָה הִיא וְלֹא הֻתְּרָה לַכּל. לְפִיכָךְ אָסוּר לְכֹהֵן לְהִתְטַמֵּא לְמֵת אֲפִלּוּ בְּעֵת שֶׁמִּתְטַמֵּא לִקְרוֹבָיו שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כא ג) "לָהּ יִטַּמָּא" אֵינוֹ מִטַּמֵּא לַאֲחֵרִים עִמָּהּ. שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר הוֹאִיל וְנִטְמֵאתִי עַל אָבִי אֲלַקֵּט עַצְמוֹת פְּלוֹנִי אוֹ אֶגַּע בְּקֶבֶר פְּלוֹנִי. לְפִיכָךְ כֹּהֵן שֶׁמֵּת לוֹ מֵת צָרִיךְ לְהִזָּהֵר וּלְקָבְרוֹ בְּסוֹף בֵּית הַקְּבָרוֹת כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִכָּנֵס לְבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת וְלֹא יִתְטַמֵּא בְּקִבְרוֹת אֲחֵרִים כְּשֶׁיִּקְבֹּר מֵתוֹ:
Quiz Yourself on Mamrim - Chapter 7
Quiz Yourself on Avel - Chapter 1
Quiz Yourself on Avel - Chapter 2
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.