Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Moed Katan, 22

1) JOINING THE SHIV'AH-COUNT OF THE REST OF THE FAMILY

QUESTION: The Gemara (end of 21b) says that if a number of family members became Aveilim and started sitting Shiv'ah, and another family member -- who was not with them when they started sitting Shiv'ah -- only finds out about the death later, then when he comes to join them, he may start counting the days of his Shiv'ah from the day that the others started (and he does not have to sit a full seven days). However, this applies only if three conditions are met:

1. The Gadol ha'Bayis (the oldest Avel in the family) is one of those who started sitting Shiv'ah earlier in the home.

2. The Avel who comes later was in a place *near* to the house of the other Aveilim when they started sitting Shiv'ah (TOSFOS, DH Makom, explains that this means within a distance of ten Parsa'os, or one day's journey).

3. Rebbi Shimon, whom the Halachah follows, says that the one who comes later may arrive as late as the seventh day of the Aveilus and still count his Aveilus according to count of the members of the household, but only if he arrives at the house of the Aveilim while visitors are still present, comforting the mourners. If he arrives after they have already arisen, then he must start his Aveilus from day one and may not go according to the count of the other Aveilim.

The Gemara here (22a) discusses a situation wherein the Gadol ha'Bayis went to bury the deceased relative, while the others left to return home before the burial. Those who returned home early begin sitting Shiv'ah as soon as they part with the funeral procession, while the one who remains only begins at the time of the actual burial (Setimas ha'Golel). The Gemara asks, when the Gadol ha'Bayis returns home and joins the other Aveilim, does he follow the count of those at home, or does he count his own days of Aveilus from when the burial was completed?

What is the Gemara's question? We said before that everyone follows the Gadol ha'Bayis. Why should the Gemara here consider that the Gadol ha'Bayis follows the count of everyone else? In addition, if he does follow everyone else, why should it depend upon whether or not he returns during the first three days. The Halachah is in accordance with Rebbi Shimon, who holds that even a brother who joins the other Aveilim on the seventh day may join their count!

ANSWERS:

(a) The Rishonim argue how to explain this Gemara (see Tosfos DH d'Asa). The BA'AL HA'ME'OR, RA'AVAD and others explain that even though, normally, a Gadol ha'Bayis does not join the count of the younger family members, in this case the Gadol ha'Bayis follows the count of the younger Aveilim, because he was together with them when they first found out about the death and was delayed from joining their count only because he was busy with the burial until he rejoined them. Therefore, if less than three days have passed until he returns home, he may count like those who started the Shiv'ah earlier. (Whether the cemetery was nearby or far away makes no difference.) Any other Aveilim who join the Aveilus also join their count, since the Gadol ha'Bayis has the same count. If three days or more have passed, then that is considered a significant amount of time and the Gadol ha'Bayis who was at the burial must count his Shiv'ah separately from those at home who started earlier.

In contrast, in the previous case of the Gemara, the Gadol ha'Bayis was unable to join the count of the other Aveilim because he did not even know about the Aveilus when they started to sit Shiv'ah.

This is also the view of the RAMBAN (in Toras ha'Adam and in Milchamos), except that the Ramban adds two points. He adds that this Halachah applies not only if the Gadol ha'Bayis stays at the burial longer than the others, but even if a younger member of the household stays longer and then returns after three days, he does not count with the others. Since he knew about the death and the burial, and yet he was not able to start with them for another reason (since he was involved with the burial), he cannot join the count of the Gadol ha'Bayis if he returns home after three days. Second, the Ramban maintains that the opinion of the Rif is that even if the person that remained at the burial comes back after three days, he may also join his brothers' count, as long as he comes before the end of *seven* days before the visitors leave. The reason that the Gemara mentions three days is because it is following the opinion of the Tana Kama (21b) who says that one may join the count of the Gadol ha'Bayis only if one returns home within three days. In other words, one's involvement with the burial removes the requirement that one may only join his relatives' count if the Gadol ha'Bayis is also there.

(b) However, other Rishonim (the RIVA cited by the Ritva) maintain that a person may join the count of the other Aveilim only if he did not know about the Aveilus until he joined them. If he already started counting Shiv'ah from a separate day (when he found out about the death) before joining them, then he cannot adopt their count when he joins them. Since he started his own count, he must continue it. Similarly, when the Gadol ha'Bayis stays until the end of the burial he must immediately start his count from that point. If so, when he returns to his family he cannot possibly join their count and ignore the count he already started. Since he started counting on a different day, he cannot join the count of his relatives.

It must be that our Gemara is not referring to the Gadol ha'Bayis returning home, but to another relative who comes to join the family during the Aveilus. Normally, another relative who did not know about the death until he joined the others does not join their count unless the Gadol ha'Bayis is there. However, if the Gadol ha'Bayis was present at the time the family found out about the death, and now he is not at home because he is busy with the burial, then if the newcomer arrives at the home within three days of the start of the Aveilus (when the Gadol ha'Bayis is not there), he may join the count of the Aveilim, since the Gadol ha'Bayis was with them originally, when they found out about the death. If more than three days have passed, then the newcomer may not join their count, since the Gadol ha'Bayis is not there. The Gadol ha'Bayis himself, though, certainly counts from a different day (from when the burial was completed).

(According to Riva, the newcomer does not join the count of the Gadol ha'Bayis, but rather he joins the count of the *house* of the Gadol ha'Bayis, which might differ from the count of the Gadol ha'Bayis.)

(c) The TOSFOS HA'ROSH, citing "others," offers a third explanation. He seems to be working with the assumption of the Riva, that if the Gadol ha'Bayis begins counting from a separate day, he can no longer join the other Aveilim under any circumstances. On the other hand, he does not accept the proposal of Riva that a newcomer can join count of the other Aveilim by arriving within three days of the Gadol ha'Bayis' departure if the Gadol ha'Bayis himself counts a different count. Therefore, he explains that the Gadol ha'Bayis who went to the cemetery did *not* go to bury the deceased (in which case he would start counting from the burial and not from time the other brothers counted). Rather, he went later in the day, *after* the burial was finished, in order to build a gravestone for the deceased, or otherwise to be involved in the needs of the deceased relative.

In such a case, the Gadol ha'Bayis certainly counts like the other Aveilim, since he began with them. The newcomer, who comes after the Gadol ha'Bayis left the house, is considered to be joining the Gadol ha'Bayis if he arrives within three days of the departure of the Gadol ha'Bayis, and therefore he joins the count of the other relatives. However, if three days have passed since the Gadol ha'Bayis has left, the newcomer is considered to be joining a house of Aveilim that does *not* include the Gadol ha'Bayis, and he counts his own count.

HALACHAH: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (375:8) does not record the Halachah of the Gadol ha'Bayis who went to the cemetery at all, since the RIF and RAMBAM omit it. The REMA, however, brings the opinion of the Me'or (a), who rules that when the Gadol ha'Bayis goes to the cemetery to bury the deceased and he returns within three days, both he and any others newcomers who join the Aveilim (from a nearby place) count with the other Aveilim.

The SHACH (12, 13) cites as Halachah the addition of the Ramban (at the end of (a), above) that if the Gadol ha'Bayis returns even within *7* days, he and any newcomers (from a nearby place) who join the Aveilim join the count of the other Aveilim. He also cites as Halachah the "other opinion" mentioned by the Rosh (c), that if the Gadol started to count with the others and then went to the cemetery to take care of the needs of the deceased relative, any relative that joins the Aveilim during the first three days from his departure joins the count of the Aveilim, as if the Gadol ha'Bayis was still there.

22b

OPINIONS: The Gemara says that for relatives other than one's parents, an Avel may choose to tear before the edge of the garment ("Kamei Safah"), or not to tear there if he wants. When tearing Keri'ah for the death of a parent, though, he *must* tear before the edge of the garment. What does the expression "before the edge of the garment" mean?

(a) RASHI explains that "before the edge of the garment" refers to the stitching around the collar. By tearing "before the edge," the Avel starts the tear before the edge of the stitching and continues the tear downward, so that the does not tear the stitching itself. Rashi explains that the reason one must tear in this manner when he is an Avel for a parent is because the tear is more noticeable when the stitching is not ripped, for if the stitching is ripped it just looks like a wider collar and not like a tear.

(b) RASHI ON THE RIF and others explain exactly the opposite. Tearing "before the stitching" does not mean that one tears below the stitching. Rather, it means the opposite. For a parent, one begins the tear from *outside* of the stitching and continues to tear through the stitching. They explain that it is more noticeable when the tear goes through the stitching, because then the garment comes apart. When one tears the garment only below the stitching, it is not as noticeable, because the garment itself remains fully intact, and it just has a tear in it.

HALACHAH: The SHULCHAN ARUCH (YD 340:12) cites the explanation of Rashi on the Rif (b), that for a parent one must tear through the stitching so that the tear will be more noticeable. The REMA rules in accordance with the stringent view of Rebbi Yehudah who argues with this Tana and says that even for relatives other than one's parents, one must tear through the stitching (this ruling is based on the MORDECHAI).

In practice, the Chevra Kadisha usually cuts with a knife through the stitching and lets the Avel tear the rest of the Keri'ah. Even though the Gemara says that one must tear Keri'ah with one's hand and not with a utensil, the practice is to be lenient for the beginning of the tear, seemingly because the stitching is not part of the Keri'ah, but is just in order that the Keri'ah of the rest of the garment be more noticeable.

(The BACH also cites the explanation of Rashi in the Gemara (a), that one should tear Keri'ah without the stitching when tearing for a parent. The Bach concludes that one should be Machmir l'Chatchilah. Apparently, he means that one should tear twice, once like Rashi on the Gemara and once like Rashi on the Rif.)

QUESTION: The Gemara says that for a Chacham, one is Choletz with the right arm (that is, he bares his right shoulder by placing his right arm through the top of his shirt). For an Av Beis Din, who is considered more prominent than a Chacham, one is Choletz with the left arm.

Why is the act of being Choletz with the left arm considered a greater sign of respect than with the right arm?

ANSWERS:

(a) The RITVA and TALMID RABEINU YECHIEL write that the reason being Choletz with the left arm is considered a greater sign of respect is because they used to wear their robes draped mostly over the left shoulder. By removing the left shoulder, they would expose more of their upper bodies than by removing the right shoulder.

(b) With regard to which side one should perform Keri'ah on, the Poskim (BACH YD 340, MAGEN AVRAHAM OC 561:4) say that one should tear one's garment on the left side when tearing for a parent. The point of tearing on the left side is to reveal one's heart which is on the left.

The RAMBAM (Hilchos Avel 9:2-3) rules that for an Av Beis Din and for a Nasi one must also tear until he reveals his heart. The MISHNAH L'MELECH and others are perplexed as to the Rambam's source for such a ruling. Our Gemara cannot be the source, because our Gemara implies that the laws of Aveilus for a Nasi are not the same as the laws of Aveilus for a parent, except for the Halachah that one may not mend the tear by sewing it. Where did the Rambam see that one must tear for an Av Beis Din and a Nasi until he reveals his heart?

Perhaps the Rambam learned like the Magen Avraham, that the point of tearing on the left side is in order to reveal one's heart. Accordingly, the Rambam understood that when our Gemara says that one is Choletz for an Av Beis Din on the left side, it means that one must reveal one's heart when ripping. The RIF explains that "Choletz" means that one puts his shoulder and arm through the tear that one made in the garment. Thus, when the Gemara says that one is Choletz on the left side for an Av Beis Din and Nasi, it means that one also tears on the left side! (M. Kornfeld)

HALACHAH: The Poskim rule that an Avel is not Choletz today (RITVA), because the Nochrim would mock us. This is the ruling of the REMA (YD 340:17). The ARUCH HA'SHULCHAN gives another reason why one is not Choletz today. Our clothing is different than that worn in the times of the Gemara. Since our jackets and shirts (button-down) are open in the front, if one is Choletz, his jacket and shirt will fall off, disgracing the Avel. Certainly in such a situation the Mes would forego the Kavod of having the Avel be Choletz for him.

Regarding Keri'ah, the practice is to do Keri'ah on the left side, over the heart, for a parent, and for other relatives on the right side (MAHARSHAL, cited by the BACH). The Poskim (in YD 340:9) write that if a person tore on the wrong side, he does *not* have to tear again.