Responsa for Bava Batra 200:8
אביי אמר בהא נמי טעה שאין עושין אלא בבית הקברות והוא עשה בעיר רבא אמר בהא נמי טעה שאין עושין אלא במקום שנהגו והתם לא נהוג
may be arranged only where they are the local practice, but there, these were not the practice. An objection was raised: [It has been stated that] they said unto him, 'If so, such [procedure] should be permitted on the Sabbath also'. Now, if it is said [that the ceremonial is to take place] in the graveyard and on the first day [only], [for] what [purpose] is the graveyard required on the Sabbath?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely burial on the Sabbath is forbidden ');"><sup>19</sup></span> — In [the case of] a town which is near a graveyard [and the dead] was brought [to burial] at twilight.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Sabbath eve. In such a case the ceremonial would be performed on the Sabbath (V. p. 420, n. 10). Though the night forms, for general purposes, the beginning of the following day, in respect of the mourning on the first day of the death an exception is made, and the night is held to follow the previous day. Sabbath eve can accordingly be regarded for the purpose as Friday. viz., the first day of the burial. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>
Teshuvot Maharam
A. A is under no obligation to repay the five marks to B since he carried out a direct order to pay this amount to the bishop. Moreover, had A acted on his own initiative and ransomed B without being requested to do so, he would still have been entitled to reimbursement, for a Jew should be ransomed even against his express will, and may be charged with the expenses thus incurred. The promise of the rich man to speak to the bishop was of no consequence, since he did not offer to spend money on B's behalf. We know that mere words are of no avail. The Gentiles are not moved by words, only money affects them. Those who fall into their hands have no hope for deliverance save through the payment of ransom.
This Responsum is addressed to Rabbi Haim Paltiel b. Jacob.
SOURCES: Cr. 32–3; Tesh. Maim. to Nezikin, 17. Cf. Maharil, Responsa 78.
Teshuvot Maharam
A. A Jew should be ransomed even against his express will, and be charged with the expenses incurred. A captive in the hands of Gentiles is exposed to ruthless treatment and incessant flogging, and his very life is in danger. Therefore, anyone who effects the ransom of a Jew is praiseworthy and is entitled to the expenses incurred. Moreover, Jews threatened by a common danger may force one another to contribute of their means to the measures that will free them of that danger. A and B have to share the expenses in proportion to their wealth, since they were captured for the purpose of extorting money from them.
R. Meir adds that this question had already been sent to him from Magdeburg. He had also been asked concerning a tutor who was arrested because of a false accusation, and who requested his former employer not to ransom him. R. Meir's answer was the same.
SOURCES: Pr. 39; L. 345, cf. Mord. B. K. 58–59; Cr. 32–33; Am. II, 128; Tesh-Maim. Nezikin, 17. Weil, Responsa 148; ibid. 149; Moses Minz, Responsa 1.