Talmud Bavli
Talmud Bavli

Talmud for Moed Katan 44:16

על כל המתים כולן שולל לאחר שבעה ומאחה לאחר שלשים על אביו ועל אמו שולל לאחר ל' ואינו מאחה לעולם והאשה שוללתו לאלתר מפני כבודה

A woman rends her undermost garment and turns it [front to] back and then again rends her uppermost garment,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus avoiding exposure of her chest.');"><sup>20</sup></span> For all [other] dead, if one desire he divides the [upper] selvage-border of his [garment],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' About the neck and shoulders.');"><sup>21</sup></span>

Jerusalem Talmud Moed Katan

137This paragraph is copied from Nazir 3:1 (Notes 7–16, ז). Something happened to Rebbi Immi and he shaved on the 30th day. Something happened [to one rabbi] and he shaved on the 31st day138The editor’s insert declares the question of the first day when shaving is permitted to be open, different authorities following different rules. The text in Nazir and the scribe’s text here note that R, Immi himself was inconsistent in this matter. S. Lieberman (Tarbiz 3) accepts the editor’s addition as genuine (but more likely would be חד בירבי). The only certain statement is that the Venice text is not a genuine version of the Yerushalmi.. Rebbi Zeriqan said, Rebbi Immi learned this from our Mishnah, as we have stated there139Mishnah Nazir 3:2.: “If somebody vowed two neziriot140If somebody declares himself a nazir without indicating the duration of his vow, it is automatically interpreted to mean that he is nazir for 30 days. If the 30th day could not possibly be a day for shaving, he should be able to shave only on the 62nd day. Therefore if the rabbinic rules for mourning are modelled on the biblical of the nazir, the Mishnah gives support both for the 30th and the 31st as days of shaving by the mourner., he shaves for the first on the 31st day, for the second on the 61st day.” Rebbi Yose said, there after it happened, here from the start141R. Yose criticizes R. Immi. The Mishnah requires the nazir to shave on his 31st day; it only legitimizes shaving on the 30th after the fact. But R. Immi shaved on the 30th on his own initiative. R. Zeriqan seems to hold that what is acceptable after the fact in biblical rules is permitted from the start in rabbinic usage.. Rebbi Jeremiah instructed Rebbi Isaac from Aṭoshia, and some say, Rav Ḥiyya ben Rebbi Isaac from Aṭoshia, to shave on the 30th day, following the Mishnah: “Eight days, the decree of 30 days is waived for him.” The eighth has the same status as the 30th day142The argument here goes as follows: If the 8th day of mourning was holiday eve, the mourner can shave in the afternoon in preparation for the holiday. The time elapsed from dawn to the afternoon is counted as a full day for him. Therefore, the person who shaves on the 30th day can nevertheless count the entire 30th day as being part of his mourning period.. Rebbi Yose said, there is a difference; there they permitted in order to honor the holiday. You should know this, since Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rav Ḥuna said in the name of Rav: If his eighth day fell on the Sabbath, he shaves Friday. If you say that they did permit not in order to honor the holiday, then even if his 30th day falls on the Sabbath, he should shave Sabbath eve143Nobody permits shaving on the 29th day.. In addition, from what was stated144Babli 22b. In the Babli and in Nazir this is an Amoraic statement.: “For all deceased he stitches together after seven days and mends after 30.” Why should he not stitch on the seventh day and mend on the 30th day145For the seven-day period, the mourner is required to wear the garment torn before the burial. He can stitch together the tear after the end of the seven-day period (after 30 days for father or mother) and invisibly mend it after thirty days (never mending invisibly for father or mother.) Why does one not allow stitching or mending on the last day of a period if “part of the day is counted as a whole day”?? Rebbi Ḥaggai said, this has been transmitted in this way and that has been transmitted in that way146Since one tradition is in from the school of Rav and the other (in the formulation of Nazir) of the school of R. Joḥanan, the two formulations of old (pre-)tannaitic traditions do not have to be coherent..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Previous VerseFull ChapterNext Verse