Zevachim 199

לא קשיא כאן שמת לו מת בי"ד וקברו בי"ד כאן שמת לו מת בי"ג וקברו בי"ד

There is no difficulty:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Simeon is not self-contradictory.');">¹</span> in the one case the man died on the fourteenth and was buried on the fourteenth; in the other the man died on the thirteenth and was buried on the fourteenth. If the man died on the fourteenth and was buried on the fourteenth, the day of death embraces the night [that follows] by Scriptural law;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence he may not eat of the Passover-offering in the evening.');">²</span>

מת לו מת בי"ד וקברו בי"ד יום מיתה תופס לילו מדאורייתא מת לו מת בי"ג וקברו בי"ד יום קבורה מדרבנן אינו תופס לילו אלא מדרבנן

if the man died on the thirteenth and was buried on the fourteenth, [aninuth even on] the day of burial is [only] Rabbinical,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He holds that by Scriptural law aninuth applies only to the day of death.');">³</span> and it embraces the night [that follows only] by Rabbinical law.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And this Rabbinical law is waived in favour of the Passover-offering.');">⁴</span> Said R'Ashi to R'Mari: If so, when it is taught, R'Simeon said to him, The proof is that they [the Rabbis] said: An onen performs immersion and eats his Passover-offering in the evening, but [may] not [partake] of [other] sacrifices; let him [R'Judah] answer him: I speak to you of the day of death, [when one is an onen] by Scriptural law, whereas you tell me about the day of burial, [when aninuth is only] Rabbinical?

א"ל רב אשי לרב מרי ואלא הא דקתני אמר לו ר"ש תדע שהרי אמרו אונן טובל ואוכל את פסחו אבל לא בקדשים נימא ליה קאמינא לך אנא יום מיתה דאורייתא ואמרת לי את יום קבורה דרבנן קשיא

That is a difficulty. Abaye said, There is no difficulty: In the one case he died before midday [of the fourteenth]; in the other he died after midday. [If he died] before midday, when he had [as yet] no obligation of the Passover-offering, aninuth falls upon him; [if he died] after midday, when he is subject to the Passover-offering, aninuth does not fall upon him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In both cases the man died on the fourteenth, and R. Simeon holds that the aninuth of the following night is Rabbinical. Now, the obligation to sacrifice the Passover-offering commences at midday on the fourteenth. Consequently, if death took place before midday, aninuth preceded the obligation, and this prevents the obligation from becoming operative; therefore he does not eat the Passover-offering in the evening. But if the man died after midday, this person was already under the obligation, therefore he does eat the Passover-offering in the evening.');">⁵</span>

אביי אמר לא קשיא כאן שמת קודם חצות כאן שמת לאחר חצות קודם חצות דלא איחזי לפסח חיילא עליה אנינות אחר חצות דאיחזי לפסח לא חיילא עליה אנינות

And how do you know that we differentiate between [death] before midday and [death] after midday? - Because it was taught: For her shall he defile himself:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 3. This refers to a priest, who may not defile himself for the dead, except for certain near relations, e.g., father and mother etc. 'Her' means an unmarried sister, and, according to the Rabbis, his wife ('his kin that is near to him,' v. 2) .');">⁶</span> this is obligatory; if he does not wish to, we defile him by force. Now, the wife of Joseph the priest happened to die on the eve of Passover, and he did not wish to defile himself, whereupon his brother priests took a vote and defiled him by force.

ומנא תימרא דשני ליה בין קודם חצות בין לאחר חצות דתניא (ויקרא כא, ג) לה יטמא מצוה לא רצה מטמאין אותו על כרחו ומעשה ביוסף הכהן שמתה אשתו בערב הפסח ולא רצה ליטמא ונמנו אחיו הכהנים וטימאוהו בעל כרחו

But the following contradicts it: [He shall not make himself unclean for his father.] and for his sister [when they die]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VI, 7. This refers to a nazirite.');">⁷</span> why is this stated?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If he may not defile himself even for his parents, it is obvious that he may not defile himself for his sister.');">⁸</span> [For this reason:] Behold if he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. one who was both a nazirite and a High Priest.');">⁹</span>

ורמינהי (במדבר ו, ז) ולאחותו מה ת"ל הרי שהלך לשחוט את פסחו ולמול את בנו ושמע שמת לו מת יכול יטמא אמרת (במדבר ו, ז) לא יטמא

was on his way to slaughter the Passover-offering or to circumcise his son,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that he could partake of the Passover-offering, which may not be eaten by a man whose son is uncircumcised.');">¹⁰</span> and he learnt that a near relation of his ha died,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that a dead had died unto him.'');">¹¹</span> you might think that he may defile himself; hence you read,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'say'.');">¹²</span>

יכול כשם שלא יטמא לאחותו כך אין מטמא למת מצוה ת"ל ולאחותו לאחותו הוא דאינו מטמא אבל מטמא הוא למת מצוה

'he shall not make himself unclean'. You might think that just as he may not defile himself for his sister, so may he not defile himself for an unattended corpse:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Heb., meth mizwah, a corpse which it is a duty to bury. If any person, even a High Priest, comes across an unattended corpse, he must defile himself and attend to his burial.');">¹³</span> therefore it states, 'and for his sister': he may not defile himself for his sister, but must defile himself for an unattended corpse.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus it is taught here that he must not defile himself but sacrifice the Passover-offering, whereas the first Baraitha teaches that he must defile himself. An obvious difficulty arises here: the first Baraitha refers to a priest, who must defile himself for his near relations, whereas the second treats of a nazirite who is also a High Priest, who may not defile himself even for his relations. Sh.M. quotes a var. lec., according to which this second Baraitha, though interpreting a passage dealing with a nazirite, transfers its teaching to an ordinary priest; in which case there is a definite contradiction between the two.');">¹⁴</span>

לאו ש"מ כאן קודם חצות כאן לאחר חצות

Hence you must surely infer that one holds good [where the person died] before midday, and the other where he died after midday.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. p. 479. n. 6.');">¹⁵</span> Whence [does this follow]? Perhaps I can argue that in truth both refer to after midday, but one agrees with R'Ishmael and the other with R'Akiba.

ממאי דילמא לעולם אימא לך אידי ואידי אחר חצות והא רבי ישמעאל והא ר"ע דתניא לה יטמא רשות דברי רבי ישמעאל ר"ע אומר חובה

For it was taught: 'For her shall he defile himself': this is permissive; these are the words of Ishmael.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the obligation to sacrifice the Passover-offering overrides this permission, and he may not defile himself.');">¹⁶</span> R'Akiba said: It is an obligation!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yet there may be no difference between death before midday and death after midday.');">¹⁷</span> - You cannot think so, for the first clause of that [Baraitha]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which forbids him to defile himself.');">¹⁸</span>

לא ס"ד דרישא דההיא ר"ע קתני לה דתניא ר"ע אומר (במדבר ו, ו) נפש אלו הקרובים מת אלו הרחוקים

was taught by R'Akiba. For it was taught, R'Akiba said: [He shall not come near to a body, [to] the dead.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. VI, 6. E.V. to a dead body. R. Akiba however understands the Hebrew as two substantives.');">¹⁹</span> 'Body' refers to strangers;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'distant ones'.');">²⁰</span>

לאביו אינו מטמא אבל מטמא הוא למת מצוה לאמו היה כהן והוא נזיר לאמו הוא דאינו מטמא אבל מטמא הוא למת מצוה לאחיו שאם היה כ"ג והוא נזיר לאחיו הוא דאינו מטמא אבל מטמא הוא למת מצוה

'dead' refers to relations.' For his father' he may not defile himself, but he mus defile himself for an unattended corpse.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since 'dead' refers to relations, v. 7 which enumerates these relations is superfluous; R. Akiba explains that each relation enumerated has a particular teaching.');">²¹</span> 'For his mother': [even] if he was [both] a priest and nazirite, onl for his mother he may not defile himself, but he must defile himself for an unattended corpse.

ולאחותו מה ת"ל הרי שהלך לשחוט את פסחו ולמול את בנו ושמע שמת לו מת יכול יטמא אמרת לא יטמא יכול כשם שאין מטמא לאחותו כך אינו מטמא למת מצוה תלמוד לומר ולאחותו לאחותו לא יטמא אבל יטמא הוא למת מצוה

For his brother': [even] if he was [both] a High Priest and a nazirite, only for his brother he may not defile himself, but he must defile himself for an unattended corpse.' And for his sister': why is this stated? If he was on his way to slaughter his Passover-offering or to circumcise his son, and he learnt that a near relation of his had died, you might think that he may defile himself; hence you read, 'he shall not make himself unclean'. You might think that just as he may not defile himself for his sister, so he may not defile himself for an unattended corpse; therefore it states, 'and for his sister': he may not defile himself for his sister, but he m defile himself for an unattended corpse.