Moed Katan

Nor may the Alexandrian1 mending [be used]. Our Rabbis taught: One who rends [his garment] in a part that had been tacked together, basted, or [the edges] picked up by cross or ladderstitch, has not discharged his duty; if in a part which had been rejoined [in a seam], he has discharged his duty. Said R. Hisda: Also [if he rent] in a part [which had been done up] with the Alexandrian mending. Our Rabbis taught: One is allowed to turn [a garment] upside down2 and [then] completely mend the rent. R. Simeon b. Eleazar forbids complete mending of the rent. And just as the vendor [of the garment] is forbidden to reunite the rent [completely] the buyer too is forbidden to reunite it [completely] and accordingly the vendor is bound to inform the buyer of [the nature of the rent]. Our Rabbis taught: The initial rending is [to the extent of] a handbreadth,3 and any extension thereof4 is to be to the depth of three fingers: these are the words of R. Meir. R. Judah says: The initial rending is [to the extent of] three fingers and the extension may be as small as he cares.5 Said ‘Ulla, The halachah; follows R. Meir in regard to the [initial] rending and in regard to the extension, the halachah follows R. Judah. It is likewise taught: R. Jose Says. The initial rending is [to the extent of] one handbreadth and the extension may be as little as one cares.5 Our Rabbis taught: If one was informed that his father died and he rent [his garment], [then] that his son died and he added thereto, the lower [inner portion] may be reunited; the upper parts is not to be reunited; that his son died and he rent his garment, [then] that his father died and he added thereto, the upper part may be reunited [and] the lower part6 is not to be reunited. [If one was informed] that his father died, that his mother died, that his brother died, that his sister died,7 he makes one rent for all. R. Judah b. Bathyra8 says: For all [near of kin he makes] one rent; for his father and/or mother9 [he makes] another rent: because a rent made for one's father or mother is not to be added to.10 What is the reason [for this differentiation]? — Said R. Nahman b. Isaac, it is because there is no extension [of a rent] in their case.11 Samuel said: The halachah follows the view of R. Judah b. Bathyra. But did Samuel say that? Inasmuch Samuel stated that the halachah in matters of mourning is to follow the view of the [more] lenient authority!12 — The [observance13 of] mourning comes under one category and the [act of] rending14 under another [category], To what extent does one rend [his garment]? — To [exposing his breast down to] the [region of the] navel; some say, [only] down to the [region of the] heart — Although there is no [authentic] proof on this point, there is some [Scriptural] allusion to it, as it is said: And rend your hearts and not your garments.15 Having reached to the navel, [on hearing another evil report] he moves away a space of three fingers [from the former rent] and rends [afresh]. If the forepart of his garment is become full [of rents], he turns the garment front to back and then rends [again]; if it become full [of rents] in the upper parts. he turns the garment [upside] down; but one who rends the lower part or on the sides [of the garment] has not discharged his duty, save the High Priest, who rends [his garment] below. [On the extension rending] R. Mattenah and Mar ‘Ukba held different views and both advanced them in the names of [Abba] Samuel's father and R. Levi [b. Sisi]. One said: ‘Anytime during the seven days. one rends [anew for another bereavement] and after the seven he [merely] adds [to the first rent]’. The other said: ‘Anytime during the thirty. one rends [anew for another bereavement] and after the thirty he [merely] adds thereto’. To these statements R. Zera demurred. Now [said R. Zera], in regard to the one who says: ‘Anytime during the seven days one rends [anew for another bereavement]’,16 why [rend anew]? Because the rent may not be tacked together;17 then [in the case of a woman] in view of the Master's statement: ‘A woman [mourner] tacks the rent together forthwith’ [may she not] just as well [add even to the first rent]?17 — [No, because] there18 it is [a concession merely] out of the respect due to a woman.19 Again [said R. Zera], in regard to the one who says: ‘ Anytime during the thirty, one rends [anew for another],16 why is that? Because the rent is not to be reunited;20 then [in the case of] a rent made for a father or mother that is never to be reunited, [may he not] just as well [add to the rent]?21 — [No, because] there [also the restriction is merely] out of the deference22 due to one's father and mother. Our Rabbis taught: One who goes forth before the dead with a garment already rent, robs the dead and the living [relatives of their due]. Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel says: If a man says to his friend, ‘Lend me your cloak and I shall go and visit my father who is ill’, and he went and found him already dead, he rends it and then mends the rent. After returning home he returns the cloak and compensates him for the damage done by the rent; but if he had not informed him [of his intention to visit his sick father], he must not touch it. Our Rabbis taught: If one who is ill sustains bereavement, they should not inform him thereof, lest he thereby become distracted in mind; nor do they direct to have any garments rent in his presence and they direct the women to keep silent [from lamenting] in his presence. Children may be made to rend their clothes in order to stir up sadness and garments are also rent for a father-in-law or mother-in-law, out of deference to one's wife. R. Papa said: It is taught in the Ebel Rabbathi:23 ‘A mourner should not set an infant on his knee, because the child may amuse him and he may thereby incur censure from his fellow men’. NOR DO THEY PROVIDE A REPAST SAVE24 [SEATED] ON UPRIGHT COUCHES.25 Our Rabbis taught: ‘One who goes to the house of a mourner, if he be on familiar terms with him, may provide the repast for him [to be taken]26 on overturned couches, but if not, he provides the repast for him [to be taken] on couches in erect position’.27 Raba suffered a misfortune and Abba b. Martha, who is the same as Abba b. Manyomi, went to the house [to provide the mourner's repast for him]. Raba sat on all upright couch while Abba b. Martha sat on an overturned one. Said Raba: How lacking in [good] sense28 is that Associate of the Rabbis! Our Rabbis taught: One who goes from place to place [and mourning befell him while being on the road],29 piece neatly let in. V. Tosaf. s.v. hujht . death of his father and mother and of his Master who had taught him wisdom, he makes one rent for all’. that he does not make that for his father and that for his mother as an extension". But is not this (latter part) to the same effect as the former part? Only, what he means is, that one shall make no extension on a rent made for a father or a mother’. apart from the rent made for the other near-of-kin on that occasion; or (b) a separate rent for each, even if the news of their deaths was communicated to him at the same moment. The former interpretation (with some reservations) is accepted by Ritba. V. infra n. 1. Judah b. Tema says: He makes a rent for this one separately and a rent for this one separately. clause (‘because a rent made. . .’) is probably a gloss (and is in fact not found in Sem. I.e.). Rabad, however, cited by Asheri, n. 71, explains the comment thus: Since a rent for a parent extends to the region of the heart (or even to the navel), any extension of it (for another sorrow) would fail to be any indication thereof, as his friends would take the enlarged rent as the sign of the mourners excessive grief for his parent. interment) or at the first intelligence of it. It is a tribute to the dead. the dead, and like everybody else she should act in the regular way for all, i.e., rend anew. any other person according to the law and merely add to the rent a little, in tribute of the fresh loss; otherwise there is no concession in the case of a son mourning for a parent until the end of the year. Asheri) explain the Mishnah as referring to festival week, when in no case is the meal provided on overturned couches. As, however, no couches are overturned on festival week, the word ‘SAVE’ is redundant and on this interpretation is to be omitted, v. n. 3.] Raba out of deference to the visitor sat on the couch in its normal position.