We do not occupy ourselves in any respect with the funeral rites of one who committed suicide wilfully. R. Ishmael said: We exclaim over him, ‘Alas for a lost¹, ‘[a life] carried away’. H reads nishlah with a similar meaning (cf. God takth away [yeshel] his soul, Job 27, 8). GRA emends to nithlah, ‘hanged’. [life!] Alas for a [lost] life!’ R. ‘Aḳiba said to him, ‘Leave him unmourned; speak neither well nor ill of him’.² We do not rend garments for him,³ Y.D., §345, near relatives do not rend their garments. bare the shoulder, or deliver a memorial address over him. We do, however, stand in a row⁴ for him and recite the benediction of mourners⁵, p. 119. for him, from respect of the living [relatives]. The general rule is: With anything that makes for respect of the living we occupy ourselves, but with anything that does not make for the respect of the living, the public do not in any way occupy themselves.

footnotes: ¹ Heb. niṭṭelah ² lit. ‘do not bless him and do not curse him’. ³ According to the Ṭur ⁴ At the cemetery after the funeral those present divide themselves into two rows and the mourners pass between them to receive condolences. ⁵ The condolence ended with the words, ‘Blessed be He Who comforteth the mourners’ (Keth. 8b, Sonc. ed., p. 40). Hence the term ‘benediction of mourners’; cf. J. Rabbinowitz, Mishnah Megillah

Who [comes within the category of] ‘one who committed suicide wilfully’? He does not who climbed to the top of a tree and fell down and died, or he who went up to the top of the roof and fell down and died.⁶ But he who calls out, ‘Look, I am going to the top of the roof or to the top of the tree, and I will throw myself down that I may die’ [comes within the category]. When people saw him go up to the top of a tree or roof [for the purpose] and he fell down and died, he is presumed to have committed suicide wilfully; and with the person who commits suicide wilfully we do not occupy ourselves in any respect.

footnotes: ⁶ It may have been an accidental fall.

If a person was found strangled or hanging from a tree or lying dead on a sword, he is presumed not to have committed suicide wilfully, and none [of the rites] are withheld from him.

It is related of the son of Gorgias⁷ of Lydda that he ran away from school and his father pointed to his ear.⁸ In fear of his father he went and destroyed himself in a pit.⁹ They went and inquired of R. Ṭarfon who ruled: We do not withhold anything from him.¹⁰

footnotes: ⁷ A variant is Gornos. [He is not mentioned elsewhere in Rabbinic literature.] ⁸ i.e. he threatened to punish him. ⁹ So GRA and H. V wrongly ‘with a garment’. ¹⁰ He is buried with full rites.

It is related of a child in Benë Beraḳ¹¹ that he broke a bottle on the Sabbath and his father pointed to his ear. In fear of his father he went and destroyed himself in a pit. They inquired of R. ‘Aḳiba who ruled: We do not withhold anything from him.

footnotes: ¹¹ A town near Jaffa.

Hence the Sages ruled: A man should not point at the ear of a child, but either punish him immediately or keep silent and say nothing to him. R. Simeon b. Eleazar said:¹² With human nature,¹³, which means human instinct; cf. Lazarus, Ethics of Judaism, II, pp. 106f. a child and a woman, the left hand should repulse them but the right hand bring them back.¹⁴

footnotes: ¹² Sanh. 107b (Sonc. ed., p. 736), Soṭah 47a (Sonc. ed., p. 246). ¹³ Heb. Yeẓer ¹⁴ One should not be too severe with them, not suppressing their desires but disciplining them.

With those executed by a Court we do not occupy ourselves in any respect. Their brothers and relatives come and greet the witnesses and judges¹⁵ [as if to say], ‘We have no [ill feelings] against you in our hearts because you gave a true judgment’. They observe no [public] mourning¹⁶ for them but grieve, since grief is felt only in the heart.

footnotes: ¹⁵ Cf. Sanh. 46a (Sonc. ed., p. 305). ¹⁶ i.e. the seven days, thirty days and the twelve months.

R. Nathan said: There is no difference between silence and mourning.¹⁷

footnotes: ¹⁷ i.e. the silence of the mourners is itself a form of mourning. Hence the persons mentioned in the previous Rule must not even grieve. It is suggested that R. Nathan’s statement was originally a marginal note which found its way into the text.

The ‘meal of comfort’¹⁸]’; cf. 2 Sam. 3, 35, to cause David to eat bread (lehabroth). It was prepared by friends and consisted of lentils and eggs (cf. Sanh. 63a, Sonc. ed., p. 430, n. 6) the round shape of which being a reminder of the revolving wheel of fortune. is not eaten in their case, as it is stated, Ye shall not eat [anything] with the blood.¹⁹ [The judges of] a Court who ordered the execution of a man used not to eat anything on that day.²⁰ [The condemned] are allowed to converse with their brothers and relatives; and not to delay matters²¹ they are given to drink wine containing frankincense²² so that they should not feel grieved. They are urged²³ to confess, because he who confesses has a portion in the World to Come. We find it so with Achan to whom Joshua said, My son, give, I pray thee, glory to the Lord, the God of Israel, and make confession unto Him; and tell me now what thou hast done; hide nothing from me. And Achan answered Joshua, and said: Of a truth I have sinned against the Lord, the God of Israel, and thus and thus have I done.²⁴ What is the meaning of and thus and thus? It teaches that he violated the ban twice.²⁵ [44b] I have sinned, i.e. I and not my household, I and not my children. This teaches that he truthfully²⁶) is explained as be’emunah (‘truthfully’). confessed. And whence do we know that his confession made atonement for him? As it is stated, And Joshua said: Why hast thou troubled us? The Lord shall trouble thee this day²⁷. 25.—this day art thou to be troubled but thou shalt not be troubled in the World to Come; and it states, *And the sons of Zerah: Zimri, and Ethan, and Heman, and Calcol and Dara: five of them in all.*²⁸ Do we not know that there were *five of them in all?*²⁹ It teaches that Achan will be with them in the world to come.³⁰ Similarly one who steals the tax³¹ or anything devoted [to the Sanctuary] is as if he shed blood; and not only is he as if he shed blood, but he is also as if he worships idols, was guilty of immorality and desecrates the Sabbath.³², p. 198n.]

footnotes: ¹⁸ The first meal partaken by the mourners on their return from the funeral is termed ‘the meal of comfort [habra’ah ¹⁹ Lev. 19, 26. This is homiletically interpreted to mean: where blood is shed (i.e. an execution has taken place) no ceremonial meal of mourners should be eaten. Cf. Sanh. loc. cit. ²⁰ Sanh. loc. cit. ²¹ i.e. to avoid giving the appearance that the execution of justice is unduly protracted. ²² To numb the senses; cf. Sanh. 43a (Sonc. ed., p. 279). ²³ lit. ‘they teach them’. ²⁴ Josh. 7, 19f. ²⁵ By taking from the devoted things on two occasions. Sanh. 43b (Sonc. ed., p. 284) explains that he took of the ban three times, twice in the days of Moses and once at Jericho. ²⁶ Of a truth (’omnam ²⁷ ibid ²⁸ 1 Chron. 2, 6. ²⁹ Since five names are specified. ³⁰ Cf. Sanh. 44b (Sonc. ed., p. 291). Zimri, according to a tradition, is identical with Achan. As Achan is mentioned together with the other four, who are considered to be worthy men, it is an indication that his confession was accepted and with them he shared in the World to Come. ³¹ i.e. eludes the customs; cf. B.Ḳ. 113a (Sonc. ed., p. 663), Tosiftha B.Ḳ. X, 8. ³² [On this passage, cf. Büchler, Studies in Sin and Atonement

We do not occupy ourselves with those who separated themselves from the community³³, I, 5, cf. Ṭur Y.D., §345) the reference is to those who discarded all the religious precepts and ceremonies of Judaism. in any respect. Their brothers and relatives clothe themselves in white, wrap themselves in white and eat and drink and rejoice because an enemy of the All-present perished; as it is stated, Do not I hate them, O Lord, that hate Thee? And do not I strive with those that rise up against Thee? I hate them with utmost hatred; I count them mine enemies.³⁴

footnotes: ³³ According to Maimonides (Hil. ’Ebel ³⁴ Ps. 139, 21f.

We do not withhold mourning rites from those executed by the Government.³⁵ When do we begin to count [the days of mourning] for them?³⁶ From the time that [the relatives] despaired in their appeal [for the body to be delivered to them for burial], but not [given up the hope] of stealing it. For he who steals is as if he shed blood, and not only is he as if he had shed blood, but also as if he worshipped idols, etc.³⁷

footnotes: ³⁵ i.e. the occupying power, viz. the Romans. ³⁶ Usually this begins from the moment the grave is filled in, but here the body of the victim was not handed over to the family for burial. ³⁷ This sentence is repeated from the last clause of Rule 9 and has no relevance to the present context.

Mourning rites are not withheld in any respect from one who fell into the sea, or was washed away by a stream, or killed by a wild beast. When do we begin to count [the days of mourning] for such as these? From the time that hope of finding them has been given up. If they found a body limb by limb, we do not count [the days of mourning] until the head and greater part [of the torso] is found. R. Judah said: The spine and skull constitute the greater part [of the torso].

If one’s husband, wife, father or mother had been impaled³⁸ in his city, one should not continue to reside there³⁹ unless it is a city as big as Antioch.⁴⁰ [Even then] one should not reside in the same side of the city but in another part. Until when is one so forbidden? Until the flesh is completely decomposed and the identity⁴¹ unrecognizable from the bones.

footnotes: ³⁸ By the Roman authorities. Impaling was not a form of execution carried out by the Jews. ³⁹ On seeing him, people will recall the impaling of his relative, and that would be a slight on the memory of the victim. ⁴⁰ The ancient capital of Syria. Since it is a large city, the fact might not be generally known. ⁴¹ lit. ‘the form’.

[Beth Shammai said:]⁴² If a man divorced his wife, he should not live in the same alley or courtyard as she.⁴³ If the alley belonged to both of them, he transfers the door [of his house] to another side; and if the courtyard belonged to both of them, one vacates it on account of the other, and the woman vacates it on account of the man. This rule only applies if she has remarried⁴⁴ and in the case of the [divorced] wife of a kohen even if she has not remarried.⁴⁵ may not marry a divorced woman, not even his divorced wife (Lev. 21, 7). It further applies only if she is divorced after marriage and not after betrothal.⁴⁶ Likewise one who has freed his sister-in-law from the levirate marriage⁴⁷ does not vacate on account of her, because he does not feel attracted to her.

footnotes: ⁴² GRA omits. For what follows, cf. Keth. 27b, 28a (Sonc. ed., p. 152). ⁴³ Lest he be tempted to cohabit with her. ⁴⁴ So GRA; V ‘they have married’. After remarriage with another she can never return to her first husband (cf. Deut. 24, 3f). ⁴⁵ A kohen ⁴⁶ Cf. Kallah 1, n. 1. ⁴⁷ Cf. Deut. 25, 5ff.