וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ קָטָן אִית בֵּיהּ פְּלוּגְתָּא נִמְצֵאת אֲבֵילוּת נוֹהֶגֶת בְּקָטָן And if you say that with regard to a baby there is a distinction between being born before the Festival and being born on it, and in some cases it is prohibited to cut the hair of a baby, then you find that mourning is practiced even with a minor.
וְהָתַנְיָא מְקָרְעִין לַקָּטָן מִפְּנֵי עׇגְמַת נֶפֶשׁ Isn’t it taught in a baraita: One rends the clothes of a minor whose relative has passed away, due to the desire to bring about feelings of grief among those who see him? However, there is no inherent requirement for the minor to observe any of the halakhot of mourning.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי מִי קָתָנֵי הָא אֲסוּרִין דִּלְמָא יֵשׁ מֵהֶן אָסוּר וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶן מוּתָּר Rav Ashi said: Is it taught explicitly in the first baraita cited by Rav Pineḥas that if it is prohibited for one to have a haircut during the Festival, it is likewise prohibited to have a haircut during the week of mourning? That was merely an inference. Perhaps there are those among them, i.e., those listed in the mishna, for whom it is prohibited, while there are others among them for whom it is permitted, and the halakhot of mourning do not apply to a baby.
אַמֵּימָר וְאִי תֵּימָא רַב שִׁישָׁא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אִידִי מַתְנֵי הָכִי אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל קָטָן מוּתָּר לְגַלְּחוֹ בַּמּוֹעֵד לָא שְׁנָא נוֹלַד בַּמּוֹעֵד וְלָא שְׁנָא נוֹלַד מֵעִיקָּרָא Ameimar, and some say it was Rav Sheisha, son of Rav Idi, taught that statement in this manner. Shmuel said: With regard to a baby, it is permitted to cut his hair during the Festival. It is no different whether he was born during the Festival, and it is no different whether he was born beforehand.
אָמַר רַב פִּנְחָס אַף אֲנַן נָמֵי תְּנֵינָא כׇּל אֵלּוּ שֶׁאָמְרוּ מוּתָּר לְגַלֵּחַ בַּמּוֹעֵד מוּתָּר לְגַלֵּחַ בִּימֵי אֶבְלוֹ הָא אֲסוּרִין לְגַלֵּחַ בַּמּוֹעֵד אֲסוּרִין לְגַלֵּחַ בִּימֵי אֶבְלוֹ Rav Pineḥas said: We, too, learn in the baraita a support for this statement: All of those about whom the Sages said: It is permitted to shave and cut his hair on the intermediate days of the Festival, it is also permitted to shave and cut his hair during the days of his mourning. But from this it follows that one who is prohibited from shaving and cutting his hair on the intermediate days of a Festival is also prohibited from shaving and cutting his hair during the days of his mourning.
אִי אָמְרַתְּ קָטָן אָסוּר נִמְצֵאת אֲבֵילוּת נוֹהֶגֶת בְּקָטָן וְתַנְיָא מְקָרְעִין לַקָּטָן מִפְּנֵי עׇגְמַת נֶפֶשׁ If you say that with regard to a baby it is prohibited to cut his hair, then you find that mourning is practiced even with a minor. And it was taught in a baraita: One rends the clothes of a minor whose relative has passed away due to the desire to bring about feelings of grief among those who see him. However, there is no inherent requirement for the minor to observe any of the halakhot of mourning.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי מִי קָתָנֵי הָא אֲסוּרִין דִּלְמָא יֵשׁ מֵהֶן אָסוּר וְיֵשׁ מֵהֶן מוּתָּר Rav Ashi said: Is it taught explicitly in the first baraita cited by Rav Pineḥas that if it is prohibited for one to shave during the Festival, it is likewise prohibited to shave during the week of mourning? That was merely an inference. Perhaps there are those among them for whom it is prohibited, while there are others among them for whom it is permitted. If so, there is no clear support from this baraita for Shmuel’s statement.
אָבֵל אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג אֲבֵילוּתוֹ בָּרֶגֶל שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְשָׂמַחְתָּ בְּחַגֶּךָ § A mourner does not practice the halakhot of his mourning on a Festival, as it is stated: “And you shall rejoice in your Festival” (Deuteronomy 16:14).
אִי אֲבֵילוּת דְּמֵעִיקָּרָא הוּא אָתֵי עֲשֵׂה דְרַבִּים וְדָחֵי עֲשֵׂה דְיָחִיד וְאִי אֲבֵילוּת דְּהַשְׁתָּא הוּא לָא אָתֵי עֲשֵׂה דְיָחִיד וְדָחֵי עֲשֵׂה דְרַבִּים The Gemara explains: If it is a mourning period that had already begun at the outset of the Festival, the positive mitzva of rejoicing on the Festival, which is incumbent upon the community, comes and overrides the positive mitzva of the individual, i.e., the mourning. And if the mourning period began only now, i.e., the deceased died during the Festival, the positive mitzva of the individual does not come and override the positive mitzva of the community.
מְנוּדָּה מַהוּ שֶׁיִּנְהוֹג נִידּוּיוֹ בָּרֶגֶל אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף תָּא שְׁמַע דָּנִין דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת וְדִינֵי מַכּוֹת וְדִינֵי מָמוֹנוֹת וְאִי לָא צָיֵית דִּינָא מְשַׁמְּתִינַן לֵיהּ The Gemara asks: With regard to one who was ostracized, what is the halakha? Must he observe the practices of ostracism, or are they overridden by the mitzva to rejoice on the Festival? Rav Yosef said: Come and hear an answer from that which is taught: During the Festival the court judges cases of capital law, cases of lashes, and cases of monetary law. It is known that if one does not listen to and follow the judgment, among the possibilities of enforcement is that we ostracize him until he accepts the verdict.
וְאִי סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ אֵינוֹ נוֹהֵג נִידּוּיוֹ בָּרֶגֶל מְשׁוּמָּת וְאָתֵי מֵעִיקָּרָא אָתֵי רֶגֶל דָּחֵי לֵיהּ הַשְׁתָּא מְשַׁמְּתִינַן לֵיהּ אֲנַן And if it enters your mind that one does not observe the practices of ostracism during the Festival, the following a fortiori argument can be made: If, for one who has already been ostracized at the outset of the Festival, the Festival comes and overrides his observance of that status, is it reasonable that now we, the court, should ostracize he who does not listen to the judgment of the court during the Festival itself? Rather, it must be that one does observe the practices of ostracism, even during the Festival.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי וְדִלְמָא לְעַיּוֹנֵי בְּדִינֵיהּ דְּאִי לָא תֵּימָא הָכִי דִּינֵי נְפָשׁוֹת דְּקָתָנֵי הָכָא נָמֵי דְּקָטְלִין לֵיהּ Abaye said to him: There is no proof from here, as perhaps when the baraita states that the court judges cases, what it meant is that it deliberates in judgment on the Festival, but it does not actually reach a verdict. Therefore, the court never ostracizes someone during the Festival. Accordingly, there is no a fortiori argument proving that one observes the practices of ostracism during the Festival. Because if you do not say so, that the baraita is referring to deliberation, then in the cases of capital law that are taught, here too, would we put someone to death on the Festival?
וְהָא קָא מִימַּנְעִי מִשִּׂמְחַת יוֹם טוֹב דְּתַנְיָא רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר מִנַּיִן לְסַנְהֶדְרִין (שֶׁרָאוּ בְּאֶחָד) שֶׁהָרְגוּ אֶת הַנֶּפֶשׁ שֶׁאֵין טוֹעֲמִין כׇּל אוֹתוֹ הַיּוֹם תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר לֹא תֹאכְלוּ עַל הַדָּם But if so, the judges would be prevented from rejoicing on the Festival, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Akiva says: From where is it derived with regard to the Sanhedrin who put someone to death that they may not taste any food or drink for the entire rest of the day? The verse states: “You shall not eat with the blood” (Leviticus 19:26). It is not appropriate to eat during the same day that they caused bloodshed.
אֶלָּא לְעַיּוֹנֵי בְּדִינֵיהּ הָכָא נָמֵי לְעַיּוֹנֵי בְּדִינֵיהּ אֲמַר לֵיהּ אִם כֵּן נִמְצֵאתָ מְעַנֶּה אֶת דִּינוֹ Rather, the statement of the baraita, that the court judges cases of capital law, must be referring to deliberating in judgment and not actually reaching a verdict. Here too, in cases of monetary law and of lashes, it is referring to deliberating in judgment, without the possibility of ostracizing anyone during the Festival. Rav Yosef said to him: If so, if only deliberations are conducted during the Festival, you find a perversion of justice by delaying his verdict.
אָתוּ מִצַּפְרָא וּמְעַיְּינִי בְּדִינֵיהּ וְעָיְילִי וְאָכְלִי וְשָׁתוּ כּוּלֵּי יוֹמָא וַהֲדַר אָתוּ בִּשְׁקִיעַת הַחַמָּה וְגָמְרִי לְדִינֵיהּ וְקָטְלוּ לֵיהּ Rather, the judges come in the morning as usual and deliberate in judgment. They then enter their homes and eat and drink all day, i.e., as much as they desire, in order to rejoice fully on the Festival. Then they come back to the courthouse close to sunset and complete his judgment, i.e., they dispense the verdict, and if necessary, they kill him. In this manner, they are not prevented from enjoying the Festival properly.
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי תָּא שְׁמַע וּמְנוּדֶּה שֶׁהִתִּירוּ לוֹ חֲכָמִים Abaye said: Come and hear another support from a baraita: And it is the case with regard to one who is ostracized, that the Sages permitted him to get a haircut during the intermediate days of the Festival. This indicates that one who is ostracized need not observe the practices of ostracism during the Festival.
אָמַר רָבָא מִי קָתָנֵי שֶׁהִתִּירוּהוּ חֲכָמִים שֶׁהִתִּירוּ לוֹ חֲכָמִים קָתָנֵי דַּאֲזַל וּפַיְּיסֵיהּ לְבַעַל דִּינֵיהּ וַאֲתָא קַמֵּי דְרַבָּנַן וּשְׁרוֹ לֵיהּ Rava said: Is it taught in the baraita: That they permitted it, which would indicate that the Sages permitted all those who were ostracized to cut their hair on the intermediate days of the Festival? Rather, it is taught: They permitted him. This indicates that it is referring to an individual case, where one went and appeased his opposing litigant and the Sages came and released him from his decree of ostracism.
מְצוֹרָע מַהוּ שֶׁיַּנְהִיג צָרַעְתּוֹ בָּרֶגֶל אָמַר אַבָּיֵי תָּא שְׁמַע וְהַנָּזִיר וְהַמְּצוֹרָע מִטּוּמְאָתוֹ לְטׇהֳרָתוֹ הָא בִּימֵי טוּמְאָתוֹ נָהֵיג § The Gemara asks a similar question: With regard to a leper, what is the halakha? Must he observe the practices of his leper status, or are they overridden by the mitzva to rejoice during the Festival? Abaye said: Come and hear a proof from a baraita: And both the nazirite and the leper who transfers from his state of ritual impurity to his new state of purity may shave on the intermediate days of the Festival. This implies that if during the days of his impurity he must observe all of the ordinary practices, even during the Festival.
לָא מִיבַּעְיָא קָאָמַר לָא מִיבַּעְיָא בִּימֵי טוּמְאָתוֹ דְּלָא נָהֵיג אֲבָל לְטׇהֳרָתוֹ נִיגְזוֹר שֶׁמָּא יְשַׁהֶה קׇרְבְּנוֹתָיו קָמַשְׁמַע לַן The Gemara rejects this proof: The baraita is speaking employing the didactic style of: Needless to say. Needless to say, during the days of his impurity on the Festival, he does not observe the practices of ostracism. However, with regard to one who regains his state of purity during the intermediate days of the Festival, one might think that we should issue a decree that he not be permitted to shave, lest he delay sacrificing his offerings until the last day of the Festival, when it is prohibited to sacrifice offerings of an individual. Perhaps prohibiting him from shaving will prevent this possibility. Therefore, because one might have thought that shaving should be prohibited, the baraita teaches us that it is, in fact, permitted for him to shave during the intermediate days of the Festival.
אָמַר רָבָא תָּא שְׁמַע וְהַצָּרוּעַ לְרַבּוֹת כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל וְהָא כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל דְּכׇל הַשָּׁנָה כְּרֶגֶל לְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא דָּמֵי דִּתְנַן כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל מַקְרִיב אוֹנֵן וְאֵינוֹ אוֹכֵל שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ נוֹהֵג צָרַעְתּוֹ בָּרֶגֶל שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ Rava said: Come and hear another source. The verse states: “And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent” (Leviticus 13:45). The extra emphasis of the phrase: “And the leper” comes to include the High Priest, teaching that all the halakhot of the leper apply to him. And the status of the High Priest during the entire year is like that of everyone on a Festival, as we learned in a mishna (Horayot 12b): The High Priest sacrifices animals when he has the status of an acute mourner, i.e., before the burial of a close relative who died, but he may not eat of the offering. Learn from it that a leper practices the customs of his leprosy during the Festival. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from it that this is so.
אָבֵל אָסוּר בְּתִסְפּוֹרֶת מִדְּקָאָמַר לְהוּ רַחֲמָנָא לִבְנֵי אַהֲרֹן רָאשֵׁיכֶם אַל תִּפְרָעוּ מִכְּלָל דְּכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא אָסוּר § The source for the halakha that it is prohibited for a mourner to receive a haircut is derived from the fact that the Merciful One states to the sons of Aaron: “Let not the hair of your heads go loose” (Leviticus 10:6). It was prohibited for them to let their hair grow long during their period of mourning over the death of their brothers, Nadav and Avihu. By inference, it is teaching that for everyone else, i.e., non-priests, it is prohibited to cut their hair during the period of mourning.