ואי אמרת קטן אית ביה פלוגתא נמצאת אבילות נוהגת בקטן
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.
והתניא מקרעין לקטן מפני עגמת נפש
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.
אמר רב אשי מי קתני הא אסורין דלמא יש מהן אסור ויש מהן מותר
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.
אמימר ואי תימא רב שישא בריה דרב אידי מתני הכי אמר שמואל קטן מותר לגלחו במועד לא שנא נולד במועד ולא שנא נולד מעיקרא
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.
אמר רב פנחס אף אנן נמי תנינא כל אלו שאמרו מותר לגלח במועד מותר לגלח בימי אבלו הא אסורין לגלח במועד אסורין לגלח בימי אבלו
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.
אי אמרת קטן אסור נמצאת אבילות נוהגת בקטן ותניא מקרעין לקטן מפני עגמת נפש
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.
אמר רב אשי מי קתני הא אסורין דלמא יש מהן אסור ויש מהן מותר
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.
אבל אינו נוהג אבילותו ברגל שנאמר (דברים טז, יד) ושמחת בחגך
§ 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).
אי אבילות דמעיקרא הוא אתי עשה דרבים ודחי עשה דיחיד ואי אבילות דהשתא הוא לא אתי עשה דיחיד ודחי עשה דרבים
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.
מנודה מהו שינהוג נידויו ברגל אמר רב יוסף תא שמע דנין דיני נפשות ודיני מכות ודיני ממונות ואי לא ציית דינא משמתינן ליה
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.
ואי סלקא דעתך אינו נוהג נידויו ברגל משומת ואתי מעיקרא אתי רגל דחי ליה השתא משמתינן ליה אנן
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.
א"ל אביי ודלמא לעיוני בדיניה דאי לא תימא הכי דיני נפשות דקתני ה"נ דקטלין ליה
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?
והא קא מימנעי משמחת יום טוב דתניא ר"ע אומר מנין לסנהדרין (שראו בא') שהרגו את הנפש שאין טועמין כל אותו היום ת"ל (ויקרא יט, כו) לא תאכלו על הדם
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.
אלא לעיוני בדיניה ה"נ לעיוני בדיניה א"ל אם כן נמצאת מענה את דינו
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.
אתו מצפרא ומעייני בדיניה ועיילי ואכלי ושתו כולי יומא והדר אתו בשקיעת החמה וגמרינן לדיניה וקטלו ליה
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.
אמר אביי ת"ש ומנודה שהתירו לו חכמים
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.
אמר רבא מי קתני שהתירוהו חכמים שהתירו לו חכמים קתני דאזל ופייסיה לבעל דיניה ואתי קמי דרבנן ושרו ליה
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.
מצורע מהו שינהיג צרעתו ברגל אמר אביי תא שמע והנזיר והמצורע מטומאתו לטהרתו הא בימי טומאתו נהיג
§ 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.
לא מיבעיא קאמר לא מיבעיא בימי טומאתו דלא נהיג אבל לטהרתו ניגזור שמא ישהה קרבנותיו קמ"ל
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.
אמר רבא ת"ש (ויקרא יג, מה) והצרוע לרבות כהן גדול והא כה"ג דכל השנה כרגל לכולי עלמא דמי דתנן כהן גדול מקריב אונן ואינו אוכל שמע מינה נוהג צרעתו ברגל שמע מינה
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.
אבל אסור בתספורת מדקאמר להו רחמנא לבני אהרן (ויקרא י, ו) ראשיכם אל תפרעו מכלל דכולי עלמא אסור
§ 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.