וְאֵלּוּ קְרָעִין שֶׁאֵין מִתְאַחִין הַקּוֹרֵעַ עַל אָבִיו וְעַל אִמּוֹ וְעַל רַבּוֹ שֶׁלִּימְּדוֹ תּוֹרָה וְעַל נָשִׂיא וְעַל אָב בֵּית דִּין וְעַל שְׁמוּעוֹת הָרָעוֹת וְעַל בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם וְעַל סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה שֶׁנִּשְׂרַף וְעַל עָרֵי יְהוּדָה וְעַל הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְעַל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם וְקוֹרֵעַ עַל מִקְדָּשׁ וּמוֹסִיף עַל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם And these are the rents of mourning that may never be properly mended: One who rends his garments for the death his father, or for his mother, or for his teacher who taught him Torah, or for the Nasi, or for the president of the court; or upon hearing evil tidings; or hearing God’s name being blessed, which is a euphemism for hearing God’s name being cursed; or when a Torah scroll has been burned; or upon seeing the cities of Judea that were destroyed or the destroyed Temple or Jerusalem in ruins. This is the way one conducts himself when approaching Jerusalem when it lies in ruin: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem.
אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ וְרַבּוֹ שֶׁלִּימְּדוֹ תּוֹרָה מְנָלַן דִּכְתִיב וֶאֱלִישָׁע רֹאֶה וְהוּא מְצַעֵק אָבִי אָבִי רֶכֶב יִשְׂרָאֵל וּפָרָשָׁיו אָבִי אָבִי זֶה אָבִיו וְאִמּוֹ רֶכֶב יִשְׂרָאֵל וּפָרָשָׁיו זֶה רַבּוֹ שֶׁלִּימְּדוֹ תּוֹרָה The Gemara elaborates upon the halakhot mentioned in this baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for his father, his mother, and his teacher who taught him Torah? As it is written with regard to the prophet Elijah, when he ascended to Heaven in a tempest: “And Elisha saw it, and he cried, My father, my father, the chariots of Israel and their horsemen” (II Kings 2:12). The Gemara interprets this verse as follows: “My father, my father”; this comes to teach that one must rend his garments for the death of his father or mother. “The chariots of Israel and their horsemen”; this comes to include also one’ teacher who taught him Torah.
מַאי מַשְׁמַע כְּדִמְתַרְגֵּם רַב יוֹסֵף רַבִּי רַבִּי דְּטָב לְהוֹן לְיִשְׂרָאֵל בִּצְלוֹתֵיהּ מֵרְתִיכִּין וּפָרָשִׁין The Gemara asks: From where may it be inferred that this is referring to one’s teacher? The Gemara explains: As the verse was translated by Rav Yosef: My teacher, my teacher, who was better for the protection of the Jewish people with his prayers than an army with chariots and horsemen.
וְלֹא מִתְאַחִין מְנָלַן דִּכְתִיב וַיַּחֲזֵק בִּבְגָדָיו וַיִּקְרָעֵם לִשְׁנַיִם קְרָעִים מִמַּשְׁמַע שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וַיִּקְרָעֵם אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ שֶׁלִּשְׁנַיִם אֶלָּא מְלַמֵּד שֶׁקְּרוּעִים וְעוֹמְדִים לִשְׁנַיִם לְעוֹלָם And from where do we derive that these rents are never to be properly mended? As it is written: “And he took hold of his own clothes, and rent them in two pieces” (II Kings 2:12). From the fact that it is stated: “And he rent them,” do I not know that he rent them in two pieces? Rather, when the verse adds that they were torn into two pieces, it teaches that they must remain torn in two pieces forever. Accordingly, this rent must never be properly mended.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אֵלִיָּהוּ חַי הוּא אֲמַר לֵיהּ כֵּיוָן דִּכְתִיב וְלֹא רָאָהוּ עוֹד לְגַבֵּי דִידֵיהּ כְּמֵת דָּמֵי Reish Lakish said to Rabbi Yoḥanan: But isn’t Elijah still alive? Why, then, did Elisha rend his garments for him? He said to him: Since it is written: “And he saw him no more” (II Kings 2:12), Elijah was considered dead from Elisha’s perspective, and so Elisha rent his clothing for him.
נָשִׂיא וְאַב בֵּית דִּין וּשְׁמוּעוֹת הָרָעוֹת מְנָלַן דִּכְתִיב וַיַּחֲזֵק דָּוִד בִּבְגָדָיו וַיִּקְרָעֵם וְגַם כׇּל הָאֲנָשִׁים אֲשֶׁר אִתּוֹ וַיִּסְפְּדוּ וַיִּבְכּוּ וַיָּצוּמוּ עַד הָעָרֶב עַל שָׁאוּל וְעַל יְהוֹנָתָן בְּנוֹ וְעַל עַם ה׳ וְעַל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי נָפְלוּ בֶּחָרֶב § From where do we derive that one must rend his clothing for the death of the Nasi or the president of the court and upon hearing evil bad tidings? As it is written, when David heard about the defeat of Israel and the death of Saul and his sons: “Then David took hold of his clothes, and rent them; and likewise all the men that were with him: And they mourned, and wept, and fasted until evening, for Saul and for Jonathan his son, and for the people of the Lord, and for the house of Israel; because they were fallen by the sword” (II Samuel 1:11–12).
שָׁאוּל זֶה נָשִׂיא יְהוֹנָתָן זֶה אַב בֵּית דִּין עַל עַם ה׳ וְעַל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל אֵלּוּ שְׁמוּעוֹת הָרָעוֹת The Gemara explains how the aforementioned halakhot are derived from the verse: “Saul”; this is a reference to the Nasi, as Saul was king of Israel. “Jonathan”; this is a reference to the president of the court. “For the people of the Lord, and for the house of the Israel”; these are a reference to evil tidings.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב בַּר שַׁבָּא לְרַב כָּהֲנָא וְאֵימָא עַד דְּהָווּ כּוּלְּהוּ אָמַר לֵיהּ עַל עַל הִפְסִיק הָעִנְיָן Rav bar Shaba said to Rav Kahana: But perhaps you can say that one need not rend his clothing until all these calamities occur together, and that rending clothing is performed only over a tragedy of this magnitude. He said to him: The repetition of the word “for”: “For Saul,” “for Jonathan,” and “for the people of the Lord” divides the matter and teaches that each individual misfortune is sufficient cause to rend one’s garments.
וּמִי קָרְעִינַן אַשְּׁמוּעוֹת הָרָעוֹת וְהָא אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ לִשְׁמוּאֵל קְטַל שַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא תְּרֵיסַר אַלְפֵי יְהוּדָאֵי בִּמְזִיגַת קֵסָרִי וְלָא קְרַע לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בְּרוֹב צִבּוּר וּכְמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה The Gemara asks: But do we actually rend our clothing upon hearing evil tidings? But didn’t they say to Shmuel: King Shapur killed twelve thousand Jews in Mezigat Caesarea, and Shmuel did not rend his clothing?The Gemara answers: They said that one must rend his clothing upon hearing evil tidings only in a case where the calamity involved the majority of the community of Israel and resembles the incident that occurred when Saul was killed and the entire nation of Israel suffered defeat.
וּמִי קְטַל שַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא יְהוּדָאֵי וְהָא אֲמַר לֵיהּ שַׁבּוּר מַלְכָּא לִשְׁמוּאֵל תֵּיתֵי לִי דְּלָא קְטַלִי יְהוּדִי מֵעוֹלָם הָתָם אִינְהוּ גָּרְמִי לְנַפְשַׁיְיהוּ דְּאָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי לְקָל יְתֵירֵי דִּמְזִיגַת קֵסָרִי פְּקַע שׁוּרָא דְלוּדְקִיָּא The Gemara tangentially asks: Did King Shapur really kill Jews? But didn’t King Shapur say to Shmuel: I have a blessing coming to me, for I have never killed a Jew? The Gemara answers: King Shapur never instigated the killing of Jews; there, however, they brought it upon themselves, as Rabbi Ami said in an exaggerated manner: Due to the noise of the harp strings of Mezigat Caesarea, the walls of Laodicea were breached, for the residents of the city celebrated when they rebelled against King Shapur. Because they rebelled against him and threatened his rule, he was forced to kill them.
עַל בִּרְכַּת הַשֵּׁם מְנָלַן דִּכְתִיב וַיָּבֹא אֶלְיָקִים בֶּן חִלְקִיָּה אֲשֶׁר עַל הַבַּיִת וְשֶׁבְנָא הַסּוֹפֵר וְיוֹאָח בֶּן אָסָף הַמַּזְכִּיר אֶל חִזְקִיָּהוּ קְרוּעֵי בְגָדִים § The Gemara continues its analysis of the baraita: From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon hearing God’s name being blessed, i.e., cursed? As it is written with regard to the blasphemous words said by Rab-shakeh: “Then came Eliakim, son of Hilkiya, who was over the household, and Shebna the scribe, and Joah, son of Asaph, the recorder, to Hezekiah with their clothes rent” (II Kings 18:37).
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן אֶחָד הַשּׁוֹמֵעַ וְאֶחָד הַשּׁוֹמֵעַ מִפִּי הַשּׁוֹמֵעַ חַיָּיב לִקְרוֹעַ וְהָעֵדִים אֵינָן חַיָּיבִין לִקְרוֹעַ שֶׁכְּבָר קָרְעוּ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁשָּׁמְעוּ The Sages taught a baraita with regard to this issue: Both one who actually hears the curse and one who hears from the mouth of the one who heard the curse are obligated to rend their garments. But the witnesses who testify against the person who uttered the blasphemy are not obligated to rend their clothing when they testify as to what they heard because they already rent their clothing when they heard the curse the first time.
בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁשָּׁמְעוּ מַאי הָוֵי הָא קָא שָׁמְעִי הַשְׁתָּא לָא סָלְקָא דַּעְתָּךְ דִּכְתִיב וַיְהִי כִּשְׁמוֹעַ הַמֶּלֶךְ חִזְקִיָּהוּ וַיִּקְרַע אֶת בְּגָדָיו הַמֶּלֶךְ קָרַע וְהֵם לֹא קָרְעוּ The Gemara asks: What difference does it make that they rent their garments when they heard the curse the first time? Didn’t they hear it again now? The Gemara rejects this argument: This will not enter your mind, as it is written: “And it came to pass, when King Hezekiah heard it, that he rent his clothes” (II Kings 19:1). This indicates that the king rent his garments, but those who reported the blasphemy to him did not rend theirs, as they had already rent their garments the first time.
וְלֹא מִתְאַחִין מְנָלַן אָתְיָא קְרִיעָה קְרִיעָה And from where do we derive that these rents may not be properly mended? This is derived by way of a verbal analogy between the verb rending used here with regard to Hezekiah and the verb rending used in the case of Elijah and Elisha.
סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה שֶׁנִּשְׂרַף מְנָלַן דִּכְתִיב וַיְהִי כִּקְרֹא יְהוּדִי שָׁלֹשׁ דְּלָתוֹת וְאַרְבָּעָה וְיִקְרָעֶהָ בְּתַעַר הַסּוֹפֵר וְהַשְׁלֵךְ אֶל הָאֵשׁ אֲשֶׁר אֶל הָאָח וְגוֹ׳ מַאי שָׁלֹשׁ דְּלָתוֹת וְאַרְבָּעָה § From where do we derive that one must rend his garments when a Torah scroll has been burned? As it is written: “And it came to pass, that when Jehudi had read three or four leaves, he would cut it with a penknife, and cast it into the fire that was in the brazier” (Jeremiah 36:23). With regard to the verse itself the Gemara asks: What is meant by “three or four leaves,” and why did he cut the book only at that point?
אֲמַרוּ לֵיהּ לִיהוֹיָקִים כָּתַב יִרְמְיָה סֵפֶר קִינוֹת אֲמַר לְהוּ מָה כְּתִיב בֵּיהּ אֵיכָה יָשְׁבָה בָּדָד אֲמַר לְהוּ אֲנָא מַלְכָּא אֲמַר לֵיהּ בָּכֹה תִבְכֶּה בַּלַּיְלָה אֲנָא מַלְכָּא גָּלְתָה יְהוּדָה מֵעוֹנִי אֲנָא מַלְכָּא דַּרְכֵי צִיּוֹן אֲבֵלוֹת אֲנָא מַלְכָּא The Gemara explains: They said to Jehoiakim: Jeremiah has written a book of Lamentations over the future downfall and destruction of Jerusalem. He said to them: What is written in it? They read him the first verse: “How does the city sit solitary” (Lamentations 1:1). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the second verse: “She weeps sore in the night” (Lamentations 1:2). He said to them: I am king, and this does not apply to me. They read him the third verse: “Judah is gone into exile due to affliction” (Lamentations 1:3). He said to them: I am king. They read to him: “The ways of Zion do mourn” (Lamentations 1:4). He said to them: I am king. These are the four leaves, or verses, that he read first.
הָיוּ צָרֶיהָ לְרֹאשׁ אֲמַר לְהוּ מַאן אַמְרַהּ כִּי ה׳ הוֹגָהּ עַל רוֹב פְּשָׁעֶיהָ מִיָּד קָדַר כׇּל אַזְכָּרוֹת שֶׁבָּהּ וּשְׂרָפָן בָּאֵשׁ וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב וְלֹא פָחֲדוּ וְלֹא קָרְעוּ אֶת בִּגְדֵיהֶם מִכְּלַל דִּבְעוֹ לְמִיקְרַע They read him an additional verse: “Her adversaries have become the chief” (Lamentations 1:5), i.e., the reigning king will be removed from power. Once he heard this, he said to them: Who said this? They said to him: This is the continuation of the verse: “For the Lord has afflicted her for the multitude of her transgressions” (Lamentations 1:5). Immediately, he cut out all the names of God from the book and burned them in fire. This is as it is written: “Yet they were not afraid, nor rent their garments, neither the king, nor any of his servants that heard all these words” (Jeremiah 36:24). By inference, this shows that they were required to rend their clothing when they saw this.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב פָּפָּא לְאַבָּיֵי אֵימַר מִשּׁוּם שְׁמוּעוֹת הָרָעוֹת אֲמַר לֵיהּ שְׁמוּעוֹת רָעוֹת בְּהָהִיא שַׁעְתָּא מִי הֲווֹ Rav Pappa said to Abaye: Perhaps you can say that they should have rent their garments due to the evil tidings contained in the scroll and not because of the destruction of the book? Abaye said to him: Were they evil tidings at that time? This was a prophecy and not an account of current events.
אָמַר רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ אָמַר רַב הוּנָא הָרוֹאֶה סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה שֶׁנִּקְרַע חַיָּיב לִקְרוֹעַ שְׁתֵּי קְרִיעוֹת אֶחָד עַל הַגְּוִיל וְאֶחָד עַל הַכְּתָב שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר אַחֲרֵי שְׂרוֹף הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶת הַמְּגִלָּה וְאֶת הַדְּבָרִים Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Rav Huna said: One who sees a Torah scroll that was torn is obligated to make two rents, one for the parchment that was damaged and one for the writing, as it is stated: “Then the word of the Lord came to Jeremiah, after the king had burned the scroll and the words” (Jeremiah 36:27). This implies that a separate rent must be made for each of them, both the parchment and the writing.
רַבִּי אַבָּא וְרַב הוּנָא בַּר חִיָּיא הָווּ יָתְבִי קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אַבָּא בְּעָא לְאִפַּנּוֹיֵי שַׁקְלֵיהּ לְטוֹטֶפְתֵּיהּ אַחֲתֵיהּ אַבֵּי סַדְיָא אֲתַאי בַּת נַעָמִיתָא בְּעַא לְמִיבְלְעֵיהּ It was related that Rabbi Abba and Rav Huna bar Ḥiyya were sitting before Rabbi Abba. Rabbi Abba needed to relieve himself. He removed his phylacteries from his head and placed them on the cushion on which he was sitting. An ostrich came and wanted to swallow the phylacteries.
אֲמַר הַשְׁתָּא כִּי חַיְּיבַן לִי שְׁתֵּי קְרִיעוֹת אֲמַר לֵיהּ מְנָא לָךְ הָא וְהָא בְּדִידִי הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא וַאֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב מַתְנָה וְלָא הֲוָה בִּידֵיהּ אֲתַאי לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַב יְהוּדָה וַאֲמַר לִי הָכִי אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא בִּזְרוֹעַ וּכְמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה He said: Now, had it succeeded to swallow it, I would have been obligated to make two rents. He said to him: From where do you derive this? There was an incident in which I was involved and I came before Rav Mattana asking what to do, but he did not have an answer readily available. I then came before Rav Yehuda, and he said to me: Shmuel said as follows: They said that one is obligated to rend his clothing only when a Torah scroll or some other sacred book is torn by force, and it resembles the incident that occurred with Jehoiakim.
עָרֵי יְהוּדָה מְנָלַן דִּכְתִיב וַיָּבֹאוּ אֲנָשִׁים מִשְּׁכֶם מִשִּׁילוֹ וּמִשֹּׁמְרוֹן שְׁמוֹנִים אִישׁ מְגוּלְּחֵי זָקָן וּקְרוּעֵי בְגָדִים וּמִתְגּוֹדְדִים וּמִנְחָה וּלְבוֹנָה בְּיָדָם לְהָבִיא בֵּית ה׳ וְגוֹ׳ § From where do we derive that one must rend his garments upon seeing the cities of Judea in ruin? As it is written: “There came certain men from Shechem, from Shiloh, and from Samaria, eighty people, their beards shaven, and their clothes rent, and having cut themselves, with offerings and incense in their hand, to bring to the house of the Lord” (Jeremiah 41:5). This indicates that they rent their garments upon seeing the destruction.
אָמַר רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ אָמַר עוּלָּא בִּירָאָה אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הָרוֹאֶה עָרֵי יְהוּדָה בְּחוּרְבָּנָן אוֹמֵר עָרֵי קׇדְשְׁךָ הָיוּ מִדְבָּר וְקוֹרֵעַ יְרוּשָׁלַיִם בְּחוּרְבָּנָהּ אוֹמֵר צִיּוֹן מִדְבָּר הָיָתָה יְרוּשָׁלִַם שְׁמָמָה וְקוֹרֵעַ בֵּית הַמִּקְדָּשׁ בְּחוּרְבָּנוֹ אוֹמֵר בֵּית קׇדְשֵׁנוּ וְתִפְאַרְתֵּנוּ אֲשֶׁר הִלְלוּךָ אֲבוֹתֵינוּ הָיָה לִשְׂרֵיפַת אֵשׁ וְכׇל מַחֲמַדֵּינוּ הָיָה לְחׇרְבָּה וְקוֹרֵעַ: Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Ulla Bira’a said that Rabbi Elazar said: One who sees the cities of Judea in their desolation says: “Your sacred cities are become a wilderness” (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees Jerusalem in its desolation says: “Zion is a wilderness, Jerusalem a desolation” (Isaiah 64:9), and then rends his garments. One who sees the Temple in its desolation says: “Our sacred and our beautiful house, where our fathers praised You, is burned with fire; and all our pleasant things are laid waste” (Isaiah 64:10), and then rends his garments.
קוֹרֵעַ עַל מִקְדָּשׁ וּמוֹסִיף עַל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם וּרְמִינְהוּ אֶחָד הַשּׁוֹמֵעַ וְאֶחָד הָרוֹאֶה כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ לְצוֹפִים קוֹרֵעַ וְקוֹרֵעַ עַל מִקְדָּשׁ בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וְעַל יְרוּשָׁלַיִם בִּפְנֵי עַצְמָהּ It was taught in the baraita: He first rends his garments for the Temple and then extends the rent for Jerusalem. And they raise a contradiction from another baraita that states: Both one who hears that Jerusalem is in ruin and one who sees the destruction, once he reaches Mount Scopus [Tzofim], rends his garments. And he rends his garments for the Temple separately and for Jerusalem separately.
לָא קַשְׁיָא הָא דְּפָגַע בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ בְּרֵישָׁא הָא דְּפָגַע בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּרֵישָׁא The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. This baraita, which states that instead of making a separate rent for Jerusalem one may extend the first rent that he had made for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached the Temple first, before seeing the rest of Jerusalem, and saw it in ruin. That baraita, which states that one must make separate rents for Jerusalem and for the Temple, is referring to the case where one reached Jerusalem first, and only afterward the Temple.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן וְכוּלָּן רַשָּׁאִין לְשׁוֹלְלָן וּלְמוֹלְלָן וּלְלוֹקְטָן וְלַעֲשׂוֹתָן כְּמִין סוּלָּמוֹת אֲבָל לֹא לְאַחוֹתָן § The Sages taught the following baraita: And all of these rents, one may tack them together with loose stitches, and hem them, and gather them, and fix them with imprecise ladder-like stitches. But one may not mend them with precise stitches.
אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא Rav Ḥisda said: