Siman 364שס״ד
1 א

איסור הנאה של קבר והאבן והבנין. ובו ז' סעיפים:
אקבר של בנין אסור בהנאה אבל קרקע עולם של קבר אינו נאסר: הגה וי"א דהקרקע שלקחו מן הקבר וחזרו ונתנו עליו בדהוי תלוש ולבסוף חברו אסור בהנאה (טור בשם הר"ר ישעיה) גויש אוסרים עוד לישב על האבן שנותנין על הקבר למצבה (גם זו בשמו וכ"כ הגהות אשיר"י בשם אור זרוע פ' אלו מגלחין) ויש חולקים ומתירין (טור בשם הרא"ש) הכלים שחופרין וקוברים בהם מותרים בהנאה ואין להשתמש בהן אלא מדעת הגבאי כמו בשאר צדקה (תשובת הרשב"א סימן צ"ז) : והא דקבר של בנין אסור לעולם דוקא שבנאו לשם מת ונתנו בו אפי' על דעת לפנותו ואפילו לא נתן בו אלא נפל אבל אם בנאו לשמו ולא נתנו בו מותר וכן אם נתנו בו אדעתא לפנותו ולא הזמינו מתחלה מותר לאחר שפינהו אבל אם נתנו בו על דעת להיות בו עולמית אסור אפי' לאחר שפינהו אפי' לא בנאו לשמו ואם לא בנאו לשמו ונתנוהו בתוכו והוסיף בו דימוס (פירוש נדבך והוא שורת בנין החומה) לשמו כולו אסור אפילו לאחר שפינהו ואפילו שקברו שם על דעת לפנותו ואם מכיר הדימוס שהוסיף לשמו מסירו והוא לבדו אסור ושאר הקבר מותר:

A built grave is forbidden for profitable use, but natural1Lit. ‘world.’ earth of a grave is not forbidden.2San. 47b regarding the earth of Rab’s grave. This is derived (ibid.) from, ‘And he cast the dust thereof (i.e., of the Ashera) upon the graves of the common people’ (II Kings XXIII, 6) whence we learn that the graves of the common people are compared to idols. And just as idols are not prohibited when they are attached, as it is written, ‘Ye shall utterly destroy all the places wherein the nations that ye are to dispossess served their gods, upon the high mountains’ (Deut. XII, 2), i.e., their gods which are upon the high mountains (are forbidden for use), but not the mountains which themselves are their gods, — so too, whatever belongs to the dead, i.e., attached, is not prohibited. However, a built grave is not considered attached to the soil, and as in the case of detached idols, is prohibited (v. supra § 145, 3). Meg. 29a and infra § 363, 1, according to which even natural soil of burial grounds is forbidden for profitable use and consequently contradicts the present ruling. B.Hillel therefore, explains that in our case (Gemara San. ibid.) where it is reported that Samuel permitted people to take earth from Rab’s grave and apply it as a remedy on the first day of an attack of fever, we deal with natural soil taken from a grave and applied as a remedy only, which is permissible; whereas in the other passage (Gemara Meg. ibid.) the natural soil was not used for a remedial purpose, and consequently, is forbidden for profitable use, not because legally this is so, but rather because this is considered disrespectful treatment of the dead. Cf. also Mord. Meg. ibid. Gloss: Some say3Hag. Asheri M.K. that the earth which they removed4Lit. ‘they took.’ from the grave and then placed it back upon him [the dead person], which is [then] regarded as an object [originally] loose that one subsequently attached is forbidden for profitable use.5Tur on the authority of R. IsaiahG. What is natural soil? — One who hews a grotto in a rock that was never detached (Tur). The sides of the grave and the bottom are certainly not forbidden. The example of the grotto is cited in order to emphasize that even the earth above it is not prohibited but is regarded as natural soil — ShaK. A.H. elucidates the ruling here as follows: An object originally loose and subsequently attached (תלוש ולבסוף חברו) is forbidden only if it was removed from one place and attached in another place, as in the case of idols. For this reason a built grave is forbidden for use. Not so, however, in the case of earth which was dug out for burial purposes and then put back into the same grave. In the latter case it should be considered ‘natural soil’ contra R. Isaiah and in agreement with those authorities who permit (v. infra Isserles). Furthermore, some prohibit to sit on the stone that is placed upon the grave as a monument;6Tur on the authority of R. Isaiah. Thus also Hag. Asheri in the name of Or Zaru‘a M.K. III — G. This is considered ‘an object originally loose and subsequently attached,’ and refers as stated here, only to the stone placed on the grave proper. But the tombstone that is placed at the side of the grave is permissible for use. A.H. It is forbidden to sell a broken tombstone or to lean on a tombstone or to tread upon graves — ShaK. Two reasons are advanced for this prohibition, a) it is forbidden for profitable use, b) it is disrespectful to the dead — P.Tesh. Cf. also G.Mah. and some differ with [this ruling] and permit.7Twr on the authority of AsheriG. supra n. 5. Cf. B.B. 101a, RaShBaM s.v. קמיתדשי according to which temporary treading upon graves in order to reach another place on the cemetery, is permitted. Old tombstones may be used for other dead, but are forbidden for profitable use. supra n. 6. The implements wherewith they dig [graves] and bury [the dead] are permitted for profitable use, and one is permitted to make use of them only with the knowledge of the communal manager as in all other [cases of public] charity.8RaShBA Resp. 97 — G. supra § 349. This [ruling viz.,] that a built grave is prohibited [for profitable use] forever, [applies only when one built it for the sake of a dead person and [also] placed him9The dead person. therein,10In accord with San. 48a that both designation and the material act are required. even [if done] with the intention to remove him9The dead person. [later];11In accord with the interpretation of N to San. ibid. s.v. אעג דפנייה i.e., the prohibition remains in force even if the corpse was later removed therefrom. supra § 363, and even if one placed therein a prematureborn child; but if one built it for his9The dead person. sake and did not place him9The dead person. therein, it is permitted [for profitable use]. Likewise, if he placed him9The dead person. therein with the intention to remove him [later], but did not designate it [for the dead] from the beginning, it is permitted [for profitable use] after he removed him9The dead person. [therefrom].12San. ibid. However13Lit. ‘but.’ if he placed him therein with the intention that he remain14Lit. ‘be.’ there forever, it is prohibited [for profitable use] even after he removed him [therefrom; and] even [if] he did not build it for his9The dead person. sake.15San. ibid. The very fact that his intention is to place the corpse therein forever constitutes ‘designation’ which coincides with ‘the material act’ of placing the corpse therein — A.H. And if he did not build it for his9The dead person. sake, and he9The dead person. was placed therein and he added a single row of stones, i.e., a layer, viz., a row of [stones] in the wall structure for his9The dead person. sake, the entire [structure] is prohibited [for profitable use]16Since it is unknown which row was added. even after he removed him, and even if he buried him therein with the intention to remove him [later].15San. ibid. The very fact that his intention is to place the corpse therein forever constitutes ‘designation’ which coincides with ‘the material act’ of placing the corpse therein — A.H. If he recognizes the row of stones that he added for his9The dead person. sake, he removes it and it alone is prohibited, but the rest of the grave is permissible [for profitable use].15San. ibid. The very fact that his intention is to place the corpse therein forever constitutes ‘designation’ which coincides with ‘the material act’ of placing the corpse therein — A.H.

2 ב

קבר הנמצא דמותר לפנותו פינהו מקומו טהור הומותר בהנאה וקבר הידוע אסור לפנותו פינהו זמקומו טמא ואסור בהנאה חוהרמב"ם גורס קבר הנמצא מותר לפנותו טפינהו מקומו טמא ואסור בהנאה קבר הידוע אסור לפנותו פינהו מקומו טהור ומותר בהנאה:

A grave that has been discovered17One in which the corpse was buried without the consent of the owner of the ground. may be cleared;18We do not say that perhaps a Meth Miẓwah (v. Glos.) was buried therein who takes possession of his place (v. infra par. 3), for if this were so, the matter would have been known (San. 47b). after it is cleared, the place thereof is [levitically] clean19Since the corpse was buried therein without the consent of the owner of the ground, he does not take possession of his place. and is permitted for use.20For a person cannot prohibit something which does not belong to him (Pes. 90a. Yeb. 66b). We deal here with a ‘built grave,’ for if it refers to ‘natural soil’ of a grave, it would not be prohibited in any case (v. supra par. 1) — ShaK. A known grave21In which one was buried with the owner’s consent. may not be cleared; if it has been cleared, the place thereof is unclean and forbidden for use.22San. 47b. This was a Rabbinical precautionary measure against unwarranted removal of bones. Maimonides' [version] reads: A grave that has been discovered may be cleared; after it is cleared, the place thereof23‘The place thereof’ refers to the surrounding parts of the field where more bones may be discovered. is unclean and forbidden for use. A known grave may not be cleared; if it has been cleared, the place thereof is [levitically] clean24Since it is known that no other graves are found in the environs. and permitted for use.25Yad, Tumath Meth VIII, 5 ( Kes. Mish. a.l.) derived from Y.Naz. IX, 3(57d). Cf. Tosef(Z). Ohol. XVI, 9.

3 ג

מת מצוה שמצאו אדם בשדה וקברו שם אפילו שלא מדעת בעל השדה אסור לפנותו שמת מצוה קונה מקומו יוכל המוצאו צריך לקברו במקום שמצאו ואם מצאו על המצר שצריך לפנותו משם מפני הרבים שלא יאהילו עליו אם מצאו בין שדה בור (פיר' שאינה חרושה וזרועה) לשדה ניר (פירוש ניר נחרש ולא נזרע) מפנהו לשדה בור בין שדה ניר לשדה זרע מפנהו לשדה ניר בין שדה זרע לשדה אילן מפנהו לשדה זרע בין שדה אילן לשדה כרם מפנהו לשדה אילן ואם שתיהן שוות מפנהו לקרוב שבהם ואם שתיהן שוות בקירוב מפנהו לאיזהו מהם שירצה בד"א במצאו חוץ לתחום אבל אם מצאו בתוך התחום מביאו לבית הקברות ואינו נקרא מת מצוה אא"כ מצא ראשו ורובו:

A Meth Mizwah26 Glos. whom one found in a field and buried him therein even without the knowledge of the owner of the field,27Derived from San. ibid. is forbidden to be cleared away, for a Meth Mizwah takes possession of his place, and when one finds him he must bury him on the spot wherein he found him.28One of the ten enactments laid down by Joshua upon entering the Land of Israel was that a Meth Miẓwah should be buried in whatever spot he is found (B.K. 81a-b; ‘Er. 17a; Sot. 45b and cf. San. 47b). Nowadays this law is no longer applicable and we follow the law of the land — TaZ, ShaK, A.H. If he found him [lying broadways] across a narrow path29Obstructing the way so that people passing by are compelled to step over the corpse. he must remove him therefrom on account of the public, so that they should not convey uncleanness by overshadowing him.30So as not to cause defilement to Priests and those who abserve levitical purity through overshadowing or forming a shelter over the corpse. Cf. Ohol. III, 1 seq. If he found him between an uncultivated field, i.e., one that is unplanted and unsown and a fallow field, i.e., one that was ploughed but unsown, — he removes him to the uncultivated field;31In order to reduce the damage as much as possible. [if] between a fallow field and a field with seed, he removes him to the fallow field;32B.K. 81b and ‘Er. 17b in accord with R. Bibi. [if] between a field with seed and a tree-planted field, he removes him to the field with seed; if betwwen a tree-planted field and a vineyard field, he removes him to the tree-planted field; but if both [fields] are equal he removes him to the nearer one; and if both are equal in nearness, he may remove [him] to whichever one he prefers.33Sem(H). IV, 18; Y.Naz. VII, 1(56b). The latter source adds: ‘If found between a tree-planted field and a vineyard, he should remove him to the vineyard.’ Thus Yad, Tumath Meth VIII, 7 and Sefer Ha-Eshkol. When does this apply? — [If he found him] outside the [cemetery]34Thus A.H. limits, but if he found him within the [cemetery]34Thus A.H. limits he conveys him to the cemetery.35Y.Naz. VII, 1(55d-56a-b). Thus also in Sem. ibid. according to the version of N in T.H. Not found in cur. ed. of Sem ( Baraithoth Ebel Rabbathi IV, p. 245). He is designated a Meth Mizwah only if he found his head and the larger portion [of his body].36Y.Naz. ibid. and Sem. in accord with version of N. Needless to say that the law of Meth Miẓwah applies only if the head and the larger portion of the body were found intact. With respect to the head if found in one place and the body in another, v. Mishna Sot. 45b and Gemara ibid.

4 ד

אם מצאו ישראל הרוג יקברוהו כמו שמצאוהו בלא תכריכין ולא יחלצו בו אפילו מנעליו: הגה וכן עושין ליולדת שמתה יאאו למי שנפל ומת (מהרי"ל סימן ס"ה) וי"א שמלבישין אותם למעלה מבגדיהם תכריכין (הגהמי"י בשם ר"י מדורא) ונהגו שאין עושין להם תכריכין כשאר מתים רק קוברין אותן בבגדיהם ולמעלה מהם סדין כשאר מתים:

If they found a slain Israelite, they may bury him [in the same condition] as they found him, [viz.,] without shrouds, and they do not even remove his shoes.37B.Yos. Gloss: Thus they do [with respect] to a woman in confinement who died, or regarding a person who fell down38E.g., from a roof top. and died.39MaHaRIL s. 65 — G. If there was bleeding, the Tohorah (v. Glos.) should not be performed, for the blood which also requires burial (v. infra) will thereby be removed. The dead person should therefore be buried in his clothes. This applies only if the person died while wearing his clothes, but if after suffering a fall, the person was confined to bed and died some days later, after his clothes were removed, and there was no bleeding, the Tohorah is performed and the corpse is wrapped in shrouds as usual. There is however, a distinction to be made between the case of one who fell from a roof top and one who was murdered. In the latter case, even if the blood flow had ceased when the corpse was found, he is buried in the condition he was found in order ‘to raise our anger’ and possibly avenge the slain person; whereas in the former case where the person fell from a roof top, this is not applicable. Similarly, in the case of a woman who died in confinement, and the blood flow still continues, we bury her in the garments she wore at the time of death. But if death occurred some days or weeks later, at which time the blood flow had already ceased, we deal with her as with other dead and bury her in shrouds. A further reason for burying a slain person in his clothes is that there is fear that at least a fourth of a Log (v. Glos.) of blood that escaped, — the smallest quantity required to sustain life, — is absorbed in the clothes. Hence, he should be buried in his clothes. For the very same reason even the shoes should not be removed, since there may be a similar quantity absorbed in them. Even the earth surrounding him, which absorbed blood, should be buried. The same principle would therefore apply to one who fell from a roof top, or in the case of a house which collapsed upon a person, or a confinement case, where there was a flow of blood, and consequently there is an absorption thereof in the garments, — in all these cases, since there is an absorption of blood in the garments, — they should be buried with the corpse. This would not apply to one who froze to death or was drowned, for since there was no flow of bloood, they are buried in shrouds as usual — MaHaRIL (ibid.), TaZ and ShaK. P.Tesh. Some say that they wrap them over their garments [with] shrouds.40Hag. Maim. on the authority of R. Isaac b. Meir DuerenG. The accepted practice is that one makes no shrouds for them as [for] other dead, but one buries them in their garments over which [they place] a sheet as [in the case] of other dead.

5 ה

קבר המזיק את הרבים כגון שהוא סמוך לדרך אפילו נקבר שם מדעת בעל השדה מותר לפנותו ומקומו טהור יבואסור בהנאה אם קדם הקבר אבל אם קדם הדרך מקומו יגמותר בהנאה:

A grave which injures the public, e.g., it is close to the [public] road,41San. 47b. It thereby causes defilement to all passers-by. even if he was buried therein with the knowledge of the owner of the field, may be cleared,42Since this ruling follows the ruling (San. ibid.) of a ‘known grave’ (v. supra par. 2), it follows that in this case even if the owner’s consent was obtained, it may be cleared. Hence, Caro’s ruling — W.G. but is prohibited for use,43The injury caused to the public does not warrant a decree of impurity to the place thereof, but it is forbidden for profitable use, since the prohibition is Biblical, and does not lapse even after the corpse is removed. This refers to a ‘built grave’ (v. supra par. 1 and notes) — TaZ [provided] the grave was there first;44Derived from Y.Naz. IX, 3(57d). but if the road was there first, the place thereof is permitted for use.45On the principle that a person cannot prohibit that which does not belong to him. In this case the road belongs to the public — ShaK.

6 ו

קבר שפינהו היכא דמותר בהנאה ידלא יעשנו בית התבן ולא בית העצים ולא בית האוצרות:

A grave which one cleared, where it is permitted for use,46E.g., if the corpse was buried therein without the owner’s consent. one may not make of it a shed for straw,47Sem. adds: ‘or a stall.’ or a shed for wood or a storehouse.48Sem(H). XIII, 9; Mord. M.K. III end. These are prohibited because of disrespect to one’s father who was buried therein. However, a dwelling would not be regarded disrespectful — A.H.

7 ז

החוצב קבר לאביו וקברו במקום אחר טולא יקבר בו הוא עולמית משום כבוד אביו אבל אחר מותר ליקבר בו:

One who hews a grave for his [dead] father and [then] buried him elsewhere, may himself never be buried therein, on account of his father's honour,49San. 48a. supra § 240, 9. Even ‘natural soil’ is considered forbidden in this case — ShaK. On account of one’s father mere designation prohibits. supra n. 10. but another [person] is permitted to be buried therein.50 San. 47b, Tosaf. s.v. איתביה. N writes that this accords with Abaye; according to Raba it would be prohibited to everyone. supra § 349 and notes. All relatives excluding the sons and daughters are permitted to be buried therein. The same ruling applies to the tombstone — A.H.