Rabbi Yoḥanan asked of Shmuel: Is there some mourning on Shabbat or is there no mourning on Shabbat at all? He said to him: There is no mourning on Shabbat at all.

The Sages sat before Rav Pappa and said in the name of Shmuel: A mourner who engaged in sexual relations during his days of mourning is liable to receive the death penalty at the hand of Heaven. Rav Pappa said to them: It was said that sexual relations are prohibited, but not that the offender is guilty of a capital crime. And the ruling was said in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan, and not in the name of Shmuel.

And if you heard a statement on this issue in the name of Shmuel, then you heard as follows: Rav Taḥlifa bar Avimi said that Shmuel said: A mourner who did not let his hair grow wild and did not rend his garments is liable to receive the death penalty at the hand of Heaven, as it is stated following the deaths of Nadab and Abihu concerning the surviving sons of Aaron: “Let not the hair of your heads go loose, neither rend your clothes, that you not die” (Leviticus 10:6). They were instructed not to mourn, so as not to interfere with the dedication of the Tabernacle. From here it may be deduced that any other mourner who did not let his hair grow wild or rend his clothes is liable to receive the death penalty.

Rafram bar Pappa said: A Sage taught in Evel Rabbati, a separate tractate devoted to the halakhot of mourning: A mourner is prohibited from engaging in sexual relations during his days of mourning. There was an incident with one who engaged in sexual relations during his days of mourning and he was punished, for after his death pigs dragged away his corpse.

Shmuel offered a mnemonic device with regard to the observance of mourning rites on Shabbat, and said: Peh, ḥet, zayin are obligatory. These letters combine to create a mnemonic standing for: Uncovering the head [periat rosh], reversing the torn garment [ḥazarat kera], and standing the bed upright [zekifat hamitta]. However, nun, tav, reish, which stand for: Wearing shoes [ne’ilat hasandal], marital relations [tashmish hamitta], and hand washing [reḥitzat yadayim], are optional.

This is explained: Uncovering the head, i.e., removing the head covering usually worn by a mourner; reversing the tear to the back, so that it will not be visible; and standing the bed upright in the usual position, so that it is not overturned, are all obligatory for the mourner to uphold in honor of Shabbat. However, wearing shoes, engaging in sexual relations, and washing one’s hands and feet in hot water in the evening are optional activities on Shabbat. If a mourner wishes to refrain from them he may do so. And Rav said: Uncovering the head is also an optional activity.

The Gemara asks: According to Shmuel, what is different about wearing shoes that it is optional? His reasoning presumably is that not everyone wears shoes at all times, and therefore not wearing shoes will not be perceived by others as a sign of mourning. If so, the same thing may be said about uncovering the head also, i.e., not everyone uncovers his head at all times, as some people always walk around with their heads wrapped. This, too, should not be seen as a clear display of mourning, and therefore uncovering one’s head should also be treated as optional.

The Gemara answers: Shmuel conforms to his standard line of reasoning, for Shmuel said: Any rending of garments that is not done at the time of the most intense grief, i.e., the time of death, is not considered proper rending of garments. And any wrapping of the head that is not done in the manner of the wrapping of the Ishmaelites, who wrap their heads on all sides, is not considered proper wrapping. Since Shmuel requires that a mourner wrap his head in this special manner, one who acts in this way on Shabbat openly displays his mourning, as people do not ordinarily wrap their heads in this manner. What is this wrapping? Rav Naḥman demonstrated the procedure by covering up his face to the sides of the beard, leaving only the center of his face exposed.

Rabbi Ya’akov said that Rabbi Yoḥanan said: They taught that a mourner is required to remove his head covering on Shabbat only when he has no shoes on his feet, so that he not appear too obviously to be in mourning. But if he has shoes on his feet, then his shoes prove that he is not observing the rites of mourning on Shabbat.

The Gemara returns to Shmuel’s statement that any rending of garments that is not done at the time of most intense grief and pain is not considered proper rending of garments. The Gemara poses a question: But when they said to Shmuel that Rav had passed away, he rent twelve garments on account of him, and said: The man of whom I was in fear, owing to his great learning, has gone and died. Similarly, when they told Rabbi Yoḥanan that Rabbi Ḥanina had passed away, he rent thirteen expensive wool [mileta] garments [itztelei] on account of him, and said: The man of whom I was in fear has gone. When each of these Sages received the news that their distinguished colleague had died, it was no longer the time of the most intense grief, i.e., the time of death, and yet they rent their garments.

The Gemara answers: The Sages are different. Since their teachings are mentioned all the time, every time they are mentioned is like the time of most intense grief, as the pain over their death is once again renewed.

Ravin bar Adda said to Rava: Your student, Rav Amram, said that it is taught in a baraita as follows: For all seven days of mourning, a mourner must keep the tear in his garment before him so that it will be seen. And if he comes to change clothing, he changes and rends the new garment. On Shabbat, he turns the tear to his back, and if he comes to change clothing, he changes but does not tear the second garment. From here it seems that there is an obligation to rend garments during the entire week of mourning, not only at the most intense moment of grief.

The Gemara answers: When that baraita is taught, it is referring to the specific case of rending one’s garment in honor of his father or mother. Owing to the special honor due to one’s parents, it is inappropriate for the child to wear a garment that is not torn. Consequently, if he changes clothing, he must tear the new garment, even if it is no longer the most intense time of grief.

The Gemara asks: Those additional tears that are made in honor of one’s father or mother, may they be properly mended at the end of the son’s period of mourning, or may they not be properly mended, like the tear made for one’s father or mother at the most intense moment of grief? The Gemara answers: They disagree about this issue, the father of Rav Oshaya and bar Kappara. One said: They may not be mended, and one said: They may be mended.

The Gemara comments: Conclude that it was Rav Oshaya’s father who said that such rents may not be properly mended, for Rav Oshaya said: Such rents may not be properly mended. From whom did he hear this halakha? Was it not from his father? The Gemara rejects this argument: No, this cannot be offered as a proof, as perhaps he heard it from bar Kappara, who was his teacher.

§ Rava said: A mourner may walk about his house in a torn robe [unkali] on Shabbat, since he is not doing so in public. It was related that Abaye found Rav Yosef walking back and forth in his house on Shabbat when he was in mourning with a scarf spread over his head in the manner of mourning. He said to him: Master, do you not maintain that there is no mourning on Shabbat? He said to him: This is what Rabbi Yoḥanan said: Matters that are in private apply, and so when one is in his house he must observe the rites of mourning even on Shabbat.

§ The mishna taught: Rabbi Eliezer says: Since the Temple was destroyed, Shavuot is like Shabbat with regard to mourning. Rabban Gamliel says: Even Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur are considered like Festivals. The Gemara comments that Rav Giddel bar Menashya said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabban Gamliel.

And some teach this ruling of Rav Giddel bar Menashya as referring to the following case: It is taught in a baraita: Within the first thirty days after birth, an infant that dies is taken out for burial in one’s bosom, that is to say, he is carried to his grave in one’s arms, not in a coffin. And he is buried by one woman and two men, there being no need for a quorum of ten men. But he should not be taken out by one man and two women, because it is prohibited for one man to seclude himself with two women.