The halacha is only pure rakov (corpse) dust is m'tamei in an ohel. Rashi on the top of amud bais (Gangilon) states that just like if a corpse is buried w/ something that is normal to decompose (e.g. buriel shrouds) it nullifies the corpse dust, so to if it is originally pure corpse dust - when buried "k'hilchaso" (i.e. naked). is that the ikkur din to bury a meis w/out tachrichin (buriel shrouds)
Ari Fisch, Brooklyn USA
1. The Teshuvas Seridei Esh (2:100, page 644, in his Kuntres about moving bones of the deceased, #33) addresses a question from someone who wanted to suggest that the custom in the time of Chazal was to bury the corpse naked. The Seridei Esh replied that this is not the case, and he cites the Gemara in Moed Katan (27b) that states that before the time of Raban Gamliel they used to bury the dead in expensive clothing, which was a heavy burden on the family of the deceased. Raban Gamliel made light of his own honor and ordered that he be buried in simple linen garments. The Seridei Esh writes that the Mishnah in Ohalos (2:1) -- that teaches that Melo Tarvad Rekev is Metamei -- is discussing a scenario in which it so happened that the Mes was buried naked in a glass or marble coffin, but this is not the normal practice.
2. See also Pischei Teshuvah (YD 369:4) who writes in the name of the Chasam Sofer that it is unusual that the Mes should be buried naked in a marble coffin.
3. There is no proof from Rashi in Nidah (27b, DH Gangilon), which you cite, that the Ikar Din is that one should bury the corpse naked. On the contrary, "Nikbar k'Hilchaso" means that he was buried with shrouds and afterwards become Rekev when the body disintegrated. The Tachrichin that are now mixed together with the Mes are Mevatel it, and, therefore, according to Rebbi Shimon, the Rekev is not Tamei.
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
Thank you for the response. I was unclear re: the final point. You responded that there is no proof from Rashi in Nidah (27b, DH Gangilon) and you wrote, "On the contrary, "Nikbar k'Hilchaso" means that he was buried with shrouds and afterwards become Rekev when the body disintegrated. The Tachrichin that are now mixed together with the Mes are Mevatel it,
and, therefore, according to Rebbi Shimon, the Rekev is not Tamei." However unless I am mistaken the Gemorah's point was that just as if a meis is buried w/ a "davar acher" and that daver acher is m'vatel the rekev, so to (and this is R' Shimon's point) if you have pure corpse dust and only afterwards mix in a daver acher, this daver acher will still be m'vatel the corpse dust. It is on this point (I thought) that Rashi makes the comment that what is "af sofo" this is a situation where a body is buried k'hilchso and the daver acher is mixed in afterwards (i.e. it is pure corpse dust - which the gemorah right afterwards explains that the way you get rekev is by burying the body naked in a coffin of marble or on a floor of stone). It is this kvurah, which yields Rekev that Rashi seems to call "nikbar k'hilchaso." and a kvurakh that yields Rekev is one in which the niftar is buried naked.
Sincerly,
Ari Fisch
Ari, thank you very much for pointing out my mistake. My apologies.
1. A colleague of mine offered a very simple explanation for what Rashi means, "keshe'Nikbar k'Hilchaso" and it sounds accurate. "K'Hilchaso" means according to the Halachos of a corpse which has Rekev, i.e. it was buried naked in a marble coffin or on a stone floor. According to this, when Rashi writes "k'Hilchaso" he does not mean that the Halachah states that one must bury the dead in this way, but rather that in order to have the Din of Rekev that is Metamei, one must bury it according to these conditions. However, if one did not bury it naked, it is also a Halchically acceptable way of burial, as we see frequently in Chazal that the Mes was buried with clothing.
2. However, I found that the Chidushei ha'Rashba (slightly later in the Sugya on 27b, DH Ha d'Amrinan Malei Tarvad v'Od Afar) writes, "They used to bury all their dead without garments on a floor of stone." According to this, perhaps one could say that Rashi means that the Halachah states that one must bury without clothes. However, the Rashba's statement seems to be very surprising, and it seems to be contradicted by many statements in the Gemara which say that they did bury in clothing. Some of these sources I mentioned in my last reply, and I can add a few sources from Nidah that we have learned recently in Dafyomi. On 20a, we learned how Rebbi Yanai expressed which clothes he should be buried in, and on 37a we learned that Shila told his wife to prepare shrouds for him.
3. Further study is necessary in order to understand what the Rashba means. In the meantime, I looked around further and have found more sources that state that one may bury the dead naked:
a. In a verse in Iyov (1:21), Iyov says, "I came out naked from my mother's stomach and I will return naked." This suggests that the corpse may be buried naked.
b. The Gemara in Shabbos (end of 14a) cites Rav Parnach in the name of Rebbi Yochanan that someone who holds a Sefer Torah naked (i.e., he holds the Sefer Torah directly with his bare hands without any cloth separating between his hands and the scroll) will be buried naked. The Gemara asks: "Could one think that he will be buried naked?!" The Ritva there gives a novel explanation and says that it is not a big punishment to be buried naked, for it is an atonement as is said, "And to the dust you will return" (Bereshis 3:19). The Ritva understands that it is an atonement to return directly to the earth without anything separating between the body and the earth, so Rav Parnach could not mean that being buried naked is a punishment. Since there are in fact advantages in this form of burial, this could not be a punishment for the lack of respect shown to the Sefer Torah by holding it without any intermediary. We see from the Ritva that there is nothing wrong with being buried naked.
c. On the basis of 1 and 2 above, the Or Same'ach (Hilchos Avel (Semachos) 14:21) writes that it is permitted to bury the dead naked without "Tachrichin."
d. These sources appear to support the Rashba that we mentioned earlier, who says that they used to bury all their dead without garments on a stone floor. While we still have not explained fully the fact that in many places Chazal mention that the dead were buried in clothing, as we have seen, nevertheless perhaps we may suggest that there were different customs at different times of Chazal. While I do not yet know whether we can say that me'Ikar ha'Din one should bury naked as you suggested initially, nevertheless I think we may say that what Rashi writes in Nidah (beginning of 27b) -- that burial naked is Nikbar k'Hilchaso -- can be explained not necessarily that one is obligated to bury naked but at least there is nothing in Halachah against doing so.
Ari, I thank you again for drawing our attention to this very important Inyan (and also for not letting me get away with my initial reply!).
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom
I looked around further and have found more sources that state that one may bury the dead naked.
1. In a verse in Iyov (1:21), Iyov says, "I came out naked from my mother's stomach and I will return naked." This suggests that the corpse may be buried naked.
2. The Gemara in Shabbos (end of 14a) cites Rav Parnach in the name of Rebbi Yochanan that someone who holds a Sefer Torah naked (i.e., he holds the Sefer Torah directly with his bare hands without any cloth separating between his hands and the scroll) will be buried naked. The Gemara asks: "Could one think that he will be buried naked?!" The Ritva there gives a novel explanation and says that it is not a big punishment to be buried naked, for it is an atonement as is said, "And to the dust you will return" (Bereshis 3:19). The Ritva understands that it is an atonement to return directly to the earth without anything separating between the body and the earth, so Rav Parnach could not mean that being buried naked is a punishment. Since there are in fact advantages in this form of burial, this could not be a punishment for the lack of respect shown to the Sefer Torah by holding it without any intermediary. We see from the Ritva that there is nothing wrong with being buried naked.
3. On the basis of 1 and 2 above, the Or Same'ach (Hilchos Avel (Semachos) 14:21) writes that it is permitted to bury the dead naked without "Tachrichin."
4. These sources appear to support the Rashba that we mentioned earlier, who says that they used to bury all their dead without garments on a stone floor. While we still have not explained fully the fact that in many places Chazal mention that the dead were buried in clothing, as we have seen, nevertheless perhaps we may suggest that there were different customs at different times of Chazal. While I do not yet know whether we can say that me'Ikar ha'Din one should bury naked as you suggested initially, nevertheless I think we may say that what Rashi writes in Nidah (beginning of 27b) -- that burial naked is Nikbar k'Hilchaso -- can be explained not necessarily that one is obligated to bury naked but at least there is nothing in Halachah against doing so.
Ari, I thank you again for drawing our attention to this very important Inyan (and also for not letting me get away with my initial reply!).
Kol Tuv,
Dovid Bloom