Siman 372

Beit haPeras is a rabbinic impurity. And this is a field in which a grave was lost, or a field in which a grave was plowed – it conveys impurity up to one hundred amot. And likewise, to depart from Eretz Yisrael to outside the Land in ancient times, as I wrote in siman 369. And the sages permitted going there for the sake of a mitzvah, such as to marry a woman or to study Torah, and he has no other way – he may pass through there even if he finds opportunity to study in another place, for one does not merit to learn from every person. And likewise, they may comfort a mourner, to go through there to comfort him, or to visit the sick. And likewise, to litigate with an extortionist and to contest with him, because it is like one who rescues from his hand. And likewise, anything similar to this.

And know that there is one who wishes to say that tumah that travels through a space of a "poteach tefach" is a rabbinic tumah. And likewise, this rule of "the end of the tumah is to exit" is only rabbinic (Shach, subsection 2). And these are astonishing matters, for in the entire Shas and the poskim it appears explicitly that all the laws of tumah are a Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai. And that which Rashi wrote in Beitzah 10a, the Tosafot Yom Tov has already explained in the seventh chapter of Ohalot that his intention was Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai, as Rashi himself wrote in Eruvin 68a. And what the Shach wrote, that it is so in the Tur—I do not know, and also some of the great authorities followed the Shach. And in my humble opinion, it is clear that it is a Halacha LeMoshe MiSinai, and their law is as a Torah law. Examine carefully and you will find it simple.

The Tur wrote that for this reason our sages, of blessed memory, permitted in Berakhot (Berakhot 19b) to skip over the coffins of graves to go out toward a king, because this is a rabbinic impurity. And they permitted it because of the honor of a king, for since most coffins have within them an opening of a tefach—there is no Torah impurity in this. And this was specifically in their days when they would bury in a manner that there was an opening of a tefach at the exit of the grave. But nowadays when it is entirely closed, even if it has (even if it has) an airspace of a tefach—everything opposite it is impure from the Torah. Thus far his words. And this is the approach of the Tosafot and the Rosh in several places, that even though "crushed impurity" breaks through and rises only in less than a tefach, nevertheless a closed grave, even if there is an airspace of an opening of a tefach, nevertheless the impurity breaks through and rises. But the approach of Rashi there and in Chullin 71a and in Nazir 53b, and so is the approach of the Ra'avad and the Ramban and the Rashba, is that whenever there is an opening of a tefach—we do not say it breaks through and rises in any place. (And the Pnei Yehoshua already explained this in Berakhot there, in Tosafot starting with the words "the majority," see there.)

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote: A kohen who is lying naked and is in a tent with the deceased and did not know—one should not tell him. Rather, they should simply call to him to exit, so that he may dress himself first. But if they already told him—it is forbidden to wait until he dresses himself. And specifically if he is in the tent of the deceased, which is a Torah impurity. But if he is in a beit hapras or in the land of the nations, which is a rabbinic impurity—he should dress himself first, for great is human dignity, as I wrote above in siman 303 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 303) regarding the matter of shaatnez. A kohen who is sleeping, and a deceased person is with him in the tent—they must wake him and tell him so that he may exit. Thus far his words. For when he remains there, it is like performing an action. And regarding rabbinic impurity, there is no need to wake him. And similarly a minor kohen—there is no need to wake him. And also that which he wrote that he is obligated to exit naked—the great authorities agreed that he may put on the tunic. And we have already explained that impurity of a space of a handbreadth is from the Torah, but for this there is a remedy to close the entire opening with something that does not contract impurity. And there are those who questioned his words, and the halacha is like our teacher, the Rema. (And if he is engaged in a mitzvah—one does not need to tell him.)

The Rambam in the ninth chapter of Tumat Met (Rambam Laws of Tumat Met 9) ruled that the graves of gentiles do not impart tumah in an ohel, but through contact and carrying—they do impart tumah, see there. And the opinion of our teachers the authors of the Tosafot in Bava Metzia 114a is that they impart tumah in an ohel, see there. And in the Gemara there is a dispute regarding this. And the Yereim ruled that even through carrying and contact they do not impart tumah, for any corpse that does not impart tumah in an ohel does not impart tumah through contact and carrying, as is proven from the Sifrei (see Beit Yosef). Therefore, our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote that regarding the graves of gentiles—it is proper for the kohen to be careful not to walk over them even though there are those who are lenient, and it is proper to be careful, see there. And they took the primary ruling to be like the Rambam. And Karaites and apostates—their law is like that of an Israelite. Therefore, even according to the Rambam, it is forbidden for a kohen to walk over their cemetery, for perhaps there are also some of them there. And it seems to me that the kohanim are careful regarding this.