Siman 389

In the time of the Gemara, there were two types of laundering: one like our laundering, and the second which is better than laundering and is called "gehutz." And this is what they rub with a glass stone (Rashi, Ketubot 10b). And the primary quality laundering and gehutz was in Eretz Yisrael, to the point that they said that our gehutz of the people of Bavel is like their laundering of Eretz Yisrael. And Rashi explained (ibid.) that their waters were good for laundering, or they had good dyes for laundering. And in our laundering, the garment is not whitened until it is pressed. Thus far his words. And at the end of Ta'anit they also said so, and they further said there that linen vessels are not subject to gehutz, see there.

And behold, regarding the mourning of seven days—certainly every type of laundering is forbidden. And regarding this they said (Moed Katan 15a): A mourner is forbidden in laundering. And it is forbidden due to two things: one due to labor, for it is forbidden whether by himself or by others, as I wrote in siman 380. And one is the prohibition of wearing even if it was laundered beforehand, for they learned it from the Tekoite woman, as it is written regarding her "garments of mourning," see there. But regarding the mourning of thirty days, we do not find in the Gemara a prohibition of laundering, but rather a prohibition of ironing. And our Rabbis taught: All thirty days for ironing (Moed Katan 23a). And Rabbi Eleazar son of Rabbi Simeon says: They only forbade new white garments alone. And Rava ruled like him, see there. And so they said: Three for weeping etc., and thirty for ironing (Moed Katan 27b). And in Yevamot (Yevamot 43a) they said explicitly that it is permitted to launder within thirty. And Rashi explained that a mourner is not forbidden in laundering except for seven days, for all thirty days are for ironing etc. Thus far his words. And so the Rambam in the fifth chapter wrote that a mourner is forbidden in laundering all seven, and in the sixth chapter he wrote that all thirty he is forbidden in ironing. This is his wording there in law 4: And so it is forbidden to wear white garments that are new and ironed all thirty days, whether a man or a woman. If they were colored and ironed—they are permitted. And so if they were not new, even though they are white and ironed—they are permitted. And linen garments are not subject to ironing. And after thirty days, ironing is permitted even for his father and for his mother. Thus far his words.

But there is a system of the Rishonim that even laundering is forbidden within thirty days. And there is a proof for this from Semachot chapter seven, which says there: If one did not launder on the eve of the festival – it is forbidden to launder until thirty days. And that which they said in Yevamot, that it is permitted to launder within thirty days – this refers to those whom the sages permitted to launder during the days of his mourning, and on Chol HaMoed all those enumerated at the beginning of the chapter "Elu Megalchin": one who comes from overseas, one who leaves prison, etc., and they have the version at the end of Moed Katan: "thirty days for laundering." And that which they said "a mourner is forbidden in laundering," which implies only during the days of his mourning and not within thirty days – this refers to water alone, which is certainly permitted within thirty days. But in the manner of laundering with natron and sand – it is forbidden (Tosafot 23a (Moed Katan 23a) s.v. Kol in the name of Riva.)

The words of the Tur are not understood at all, for he wrote: But it is forbidden to wash his garment all seven days, even with water alone. And after seven—it is permitted. And Riva forbade all thirty. And in the Sefer HaMitzvot he wrote: It is permitted to wear a white tunic immediately after seven. And the world practiced a prohibition regarding it. And it is the custom that another person wears them first, and afterward he wears them. And this custom is primary. Thus far his words. And I do not know the reason for this custom. For even calendering is permitted with old garments, all the more so washing. Thus far the wording of the Tur. And it is astounding: Why was he astonished by the custom? Perhaps it holds like Riva (Beit Yosef)? And furthermore, he wrote: "And Riva forbade all thirty," and it refers back to the previous statement which prohibits during the seven even with water alone. Yet it is explicitly explained in the Tosafot that with water alone even Riva permitted within thirty.

And it appears to me that this is the explanation: That which he wrote, "and after seven it is permitted," the meaning is: it is permitted with all types of laundering, even with natron and sand. And regarding this he says that the Riva forbids for the entire thirty days. And afterwards he brought the words of the Sefer HaMitzvot who wrote "it is permitted to wear" etc., meaning like the majority of opinions that after seven it is permitted with laundering. And the world practiced a prohibition regarding it, for they are concerned for the opinion of the Riva. Therefore, he wears them after another first, for now it is not like that which is laundered. And he concludes: "and this custom is primary," and with this the Tur wondered why he wrote that this custom is primary. Granted that the custom is a concern for the opinion of the Riva, nevertheless, how did he write that such is primary? For behold, the opinion of the Riva is a minority opinion, as the Rif, the Rambam, Rashi, and others of the great Rishonim permit laundering. And more than this: for behold, even calendering with old garments is permitted, as we have brought that the halacha is like Rabbi Elazar son of Rabbi Shimon that only with new garments is calendering forbidden, and all the more so with laundering. And if so, how did the author of the Sefer HaMitzvot write that such is primary? And this is certainly a great wonder. (And should we say that he holds that laundering applies to old garments, as the Bach wrote—this is even more wondering. Examine carefully and you will find it simple.)

It emerges that the primary ruling is according to the opinion of most of our teachers, that after seven days it is permitted to launder and to wear a laundered garment. The opinion of our teacher, the Beit Yosef, is also thus, and this is his wording: But it is forbidden to launder his garment all seven days, even with water alone, and after seven days it is permitted (with any type of laundering). And just as it is forbidden to launder, so it is forbidden to wear those laundered previously. And it goes without saying that it is forbidden to wear new ones. Thus far his words. Our teacher, the Rema, wrote regarding this: And after seven days—it is permitted. But the world has adopted a custom of prohibition, and it is the practice that another person wears them first, and afterward the mourner wears them. And the custom is the primary rule, and such is the practice in these lands after seven days. And if another person wore it for even one hour—it is sufficient. Thus far his words. And it appears to me that what he wrote, that the custom is the primary rule, his intention is not that such is the primary ruling of the law, for the Tur already wondered at this as has been explained. Rather, his intention is that you should not say that the custom has no reasoning, but rather that there is a basis for this custom, namely that they hold according to the system of Riva. However, regarding the law, we certainly hold like the majority of the poskim. And it seems to me that now people are not careful in this to give the undershirt to another to wear, because many people are repulsed by this, to wear an undershirt that another wore. Furthermore: regarding an undershirt, one may be lenient even according to Riva, for this is not for the sake of pleasure, but rather because it is impossible to go in the old undershirt because of perspiration. And it is possible to say that the intention of Riva was regarding other garments and not regarding an undershirt.

And specifically we, who wear them only from Shabbat to Shabbat, the Maharash has already written in a responsum (siman 106) that even within the seven days—it is permitted to wear a white shirt on Shabbat. And he wrote in this wording: On a Shabbat of mourning, one who does not wear a laundered shirt—it is foolish piety. Thus far his words. And in the Midrash, in the opening of "Eichah" on the verse "Those who sit in the gate talk about me," it brought that the nations would mock us regarding the shirt that we wear only from Shabbat to Shabbat, see there. And I saw one of the great authorities who wrote that even on a weekday it is permitted for a mourner within the seven days to change the shirt, if the old one is full of sweat or filth, for they only prohibited for pleasure and not because of distress, just as with washing (Pitchei Teshuva, subsection 2, in the name of Lachmi Todah). And all the more so during the thirty days on the eve of Shabbat, it would not enter one's mind to prohibit at all wearing a laundered shirt, and laundered socks, and trousers and the like, for the body suffers distress if one does not change them.

Also the sheets and the bed coverings—it is forbidden to wash them within the seven days. And so too it is forbidden to spread those that are laundered. And so too hand towels—it is forbidden, even though it is permitted to wash them on the Moed. However, in honor of Shabbat, one may spread a laundered cloth on the table (Taz, subsection 1). And consequently, also a towel to dry the hands—it is permitted in honor of Shabbat. But on a weekday—it is forbidden. And so too all those of whom we learned at the beginning of the chapter "Elu Megalchin" (Moed Katan 13b) who are permitted to wash on the Moed, such as one who leaves captivity or prison, and one who was distanced whom the sages permitted as I wrote in siman 334. And so too one who vowed not to wash, and consulted a sage on the Moed and was released; and one who comes from afar who went to earn a livelihood, and arrived now and did not have time to wash, and they permitted him on the Moed. Nevertheless, in the days of his mourning in such a case they did not permit him, such as if he left prison and immediately became a mourner, and so too all these—they did not permit him to wash within the seven days. And on the Moed they permitted it because of the honor of the festival. And so too in mourning if, Heaven forbid, mourning overtook him, meaning that two mournings occurred one after the other, the law is as follows: if the second mourning occurred to him after one of all that has been explained—it is permitted to wash within the seven days, even with natron and sand. And if the second mourning occurred to him without one of all that has been explained—it is permitted to wash with water but not with natron and sand, provided that he does this in private within his house. And so too in every mourning it is permitted to wash the clothes of minors whose father or mother died, for with minors it is impossible not to change their clothes. And it is permitted to wash them in the house, for everyone sees that these are the clothes of minors.

Our teacher, the Beit Yosef, wrote in section 3 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 389:3): It is forbidden to wear during the seven days new dyed garments, or old ones that have come out from under the press. Thus far his words. And there is no novelty in this law at all, for even laundering with water alone is forbidden. And similarly, to wear those previously laundered with water alone is forbidden as has been explained, and certainly these. Rather, it is because regarding the thirty days he wrote in section 5 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 389:5), and this is his wording: All thirty days it is forbidden to wear or to spread beneath him a pressed garment. This is provided it is white and new, and even if it is of linen. And for his father or his mother it is forbidden until a festival arrives after thirty days, and his friends rebuke him. Thus far his words. And so that one should not err to say that that which they permitted during the thirty days they forbade during the seven, namely pressed and white and new, but dyed and old even during the seven is permitted, for this he informs us that during the seven everything is forbidden. And that which he wrote "even of linen" – to exclude the opinion of the Rambam that we cited in section 2, that linen vessels are not subject to the law of pressing. And those who disagree with him hold that this is only regarding Tisha B'Av, see in the Tur. And regarding pressing, he wrote that some say it is "tzakal" in the Arabic language, and some say that this is laundering with water and ash, or with natron and soap. Thus far his words. And "tzakal" appears to be like our "press." And he wrote further in section 8 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 389:8) that there is one who says that nowadays there is no pressing, for they said our pressing is like their laundering. Thus far his words. And according to this, all types of our pressing are permitted to wear during the thirty days. But we do not practice accordingly, for certainly with white and new garments we practice a prohibition, and even with dyed ones they practiced a prohibition with new ones, and only with old ones do they facilitate.

Within seven days it is forbidden to launder even not for the purpose of wearing, whether by himself or by others. And if his garments were already with the launderer, he may do so through kibulut: not as a daily wage but rather that he takes for each garment such and such, and the laundering is in the house of the launderer and not with the mourner. The launderer launders in his usual manner according to the law of detached labor that is in the hands of others through kibulut, which was explained in siman 380 as being permitted, see there. But after seven days when labor is permitted—it is permitted even for himself to launder and press, whether for himself or for others. And the sages did not forbid pressing for thirty days except for wearing. And in this it is not similar to the seven days, for during the seven days labor is forbidden, which is not the case during the thirty.

Our teacher, the Rema, wrote in section 3 (Shulchan Aruch Yoreh Deah 389:3): There are those who say that it is forbidden to wear Shabbat clothes during the first four weeks. But afterwards it is permitted even for one's father and mother, and likewise to make new clothes. However, they practiced the prohibition for all twelve months. Thus far his words. And for about a hundred years the minds of the giants of the generation have not been at ease with going in weekday clothes on Shabbat, as it is like a public display, and likewise on Shabbat Chazon, and they instituted the practice of going in Shabbat clothes. And a significant new garment is certainly forbidden, but simple clothes like trousers and the like, and also a weekday garment when there is a necessity for it – it is permitted to make, for this is not a significant garment. And in the Kol Bo he wrote that if another man wears it for two or three days – a new garment is permitted (Beer HaGolah). And it appears that he permitted in this manner even a significant garment, and one may rely on this if there is a need for it.