The Parsha discusses the laws of Tumas Meis (impurity from contact with the dead) and the purification process of the Parah Adumah.
Impurity can be contracted from contact with a Meis, carrying a Meis, walking over graves or being in an Ohel (under the same roof) with a Meis. Additionally a Kohen is required to remain at least 4 Amos (approx. 2 metres) away from a grave or dead body. (If there is a wall of 10 Tefachim tall it is permissible to go up to 4 Tefachim away from the grave).
One of the Halachic questions debated throughout the ages is whether Tumas Meis applies to the bodies and graves of Tzaddikim.
The relevance of this Shaalah would be whether Kohanim are able to visit sites such as Maaras Hamachpeilah, Kever Rochel, the gravesite of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai in Meiron and the like.
The question arises because of a Midrash that teaches that when Rabbi Akiva was murdered by the Romans, Eliyahu Hanovi took care of his burial, carrying him on his shoulder. Rabbi Yehoshua Hagarsi saw Eliyahu carrying Rabbi Akiva’s body and asked how he was able to be involved in the burial if he was a Kohen? Eliyahu Hanovi replied “there is no Tumah with Talmidei Chachamim or their disciples”.
But there are passages in the Gemara which suggest otherwise.
Pesach Sheini came about because a group of individuals who were impure from contact with the dead came to Moshe to complain why they should miss out on bringing the Korban Pesach. The Gemara explains that these individuals were the bearers who carried the body of Yosef Hatzaddik. This indicates that the bodies of Tzaddikim do convey Tumah.
Elsewhere the Gemara teaches that Rabbi Benaah would mark graves, including the burial cave of the Avos. Rashbam and Tosfos explain that he did this in order that the Kohanim would know to stay away from them on account of Tumah, which applies even to the Avos.
How do we reconcile this with the Midrash quoted above?
Usually, we do not derive Halachic rulings from Midrashim, especially when they are contradicted by the Gemara. Nonetheless the Rishonim try to reconcile the teachings.
Tosfos (Rabbeinu Tam) explains that the reason Eliyahu Hanovi took part in the burial of Rabbi Akiva was because it had the status of a Meis Mitzvah. Since those executed by the government were not allowed to be buried, no one else was able to take care of the Kevurah. A Kohen is allowed to become impure for a Meis Mitzvah. His answer to Rabbi Yehoshua “there is no Tumah with Talmidei Chachamim or their disciples” was only said as a “throw-away” answer to push him off.
Ritva resolves the Midrash in a similar manner, that Rabbi Akiva had the status of a Meis Mitzvah. Unlike Tosfos, Ritva explains that this would be true even if there were relatives who could take care of the burial. This is because it is considered as the honour of a Nosi or other great Torah giant that everyone participate in the burial, even Kohanim.
But not all of the Rishonim take this view.
Based on the commentary of the Ramban, we cannot say that Eliyahu’s response was just a Dechiya. Were it not actually the Halacha, he would be issuing rulings which are not according to Torah. Further this would be a violation of Lifnei Iver (placing a stumbling block in front of the blind) as those who heard his ruling would believe that this is the Halacha and would act accordingly.
Rashba likewise attacks the position of Rabbeinu Tam that Eliyahu was merely pushing away Rabbi Yehoshua’s question. This is also the position of Sefer Hachinuch.
In his commentary on Parshas Chukas (Parshas Parah) Ramban writes clearly that the bodies of Tzaddikim do not cause Tumah. Impurity only applies to those who died on account of the “seduction of the snake”. Tzaddikim who pass away with Neshikah (Divine kiss) do not cause impurity.
The Poskim suggest that even Ramban’s lenient position may be limited only to the actual burial of Tzaddikim but not visiting their graves.
The Gemara teaches that on the day Rebbi (Rabbi Yehuda Hanosi) passed away the Kedusha of the Kohanim was nullified and Kohanim were allowed to become defiled. The Gemara indicates that it was only on the day of passing. This would fit with Ritva’s explanation a Nosi has the status of a Meis Mitzvah, an allowance which only applies to the actual burial itself. Therefore even according to this view, one would not be able to rely on it to permit visiting Kivrei Tzaddikim.
Based on this Gemara, Rabbeinu Chaim Kohen (one of the Baalei Tosfos) said that were he present when Rabbeinu Tam passed away, he would have become defiled for his burial. Beis Yosef questions this, since Rabbeinu Tam was not a Nosi. He concludes that Rabbeinu Chaim must hold that this allowance applies to any Godol Hador. The Beis Yosef notes that we do not follow this opinion.
The Raava”d has an interesting opinion. Nowadays since Kohanim are all impure anyway, there is no longer any prohibition on them becoming impure. This is also the opinion of the Sefer Mitzvos Gadol. Many understand this literally, that according to the Raavad there is no problem for a Kohein nowadays to become impure.
However the majority of Rishonim maintain that Tumas Meis remains in force today. Noda Biyehuda and Chasam Sofer explain that the Raavad himself agrees that there is still a Biblical prohibition, only that it is not considered a punishable offense.
The vast majority of Poskim maintain that there is an Issur Gamur for Kohanim to visit the gravesites of Tzaddikim. Rabbi Shlomo Kluger writes that a Kohen who does so desecrates their Kehuna and cannot be called a Kohen. Even on the day of the burial itself we cannot be lenient nowadays. This is also the ruling of the Kitzur Shulchan Aruch that it is a mistaken practise and one must protest. This is especially so as it pertains to an Issur Torah.
A noted voice of dissent in the Minchas Elozor who writes that it is permissible for Kohanim to visit Kivrei Tzaddikim of their own Rebbe. However it is preferable to refrain from doing so as it may lead to Kohanim being permissive for any Rabbi or Talmid Chacham.
At the funeral of the Sfas Emes they asked the Avnei Nezer whether a Kohen was allowed to be involved with the Kevurah. He replied “Chas Veshalom”! He related that at the Levaya of the Kotzker Rebbe, the Chiddushei Harim screamed and protested at the those Kohanim who acted leniently.
In a letter, the Rebbe refers to a letter from the Alter Rebbe’s brother, the Mahari”l concerning the fence which was erected around the Alter Rebbe’s Tziyun in Haditch. In another letter the Rebbe writes that he is not pleased with the practise, noting that at the Ohel in Lubavitch there were markers to restrict Kohanim from approaching. The Rebbe continues to explain that at the Ohel of the Frierdike Rebbe a wall of 10 Tefachim tall was erected and that Kohanim may enter (as long as they stay 4 Tefachim away from the grave itself).
