The category known as the Onen (אונן) describes the mourner between the time of passing and burial. This word actually refers to a Biblical verse¹that is recited by Israelite pilgrims to the Beit ha-Mikdash when bringing their ma’aser to the Temple. This verse is used to teach us that an Onen may not eat kodshim (the holy food of the Temple)². 

The correct phrase that describes a person between the passing and burial of a loved one today – when sadly we no longer have the Beit ha-Mikdash – is מיתו מוטל לפניו (lit. The dead person is lying  before him). This is how the third chapter of the Mishna of Berachot opens:

מסכת ברכות פרק ג משנה א (דף יז:)

מי שמתו מוטל לפניו פטור מק”ש ומן התפלה ומן התפילין ומכל מצות האמורות בתורה

Mishna, Berachot 3:1 (17b)

One whose dead lies before them is exempt from the reading of the Shema, from Tefila and from Tefilin and from all [positive] commandments recorded in the Torah.

The basic law of an onen is that they are exempt from the positive commandments. A fundamental debate runs through many rishonim asking how we are meant to understand this exemption. For some, the language of exemption does not imply prohibition; rather the onen’s obligations are lifted, giving them the time and space to care for their loved one. If they were able to and interested in performing positive commandments, they would be permitted to do so³. On the other hand, the majority position is, in fact, that this exemption functions as a prohibition⁴.

There is a third approach that combines both possibilities and claims that when the onen must be involved with matters related to the burial then, and only then, does exemption really mean prohibition. However, if all the arrangements have been made or someone else is taking care of the details, the onen remains exempt but permitted to engage in positive commandments⁵.

These three approaches reflect different understandings of why the onen should be exempt. The first approach, which reads the exemption as implying permission (פטור ומותר), wants to ensure that the onen has the time necessary to tend to the needs of the departed. The second approach, which sees the exemption as a prohibition (פטור ואסור), seems to imply that there is something fundamentally inappropriate about engaging with positive commandments – particularly in areas such as prayer – when a loved one awaits burial. The third approach weaves together these two ideas and claims that, when a mourner is involved with the burial, that should be their entire focus, to the exclusion of Mitzvot. However, once the arrangements have been made, the status shifts, and the mourner may choose to engage with positive commandments⁶.

The Halakha is struggling to balance two competing values: the appropriate honor of and focus on the person who has passed away and the ongoing religious obligations of every Jew to the Creator of the World. What happens when my obligation to people bumps up against my obligation to God? This is a question that must be asked by anyone struggling to live a life of Mitzvot. The simplest answer – in our case – is that sometimes the Torah tells me that human needs come before divine obligations. Then, and only then, is one permitted to set aside divine Mitzvot for the sake of human need.

1. Devarim 26:14 – לֹא אָכַלְתִּי בְאֹנִי מִמֶּנּוּ
2. See Mishna Zevachim 2:1 and the gemara there page 16a/b as well as Mishna Zevachim 12:1 and the gemara there 99b. See also Mishna Horayot 3:5. Rashi in Zevachim 16b s.v. she-eino ochel quotes Devarim 26:14 as the source for the prohibition of an Onen to eat kodshim as does Rambam in Hil, Biat ha-Mikdash 2:7. However, see the next Halakha of the Rambam where he quotes an additional verse regarding the same rule for the High Priest.
3. See Rashi, Berachot 17b s.v. vi-ein mevarech, Rambam Hilkhot Avel 4:6 and Hilkhot Kriyat Shema 4:7 (according to the Beit Yosef’s read in the beginning of שמא. The Beit Yosef also addresses the approach of the Rambam in Orach Chayyim 71 and 70.
4. See Tosafot, Berachot 17b s.v. vi-ein mevarech, the Ra”ah on Berachot 16b s.v. mi she-meito mutal, as well as the Rosh Berachot 3:1 & Talmidei Rabbeinu Yona on the Rif in Berachot page 10b. Tosafot and the Rosh rely on the Yerushalmi that we will unpack carefully in the next essay
5. See the second half of Tosafot Berachot 23b s.v. v’ein mevarvhin alav who cites this in this position in the name R. Yitzchak. The Or Zarua Section 2, Hilkhot Aveilut siman 417 also links this position to R. Yitzchak b. Shmuel. However, the Mordechai in the beginning of the third chapter of Berachot,Remez 55 says that R. Yitzchak simply prohibits. In addition, the same approach appears in Rosh Berachot 3:1 & Moed Katan 3:54. While the Rosh pretty quickly rejects this position, it does appear to align with the behavior of Rebbeinu Tam when his sister passed away as noted at the end of the Rosh in Berachot 3:3
6. There was a custom in Speyer for an onen to come to shul and recite kaddish even before the burial – See Or Zarua Section 2, Hilkhot Aveilut siman 417, Ra’avya v.1 Masechet Berachot siman 48, Hilkhot Semachot of the Maharam siman 64