Introduction
Different societies and religions have different customs regarding death. Judaism is no exception. In Judaism there are distinctive customs regarding what is to be done with the deceased, how family members are expected to express their bereavement, and how the deceased should be remembered. Indeed, it is hard to think of another realm in which Jewish customs differ so radically from the customs found in the contemporary western world.
Although Jewish customs relating to death contrast sharply with non-Jewish customs, there are some customs about which there are differences among the Jews themselves. In this lesson we will explore one such custom regarding burial and show how it relates to the theme of this course.
Go to the Discussion Board. Where are your family members and Jewish loved ones buried? Why was that particular burial site chosen? In general, what should be the considerations in choosing a burial site?
Text Study 1
Read texts 1-3 and try to answer the following questions:
1. What did both Jacob and Joseph request regarding their burials?
2. What was the importance of this request to them?
3. Should their request have any bearing on burial practices in future generations?
1. Genesis 47:28-30
Jacob lived seventeen years in the land of Egypt, so that the span of Jacob’s life came to one hundred and forty-seven years. And when the time approached for Israel to die, he summoned his son Joseph and said to him, “Do me this favor, place your hand under my thigh as a pledge of your steadfast loyalty: please do not bury me in Egypt. When I lie down with my fathers, take me up from Egypt and bury me in their burial-place.” He replied, “I will do as you have spoken.”
2. Genesis 49:29-32
Then he instructed them, saying to them, “I am about to be gathered to my kin. Bury me with my fathers in the cave which is in the field of Ephron the Hittite, the cave which is in the field of Machpelah, facing Mamre, in the land of Canaan, the field that Abraham bought from Ephron the Hittite for a burial site – there Abraham and his wife Sarah were buried; there Isaac and his wife Rebekah were buried; and there I buried Leah – the field and the cave in it, bought from the Hittites.”
3. Genesis 50:24-25
Joseph said to his brothers, “I am about to die. God will surely take notice of you and bring you up from this land to the land that He promised on oath to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.” So Joseph made the sons of Israel swear, saying, “When God has taken notice of you, you shall carry up my bones from here.”
Suggested Answers
- Both Jacob and his son Joseph requested to be buried in Eretz Yisrael.
- From text 1 one might get the impression that Jacob is not concerned with burial in Eretz Yisrael as much as he is concerned about not being buried in Egypt. If so, we might suggest that this reflects an instinctive abhorrence for being buried in a land where the Jews were oppressed and enslaved. The problem is that Egyptian oppression and slavery occurred only at a later stage in history. For the time being things were pretty good in Egypt. Joseph was second in command, Jacob’s family was settled in one of the choice regions of Egypt (Goshen) and he himself was given a royal welcome (see Genesis 45:18-20 and 47:6, 11). So then what was the significance of Jacob’s request? If text 1 is read together with text 2 it appears that Jacob is concerned about being buried in the family burial plot, “in the field of Machpelah (known as “Me’arat (the “Cave of”) Ha-Machpelah”), much as it is common today to bury family members in close proximity. Understood this way, the fact that his family happened to have been buried in Eretz Yisrael was incidental and of minor importance.
The problem with this reading is that it ignores the larger context in which this story is told. Abraham, then Isaac, then Jacob, were repeatedly promised that they would be the forefathers of a great nation and that that nation would inherit the Land of Canaan (See Genesis 12:1-3, 7; 13:15-17; 15:5, 7, 18-21; 17:5-8; 22:17-18; 26:3-5; 28:13-15; 35:9-12.) However, numerous incidents in their lives seemed to fly in the face of these promises (the binding of Isaac is perhaps the most obvious example) and the promise seemed to be in jeopardy once again when Jacob was now forced to leave Eretz Yisrael for Egypt because of a famine in the Land. How was Jacob to know for certain that he and his offspring will be given the opportunity to return and that the promise will in fact be fulfilled?
In order to address these concerns, God appears to him on the eve of his departure and assures him “Fear not to go down to Egypt” and He proceeds to explain “for I will make you there a great nation. I myself will also bring you back” (Genesis 46:3-4). While the first part of God’s assurance is of national importance –the promise of peoplehood – the second is of importance both to the nation and to Jacob personally. Both he, and his descendants, will return to Eretz Yisrael from Egypt.
Against this background it is difficult to interpret Jacob’s desire to be buried in Eretz Yisrael as merely a desire to be buried in his family plot which happens coincidentally to be located in Eretz Yisrael. Rather it is most likely that Jacob wanted to make sure that he did his part in having his personal remains buried in the Land in accordance with the divine promise. Furthermore, he wanted to symbolize to his offspring God’s promise to bring them back to Eretz Yisrael as well.
That the request for burial in Eretz Yisrael is linked to the divine promise is clear from text 3. Joseph does not request to be buried in the family burial plot (and indeed is not! He was buried in Shechem – currently the Palestinian town of Nablus.) but to have his bones carried up from Egypt “to the Land that He promised on oath to Abraham, to Isaac, and to Jacob.” Unlike his father, however, Joseph did not request to be buried in Eretz Yisrael now but only when “God has taken notice of you”, i.e. after the Exodus. Perhaps by linking his burial to the Exodus he wished to give the People the strength to endure the slavery and the hardship that will be inflicted on them soon after his death; that just as he had faith in the eventual return to the Land so should they.
- On the one hand, the burial of Jacob and Joseph in Eretz Yisrael symbolized the profound connection between the People and the Land of Israel. Thus, perhaps Diaspora Jews in all generations should follow their example. On the other hand, the burial of Jacob and Joseph in Eretz Yisrael took on particular importance because of their patriarchal role and the unique circumstances that existed at the time. Their burial had symbolic importance for the People but does ours? If not, then we may legitimately ask: does it really matter where we are buried?
In the following texts we will try to answer this question.
Text Study 2
Read texts 4-8 and try to answer the following questions.
1. Why did Jacob want to be buried in Eretz Yisrael according to text 4?
2. What problem arises for rabbinic scholars in the Diaspora?
3. How does the Talmud solve this problem?
4. What is the significance of burial in Eretz Yisrael according to each opinion in text 5?
5. What was Ulla crying about just prior to his death?
6. How does Ulla’s view differ from that of the opinions in text 5?
7. What are the views of R. Qoriya and R. Eleazar regarding burial of Diaspora Jews in Eretz Yisrael?
8. What is the fundamental difference between the view expressed by Rabbah and R. Yoseph in text 8 and the views of the previous texts?
9. Review the historical background and our historical analysis of lesson 3. What might be the historical framework for the views expressed in our texts regarding burial in Eretz Yisrael?
4. Jerusalem Talmud, Kilayim, 9:3, 32c
It is written “When I lie down with my fathers, take me up from Egypt and bury me in their burial-place.” (Genesis 47:30). Jacob- what would he lose, wherever he is [buried]? R. Shimon b. Lakish [3rd century Eretz Yisrael scholar] said: I shall walk before the Lord in the lands of the living” (Psalms 116:9). But are not “the lands of the living” Tyre and its environs, Caesarea and its environs, [for] there (everything is cheap), there [everything] is plentiful? R. Shimon b. Lakish in the name of Bar Qapparah said: [the Psalmist means] a land whose dead will come to life first in the days of Messiah… But if so our sages in the Diaspora have lost out! R. Simai [early 3rd century Eretz Yisrael scholar] said: The Holy One, Blessed be He, will bore through the earth before them and they will roll through like wine-skins and when they arrive in Eretz Yisrael their souls return to them.
5. Ibid.
It is written “As for you, Pashhur, and all who live in your house, you shall go into captivity. You shall come to Babylon; there you shall die and there you shall be buried, and so shall all your friends to whom you prophesied falsely” (Jeremiah 20:6). R. Abba b. Zamima [4th century Eretz Yisrael scholar] said: R. Helbo [3rd-4th century Babylonian scholar who immigrated to Eretz Yisrael] and R. Hamma b. Hanina [3rd century Eretz Yisrael scholar] [were discussing this verse]. One said: If one dies (abroad) and was buried there – he has suffered two deaths; if one died there and was buried here (i.e. in the Land), he has suffered one [death]. The other said: Burial here atones for death [there].
6. Ibid. 33c
Ulla [late 3rd century Eretz Yisrael scholar] was a “nahota” (i.e. one who “goes down” from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia in order to transmit legal traditions and deliberations); as he was dying there (in Babylonia) he began to cry. They told him: why are you crying, we will bring to Eretz Yisrael [for burial]? He told them: What use is it, I am losing my precious stone (i.e. my soul) while in an unclean land; losing [the soul] in a mother’s bosom (i.e. in the motherland) is not the same as losing it in the bosom of a foreigner (i.e. on foreign land).
7. Genesis Rabbah 96
R. bar Qoraiya and R. Eleazar [late 3rd century Eretz Yisrael scholars] were sitting and studying Torah in the ‘ilasis’ [a place where glass is made?] of Tiberias, when they saw coffins arriving from abroad. Said b. Qoraiya to R. Eleazar: Regarding these I apply the verse: In your lifetime “you made My possession abhorrent” (Jeremiah 2:7) and in your death – “you came and defiled my Land (Jeremiah 2:7). He [= R. Eleazar] said to him: Not so, when they come to the Land of Israel, they place upon them a lump of earth, thus atoning for their sins. On what basis (is this assertion made)? “And the Land will make expiation for His people” (Deuteronomy 32:43).
8. Babylonian Talmud, Ketubot 111a
Both Rabbah and R. Joseph [late 3rd- early 4th century Babylonian scholars] stated: The fit persons of Babylonia are received by Eretz Yisrael, and the fit ones of other countries are received by Babylonia. In what respect? If it be suggested: In respect of purity of descent surely [it may be objected] did not the Master [R. Yehuda Ha-Nasi] say, “All countries are [like] dough towards Eretz Yisrael, and Eretz Yisrael is like dough toward Babylonia? The fact, however, [is that the “fit” are received] in respect to burial.
Suggested Answers
1-2. According to R. Shimon b. Lakish in text 4, Jacob wanted to be buried in Eretz Yisrael not because of his family plot and not to symbolize the promise of the Land but for a very personal spiritual benefit – so that he will be resurrected first in the days of the Messiah. Now while many of us may not fully understand the doctrine of the resurrection (or believe in it) the fact is that it was one of the central tenets of rabbinic theology; indeed denial of this doctrine was considered a form of heresy (See Mishnah Sanhedrin 10:1). Thus, by claiming that those buried in Eretz Yisrael will be resurrected first he was claiming an important advantage for Eretz Yisrael burial that couldn’t easily be dismissed. Of course, the implications of this claim weren’t lost on the rabbis of the Talmud and their supporters. If such advantages are only enjoyed by those buried in Eretz Yisrael then the many rabbis (probably singled out because they were the spiritual leaders and were considered the most worthy of spiritual rewards in the future) who live and die in Babylonia (“Diaspora” being a catch phrase for Babylonian Jewry) will lose out. Is that really fair?
3. R. Simai solves this problem rather creatively: “The Holy One, Blessed be He, will bore through the earth before them and they will roll through like wine-skins and when they arrive in Eretz Yisrael their souls return to them.” Now, while the image of the “rolling” dead rabbi seems like something straight out of a Steven Spielberg film the basic message is clear. The rabbis who are buried in Babylonia will not lose out; they too will be among the first to be resurrected.
4. If text 4 described the advantages of Eretz Yisrael burial in terms of resurrection in the Messianic Era, this text describes the advantages differently. At stake is not resurrection in some future time but suffering and atonement in the here and now. Those who live and die abroad it is as if they suffer two deaths, one for living abroad and one for being buried there. But those who live abroad and are buried in Eretz Yisrael suffer only one death, for living outside the Land. That is the opinion of the first rabbi. The other rabbi maintains that “burial here atones for death there”, i.e. it atones even for having lived outside the Land.
One can only imagine how eager Jews in the Diaspora, who adopt this last opinion, would be to be buried in Eretz Yisrael! One can safely and comfortably live in the Diaspora while enjoying all the benefits of Eretz Yisrael by arranging for burial in Eretz Yisrael. Nevertheless, as we will soon see, not everyone believed that things were quite so easy.
5. Ulla was crying because he realized that he was going to die in Babylonia – not in Eretz Yisrael – while on one if his many trips there. The fact that he was slated for Eretz Yisrael burial was of little comfort to him because “what use is it, I am losing my precious stone (i.e. my soul) while in an unclean land”; losing [the soul] in a mother’s bosom (i.e. in the motherland) is not the same as losing it in the bosom of a foreigner (i.e. on foreign land).
6. Unlike the views expressed in text 5 according to which Eretz Yisrael burial atones for either death or life outside the Land, Ulla calls into question the very value of Eretz Yisrael burial for those who die abroad. What matters in his view is where one lives and dies and not where one is buried. Dying in a “foreign” and “unclean” land cannot be compared to dying in a “mother’s bosom”, no matter where one is eventually buried.
7. R. Qoriya adopts the basic premise of Ulla but takes it to an extreme. The sight of coffins arriving from abroad reminded him of a verse in Jeremiah which, in its context, referred to the sins of the People of Israel who had defiled the Land and made it abhorrent by abandoning God after He had led them into the Land from Egyptian slavery. For R. Qoriya this verse had particular relevance to the people who abhorred the Land in his day by choosing to live elsewhere and then defiling the Land by having their impure remains sent to the Land for burial (It isn’t clear whether their remains are impure as all corpses are considered impure or whether they are impure by virtue of their being the remains of sinners who abandoned God’s Land.). Thus, if Ulla felt that Eretz Yisrael burial for those who live and die abroad was of little use, R. Qoriya seems to have felt that such burial was nothing less than an insult and an affront to God. Indeed, had he been asked, it is conceivable that he would have had the remains sent back where they came from.
Nevertheless, R. Qoriya’s extreme view was rejected by his contemporary R. Eleazar. In the latter’s view, rather than become defiled by impure corpses the Land will help them overcome their own impurity and sin. Once they arrive in the Land a lump of earth from Eretz Yisrael should be placed upon them and in this way their sins will be atoned.
Now, while it is not entirely clear whether R. Eleazar in this text subscribes to views 1 or 2 of text 5 (either atonement for death abroad or atonement for life abroad), it is clear that R. Eleazar couldn’t accept R. Qoriya’s harsh condemnation of Eretz Yisrael burial of Diaspora Jews and felt compelled to assign some spiritual value to it. We will soon provide a historical framework in which these views may be understood.
8. This text begins with an ambiguous statement by the Babylonian scholars Rabbah and R. Joseph. Who are the “fit persons” and what does it mean to be “received”? Now, for those of us who recall our previous lesson, it sounds an awful lot like a reiteration of text 7 regarding the superior lineage of the Jews of Eretz Yisrael and Babylonia. Indeed, this is how the Talmud initially tries to interpret this statement. The problem however is that here Eretz Yisrael is afforded a higher position than Babylonia (the “fit persons” of Babylonia are received by Eretz Yisrael, not vice versa) whereas the other text affords Babylonia a higher position! Thus, the Talmud is forced to offer another interpretation. The statement, concludes the Talmud, must be referring to the way in which the dead are received in Babylonia and Eretz Yisrael with respect to burial.
Now, the notion that Eretz Yisrael “receives” the “fit”, i.e. the worthy, for burial should not come as a surprise considering the expiatory power of the Land. However, what is this about Babylonia “receiving” the “fit” for burial? Is there some advantage to being buried in Babylonia? Is there some sanctity in Babylonian soil like there is in Eretz Yisrael? Where could such an idea come from? How can it be understood? It is now time to try to put this whole issue into a historical context.
9. Let us recall the changes that occurred in Eretz Yisrael in the aftermath of the Bar-Kokhba revolt. Many towns were destroyed and others were transformed into towns of mixed populations. Many of the religious leaders were executed, and a period of religious persecution followed which affected the status of the entire Jewish population. At the same time, the Jewish community in Babylonia which was not under Roman rule grew in strength and numbers and was beginning to attract some of the leading Torah scholars from Eretz Yisrael.
In lesson 3 we tried to show how these changes led to changes in attitude of the two communities toward one another. Leading rabbinic figures in Eretz Yisrael began to place great emphasis on the religious importance of living in the Land while leading rabbinic figures in Babylonia increasingly tried to highlight the religious importance of Babylonia. We showed how these two competing trends was a source of resentment, particularly in the traditional center of Eretz Yisrael.
Against this background it may be possible to offer a reasonable reconstruction of the historical context in which the various attitudes toward burial arose (Here too my historical reconstruction is based largely on Land, Center and Diaspora of Isaiah Gafni). Among the many arguments that rabbinic leaders after the Bar Kokhba revolt made to emphasize the importance of Eretz Yisrael, in addition to those mentioned in the previous lesson, is that those who are buried there will be resurrected first in the Messianic Era (Resh Lakish in text 4). Now it is likely that such a statement was originally meant to highlight the advantage of living in Eretz Yisrael – those who live there will be resurrected first after they die – and not to emphasize the importance of dying and being buried there. But to attribute such advantages to living in Eretz Yisrael would probably not sit well with those who felt that the great rabbinic sages of the Diaspora should not be denied all the great spiritual rewards of the future. Thus, it was argued that they will indeed be able to reap the rewards of an early resurrection because after their death their bodies will roll through the earth until they arrive in Eretz Yisrael.
The problem is what about the common people who are not likely to merit having their bodies roll through the earth until they arrive in the Land? Furthermore, the problem arises even for Babylonian rabbis when we keep in mind the second argument in favor or burial in Eretz Yisrael – that burial in the Land atones for sins (text 5). The fact that the Torah scholars will eventually roll from Babylonia to Eretz Yisrael will not help them atone for their sins in the here and now. Thus, what could Babylonian Jews do to gain these important spiritual benefits, short of making aliyah? The only solution is to have their remains buried in Eretz Yisrael.
In light of this, it should not be surprising that, according to most scholars, it was around this time – the late 2nd– 3rd centuries – that the custom of bringing the dead from the Diaspora for burial in Eretz Yisrael began to emerge. Excavations of ancient Jewish cemeteries from that period such as those at Beth She’arim, Jaffa and Tiberias, have shown that they were international cemeteries for Jews around the world. Thus we find among the inscriptions “Eusabios the most illustrious archisynagogos (head of the synagogue) of the people of Beirut”; “Aristaeas from Sidon”; “The sons of Leontius, the banker, from Palmyra; “Aidesios, head of the Council of Elders of Antioch”. In fact, no such inscriptions appear on graves from earlier periods. Apparently, as a reflection of the importance placed upon burial in Eretz Yisrael as described in our texts, it became somewhat fashionable at this time for Jews to live abroad and to have their remains sent for burial to the Land.
Now let us imagine that we were living in Eretz Yisrael when this custom was becoming increasingly popular. On the one hand it must have been nice that Jews living abroad still considered the traditional center – Eretz Yisrael – important enough to have their remains sent there for burial. Indeed, we may have even encouraged the custom and described its spiritual advantages as a way of keeping the Land in people’s hearts and minds (the two opinions in text 5 and Ulla’s peers in Babylonia). On the other hand, let’s think for a moment about what else might have been going through our heads. We stuck it out after the Bar Kochba revolt, suffered persecution, and had to make significant changes in our lifestyle to adapt to the deteriorating circumstances. We chose not to leave the country even when the opportunity arose to do so because we believed in the religious importance and centrality of the Land and we refused to abandon it even though things were getting tough. We took comfort in the belief that we were doing the right thing and will be eventually rewarded for our sacrifice and dedication. In the meantime, however, we know that our brethren in Babylonia were living in relative comfort, witnessing the growth and strengthening of the Jewish community there and were beginning to see themselves as the community of the future. And just when we thought we had “one up” on them because of the spiritual advantages attached to living and dying in the Land they were starting to claim at least some of those spiritual advantages by living abroad and having their remains sent for burial in Eretz Yisrael. Would we really be eager to receive them and acknowledge the virtues of their Eretz Yisrael burial while they were living comfortably abroad? Would we not be somewhat resentful of the clever “shortcut” they had devised to receive the spiritual rewards while we had to earn those rewards by hard work throughout our lifetimes?
Thus, while some may have been uncomfortable with the idea of sending remains for burial in Eretz Yisrael while they were going to die “in the bosom of a foreigner” (Ulla in text 6), others were downright resentful and were not afraid to say what was on their mind: “in your lifetime ‘you made My possession abhorrent’ and in your death – ‘you came and defiled my Land’” (R. Koriya in text 7). While such a harsh reaction may not have been voiced frequently (see R. Eleazar’s immediate rejection of R. Koriya’s view) it is not hard to imagine that such feelings may have been brewing under the surface for some time.
The growing popularity of the custom of sending the remains for burial in Eretz Yisrael in the late 3rd and 4th centuries – despite the discomfort or opposition of some the local Jewish population – however, had one serious limitation. It could never have mass appeal. That is, firstly, because of the enormous expense involved in arranging for a distant burial; remember there were no planes and, at least from Babylonia, no shipping routes. Secondly, that is because Eretz Yisrael burial would prevent periodic visits to the grave by family members. Indeed, many of us know all too well how visiting the graves of our loved-ones somehow enables us to cope with their absence. This too must have been a factor weighing on the minds of Diaspora Jews at the time who may have considered Eretz Yisrael burial. Thus, the question arises, are those who cannot have their remains buried in Eretz Yisrael doomed? Is there no way for them to gain atonement in death for their sins in life, similar to those who are buried in the Land?
An answer to this question was offered by some of the rabbinic leaders of Babylonian Jewry. Initially, there was a clever attempt to extend the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael into Babylonia as far as Nagaf, southwest of Kufa in southern Iraq. Indeed, an Arab geographer from the 12th-13th century claimed that Jews used to carry their dead there for burial. Later, however, leading figures (such as Rabbah and R. Joseph in text 8) went further and claimed that burial in Babylonia assumed an importance all its own, not as an extension of Eretz Yisrael. Although they acknowledged that the fit persons of Babylonia are received by Eretz Yisrael and not vice versa – thus suggesting the supremacy of Eretz Yisrael – the fact that the “fit are “received” for burial in Babylonia at all suggests that it possesses special spiritual qualities, similar to Eretz Yisrael. Just as R. Yehuda (see lesson 3 text 6) could argue that “He who resides in Babylonia it’s as if he resided in Eretz Yisrael” so others could argue that those who are buried in Babylonia it is (almost) as if they are buried in Eretz Yisrael. The Jews could now enjoy the best of both worlds; they could live comfortably in Babylonia and yet enjoy the spiritual benefits of life, and death, in Eretz Yisrael.
The question that we still need to examine is would the assertiveness of the Babylonian community, and the tensions that stemmed from it, lead to a split? Would there be continue to be one Jewish center or would there be two? If one, would it be Babylonia or Eretz Yisrael? If two, would they be in harmony or in competition with one another? These are the questions that we will try to address in our next and final lesson.
Go to the Discussion Board. Some of the concepts that we saw in this lesson are applied in practice by segments of the Diaspora Jewish community today. The following are 3 examples:
- Some (mostly Orthodox) Diaspora Jews purchase burial plots in Israel and ask to be flown over for Eretz Yisrael burial.
- Some Diaspora Jews arrange to have earth from the Land of Israel placed on their bodies after death
- Some Diaspora Jews come to Israel, or have others sent, on a variety of programs in order to become strengthened Jewishly so that they will be more committed and involved upon their return.
Describe your reaction to each of these practices. Do you think your reaction would be different if you were living in Israel?
