Burying a Suicide Victim in a Jewish Cemetery

One of those questions I hear every so often: Do we bury someone in a Jewish cemetery if he commits suicide?

I was reminded of the question by this CNN.com article:
When college students take their lives, as apparently happened recently at Cornell University, the instinctual reaction, to mourn publicly and officially, may be the wrong thing to do, psychologists say.
The American Foundation for Suicide Prevention recommends that schools have a "muted response" to suicide, said Ann Haas, director of suicide prevention projects. That's because students already vulnerable to suicide may be attracted to the idea of getting recognition or gratification in death.
"For those students who seem to really be at risk, there's something about those kinds of memorials that really can trigger additional suicide," she said…
Researchers have found that suicide can, in effect, be contagious, creating clusters of people taking their own lives in close proximity within a few months. The people involved may not have had any direct contact, but publicity of the suicide, including through large vigils and assemblies, may result in more suicidal behavior, said Madelyn Gould, professor of psychiatry at Columbia University Medical Center.
"We do feel that some memorials need to take place, but it might be worth trying to develop some suicide prevention activity to honor that person," she said.

Along similar lines, I remember hearing that newspapers have a policy of not explicitly recording ‘suicide’ as a cause of death in their Obituary columns, lest that inspire imitators. [See Student Newspaper Guidelines here.]

These policies confirm the longstanding but controversial Jewish practice of avoiding public honors for people who commit suicide (Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Avel 1:11):

המאבד עצמו לדעת אין מתעסקין עמו לכל דבר ואין מתאבלין עליו ואין מספידין אותו, אבל עומדין עליו בשורה ואומרין עליו ברכת אבלים וכל דבר שהוא כבוד לחיים

If a person knowingly destroys himself, we do not involve ourselves with him for anything. We do not mourn for him, we do not eulogize him, but we do form a condolence line and recite the blessing for mourners and perform all other practices which honor the living.

This is a tough practice, and one that I’ve never actually seen implemented; as the Rambam himself wrote there, and as the Aruch haShulchan noted (Yoreh Deah 345:5) seven centuries later, we depend on any possible explanation to conclude that this was not an intentional suicide.

But why have the practice in the first place? Because of the fear outlined by Ann Haas and Madelyn Gould; we don’t want to encourage others to do likewise for the sake of honor.

To return to the main question, this is why people think that we do not bury a suicide victim in a Jewish cemetery. However, neither the Rambam nor the Shulchan Aruch says anything about excluding that person from a Jewish cemetery. Indeed, the Shach to Yoreh Deah 345:1 seems to say that we do bury the person in a Jewish cemetery.

I did know of one case, in Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, in which a woman was alleged to have committed suicide, and she was buried outside of the cemetery gates. Some years later, though, they expanded the cemetery – and so her grave ended up in with those of everyone else.

Daf: Gittin 56b-57b – Titus, Divine muteness, Onkelos, Eretz Tzvi, Suicide in Judaism

We continue the “Tisha b’Av” gemara regarding the destruction of the Beit haMikdash and the fall of Beitar. For those who are looking for something other than Daf Yomi notes, feel free to skip down for an article on surviving the 120-year death sentence.

Gittin 56b
Titus slashes the parochet curtain before the Ark, and sees blood emerge; he believes that this shows he has done something to Gd. The Maharam Shif suggests that the blood may have been from the sprinklings of the Kohen Gadol on Yom Kippur, but this is problematic. As Maharam Shif notes, the sprinklings were toward the curtain rather than on it – but, also, the gemara here states explicitly that the emergenc of the blood was miraculous.

The sages observed that Gd did not act to defend the second Beit haMikdash from the Romans, and altered verses as part of a pain-driven, theodicy-based challenge to Gd's mute unresponsiveness. For a passage that goes even further, see Yerushalmi Berachot 7:3, where Yirmiyah and Daniel actually altered the way we praised Gd, eliminating some of the praises, after the destruction of the first Beit haMikdash – until the Great Assembly restored those praises. (That is a beautiful passage of gemara; I need to use that in a derashah at some point.)

The gemara refers to Sisra drowning in water; that may be a reference to his chariots becoming stuck in the mud, or to Yael’s substitution of milk for water, which led to his death.

Abbaye uses the Aramaic word נקטינן here to introduce an aggadic observation. That’s odd; נקטינן is normally used regarding legal statements.

Regarding the identity of Onkelos in the story of Onkelos and Titus and conversion to Judaism, Mahartz Chajes discusses this and notes that he is not the Onkelos who recorded an Aramaic commentary on the Torah.


Gittin 57a
It is suggested that, in this passage, either Bilam, or “the sinners of Israel” are meant to be a reference to Jesus.

Regarding the three great cities on Har haMelech, the Yerushalmi has a different take on the explanation of Kfar Shichlayim and Kfar Dichraya. See also the Maharsha here.

The gemara here calls Israel ארץ צבי, but I don’t believe such a term appears in Tanach. The citation from Yirmiyah 3:19 is actually ארץ חמדה נחלת צבי צבאות גויים. Either way, the literal meaning of צבי in context is to connote something desirable – the desirable/desired land.


Gittin 57b
The Babylonian Nevuzaradan’s decision to write a will for disposition of his assets before converting to Judaism is a rebuke to Achitofel, who betrayed Dovid, was caught, and then wrote a will disposing of his assets before strangling himself.

The issue of Jewish children – and communities – committing suicide rather than face torture and death is a large and complex topic. Tosafot קפצו here has a brief discussion, but there is much more to say. For a start:
Bava Kama 91b clearly prohibits suicide.
Bereishit Rabbah 34:13 shows that we have exceptions – Shaul, as well as Chananiah, Mishael and Azariah.
Mitigating circumstances include certain death (Radak Shemuel I 31:5) and fear of having to violate one of the sins which warrant ייהרג ואל יעבור, death before violation (Tosafot Avodah Zarah 18a).
Pain, as a mitigating factor, is hotly debated but generally rejected for active suicide – see Avodah Zarah 18a, Chatam Sofer Yoreh Deah 326:3 and Shut Beit Efrayim Yoreh Deah 76.
There is much more to say, but any discussion would be incomplete if it did not include the story cited by Ritva (I forget where) and the Beit Yosef (Yoreh Deah 157), of the rabbi who was involved in his community’s mass suicide to avoid the crusaders, and who lived to see the decree against the community annulled, so that the deaths were unnecessary. See the horrible details there.

We then encounter the well-known story of the woman and her 7 sons who refused to bow to the idol:
Note that the story does not involve anyone named Chanah; that name doesn’t appear until the 15th century or so.
See three versions – ours, the Maharsha’s and Eichah Rabbah 1:50, all of which offer different orders of pesukim recited by the seven children.
The Maharsha and the Yefeh Anaf explain why each child chose a different pasuk. The Maharsha matches each pasuk to a day of the week; Yefeh Anaf on the midrash shows that each pasuk responded to a different claim made by the Roman.