Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

November 19, 2019 | 讻状讗 讘诪专讞砖讜讜谉 转砖状驻

Niddah 27

The gemara brings cases where the afterbirth came out much later than the birth and yet the rabbis asusmed it came from the first birth. The gemara brings a case where twins were born within 33 or 34 days from each other and tries to figure out how this is possible. Can a woman give birth at the beginning of the ninth month? What is the basis of Rabbi Shimon’s opinion regarding an afterbirth – that is does not create impurity in the house? Is it connected to his opinion regarding impurity of a ladleful of a decayed dead body? The gemara concludes that it is not and Rabbi Yochanan explains it is based on laws to majority – the blood cancels out the impurity of the dead body.


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

转讜讻谉 讝讛 转讜专讙诐 讙诐 诇: 注讘专讬转

讞讜诪专 砖谞讬 讜诇讚讜转 砖讗谞讬 讗讜诪专 砖诪讗 谞诪讜讞 砖驻讬专 砖诇 砖诇讬讗 讜谞诪讜讞 砖诇讬讗 砖诇 砖驻讬专 转讬讜讘转讗


the stringency of two offspring, as I say: Perhaps the gestational sac of this afterbirth, which contained the offspring, disintegrated, and the afterbirth of the gestational sac containing the fetus shaped like an animal also disintegrated. If so, there are two offspring, and as it is possible that one is male and the other female, the mother must observe the strictures of one who gave birth to both a male and a female. In any event, this baraita is a conclusive refutation of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 claim that it is impossible for an afterbirth to be tied to a fetus that has the form of a bird.


讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪注砖讛 讜转诇讜 讗转 讛砖诇讬讗 讘讜诇讚 注讚 注砖专讛 讬诪讬诐 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 转讜诇讬谉 讗诇讗 讘砖诇讬讗 讛讘讗讛 讗讞专 讛讜诇讚


Rabba bar Sheila says that Rav Mattana says that Shmuel says: An incident occurred where the Sages attributed the afterbirth that a woman discharged to an offspring that was born up to ten days beforehand. And Shmuel added that the Sages said that one attributes an afterbirth to an offspring that was born only in the case of an afterbirth that emerges after the offspring is born. By contrast, an afterbirth that emerges before the offspring is born is not attributed to that offspring.


讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪注砖讛 讜转诇讜 讗转 讛砖诇讬讗 讘讜诇讚 注讚 注砖专讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 讬诪讬诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 注讚 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讗诪专转 诇谉


Rabba bar bar 岣na says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: There was an incident where the Sages attributed the afterbirth to an offspring that was born up to twenty-three days beforehand. Rav Yosef said to him a correction of his statement: You said to us on another occasion that the offspring was born up to twenty-four days beforehand.


讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 注讜讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪注砖讛 讜谞砖转讛讛 讛讜诇讚 讗讞专 讞讘讬专讜 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 讬讜诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 砖诇砖讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讗诪专转 诇谉


Rav A岣, son of Rav Avira, says that Rabbi Yitz岣k says: There was an incident where a woman was pregnant with twins, and one offspring remained in the womb for thirty-three days after the other offspring was born. Rav Yosef said to him: You said to us on another occasion that the second offspring was born thirty-four days after the first.


讛谞讬讞讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讬讜诇讚转 诇转砖注讛 讬讜诇讚转 诇诪拽讜讟注讬谉 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讗讞讚 谞讙诪专讛 爪讜专转讜 诇住讜祝 砖讘注讛 讜讗讞讚 谞讙诪专讛 爪讜专转讜 诇转讞诇转 转砖注讛 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讬讜诇讚转 诇转砖注讛 讗讬谞讛 讬讜诇讚转 诇诪拽讜讟注讬谉 诪讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专


The Gemara asks: This works out well according to the one who says that if a woman gives birth to a baby in her ninth month, she can give birth prematurely (see Rosh HaShana 11a). You find a situation where there could be such a difference between the births of the two twins if the form of one of the twin fetuses was completed at the end of the seventh month, and it is born at that stage, and the form of the other one was completed at the beginning of the ninth month, and it is born then. In such a case, there can be a difference of thirty-four days between the births. But according to the one who says that a woman who gives birth to a baby in her ninth month cannot give birth prematurely, but rather she gives birth at the end of the ninth month, what is there to say?


讗讬驻讜讱 砖诪注转转讗 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 诇砖诇讬讗 注砖专讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 诇讜诇讚


The Gemara answers that one should reverse the statements: The difference of thirty-three days was stated with regard to a case of an afterbirth that was discharged an extended period after the birth of the offspring, whereas the gap of twenty-three days was stated with regard to a case of an offspring that was born after its twin.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讬谉 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪谞讞诐 讗讬砖 讻驻专 砖注专讬诐 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘讬转 砖注专讬诐 诪注砖讛 讜谞砖转讛讛 讜诇讚 讗讞讚 讗讞专 讞讘讬专讜 砖诇砖讛 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讛专讬 讛诐 讬讜砖讘讬诐 诇驻谞讬谞讜 讘讘讬转 讛诪讚专砖 讜诪讗谉 谞讬谞讛讜 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讞讝拽讬讛 讘谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗


Rabbi Avin bar Rav Adda says that Rav Mena岣m of the village of She鈥檃rim, and some say that he was from Beit She鈥檃rim, says: An incident occurred where one offspring remained in the womb after the other was born for three months, and both twins are sitting before us in the study hall. And who are they? They are Yehuda and 岣zkiyya, the sons of Rabbi 岣yya.


讜讛讗 讗诪专 诪专 讗讬谉 讗砖讛 诪转注讘专转 讜讞讜讝专转 讜诪转注讘专转 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讟讬驻讛 讗讞转 讛讬转讛 讜谞转讞诇拽讛 诇砖转讬诐 讗讞讚 谞讙诪专讛 爪讜专转讜 讘转讞诇转 砖讘注讛 讜讗讞讚 讘住讜祝 转砖注讛


The Gemara asks: But didn鈥檛 the Master say that a woman cannot become pregnant and again become pregnant with another offspring while she is pregnant with the first? Abaye says: Both twins were conceived at the same time; it was one drop of semen and it split into two. The form of one was completed at the beginning of the seventh month, and the form of the other one was completed at the end of the ninth month.


砖诇讬讗 讘讘讬转 讛讘讬转 讟诪讗 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖诇讬讗 讘讘讬转 讛讘讬转 讟诪讗 诇讗 砖讛砖诇讬讗 讜诇讚 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 砖诇讬讗 砖讗讬谉 讜诇讚 注诪讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专讬谉


搂 The mishna teaches that if there is an afterbirth in the house, the house is impure in the sense that everything under the roof contracts impurity imparted by a corpse. The Sages taught in a baraita: If there is an afterbirth in the house, the house is impure. The reason is not that the status of an afterbirth is that of an offspring; rather, it is that there is no afterbirth without an offspring, and the offspring rendered the contents of the house impure. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon deem the contents of the house pure.


讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讬 讗转讛 诪讜讚讛 砖讗诐 讛讜爪讬讗讜讛讜 讘住驻诇 诇讘讬转 讛讞讬爪讜谉 砖讛讜讗 讟讛讜专 讗诪专 诇讛谉 讗讘诇 讜诇诪讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜


These Sages said to Rabbi Meir: Do you not concede that if people removed the afterbirth to the outer room of the house in a basin, that the room is pure? Rabbi Meir said to them in response: Indeed, that room is pure; but why so? Because the offspring does not exist anymore, i.e., it presumably disintegrated while it was moved from place to place.


讗诪专讜 诇讜 讻砖诐 砖讗讬谞讜 讘讘讬转 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讻讱 讗讬谞讜 讘讘讬转 讛驻谞讬诪讬 讗诪专 诇讛谉 讗讬谞讜 讚讜诪讛 谞诪讜拽 驻注诐 讗讞转 诇谞诪讜拽 砖转讬 驻注诪讬诐


These Sages said to him: Just as the offspring does not exist when the afterbirth is moved to the outer room, so too, it does not exist when the afterbirth is in the inner room either. In other words, the offspring presumably disintegrated while it was moved from the woman鈥檚 womb to the place in the house where it is located. Rabbi Meir said to them: A situation in which the offspring disintegrated once, when the afterbirth was moved to its first location in the house, is not comparable to a case where the offspring disintegrated twice, i.e., when the afterbirth was first moved to the interior room of the house and then moved to the outer room.


讬转讬讘 专讘 驻驻讗 讗讞讜专讬 讚专讘 讘讬讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讜讬转讬讘 讜拽讗诪专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 拽住讘专 讻诇 讟讜诪讗讛 砖谞转注专讘 讘讛 诪诪讬谉 讗讞专 讘讟诇讛


Rav Pappa sat behind Rav Beivai in the study hall before their teacher Rav Hamnuna, and he sat and said: What is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, that a house in which there is an afterbirth is pure? He holds that with regard to any item that has ritual impurity with which there was mixed an item of another type, it is nullified by the other item and is pure. Consequently, in the case of an offspring that disintegrated, the disintegrated offspring is nullified by the blood of the childbirth.


讗诪专 诇讛讜 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 谞诪讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讞讬讻讜 注诇讬讛 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 驻砖讬讟讗


Rav Pappa said to Rav Beivai, who was a greater scholar than he, and to Rav Hamnuna his teacher: This is also the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei, who agree with Rabbi Shimon in the above baraita. Rav Beivai and Rav Hamnuna laughed at him: What is different about the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei? Since the statement of Rabbi Shimon is attributed to them as well, it is obvious that their reasoning is the same.


讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讬 讛讗 诪讬诇转讗 诇讬诪讗 讗讬谞讬砖 讜诇讗 谞砖转讜拽 拽诪讬讛 专讘讬讛 诪砖讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讗诐 谞讘诇转 讘讛转谞砖讗 讜讗诐 讝诪讜转 讬讚 诇驻讛


Rav Pappa said with regard to this incident: A person should say a matter even as obvious as this one, and one should not be silent in the presence of his teacher, despite the possibility that other people might laugh at him, because it is stated: 鈥淚f you have done foolishly in lifting up yourself, or if you have planned devices [zammota], lay your hand over your mouth鈥 (Proverbs 30:32). One who acts 鈥渇oolishly鈥 over matters of Torah by not hesitating to issue statements that might be ridiculed will ultimately be exalted and lifted up. Conversely, one who muzzles [zamam] himself due to embarrassment will end up with his hand over his mouth, unable to answer questions that are posed to him.


讜讗讝讚讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚转谞讬讗 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘 砖谞驻诇 诇转讜讻讜 注驻专 讻诇 砖讛讜 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专


With regard to Rabbi Shimon鈥檚 opinion that the woman is pure because the offspring is nullified by the blood of childbirth, the Gemara notes: And Rabbi Shimon follows his standard line of reasoning, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a ladleful [melo tarvad] of dust from a corpse, which is the minimum amount that renders everything in a house impure, into which any amount of dirt fell, the house is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems it pure.


诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讗砖讻讞转讬谞讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 讚讘讬 专讘 讚讬转讘讬 讜拽讗诪专讬 讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 砖转讬 驻专讬讚讜转 注驻专 注诇 驻专讬讚讛 讗讞转 砖诇 专拽讘 讜讞住讬专 诇讬讛


The Gemara asks: What is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? Why is the house pure when it contains a ladleful of dust from a corpse? Rabba said: I found the Sages of the study hall of Rav sitting and saying: The reason Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure is that it is impossible for there not to be two grains of dirt that are more than one grain of dust from the corpse, in a certain place in the mixture. And as that grain of dust from the corpse is nullified by the dirt, the amount of dust that remains is insufficient for rendering the house impure.


讜讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛讜 讗讚专讘讛 讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 砖转讬 驻专讬讚讜转 专拽讘 注诇


And I said to them: On the contrary, according to this reasoning the house should certainly be impure, as it is impossible for there not to be two grains of dust from the corpse that are more than


驻专讬讚讛 讗讞转 注驻专 讜谞驻讬诇 诇讬讛 砖讬注讜专讗


one grain of dirt in a certain place in the mixture. That grain of dirt is thereby nullified by the dust of the corpse, and consequently the measure of the dust increases.


讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 住讜驻讜 讻转讞诇转讜 诪讛 转讞诇转讜 谞注砖讛 诇讜 讚讘专 讗讞专 讙谞讙讬诇讜谉 讗祝 住讜驻讜 谞注砖讛 诇讜 讚讘专 讗讞专 讙谞讙讬诇讜谉


Rather, Rabba said that this is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon: The halakha with regard to a corpse in its ultimate state of dust is like the halakha in its initial state of decomposition: Just as with regard to its initial state, if another matter is mixed with the decomposing corpse it serves as a nullification [gangilon] of the corpse鈥檚 impurity, as the dust of a decomposed corpse can impart impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance, so too, in the corpse鈥檚 ultimate state of dust, if another matter is mixed with it, that serves as a nullification of the impurity of the dust.


诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗讬讝讛讜 诪转 砖讬砖 诇讜 专拽讘 讜讗讬讝讛讜 诪转 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 专拽讘 谞拽讘专 注专讜诐 讘讗专讜谉 砖诇 砖讬砖 讗讜 注诇 讙讘讬 专爪驻讛 砖诇 讗讘谞讬诐 讝讛讜 诪转 砖讬砖 诇讜 专拽讘


The Gemara asks: What is the source for the halakha that the dust of a corpse imparts impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance? The Gemara answers: As it is taught in a baraita: Which is a corpse that has the halakha of dust, i.e., whose dust imparts impurity; and which is a corpse that does not have the halakha of dust? If a corpse was buried naked in a marble coffin or on a stone floor, that is a corpse that has the halakha of dust that imparts impurity. Since any dust found there must have come from the corpse, it imparts impurity.


讜讗讬讝讛讜 诪转 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 专拽讘 谞拽讘专 讘讻住讜转讜 讗讜 讘讗专讜谉 砖诇 注抓 讗讜 注诇 讙讘讬 专爪驻讛 砖诇 诇讘谞讬诐 讝讛讜 诪转 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 专拽讘 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 专拽讘 讗诇讗 诇诪转 讘诇讘讚 诇诪注讜讟讬 讛专讜讙 讚诇讗


And what is a corpse that does not have the halakha of dust? If a corpse was buried in its cloak, or in a wooden coffin, or on a brick floor, that is a corpse that does not have the halakha of dust that imparts impurity, as it is assumed that some of the dust is from particles of the clothes, wood, or bricks, and the dust from a decomposed corpse imparts impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance. The baraita adds another halakha with regard to the impurity of the dust of a corpse: And the Sages said that the dust of a corpse is impure only with regard to the corpse of a person who died naturally, excluding one who was killed, whose dust is not impure.


讙讜驻讗 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘 砖谞驻诇 诇转讜讻讜 注驻专 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘 砖谞转驻讝专 讘讘讬转 讛讘讬转 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专


搂 The Gemara returns to discuss the matter itself, i.e., the baraita cited above that clarifies the opinion of Rabbi Shimon: In the case of a ladleful of dust from a corpse into which any amount of dirt fell, the house is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems it pure. The baraita continues: In the case of a ladleful of dust from a corpse that was scattered in the house, the house is impure. Provided that there is a sufficient amount of dust in the house, the house is impure, even if the dust is scattered. And Rabbi Shimon deems it pure.


讜爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 拽诪讬讬转讗 讘讛讛讬讗 拽讗诪专讬 专讘谞谉 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讻谞讬祝 讗讘诇 谞转驻讝专 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚讗讬谉 诪讗讛讬诇 讜讞讜讝专 讜诪讗讛讬诇


The Gemara comments: And it is necessary for the baraita to state both of these halakhot. As, if the baraita had taught us only the first halakha, with regard to dust from a corpse in which dirt was mixed, one might have thought that it is specifically in that case that the Rabbis say the house is impure, because the dust is concentrated in one place; but if the dust was scattered, one might say that the Rabbis concede to Rabbi Shimon that the house is pure. The reasoning is that if an item overlies a collection of dust of a corpse that is insufficient to render it impure and also overlies another collection of similar size, where together these collections constitute a sufficient amount to render the item and everything under it impure, it is not impure.


讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讘讛讗 讘讛讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚讗讬谉 诪讗讛讬诇 讜讞讜讝专 讜诪讗讛讬诇 讗讘诇 讘讛讗 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讛 诇讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 爪专讬讻讗


And if the baraita had taught us the halakha only with regard to this second case, where the dust of the corpse was scattered, one might have thought that it is specifically in this case that Rabbi Shimon says that the house is pure, as an item that overlies an insufficient collection of the dust of a corpse and also overlies another collection, where together these collections constitute a sufficient amount to render the item impure, is not impure. But in that first case, where dirt was mixed with the dust of the corpse, one might say that Rabbi Shimon concedes to the Rabbis that the house is impure. Therefore, it is necessary for the baraita to teach both cases.


转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 讜注讜讚 注驻专 讘讬转 讛拽讘专讜转 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚专讘谞谉 诇驻讬 砖讗讬 讗驻砖专 诇诪诇讗 转专讜讚 讜注讜讚 注驻专 讘讬转 讛拽讘专讜转 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘


There is a different dispute between Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis that is taught in another mishna (Oholot 2:2): If a house contains a ladleful of dirt from a cemetery and slightly more, the house is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems it pure. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for the opinion of the Rabbis? The Gemara answers: They deem the house impure as it is impossible for slightly more than a ladleful of dirt from a cemetery not to contain a ladleful of dust from a corpse.


讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪砖讜诐 住讜驻讜 讻转讞诇转讜 讙讘讬 砖诇讬讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪砖讜诐 讘讟讜诇 讘专讜讘 谞讙注讜 讘讛


搂 The Gemara asks: Now that you say that the reason that Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure, in a case where it contains dust from a corpse in which dirt was mixed, is that in his opinion the halakha of a corpse in its ultimate state of dust is like the halakha in its initial state of decomposition, then with regard to a case where there is an afterbirth in the house, what is the reason that Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure? Rabbi Yo岣nan says: The Sages touched upon it, i.e., deemed the house pure, due to the nullification of the disintegrated offspring by the majority of the blood that emerged during the miscarriage, in which the afterbirth was mixed.


讜讗讝讚讗 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘 讗诪专讜 讚讘专 讗讞讚 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讛讗 讚讗诪专谉 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘 讗讜诪专 讘讛诪讛 讙住讛 砖砖驻注讛 讞专专转 讚诐 讛专讬 讝讜 转拽讘专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讻讜专讛


And Rabbi Yo岣nan follows his line of reasoning in this regard, as Rabbi Yo岣nan says: Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov both said the same thing, i.e., they both issued rulings based on the same principle. The relevant statement of Rabbi Shimon is that which we said, i.e., that if a woman discharged an afterbirth the house is pure, as the offspring is nullified by the blood that emerged during the miscarriage. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov said that which is taught in a mishna (Bekhorot 21a): Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov says: In the case of a large animal that expelled a mass of congealed blood, that mass must be buried, as perhaps there was a male fetus there, which was consecrated as a firstborn when it emerged, and the animal is exempt from having any future offspring being counted a firstborn.


讜转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 注诇讛 讗讬谞讛 诪讟诪讗讛 诇讗 讘诪讙注 讜诇讗 讘诪砖讗 讜诪讗讞专 砖讗讬谞讛 诪讟诪讗讛 诇讗 讘诪讙注 讜诇讗 讘诪砖讗 讗诪讗讬 转拽讘专 讻讚讬 诇驻专住诪讛 砖讛讬讗 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讻讜专讛


And Rabbi 岣yya teaches a baraita with regard to that halakha: The mass of congealed blood does not impart ritual impurity, neither through physical contact nor through carrying it. It does not have the status of an unslaughtered animal carcass, which does impart impurity in such manners. The Gemara asks: But since the mass does not impart impurity, neither through contact nor through carrying, which indicates that it is not considered a fetus, why must it be buried? The Gemara answers: It must be buried in order to publicize that the animal is exempt from having its future offspring being counted a firstborn.


讗诇诪讗 讜诇讚 诪注诇讬讗 讛讜讗 讜讗诪讗讬 转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讗讬谞讛 诪讟诪讗讛 诇讗 讘诪讙注 讜诇讗 讘诪砖讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪砖讜诐 讘讟讜诇 讘专讜讘 谞讙注讜 讘讛


The Gemara asks: If the animal鈥檚 subsequent offspring is not counted a firstborn, evidently the mass is treated like a full-fledged offspring. But if so, why does Rabbi 岣yya teach that it does not impart impurity, neither through physical contact nor through carrying? Rabbi Yo岣nan says: It is due to the halakhic nullification of a foreign substance in a majority of permitted substances that the Sages touched upon it, to exclude it from impurity through contact or carrying. In other words, the fetus is considered a full-fledged offspring, but it does not impart impurity, because it is nullified by the rest of the congealed mass.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜诪讜讚讛 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 砖讗诪讜 讟诪讗讛 诇讬讚讛


搂 The Gemara resumes its discussion of the opinion of Rabbi Shimon that if a woman discharges an afterbirth in a house, the house is pure. Rabbi Ami says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: And Rabbi Shimon concedes that its mother is impure with the impurity of a woman after childbirth.


讗诪专 讛讛讜讗 住讘讗 诇专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗住讘专讗 诇讱 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 讗砖讛 讻讬 转讝专讬注 讜讬诇讚讛 讝讻专 讜讙讜壮 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讗 讬诇讚讛 讗诇讗 讻注讬谉 砖讛讝专讬注讛 讟诪讗讛 诇讬讚讛


A certain elder said to Rabbi Ami: I will explain to you the reason for the statement of Rabbi Yo岣nan. As the verse states: 鈥淚f a woman bears seed and gives birth to a male, she shall be impure seven days, as in the days of the menstruation of her sickness she shall be impure鈥 (Leviticus 12:2). This indicates that even if a woman gives birth to an offspring that is similar only to the seed that she bore, i.e., if the offspring liquefied and became similar to semen, the woman is impure with the impurity of a woman after childbirth.


专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专 砖驻讬专 砖讟专驻讜讛讜 讘诪讬诪讬讜 谞注砖讛 讻诪转 砖谞转讘诇讘诇讛 爪讜专转讜


Reish Lakish says: In the case of a fetus in a gestational sac, that was mashed in its amniotic fluid by being shaken violently, it is rendered like a corpse that was deformed, and therefore it does not impart impurity to other items that are under the same roof.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诪转 砖谞转讘诇讘诇讛 爪讜专转讜 诪谞诇谉 讚讟讛讜专 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诪讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 砖讘转讗讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪讙讚诇讗讛 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪讙讚诇讗讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖讘转讗讬 诪转 砖谞砖专祝 讜砖诇讚讜 拽讬讬诪转 讟诪讗 诪注砖讛 讛讬讛 讜讟诪讗讜 诇讜 驻转讞讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐


Rabbi Yo岣nan said to Reish Lakish: From where do we derive that a corpse that was deformed is pure? If we say it is derived from that which Rabbi Shabbtai says that Rabbi Yitz岣k from Migdal [Migdala鈥檃] says, and some say from that which Rabbi Yitz岣k from Migdal says that Rabbi Shabbtai says, that cannot be correct. The Gemara cites the relevant statement: With regard to a corpse that was burned but its form [veshildo] still exists, i.e., it still has the form of a human corpse, it is impure. There was an incident involving such a corpse, and the Sages deemed impure all items that were under the large openings of the house where the corpse was located, as these openings were fit for the removal of the corpse from the house through them.


Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Niddah 27

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Niddah 27

讞讜诪专 砖谞讬 讜诇讚讜转 砖讗谞讬 讗讜诪专 砖诪讗 谞诪讜讞 砖驻讬专 砖诇 砖诇讬讗 讜谞诪讜讞 砖诇讬讗 砖诇 砖驻讬专 转讬讜讘转讗


the stringency of two offspring, as I say: Perhaps the gestational sac of this afterbirth, which contained the offspring, disintegrated, and the afterbirth of the gestational sac containing the fetus shaped like an animal also disintegrated. If so, there are two offspring, and as it is possible that one is male and the other female, the mother must observe the strictures of one who gave birth to both a male and a female. In any event, this baraita is a conclusive refutation of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi鈥檚 claim that it is impossible for an afterbirth to be tied to a fetus that has the form of a bird.


讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 砖讬诇讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪转谞讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪注砖讛 讜转诇讜 讗转 讛砖诇讬讗 讘讜诇讚 注讚 注砖专讛 讬诪讬诐 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 转讜诇讬谉 讗诇讗 讘砖诇讬讗 讛讘讗讛 讗讞专 讛讜诇讚


Rabba bar Sheila says that Rav Mattana says that Shmuel says: An incident occurred where the Sages attributed the afterbirth that a woman discharged to an offspring that was born up to ten days beforehand. And Shmuel added that the Sages said that one attributes an afterbirth to an offspring that was born only in the case of an afterbirth that emerges after the offspring is born. By contrast, an afterbirth that emerges before the offspring is born is not attributed to that offspring.


讗诪专 专讘讛 讘专 讘专 讞谞讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪注砖讛 讜转诇讜 讗转 讛砖诇讬讗 讘讜诇讚 注讚 注砖专讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 讬诪讬诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 注讚 注砖专讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讗诪专转 诇谉


Rabba bar bar 岣na says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: There was an incident where the Sages attributed the afterbirth to an offspring that was born up to twenty-three days beforehand. Rav Yosef said to him a correction of his statement: You said to us on another occasion that the offspring was born up to twenty-four days beforehand.


讗诪专 专讘 讗讞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 注讜讬专讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪注砖讛 讜谞砖转讛讛 讛讜诇讚 讗讞专 讞讘讬专讜 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 讬讜诐 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘 讬讜住祝 砖诇砖讬诐 讜讗专讘注讛 讗诪专转 诇谉


Rav A岣, son of Rav Avira, says that Rabbi Yitz岣k says: There was an incident where a woman was pregnant with twins, and one offspring remained in the womb for thirty-three days after the other offspring was born. Rav Yosef said to him: You said to us on another occasion that the second offspring was born thirty-four days after the first.


讛谞讬讞讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讬讜诇讚转 诇转砖注讛 讬讜诇讚转 诇诪拽讜讟注讬谉 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讗讞讚 谞讙诪专讛 爪讜专转讜 诇住讜祝 砖讘注讛 讜讗讞讚 谞讙诪专讛 爪讜专转讜 诇转讞诇转 转砖注讛 讗诇讗 诇诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讬讜诇讚转 诇转砖注讛 讗讬谞讛 讬讜诇讚转 诇诪拽讜讟注讬谉 诪讗讬 讗讬讻讗 诇诪讬诪专


The Gemara asks: This works out well according to the one who says that if a woman gives birth to a baby in her ninth month, she can give birth prematurely (see Rosh HaShana 11a). You find a situation where there could be such a difference between the births of the two twins if the form of one of the twin fetuses was completed at the end of the seventh month, and it is born at that stage, and the form of the other one was completed at the beginning of the ninth month, and it is born then. In such a case, there can be a difference of thirty-four days between the births. But according to the one who says that a woman who gives birth to a baby in her ninth month cannot give birth prematurely, but rather she gives birth at the end of the ninth month, what is there to say?


讗讬驻讜讱 砖诪注转转讗 砖诇砖讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 诇砖诇讬讗 注砖专讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛 诇讜诇讚


The Gemara answers that one should reverse the statements: The difference of thirty-three days was stated with regard to a case of an afterbirth that was discharged an extended period after the birth of the offspring, whereas the gap of twenty-three days was stated with regard to a case of an offspring that was born after its twin.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讗讘讬谉 讘专 专讘 讗讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 诪谞讞诐 讗讬砖 讻驻专 砖注专讬诐 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讘讬转 砖注专讬诐 诪注砖讛 讜谞砖转讛讛 讜诇讚 讗讞讚 讗讞专 讞讘讬专讜 砖诇砖讛 讞讚砖讬诐 讜讛专讬 讛诐 讬讜砖讘讬诐 诇驻谞讬谞讜 讘讘讬转 讛诪讚专砖 讜诪讗谉 谞讬谞讛讜 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讞讝拽讬讛 讘谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗


Rabbi Avin bar Rav Adda says that Rav Mena岣m of the village of She鈥檃rim, and some say that he was from Beit She鈥檃rim, says: An incident occurred where one offspring remained in the womb after the other was born for three months, and both twins are sitting before us in the study hall. And who are they? They are Yehuda and 岣zkiyya, the sons of Rabbi 岣yya.


讜讛讗 讗诪专 诪专 讗讬谉 讗砖讛 诪转注讘专转 讜讞讜讝专转 讜诪转注讘专转 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讟讬驻讛 讗讞转 讛讬转讛 讜谞转讞诇拽讛 诇砖转讬诐 讗讞讚 谞讙诪专讛 爪讜专转讜 讘转讞诇转 砖讘注讛 讜讗讞讚 讘住讜祝 转砖注讛


The Gemara asks: But didn鈥檛 the Master say that a woman cannot become pregnant and again become pregnant with another offspring while she is pregnant with the first? Abaye says: Both twins were conceived at the same time; it was one drop of semen and it split into two. The form of one was completed at the beginning of the seventh month, and the form of the other one was completed at the end of the ninth month.


砖诇讬讗 讘讘讬转 讛讘讬转 讟诪讗 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 砖诇讬讗 讘讘讬转 讛讘讬转 讟诪讗 诇讗 砖讛砖诇讬讗 讜诇讚 讗诇讗 砖讗讬谉 砖诇讬讗 砖讗讬谉 讜诇讚 注诪讛 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专讬谉


搂 The mishna teaches that if there is an afterbirth in the house, the house is impure in the sense that everything under the roof contracts impurity imparted by a corpse. The Sages taught in a baraita: If there is an afterbirth in the house, the house is impure. The reason is not that the status of an afterbirth is that of an offspring; rather, it is that there is no afterbirth without an offspring, and the offspring rendered the contents of the house impure. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon deem the contents of the house pure.


讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讬 讗转讛 诪讜讚讛 砖讗诐 讛讜爪讬讗讜讛讜 讘住驻诇 诇讘讬转 讛讞讬爪讜谉 砖讛讜讗 讟讛讜专 讗诪专 诇讛谉 讗讘诇 讜诇诪讛 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谞讜


These Sages said to Rabbi Meir: Do you not concede that if people removed the afterbirth to the outer room of the house in a basin, that the room is pure? Rabbi Meir said to them in response: Indeed, that room is pure; but why so? Because the offspring does not exist anymore, i.e., it presumably disintegrated while it was moved from place to place.


讗诪专讜 诇讜 讻砖诐 砖讗讬谞讜 讘讘讬转 讛讞讬爪讜谉 讻讱 讗讬谞讜 讘讘讬转 讛驻谞讬诪讬 讗诪专 诇讛谉 讗讬谞讜 讚讜诪讛 谞诪讜拽 驻注诐 讗讞转 诇谞诪讜拽 砖转讬 驻注诪讬诐


These Sages said to him: Just as the offspring does not exist when the afterbirth is moved to the outer room, so too, it does not exist when the afterbirth is in the inner room either. In other words, the offspring presumably disintegrated while it was moved from the woman鈥檚 womb to the place in the house where it is located. Rabbi Meir said to them: A situation in which the offspring disintegrated once, when the afterbirth was moved to its first location in the house, is not comparable to a case where the offspring disintegrated twice, i.e., when the afterbirth was first moved to the interior room of the house and then moved to the outer room.


讬转讬讘 专讘 驻驻讗 讗讞讜专讬 讚专讘 讘讬讘讬 拽诪讬讛 讚专讘 讛诪谞讜谞讗 讜讬转讬讘 讜拽讗诪专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 拽住讘专 讻诇 讟讜诪讗讛 砖谞转注专讘 讘讛 诪诪讬谉 讗讞专 讘讟诇讛


Rav Pappa sat behind Rav Beivai in the study hall before their teacher Rav Hamnuna, and he sat and said: What is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, that a house in which there is an afterbirth is pure? He holds that with regard to any item that has ritual impurity with which there was mixed an item of another type, it is nullified by the other item and is pure. Consequently, in the case of an offspring that disintegrated, the disintegrated offspring is nullified by the blood of the childbirth.


讗诪专 诇讛讜 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 谞诪讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讜专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讞讬讻讜 注诇讬讛 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 驻砖讬讟讗


Rav Pappa said to Rav Beivai, who was a greater scholar than he, and to Rav Hamnuna his teacher: This is also the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei, who agree with Rabbi Shimon in the above baraita. Rav Beivai and Rav Hamnuna laughed at him: What is different about the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei? Since the statement of Rabbi Shimon is attributed to them as well, it is obvious that their reasoning is the same.


讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讗驻讬诇讜 讻讬 讛讗 诪讬诇转讗 诇讬诪讗 讗讬谞讬砖 讜诇讗 谞砖转讜拽 拽诪讬讛 专讘讬讛 诪砖讜诐 砖谞讗诪专 讗诐 谞讘诇转 讘讛转谞砖讗 讜讗诐 讝诪讜转 讬讚 诇驻讛


Rav Pappa said with regard to this incident: A person should say a matter even as obvious as this one, and one should not be silent in the presence of his teacher, despite the possibility that other people might laugh at him, because it is stated: 鈥淚f you have done foolishly in lifting up yourself, or if you have planned devices [zammota], lay your hand over your mouth鈥 (Proverbs 30:32). One who acts 鈥渇oolishly鈥 over matters of Torah by not hesitating to issue statements that might be ridiculed will ultimately be exalted and lifted up. Conversely, one who muzzles [zamam] himself due to embarrassment will end up with his hand over his mouth, unable to answer questions that are posed to him.


讜讗讝讚讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚转谞讬讗 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘 砖谞驻诇 诇转讜讻讜 注驻专 讻诇 砖讛讜 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专


With regard to Rabbi Shimon鈥檚 opinion that the woman is pure because the offspring is nullified by the blood of childbirth, the Gemara notes: And Rabbi Shimon follows his standard line of reasoning, as it is taught in a baraita: In the case of a ladleful [melo tarvad] of dust from a corpse, which is the minimum amount that renders everything in a house impure, into which any amount of dirt fell, the house is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems it pure.


诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗诪专 专讘讛 讗砖讻讞转讬谞讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 讚讘讬 专讘 讚讬转讘讬 讜拽讗诪专讬 讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 砖转讬 驻专讬讚讜转 注驻专 注诇 驻专讬讚讛 讗讞转 砖诇 专拽讘 讜讞住讬专 诇讬讛


The Gemara asks: What is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon? Why is the house pure when it contains a ladleful of dust from a corpse? Rabba said: I found the Sages of the study hall of Rav sitting and saying: The reason Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure is that it is impossible for there not to be two grains of dirt that are more than one grain of dust from the corpse, in a certain place in the mixture. And as that grain of dust from the corpse is nullified by the dirt, the amount of dust that remains is insufficient for rendering the house impure.


讜讗诪讬谞讗 诇讛讜 讗讚专讘讛 讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖诇讗 讬专讘讜 砖转讬 驻专讬讚讜转 专拽讘 注诇


And I said to them: On the contrary, according to this reasoning the house should certainly be impure, as it is impossible for there not to be two grains of dust from the corpse that are more than


驻专讬讚讛 讗讞转 注驻专 讜谞驻讬诇 诇讬讛 砖讬注讜专讗


one grain of dirt in a certain place in the mixture. That grain of dirt is thereby nullified by the dust of the corpse, and consequently the measure of the dust increases.


讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讛 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 住讜驻讜 讻转讞诇转讜 诪讛 转讞诇转讜 谞注砖讛 诇讜 讚讘专 讗讞专 讙谞讙讬诇讜谉 讗祝 住讜驻讜 谞注砖讛 诇讜 讚讘专 讗讞专 讙谞讙讬诇讜谉


Rather, Rabba said that this is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Shimon: The halakha with regard to a corpse in its ultimate state of dust is like the halakha in its initial state of decomposition: Just as with regard to its initial state, if another matter is mixed with the decomposing corpse it serves as a nullification [gangilon] of the corpse鈥檚 impurity, as the dust of a decomposed corpse can impart impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance, so too, in the corpse鈥檚 ultimate state of dust, if another matter is mixed with it, that serves as a nullification of the impurity of the dust.


诪讗讬 讛讬讗 讚转谞讬讗 讗讬讝讛讜 诪转 砖讬砖 诇讜 专拽讘 讜讗讬讝讛讜 诪转 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 专拽讘 谞拽讘专 注专讜诐 讘讗专讜谉 砖诇 砖讬砖 讗讜 注诇 讙讘讬 专爪驻讛 砖诇 讗讘谞讬诐 讝讛讜 诪转 砖讬砖 诇讜 专拽讘


The Gemara asks: What is the source for the halakha that the dust of a corpse imparts impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance? The Gemara answers: As it is taught in a baraita: Which is a corpse that has the halakha of dust, i.e., whose dust imparts impurity; and which is a corpse that does not have the halakha of dust? If a corpse was buried naked in a marble coffin or on a stone floor, that is a corpse that has the halakha of dust that imparts impurity. Since any dust found there must have come from the corpse, it imparts impurity.


讜讗讬讝讛讜 诪转 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 专拽讘 谞拽讘专 讘讻住讜转讜 讗讜 讘讗专讜谉 砖诇 注抓 讗讜 注诇 讙讘讬 专爪驻讛 砖诇 诇讘谞讬诐 讝讛讜 诪转 砖讗讬谉 诇讜 专拽讘 讜诇讗 讗诪专讜 专拽讘 讗诇讗 诇诪转 讘诇讘讚 诇诪注讜讟讬 讛专讜讙 讚诇讗


And what is a corpse that does not have the halakha of dust? If a corpse was buried in its cloak, or in a wooden coffin, or on a brick floor, that is a corpse that does not have the halakha of dust that imparts impurity, as it is assumed that some of the dust is from particles of the clothes, wood, or bricks, and the dust from a decomposed corpse imparts impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance. The baraita adds another halakha with regard to the impurity of the dust of a corpse: And the Sages said that the dust of a corpse is impure only with regard to the corpse of a person who died naturally, excluding one who was killed, whose dust is not impure.


讙讜驻讗 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘 砖谞驻诇 诇转讜讻讜 注驻专 讻诇 砖讛讜讗 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘 砖谞转驻讝专 讘讘讬转 讛讘讬转 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专


搂 The Gemara returns to discuss the matter itself, i.e., the baraita cited above that clarifies the opinion of Rabbi Shimon: In the case of a ladleful of dust from a corpse into which any amount of dirt fell, the house is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems it pure. The baraita continues: In the case of a ladleful of dust from a corpse that was scattered in the house, the house is impure. Provided that there is a sufficient amount of dust in the house, the house is impure, even if the dust is scattered. And Rabbi Shimon deems it pure.


讜爪专讬讻讗 讚讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 拽诪讬讬转讗 讘讛讛讬讗 拽讗诪专讬 专讘谞谉 诪砖讜诐 讚诪讻谞讬祝 讗讘诇 谞转驻讝专 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚讗讬谉 诪讗讛讬诇 讜讞讜讝专 讜诪讗讛讬诇


The Gemara comments: And it is necessary for the baraita to state both of these halakhot. As, if the baraita had taught us only the first halakha, with regard to dust from a corpse in which dirt was mixed, one might have thought that it is specifically in that case that the Rabbis say the house is impure, because the dust is concentrated in one place; but if the dust was scattered, one might say that the Rabbis concede to Rabbi Shimon that the house is pure. The reasoning is that if an item overlies a collection of dust of a corpse that is insufficient to render it impure and also overlies another collection of similar size, where together these collections constitute a sufficient amount to render the item and everything under it impure, it is not impure.


讜讗讬 讗砖诪注讬谞谉 讘讛讗 讘讛讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讚讗讬谉 诪讗讛讬诇 讜讞讜讝专 讜诪讗讛讬诇 讗讘诇 讘讛讗 讗讬诪讗 诪讜讚讛 诇讛讜 诇专讘谞谉 爪专讬讻讗


And if the baraita had taught us the halakha only with regard to this second case, where the dust of the corpse was scattered, one might have thought that it is specifically in this case that Rabbi Shimon says that the house is pure, as an item that overlies an insufficient collection of the dust of a corpse and also overlies another collection, where together these collections constitute a sufficient amount to render the item impure, is not impure. But in that first case, where dirt was mixed with the dust of the corpse, one might say that Rabbi Shimon concedes to the Rabbis that the house is impure. Therefore, it is necessary for the baraita to teach both cases.


转谞讬讗 讗讬讚讱 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 讜注讜讚 注驻专 讘讬转 讛拽讘专讜转 讟诪讗 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪讟讛专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚专讘谞谉 诇驻讬 砖讗讬 讗驻砖专 诇诪诇讗 转专讜讚 讜注讜讚 注驻专 讘讬转 讛拽讘专讜转 砖讗讬谉 讘讜 诪诇讗 转专讜讚 专拽讘


There is a different dispute between Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis that is taught in another mishna (Oholot 2:2): If a house contains a ladleful of dirt from a cemetery and slightly more, the house is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems it pure. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for the opinion of the Rabbis? The Gemara answers: They deem the house impure as it is impossible for slightly more than a ladleful of dirt from a cemetery not to contain a ladleful of dust from a corpse.


讛砖转讗 讚讗诪专转 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪砖讜诐 住讜驻讜 讻转讞诇转讜 讙讘讬 砖诇讬讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪砖讜诐 讘讟讜诇 讘专讜讘 谞讙注讜 讘讛


搂 The Gemara asks: Now that you say that the reason that Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure, in a case where it contains dust from a corpse in which dirt was mixed, is that in his opinion the halakha of a corpse in its ultimate state of dust is like the halakha in its initial state of decomposition, then with regard to a case where there is an afterbirth in the house, what is the reason that Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure? Rabbi Yo岣nan says: The Sages touched upon it, i.e., deemed the house pure, due to the nullification of the disintegrated offspring by the majority of the blood that emerged during the miscarriage, in which the afterbirth was mixed.


讜讗讝讚讗 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇讟注诪讬讛 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘 讗诪专讜 讚讘专 讗讞讚 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讛讗 讚讗诪专谉 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讚转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讘谉 讬注拽讘 讗讜诪专 讘讛诪讛 讙住讛 砖砖驻注讛 讞专专转 讚诐 讛专讬 讝讜 转拽讘专 讜驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讻讜专讛


And Rabbi Yo岣nan follows his line of reasoning in this regard, as Rabbi Yo岣nan says: Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov both said the same thing, i.e., they both issued rulings based on the same principle. The relevant statement of Rabbi Shimon is that which we said, i.e., that if a woman discharged an afterbirth the house is pure, as the offspring is nullified by the blood that emerged during the miscarriage. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov said that which is taught in a mishna (Bekhorot 21a): Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya鈥檃kov says: In the case of a large animal that expelled a mass of congealed blood, that mass must be buried, as perhaps there was a male fetus there, which was consecrated as a firstborn when it emerged, and the animal is exempt from having any future offspring being counted a firstborn.


讜转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 注诇讛 讗讬谞讛 诪讟诪讗讛 诇讗 讘诪讙注 讜诇讗 讘诪砖讗 讜诪讗讞专 砖讗讬谞讛 诪讟诪讗讛 诇讗 讘诪讙注 讜诇讗 讘诪砖讗 讗诪讗讬 转拽讘专 讻讚讬 诇驻专住诪讛 砖讛讬讗 驻讟讜专讛 诪谉 讛讘讻讜专讛


And Rabbi 岣yya teaches a baraita with regard to that halakha: The mass of congealed blood does not impart ritual impurity, neither through physical contact nor through carrying it. It does not have the status of an unslaughtered animal carcass, which does impart impurity in such manners. The Gemara asks: But since the mass does not impart impurity, neither through contact nor through carrying, which indicates that it is not considered a fetus, why must it be buried? The Gemara answers: It must be buried in order to publicize that the animal is exempt from having its future offspring being counted a firstborn.


讗诇诪讗 讜诇讚 诪注诇讬讗 讛讜讗 讜讗诪讗讬 转谞讬 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讗讬谞讛 诪讟诪讗讛 诇讗 讘诪讙注 讜诇讗 讘诪砖讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪砖讜诐 讘讟讜诇 讘专讜讘 谞讙注讜 讘讛


The Gemara asks: If the animal鈥檚 subsequent offspring is not counted a firstborn, evidently the mass is treated like a full-fledged offspring. But if so, why does Rabbi 岣yya teach that it does not impart impurity, neither through physical contact nor through carrying? Rabbi Yo岣nan says: It is due to the halakhic nullification of a foreign substance in a majority of permitted substances that the Sages touched upon it, to exclude it from impurity through contact or carrying. In other words, the fetus is considered a full-fledged offspring, but it does not impart impurity, because it is nullified by the rest of the congealed mass.


讗诪专 专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讜诪讜讚讛 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 砖讗诪讜 讟诪讗讛 诇讬讚讛


搂 The Gemara resumes its discussion of the opinion of Rabbi Shimon that if a woman discharges an afterbirth in a house, the house is pure. Rabbi Ami says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: And Rabbi Shimon concedes that its mother is impure with the impurity of a woman after childbirth.


讗诪专 讛讛讜讗 住讘讗 诇专讘讬 讗诪讬 讗住讘专讗 诇讱 讟注诪讗 讚专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 讚讗诪专 拽专讗 讗砖讛 讻讬 转讝专讬注 讜讬诇讚讛 讝讻专 讜讙讜壮 讗驻讬诇讜 诇讗 讬诇讚讛 讗诇讗 讻注讬谉 砖讛讝专讬注讛 讟诪讗讛 诇讬讚讛


A certain elder said to Rabbi Ami: I will explain to you the reason for the statement of Rabbi Yo岣nan. As the verse states: 鈥淚f a woman bears seed and gives birth to a male, she shall be impure seven days, as in the days of the menstruation of her sickness she shall be impure鈥 (Leviticus 12:2). This indicates that even if a woman gives birth to an offspring that is similar only to the seed that she bore, i.e., if the offspring liquefied and became similar to semen, the woman is impure with the impurity of a woman after childbirth.


专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 讗诪专 砖驻讬专 砖讟专驻讜讛讜 讘诪讬诪讬讜 谞注砖讛 讻诪转 砖谞转讘诇讘诇讛 爪讜专转讜


Reish Lakish says: In the case of a fetus in a gestational sac, that was mashed in its amniotic fluid by being shaken violently, it is rendered like a corpse that was deformed, and therefore it does not impart impurity to other items that are under the same roof.


讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诇专讬砖 诇拽讬砖 诪转 砖谞转讘诇讘诇讛 爪讜专转讜 诪谞诇谉 讚讟讛讜专 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诪讛讗 讚讗诪专 专讘讬 砖讘转讗讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪讙讚诇讗讛 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬爪讞拽 诪讙讚诇讗讛 讗诪专 专讘讬 砖讘转讗讬 诪转 砖谞砖专祝 讜砖诇讚讜 拽讬讬诪转 讟诪讗 诪注砖讛 讛讬讛 讜讟诪讗讜 诇讜 驻转讞讬诐 讙讚讜诇讬诐


Rabbi Yo岣nan said to Reish Lakish: From where do we derive that a corpse that was deformed is pure? If we say it is derived from that which Rabbi Shabbtai says that Rabbi Yitz岣k from Migdal [Migdala鈥檃] says, and some say from that which Rabbi Yitz岣k from Migdal says that Rabbi Shabbtai says, that cannot be correct. The Gemara cites the relevant statement: With regard to a corpse that was burned but its form [veshildo] still exists, i.e., it still has the form of a human corpse, it is impure. There was an incident involving such a corpse, and the Sages deemed impure all items that were under the large openings of the house where the corpse was located, as these openings were fit for the removal of the corpse from the house through them.


Scroll To Top