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

Today's Daf Yomi

November 30, 2019 | 讘壮 讘讻住诇讜 转砖状驻

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

Niddah 38

The gemara continues to discuss and explain the various opinions regarding the time in which a woman who has contractions before birth with bleeding is not considered a zava. What is the status of the blood of a woman who has bleeding with contractions in the middle of her days of pure blood after pregnancy – Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree regarding whether or not they are considered niddah/zava and are impure or not.


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

讗驻讬诇讜 讬诪讬诐 讛专讗讜讬讬谉 诇住驻讬专转 住转讬专转 讝讘讛

even if she continues to experience bleeding during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava, she remains pure. If a woman experiences bleeding during her seven clean days, she negates any days counted thus far, and must begin a new count of seven clean days. Accordingly, all the days that follow her days of ziva are effectively considered days that are fit for the counting of a zava. Therefore, blood emitted due to labor pains during these days is also ritually pure. Consequently, the blood that accompanies labor pains is ritually impure only if she begins to emit it during her days of menstruation.

转谞谉 讻诪讛 讛讜讗 拽砖讜讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗专讘注讬诐 讜讞诪砖讬诐 讬讜诐

The Gemara poses a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Levi: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure.

讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讻专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讗诇讗 诇诇讜讬 拽砖讬讗

The Gemara explains the difficulty: Granted, the mishna is clear according to Rav, as you find that it is possible that she will remain pure for such a long period, i.e., in accordance with the explanation of Rav Adda bar Ahava that Rav deems the blood pure even during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava. Accordingly, as long as the woman begins to experience labor pains during her days of ziva, she remains pure until birth, provided the labor pains continue without a twenty-four-hour period of resting. But according to Levi, who maintains that blood accompanying labor pains is pure only during the days of ziva, the mishna is difficult, as it is impossible for her blood to remain pure due to labor pains for fifty days.

讗诪专 诇讱 诇讜讬 诪讬 拽转谞讬 讟讛讜专讛 讘讻讜诇谉 讘讬诪讬 谞讚讛 谞讚讛 讘讬诪讬 讝讬讘讛 讟讛讜专讛

The Gemara explains that Levi could say to you: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all these days, i.e., that she remains pure throughout the days of menstruation and ziva? Not so. Rather, if she emitted blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she emitted the blood during the days of ziva she is pure. The mishna is teaching only that she will not be deemed a zava on account of this blood.

诇讬砖谞讗 讗讞专讬谞讗 讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 诇讜讬 讗讬谉 讛讜诇讚 诪讟讛专 讗诇讗 讬诪讬诐 讛专讗讜讬讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讘讛谉 讝讘讛 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚诪讛 讬诪讬诐 专讘讬诐 讻转讬讘

Some Sages state another version of the above disagreement: Rabbi Levi says: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure only if she experienced bleeding during the eleven days that are fit for her to become a greater zava, i.e., if she experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during that time. But if she experienced bleeding on only one or two days she is rendered a lesser zava, and she must observe a clean day for each day she experiences a discharge. What is the reason? It is written: 鈥淎nd if a woman has an issue of her blood many days鈥ll the days of the issue of her impurity she shall be as in the days of her menstruation: She is impure鈥 (Leviticus 15:25). The verse is referring specifically to a greater zava, indicating that the halakha that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of an emission of blood caused by labor pains applies only to a greater zava.

讗讘讗 砖讗讜诇 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讬诪讬诐 讛专讗讜讬讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讘讛谉 讝讘讛 拽讟谞讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讬诪讬 讜讻诇 讬诪讬 讛转诐 讻转讬讘讬

Abba Shaul says in the name of Rav: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure even if she experienced bleeding on the days that are fit for her to become a lesser zava. What is the reason? 鈥淒ays鈥 and 鈥渕any days鈥 are written there, from which the impurity of a lesser zava is derived. Accordingly, the verse includes a lesser zava in this halakha as well.

转谞谉 讻诪讛 讛讜讗 拽砖讜讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讗专讘注讬诐 讜讞诪砖讬诐 讬讜诐 拽砖讬讗 诇转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪讬 拽转谞讬 讟讛讜专讛 讘讻讜诇谉 拽砖转讛 讘讬诪讬 谞讚转讛 谞讚讛 讘讬诪讬 讝讬讘转讛 讟讛讜专讛

The Gemara raises a difficulty: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure. If so, the mishna is difficult according to both opinions, as all agree that only emissions of blood due to labor pains that occur during her days of ziva are pure. The Gemara responds: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all fifty days? Not so. Rather, if she experienced labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she experienced them during the days of ziva she is pure.

转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讬砖 诪拽砖讛 诪讗讛 讜讞诪砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉 讻讬爪讚 砖谞讬诐 讘诇讗 注转

With regard to the above statement of Rabbi Meir, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for one hundred and fifty days, and the impurity of ziva is not included in those days, i.e., she will not be rendered a greater zava. How so? First, a woman emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, e.g., she experiences bleeding on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva. She is not rendered a menstruating woman by these emissions, as they occurred during the days of ziva, nor does she become a greater zava, since she experienced bleeding on only two days.

讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛 讜讞诪砖讬诐 砖讛讜诇讚 诪讟讛专

Rabbi Meir continues: And then she continues to experience bleeding throughout the seven days of menstruation. She is not considered to have experienced bleeding of ziva for three consecutive days, as the third emission occurred during her days of menstruation. And she then experiences bleeding for the first two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., on the first and second days of the eleven days of ziva. And on the third day of ziva she begins the period of fifty days before giving birth, during which the child renders her pure. This constitutes a period of sixty-one days during which she is not rendered a greater zava.

讜砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛

Rabbi Meir continues: And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, for a total of 141 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted. And there are then seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., the first and second days of ziva, during which she experiences bleeding, for a total of 150 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 讬砖 诪拽砖讛 讻诇 讬诪讬讛 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Meir: If so, there is also a scenario in which a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains for all the days of her life, and the impurity of ziva is not included in them. For example, she gives birth to a female, and at the conclusion of her days of impurity engages in intercourse with her husband and becomes pregnant. She continues to experience bleeding throughout her days of purity, after which she experiences bleeding during the seven days of menstruation and the first two days of the next cycle of ziva. She then experiences labor pains accompanied by blood for fifty days, after which she miscarries a female. She subsequently becomes pregnant again within eighty days of the miscarriage, and the above process repeats itself. In this manner, she will never become a greater zava.

讗诪专 诇讛谉 诪讗讬 讚注转讬讬讻讜 诪砖讜诐 谞驻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 拽讜砖讬 诇谞驻诇讬诐

Rabbi Meir said to them: What is your opinion, that a woman is not rendered a zava due to the birth of non-viable newborns? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讬砖 专讜讗讛 诪讗讛 讬讜诐 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉 讻讬爪讚 砖谞讬诐 讘诇讗 注转 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛 讜砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: There is a scenario in which a woman sees blood for one hundred days, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, and then throughout the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, and seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation. This amounts to one hundred days.

诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬 讗驻砖专 诇驻转讬讞转 讛拽讘专 讘诇讗 讚诐 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗驻砖专 诇驻转讬讞转 讛拽讘专 讘诇讗 讚诐

The Gemara asks: What is this baraita teaching us? The Gemara responds: The baraita serves to exclude the opinion of the one who said that it is impossible for there to be an opening of the womb [hakever] without an emission of blood. According to this opinion, if a woman gives birth after experiencing bleeding on the first two days after the days of menstruation, it is certain she experienced bleeding on the third day as well, as every birth is accompanied by an emission of blood. Consequently, she has experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during the days of ziva and is rendered a greater zava. The baraita teaches us that it is possible for there to be an opening of the womb without an emission of blood. Therefore, if she gave birth on the third day of ziva and she did not experience bleeding, she is not rendered a greater zava.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讚讬讛 讜讻讜壮 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讟专驻讜谉 讚讬讛 讞讚砖讛 讜讬砖 讘讚讘专 诇讛拽诇 讜诇讛讞诪讬专

搂 The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: It is sufficient that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains only from within one month of her due date. In this regard, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Tarfon: It is sufficient for her not to be rendered a zava from within one month of her due date. And there is an aspect of leniency and an aspect of stringency in the matter.

讻讬爪讚 拽砖转讛 砖谞讬诐 讘住讜祝 砖诪讬谞讬 讜讗讞讚 讘转讞诇转 转砖讬注讬 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘转讞诇转 转砖讬注讬 讬诇讚讛 讛专讬 讝讜 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘

The baraita explains: How so? If she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for two days at the end of her eighth month of pregnancy, which are days in which she can be rendered a zava, and for one day at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the beginning of the ninth month, the one day from the ninth month joins together with the two days from the eighth month, and this woman is considered one who gives birth as a zava. This is an aspect of stringency.

讗讘诇 拽砖转讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘住讜祝 砖诪讬谞讬 讜砖转讬诐 讘转讞诇转 转砖讬注讬 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘住讜祝 转砖讬注讬 讬诇讚讛 讗讬谉 讝讜 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘

But if she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for one day at the end of her eighth month, and for only two days at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the end of the ninth month, this woman is not considered one who gives birth as a zava, and she is pure. This is an aspect of leniency.

讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 拽住讘专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讬驻讜专讗 讙专讬诐 讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讬谉 讗砖讛 诪转注讘专转 讜讬讜诇讚转 讗诇讗 诇诪讗转讬诐 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讬讜诐 讗讜 诇诪讗转讬诐 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜砖谞讬诐 讬讜诐 讗讜 诇诪讗转讬诐 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛

Rav Adda bar Ahava says: Conclude from the baraita that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the blast of the shofar at the beginning of the ninth month causes the blood emitted during that month to be pure. That is to say, once the ninth months begins, any blood emitted does not render her a zava. The Gemara asks: Is that so, that the entire ninth month of pregnancy is suitable for giving birth, and therefore any blood seen during the ninth month is attributed to the imminent labor? But doesn鈥檛 Shmuel say that a woman becomes pregnant and gives birth only after 271 days, which is a full nine months, or after 272 days, or after 273 days? She will not, however, give birth during the ninth month itself.

讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻讞住讬讚讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讚转谞讬讗 讞住讬讚讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪砖诪砖讬谉 诪讟讜转讬讛谉 讗诇讗 讘专讘讬注讬 讘砖讘转 砖诇讗 讬讘讜讗讜 谞砖讜转讬讛谉

The Gemara responds: Shmuel said his statement in accordance with the opinion of the early generations of pious men. As it is taught in a baraita: The early generations of pious men would engage in sexual intercourse only on a Wednesday, so that their wives should not come

诇讬讚讬 讞诇讜诇 砖讘转 讘专讘讬注讬 讜转讜 诇讗 讗讬诪讗 诪专讘讬注讬 讜讗讬诇讱

to a desecration of Shabbat. If they were to engage in sexual intercourse on a Sunday, Monday, or Tuesday, their wives might give birth on Shabbat, either 271, 272, or 273 days after conception either. The Gemara asks: If this was indeed the concern of the early generations of pious men, why would they engage in intercourse only on a Wednesday, and nothing more? After all, if they engaged in intercourse on a Thursday, Friday, or Shabbat, they would likewise avoid any desecration of Shabbat. The Gemara answers: Say that the baraita means that the early generations of pious men would engage in intercourse each week only from Wednesday onward.

讗诪专 诪专 讝讜讟专讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚讞住讬讚讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬转谉 [讛壮] 诇讛 讛专讬讜谉 讛专讬讜谉 讘讙讬诪讟专讬讗 诪讗转谉 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜讞讚 讛讜讜

Mar Zutra said: What is the reasoning of the early generations of pious men, who state that a woman does not give birth before 271 days have passed from the time of insemination? As it is written with regard to Boaz and Ruth: 鈥淎nd he went in unto her, and the Lord gave her conception [herayon]鈥 (Ruth 4:13). The letters that constitute the word herayon are 271 in numerical value.

讗诪专 诪专 讝讜讟专讗 讗驻讬诇讜 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 诇诪拽讜讟注讬诐 讬讜诇讚转 诇砖讘注讛 讬讜诇讚转 诇诪拽讜讟注讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讛讬 诇转拽驻讜转 讛讬诪讬诐 讜转讛专 讞谞讛 讜转诇讚 讘谉 诪讬注讜讟 转拽驻讜转 砖谞讬诐 诪讬注讜讟 讬诪讬诐 砖谞讬诐

Mar Zutra says: Even according to the one who said, e.g., Shmuel and the early generations of pious men, that a woman who gives birth at nine months does not give birth after an incomplete number of months, i.e., she carries for a full nine months, nevertheless, a woman who gives birth at seven months can give birth after an incomplete number of months. As it is stated with regard to the birth of Samuel: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, when the seasons of the days had come, that Hannah conceived, and bore a son鈥 (I聽Samuel 1:20). The minimal number of 鈥渟easons鈥 is two, and as each season of the year is three months, this amounts to six months. And the minimal number of 鈥渄ays鈥 is two. If so, Samuel was born in the seventh month of Hannah鈥檚 pregnancy.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 拽讜砖讬 讬讜转专 诪砖转讬 砖讘转讜转 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪讗讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚专讘谞谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讟诪讗讛 砖讘注讬诐 讻谞讚转讛 讻谞讚转讛 讜诇讗 讻讝讬讘转讛 诪讻诇诇 讚讝讬讘转讛 讟讛讜专讛 讜讻诪讛 砖讘讜注讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Labor pains do not occur more than two weeks before birth. Shmuel said: What is the reasoning of the Rabbis, i.e., Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon? As it is written with regard to a woman who gives birth to a female: 鈥淎nd she shall be impure two weeks, as in her menstruation鈥 (Leviticus 12:5). The verse indicates that she is impure as in her menstruation but not as in her ziva. By inference, one may conclude that her ziva is pure, i.e., if she emits blood accompanied by labor pains she is not rendered a zava. And for how long is this the case? For two weeks.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讬砖 诪拽砖讛 注砖专讬诐 讜讞诪砖讛 讬讜诐 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉 讻讬爪讚 砖谞讬诐 讘诇讗 注转 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇讗讞专 谞讚讛 讜讗专讘注讛 注砖专 砖讛讜诇讚 诪讟讛专

With regard to the halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not impart impurity of ziva, the Sages taught: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-five days before birth, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, i.e., on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva, and then for the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days of ziva that come after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by fourteen days during which the impending birth of a child renders pure the blood she sees.

讜讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖转转拽砖讛 注砖专讬诐 讜砖砖讛 讬讜诐 讘诇讗 讜诇讚 讜诇讗 转讛讗 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘

The baraita continues: And it is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days without a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. Since a span of twenty-six days includes at least five days of ziva, there will inevitably be three consecutive days of ziva during which she experienced bleeding, therefore rendering her a greater zava.

讘诇讗 讜诇讚 讘转诇转讗 谞诪讬 住讙讬 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讗讬诪讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讜诇讚 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 讜讛讗 讘诇讗 讜诇讚 拽转谞讬

The Gemara analyzes the baraita: Is the baraita really dealing with a case without a child, i.e., where she is not even pregnant? If there is no child, then experiencing bleeding on three consecutive days after the days of menstruation is also sufficient to render her a greater zava. Rav Sheshet said one should say the baraita as follows: Twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, i.e., where she is pregnant. Rava said to Rav Sheshet: But the baraita explicitly teaches: Without a child.

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖转转拽砖讛 注砖专讬诐 讜砖砖讛 讬讜诐 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讜诇讚 讜诇讗 转讛讗 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘 讜讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 讜诇讚 讗诇讗 谞驻诇 讘转诇转讗 谞诪讬 讛讜讬讗 讝讘讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬谉 拽讜砖讬 诇谞驻诇讬诐

Rather, Rava said that this is what the baraita is saying: It is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. And in a case where there is no child born but there is a non-viable newborn, with three consecutive days of emissions she also becomes a zava. What is the reason? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽砖讛 讘转讜讱 砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 讻诇 讚诪讬诐 砖讛讬讗 专讜讗讛 讟讛讜专讬谉 注讚 砖讬爪讗 讛讜诇讚 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诪讟诪讗

MISHNA: A woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, e.g., she conceived during the sixty-six days of purity, or she initially conceived twins and she gave birth to a female and the birth of the second fetus was delayed, all blood that she sees is ritually pure, as she is currently within her days of purity. And this remains the halakha until the child emerges from the womb, at which point she is rendered impure as a woman who gives birth. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜诪讛 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讛讞诪讬专 讘讚诐 讛砖讜驻讬 讛讬拽诇 讘讚诐 讛拽讜砖讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讛讬拽诇 讘讚诐 讛砖讜驻讬 讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖谞拽诇 讘讚诐 讛拽讜砖讬

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely if a pregnant woman emits blood after her days of purity without any labor pains she is rendered impure, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, i.e., during a woman鈥檚 days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains?

讗诪专 诇讛谉 讚讬讜 诇讘讗 诪谉 讛讚讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讻谞讚讜谉 诪诪讛 讛讬拽诇 注诇讬讛 诪讟讜诪讗转 讝讬讘讛 讗讘诇 讟诪讗讛 讟讜诪讗转 谞讚讛

Rabbi Eliezer said to them: When deriving a halakha by means of an a fortiori inference, there is a principle that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. In other words, the status of blood emitted due to labor pains during her days of purity should not be more lenient than that of blood emitted due to labor pains after her days of purity. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But she may still be rendered ritually impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 转砖讘 诇专讘讜转 讛诪拽砖讛 讘转讜讱 砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 砖讻诇 讚诪讬诐 砖讛讬讗 专讜讗讛 讟讛讜专讬谉 注讚 砖讬爪讗 讛讜诇讚 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诪讟诪讗

GEMARA: With regard to the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis concerning a woman who emits blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, the Sages taught a baraita that addresses a verse discussing a woman who gives birth to a female: 鈥淎nd sixty-six days she shall observe the blood of purity鈥 (Leviticus 12:5). The term 鈥淪he shall observe鈥 serves to include a woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, teaching that all blood that she sees is ritually pure. And this remains the case until the child emerges from the womb. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜诪讛 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讛讞诪讬专 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇驻谞讬 讛讜诇讚 讛讬拽诇 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇讗讞专 讛讜诇讚 诪拽讜诐 砖讛讬拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖诇驻谞讬 讛讜诇讚 讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖谞拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖诇讗讞专 讛讜诇讚

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child, as such blood renders her a zava, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted while resting after the birth of the child, i.e., during her days of purity; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted due to labor pains before the birth of the child, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains after the birth of the child?

讗诪专 诇讛诐 讚讬讜 诇讘讗 诪谉 讛讚讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讻谞讚讜谉 诪诪讛 讛讬拽诇 注诇讬讛 诪讟讜诪讗转 讝讬讘讛 讗讘诇 诪讟诪讗讛 讟讜诪讗转 谞讚讛

Rabbi Eliezer said to them: It is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 讛专讬 讗谞讜 诪砖讬讘讬谉 诇讱 诇砖讜谉 讗讞专 讜诪讛 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讛讞诪讬专 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇驻谞讬 讛讜诇讚 讛讬拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖注诪讜 诪拽讜诐 砖讛讬拽诇 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇讗讞专 讛讜诇讚 讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖谞拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖注诪讜

The Rabbis said to him: But we will respond to you with another version of the a fortiori inference: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains that come with it, i.e., which precede the birth of the child; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely during a woman鈥檚 days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains that come with it?

讗诪专 诇讛诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讗转诐 诪砖讬讘讬谉 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讻讜诇讜 讚讬讜 诇讘讗 诪谉 讛讚讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讻谞讚讜谉 诪诪讛 讛讬拽诇 注诇讬讛 诪讟讜诪讗转 讝讬讘讛 讗讘诇 诪讟诪讗讛 讟讜诪讗转 谞讚讛

Rabbi Eliezer said to them: Even if you respond by citing a fortiori inferences of that type throughout the entire day, the principle remains that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讘讛讗 讝讻讬谞讛讜 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诇专讘谞谉 诇讗讜 讗诪专讬转讜 讚诪讛 讚诪讛 诪讞诪转 注爪诪讛 讜诇讗 诪讞诪转 讜诇讚 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讜讟讛专讛 诪诪拽讜专 讚诪讬讛 讚诪讬讛 诪讞诪转 注爪诪讛 讜诇讗 诪讞诪转 讜诇讚

Rava said: With this response Rabbi Eliezer triumphed over the Rabbis: Didn鈥檛 you say that the reason why a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains before birth is because the verse states: 鈥淎nd if a woman has an issue of her blood many days鈥 (Leviticus 15:25)? The term 鈥渉er blood鈥 indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is impure due to ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child. So too, one can say that as the verse states with regard to a woman who gives birth: 鈥淎nd she shall be purified from the fountain of her blood鈥 (Leviticus 12:7), this indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is pure from ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child.

讗讬诪讗 讘讬诪讬 谞讚讛 谞讚讛 讘讬诪讬 讝讬讘讛 讟讛讜专讛 讗诪专 拽专讗 转砖讘 讬砖讬讘讛 讗讞转 诇讻讜诇谉

This Gemara raises a difficulty against the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer: If so, one can say that if she emits blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she is a menstruating woman, but if she emits blood in the days of ziva, i.e., after the days of menstruation, she is pure. The Gemara explains that the verse states: 鈥淪he shall observe the blood of purity鈥 (Leviticus 12:5), which indicates that there is one observance for all the days of her purity, i.e., all the blood she emits due to labor pains during her days of purity is either pure or impure.

诪转谞讬壮 讻诇 讗讞讚 注砖专 讬讜诐 讘讞讝拽转 讟讛专讛

MISHNA: For all the eleven days of ziva that follow the seven days of menstruation, a woman has the presumptive status of ritual purity, as it is unusual for her to experience bleeding on these days.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Terri Krivosha for the Refuah Shlemah of her husband Harav Hayim Yehuda Ben Faiga Rivah.聽

  • This month's learning is dedicated by Debbie and Yossi Gevir to Rabbanit Michelle and the Hadran Zoom group for their kindness, support, and care during a medically challenging year.

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 38

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Niddah 38

讗驻讬诇讜 讬诪讬诐 讛专讗讜讬讬谉 诇住驻讬专转 住转讬专转 讝讘讛

even if she continues to experience bleeding during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava, she remains pure. If a woman experiences bleeding during her seven clean days, she negates any days counted thus far, and must begin a new count of seven clean days. Accordingly, all the days that follow her days of ziva are effectively considered days that are fit for the counting of a zava. Therefore, blood emitted due to labor pains during these days is also ritually pure. Consequently, the blood that accompanies labor pains is ritually impure only if she begins to emit it during her days of menstruation.

转谞谉 讻诪讛 讛讜讗 拽砖讜讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗专讘注讬诐 讜讞诪砖讬诐 讬讜诐

The Gemara poses a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Levi: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure.

讘砖诇诪讗 诇专讘 诪砖讻讞转 诇讛 讻专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讗诇讗 诇诇讜讬 拽砖讬讗

The Gemara explains the difficulty: Granted, the mishna is clear according to Rav, as you find that it is possible that she will remain pure for such a long period, i.e., in accordance with the explanation of Rav Adda bar Ahava that Rav deems the blood pure even during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava. Accordingly, as long as the woman begins to experience labor pains during her days of ziva, she remains pure until birth, provided the labor pains continue without a twenty-four-hour period of resting. But according to Levi, who maintains that blood accompanying labor pains is pure only during the days of ziva, the mishna is difficult, as it is impossible for her blood to remain pure due to labor pains for fifty days.

讗诪专 诇讱 诇讜讬 诪讬 拽转谞讬 讟讛讜专讛 讘讻讜诇谉 讘讬诪讬 谞讚讛 谞讚讛 讘讬诪讬 讝讬讘讛 讟讛讜专讛

The Gemara explains that Levi could say to you: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all these days, i.e., that she remains pure throughout the days of menstruation and ziva? Not so. Rather, if she emitted blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she emitted the blood during the days of ziva she is pure. The mishna is teaching only that she will not be deemed a zava on account of this blood.

诇讬砖谞讗 讗讞专讬谞讗 讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 诇讜讬 讗讬谉 讛讜诇讚 诪讟讛专 讗诇讗 讬诪讬诐 讛专讗讜讬讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讘讛谉 讝讘讛 讙讚讜诇讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讚诪讛 讬诪讬诐 专讘讬诐 讻转讬讘

Some Sages state another version of the above disagreement: Rabbi Levi says: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure only if she experienced bleeding during the eleven days that are fit for her to become a greater zava, i.e., if she experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during that time. But if she experienced bleeding on only one or two days she is rendered a lesser zava, and she must observe a clean day for each day she experiences a discharge. What is the reason? It is written: 鈥淎nd if a woman has an issue of her blood many days鈥ll the days of the issue of her impurity she shall be as in the days of her menstruation: She is impure鈥 (Leviticus 15:25). The verse is referring specifically to a greater zava, indicating that the halakha that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of an emission of blood caused by labor pains applies only to a greater zava.

讗讘讗 砖讗讜诇 诪砖诪讬讛 讚专讘 讗诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讬诪讬诐 讛专讗讜讬讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讘讛谉 讝讘讛 拽讟谞讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讬诪讬 讜讻诇 讬诪讬 讛转诐 讻转讬讘讬

Abba Shaul says in the name of Rav: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure even if she experienced bleeding on the days that are fit for her to become a lesser zava. What is the reason? 鈥淒ays鈥 and 鈥渕any days鈥 are written there, from which the impurity of a lesser zava is derived. Accordingly, the verse includes a lesser zava in this halakha as well.

转谞谉 讻诪讛 讛讜讗 拽砖讜讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讗驻讬诇讜 讗专讘注讬诐 讜讞诪砖讬诐 讬讜诐 拽砖讬讗 诇转专讜讬讬讛讜 诪讬 拽转谞讬 讟讛讜专讛 讘讻讜诇谉 拽砖转讛 讘讬诪讬 谞讚转讛 谞讚讛 讘讬诪讬 讝讬讘转讛 讟讛讜专讛

The Gemara raises a difficulty: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure. If so, the mishna is difficult according to both opinions, as all agree that only emissions of blood due to labor pains that occur during her days of ziva are pure. The Gemara responds: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all fifty days? Not so. Rather, if she experienced labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she experienced them during the days of ziva she is pure.

转谞讬讗 讛讬讛 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讗讜诪专 讬砖 诪拽砖讛 诪讗讛 讜讞诪砖讬诐 讬讜诐 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉 讻讬爪讚 砖谞讬诐 讘诇讗 注转

With regard to the above statement of Rabbi Meir, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for one hundred and fifty days, and the impurity of ziva is not included in those days, i.e., she will not be rendered a greater zava. How so? First, a woman emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, e.g., she experiences bleeding on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva. She is not rendered a menstruating woman by these emissions, as they occurred during the days of ziva, nor does she become a greater zava, since she experienced bleeding on only two days.

讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛 讜讞诪砖讬诐 砖讛讜诇讚 诪讟讛专

Rabbi Meir continues: And then she continues to experience bleeding throughout the seven days of menstruation. She is not considered to have experienced bleeding of ziva for three consecutive days, as the third emission occurred during her days of menstruation. And she then experiences bleeding for the first two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., on the first and second days of the eleven days of ziva. And on the third day of ziva she begins the period of fifty days before giving birth, during which the child renders her pure. This constitutes a period of sixty-one days during which she is not rendered a greater zava.

讜砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛

Rabbi Meir continues: And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, for a total of 141 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted. And there are then seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., the first and second days of ziva, during which she experiences bleeding, for a total of 150 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 讗诐 讻谉 讬砖 诪拽砖讛 讻诇 讬诪讬讛 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Meir: If so, there is also a scenario in which a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains for all the days of her life, and the impurity of ziva is not included in them. For example, she gives birth to a female, and at the conclusion of her days of impurity engages in intercourse with her husband and becomes pregnant. She continues to experience bleeding throughout her days of purity, after which she experiences bleeding during the seven days of menstruation and the first two days of the next cycle of ziva. She then experiences labor pains accompanied by blood for fifty days, after which she miscarries a female. She subsequently becomes pregnant again within eighty days of the miscarriage, and the above process repeats itself. In this manner, she will never become a greater zava.

讗诪专 诇讛谉 诪讗讬 讚注转讬讬讻讜 诪砖讜诐 谞驻诇讬诐 讗讬谉 拽讜砖讬 诇谞驻诇讬诐

Rabbi Meir said to them: What is your opinion, that a woman is not rendered a zava due to the birth of non-viable newborns? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讬砖 专讜讗讛 诪讗讛 讬讜诐 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉 讻讬爪讚 砖谞讬诐 讘诇讗 注转 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛 讜砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇 讗讞专 讛谞讚讛

The Sages taught in a baraita: There is a scenario in which a woman sees blood for one hundred days, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, and then throughout the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, and seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation. This amounts to one hundred days.

诪讗讬 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 诇讗驻讜拽讬 诪诪讗谉 讚讗诪专 讗讬 讗驻砖专 诇驻转讬讞转 讛拽讘专 讘诇讗 讚诐 拽讗 诪砖诪注 诇谉 讚讗驻砖专 诇驻转讬讞转 讛拽讘专 讘诇讗 讚诐

The Gemara asks: What is this baraita teaching us? The Gemara responds: The baraita serves to exclude the opinion of the one who said that it is impossible for there to be an opening of the womb [hakever] without an emission of blood. According to this opinion, if a woman gives birth after experiencing bleeding on the first two days after the days of menstruation, it is certain she experienced bleeding on the third day as well, as every birth is accompanied by an emission of blood. Consequently, she has experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during the days of ziva and is rendered a greater zava. The baraita teaches us that it is possible for there to be an opening of the womb without an emission of blood. Therefore, if she gave birth on the third day of ziva and she did not experience bleeding, she is not rendered a greater zava.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讚讬讛 讜讻讜壮 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪砖讜诐 专讘讬 讟专驻讜谉 讚讬讛 讞讚砖讛 讜讬砖 讘讚讘专 诇讛拽诇 讜诇讛讞诪讬专

搂 The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: It is sufficient that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains only from within one month of her due date. In this regard, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Tarfon: It is sufficient for her not to be rendered a zava from within one month of her due date. And there is an aspect of leniency and an aspect of stringency in the matter.

讻讬爪讚 拽砖转讛 砖谞讬诐 讘住讜祝 砖诪讬谞讬 讜讗讞讚 讘转讞诇转 转砖讬注讬 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘转讞诇转 转砖讬注讬 讬诇讚讛 讛专讬 讝讜 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘

The baraita explains: How so? If she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for two days at the end of her eighth month of pregnancy, which are days in which she can be rendered a zava, and for one day at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the beginning of the ninth month, the one day from the ninth month joins together with the two days from the eighth month, and this woman is considered one who gives birth as a zava. This is an aspect of stringency.

讗讘诇 拽砖转讛 讬讜诐 讗讞讚 讘住讜祝 砖诪讬谞讬 讜砖转讬诐 讘转讞诇转 转砖讬注讬 讜讗驻讬诇讜 讘住讜祝 转砖讬注讬 讬诇讚讛 讗讬谉 讝讜 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘

But if she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for one day at the end of her eighth month, and for only two days at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the end of the ninth month, this woman is not considered one who gives birth as a zava, and she is pure. This is an aspect of leniency.

讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 拽住讘专 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 砖讬驻讜专讗 讙专讬诐 讗讬谞讬 讜讛讗 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讗讬谉 讗砖讛 诪转注讘专转 讜讬讜诇讚转 讗诇讗 诇诪讗转讬诐 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讬讜诐 讗讜 诇诪讗转讬诐 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜砖谞讬诐 讬讜诐 讗讜 诇诪讗转讬诐 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜砖诇砖讛

Rav Adda bar Ahava says: Conclude from the baraita that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the blast of the shofar at the beginning of the ninth month causes the blood emitted during that month to be pure. That is to say, once the ninth months begins, any blood emitted does not render her a zava. The Gemara asks: Is that so, that the entire ninth month of pregnancy is suitable for giving birth, and therefore any blood seen during the ninth month is attributed to the imminent labor? But doesn鈥檛 Shmuel say that a woman becomes pregnant and gives birth only after 271 days, which is a full nine months, or after 272 days, or after 273 days? She will not, however, give birth during the ninth month itself.

讛讜讗 讚讗诪专 讻讞住讬讚讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讚转谞讬讗 讞住讬讚讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 诇讗 讛讬讜 诪砖诪砖讬谉 诪讟讜转讬讛谉 讗诇讗 讘专讘讬注讬 讘砖讘转 砖诇讗 讬讘讜讗讜 谞砖讜转讬讛谉

The Gemara responds: Shmuel said his statement in accordance with the opinion of the early generations of pious men. As it is taught in a baraita: The early generations of pious men would engage in sexual intercourse only on a Wednesday, so that their wives should not come

诇讬讚讬 讞诇讜诇 砖讘转 讘专讘讬注讬 讜转讜 诇讗 讗讬诪讗 诪专讘讬注讬 讜讗讬诇讱

to a desecration of Shabbat. If they were to engage in sexual intercourse on a Sunday, Monday, or Tuesday, their wives might give birth on Shabbat, either 271, 272, or 273 days after conception either. The Gemara asks: If this was indeed the concern of the early generations of pious men, why would they engage in intercourse only on a Wednesday, and nothing more? After all, if they engaged in intercourse on a Thursday, Friday, or Shabbat, they would likewise avoid any desecration of Shabbat. The Gemara answers: Say that the baraita means that the early generations of pious men would engage in intercourse each week only from Wednesday onward.

讗诪专 诪专 讝讜讟专讗 诪讗讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚讞住讬讚讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬转谉 [讛壮] 诇讛 讛专讬讜谉 讛专讬讜谉 讘讙讬诪讟专讬讗 诪讗转谉 讜砖讘注讬诐 讜讞讚 讛讜讜

Mar Zutra said: What is the reasoning of the early generations of pious men, who state that a woman does not give birth before 271 days have passed from the time of insemination? As it is written with regard to Boaz and Ruth: 鈥淎nd he went in unto her, and the Lord gave her conception [herayon]鈥 (Ruth 4:13). The letters that constitute the word herayon are 271 in numerical value.

讗诪专 诪专 讝讜讟专讗 讗驻讬诇讜 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 诇诪拽讜讟注讬诐 讬讜诇讚转 诇砖讘注讛 讬讜诇讚转 诇诪拽讜讟注讬诐 砖谞讗诪专 讜讬讛讬 诇转拽驻讜转 讛讬诪讬诐 讜转讛专 讞谞讛 讜转诇讚 讘谉 诪讬注讜讟 转拽驻讜转 砖谞讬诐 诪讬注讜讟 讬诪讬诐 砖谞讬诐

Mar Zutra says: Even according to the one who said, e.g., Shmuel and the early generations of pious men, that a woman who gives birth at nine months does not give birth after an incomplete number of months, i.e., she carries for a full nine months, nevertheless, a woman who gives birth at seven months can give birth after an incomplete number of months. As it is stated with regard to the birth of Samuel: 鈥淎nd it came to pass, when the seasons of the days had come, that Hannah conceived, and bore a son鈥 (I聽Samuel 1:20). The minimal number of 鈥渟easons鈥 is two, and as each season of the year is three months, this amounts to six months. And the minimal number of 鈥渄ays鈥 is two. If so, Samuel was born in the seventh month of Hannah鈥檚 pregnancy.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讜诪专讬诐 讗讬谉 拽讜砖讬 讬讜转专 诪砖转讬 砖讘转讜转 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 诪讗讬 讟注诪讬讬讛讜 讚专讘谞谉 讚讻转讬讘 讜讟诪讗讛 砖讘注讬诐 讻谞讚转讛 讻谞讚转讛 讜诇讗 讻讝讬讘转讛 诪讻诇诇 讚讝讬讘转讛 讟讛讜专讛 讜讻诪讛 砖讘讜注讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Labor pains do not occur more than two weeks before birth. Shmuel said: What is the reasoning of the Rabbis, i.e., Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon? As it is written with regard to a woman who gives birth to a female: 鈥淎nd she shall be impure two weeks, as in her menstruation鈥 (Leviticus 12:5). The verse indicates that she is impure as in her menstruation but not as in her ziva. By inference, one may conclude that her ziva is pure, i.e., if she emits blood accompanied by labor pains she is not rendered a zava. And for how long is this the case? For two weeks.

转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讬砖 诪拽砖讛 注砖专讬诐 讜讞诪砖讛 讬讜诐 讜讗讬谉 讝讬讘讛 注讜诇讛 讘讛谉 讻讬爪讚 砖谞讬诐 讘诇讗 注转 讜砖讘注讛 谞讚讛 讜砖谞讬诐 砖诇讗讞专 谞讚讛 讜讗专讘注讛 注砖专 砖讛讜诇讚 诪讟讛专

With regard to the halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not impart impurity of ziva, the Sages taught: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-five days before birth, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, i.e., on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva, and then for the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days of ziva that come after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by fourteen days during which the impending birth of a child renders pure the blood she sees.

讜讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖转转拽砖讛 注砖专讬诐 讜砖砖讛 讬讜诐 讘诇讗 讜诇讚 讜诇讗 转讛讗 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘

The baraita continues: And it is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days without a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. Since a span of twenty-six days includes at least five days of ziva, there will inevitably be three consecutive days of ziva during which she experienced bleeding, therefore rendering her a greater zava.

讘诇讗 讜诇讚 讘转诇转讗 谞诪讬 住讙讬 讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讗讬诪讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讜诇讚 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 讜讛讗 讘诇讗 讜诇讚 拽转谞讬

The Gemara analyzes the baraita: Is the baraita really dealing with a case without a child, i.e., where she is not even pregnant? If there is no child, then experiencing bleeding on three consecutive days after the days of menstruation is also sufficient to render her a greater zava. Rav Sheshet said one should say the baraita as follows: Twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, i.e., where she is pregnant. Rava said to Rav Sheshet: But the baraita explicitly teaches: Without a child.

讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讛讻讬 拽讗诪专 讗讬 讗驻砖专 砖转转拽砖讛 注砖专讬诐 讜砖砖讛 讬讜诐 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讬砖 讜诇讚 讜诇讗 转讛讗 讬讜诇讚转 讘讝讜讘 讜讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 讜诇讚 讗诇讗 谞驻诇 讘转诇转讗 谞诪讬 讛讜讬讗 讝讘讛 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬谉 拽讜砖讬 诇谞驻诇讬诐

Rather, Rava said that this is what the baraita is saying: It is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. And in a case where there is no child born but there is a non-viable newborn, with three consecutive days of emissions she also becomes a zava. What is the reason? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.

诪转谞讬壮 讛诪拽砖讛 讘转讜讱 砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 讻诇 讚诪讬诐 砖讛讬讗 专讜讗讛 讟讛讜专讬谉 注讚 砖讬爪讗 讛讜诇讚 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诪讟诪讗

MISHNA: A woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, e.g., she conceived during the sixty-six days of purity, or she initially conceived twins and she gave birth to a female and the birth of the second fetus was delayed, all blood that she sees is ritually pure, as she is currently within her days of purity. And this remains the halakha until the child emerges from the womb, at which point she is rendered impure as a woman who gives birth. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜诪讛 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讛讞诪讬专 讘讚诐 讛砖讜驻讬 讛讬拽诇 讘讚诐 讛拽讜砖讬 诪拽讜诐 砖讛讬拽诇 讘讚诐 讛砖讜驻讬 讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖谞拽诇 讘讚诐 讛拽讜砖讬

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely if a pregnant woman emits blood after her days of purity without any labor pains she is rendered impure, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, i.e., during a woman鈥檚 days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains?

讗诪专 诇讛谉 讚讬讜 诇讘讗 诪谉 讛讚讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讻谞讚讜谉 诪诪讛 讛讬拽诇 注诇讬讛 诪讟讜诪讗转 讝讬讘讛 讗讘诇 讟诪讗讛 讟讜诪讗转 谞讚讛

Rabbi Eliezer said to them: When deriving a halakha by means of an a fortiori inference, there is a principle that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. In other words, the status of blood emitted due to labor pains during her days of purity should not be more lenient than that of blood emitted due to labor pains after her days of purity. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But she may still be rendered ritually impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.

讙诪壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 转砖讘 诇专讘讜转 讛诪拽砖讛 讘转讜讱 砖诪讜谞讬诐 砖诇 谞拽讘讛 砖讻诇 讚诪讬诐 砖讛讬讗 专讜讗讛 讟讛讜专讬谉 注讚 砖讬爪讗 讛讜诇讚 讜专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诪讟诪讗

GEMARA: With regard to the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis concerning a woman who emits blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, the Sages taught a baraita that addresses a verse discussing a woman who gives birth to a female: 鈥淎nd sixty-six days she shall observe the blood of purity鈥 (Leviticus 12:5). The term 鈥淪he shall observe鈥 serves to include a woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, teaching that all blood that she sees is ritually pure. And this remains the case until the child emerges from the womb. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 讜诪讛 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讛讞诪讬专 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇驻谞讬 讛讜诇讚 讛讬拽诇 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇讗讞专 讛讜诇讚 诪拽讜诐 砖讛讬拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖诇驻谞讬 讛讜诇讚 讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖谞拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖诇讗讞专 讛讜诇讚

The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child, as such blood renders her a zava, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted while resting after the birth of the child, i.e., during her days of purity; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted due to labor pains before the birth of the child, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains after the birth of the child?

讗诪专 诇讛诐 讚讬讜 诇讘讗 诪谉 讛讚讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讻谞讚讜谉 诪诪讛 讛讬拽诇 注诇讬讛 诪讟讜诪讗转 讝讬讘讛 讗讘诇 诪讟诪讗讛 讟讜诪讗转 谞讚讛

Rabbi Eliezer said to them: It is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.

讗诪专讜 诇讜 讛专讬 讗谞讜 诪砖讬讘讬谉 诇讱 诇砖讜谉 讗讞专 讜诪讛 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讛讞诪讬专 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇驻谞讬 讛讜诇讚 讛讬拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖注诪讜 诪拽讜诐 砖讛讬拽诇 讘砖讜驻讬 砖诇讗讞专 讛讜诇讚 讗讬谞讜 讚讬谉 砖谞拽诇 讘拽讜砖讬 砖注诪讜

The Rabbis said to him: But we will respond to you with another version of the a fortiori inference: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains that come with it, i.e., which precede the birth of the child; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely during a woman鈥檚 days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains that come with it?

讗诪专 诇讛诐 讗驻讬诇讜 讗转诐 诪砖讬讘讬谉 讻诇 讛讬讜诐 讻讜诇讜 讚讬讜 诇讘讗 诪谉 讛讚讬谉 诇讛讬讜转 讻谞讚讜谉 诪诪讛 讛讬拽诇 注诇讬讛 诪讟讜诪讗转 讝讬讘讛 讗讘诇 诪讟诪讗讛 讟讜诪讗转 谞讚讛

Rabbi Eliezer said to them: Even if you respond by citing a fortiori inferences of that type throughout the entire day, the principle remains that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman.

讗诪专 专讘讗 讘讛讗 讝讻讬谞讛讜 专讘讬 讗诇讬注讝专 诇专讘谞谉 诇讗讜 讗诪专讬转讜 讚诪讛 讚诪讛 诪讞诪转 注爪诪讛 讜诇讗 诪讞诪转 讜诇讚 讛讻讬 谞诪讬 讜讟讛专讛 诪诪拽讜专 讚诪讬讛 讚诪讬讛 诪讞诪转 注爪诪讛 讜诇讗 诪讞诪转 讜诇讚

Rava said: With this response Rabbi Eliezer triumphed over the Rabbis: Didn鈥檛 you say that the reason why a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains before birth is because the verse states: 鈥淎nd if a woman has an issue of her blood many days鈥 (Leviticus 15:25)? The term 鈥渉er blood鈥 indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is impure due to ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child. So too, one can say that as the verse states with regard to a woman who gives birth: 鈥淎nd she shall be purified from the fountain of her blood鈥 (Leviticus 12:7), this indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is pure from ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child.

讗讬诪讗 讘讬诪讬 谞讚讛 谞讚讛 讘讬诪讬 讝讬讘讛 讟讛讜专讛 讗诪专 拽专讗 转砖讘 讬砖讬讘讛 讗讞转 诇讻讜诇谉

This Gemara raises a difficulty against the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer: If so, one can say that if she emits blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she is a menstruating woman, but if she emits blood in the days of ziva, i.e., after the days of menstruation, she is pure. The Gemara explains that the verse states: 鈥淪he shall observe the blood of purity鈥 (Leviticus 12:5), which indicates that there is one observance for all the days of her purity, i.e., all the blood she emits due to labor pains during her days of purity is either pure or impure.

诪转谞讬壮 讻诇 讗讞讚 注砖专 讬讜诐 讘讞讝拽转 讟讛专讛

MISHNA: For all the eleven days of ziva that follow the seven days of menstruation, a woman has the presumptive status of ritual purity, as it is unusual for her to experience bleeding on these days.

Scroll To Top