Commentary for Niddah 59:37

אי לימי טומאה הא קתני נקבה ואי לימי טהרה

But why should she not perform immersion at the end of the first week?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seventh day after her return, when the counting did take place within our cognizance. ');">³⁵</span> — They do not discuss one day of a week. But why should she not perform immersion on the first day she comes to us, seeing that it is possible that she is awaiting a day for a day?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A clean day for an unclean one, sc. she might be within the period of the eleven days of zibah that intervene between the menstrual periods, during which she must perform immersion on the clean day following the one on which she experienced a discharge. ');">³⁶</span> — They deal with a major zabah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The result of discharges on three consecutive days within the eleven days period (cf. prev. n.). ');">³⁷</span> but not with a minor one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Due to a discharge on one or two days only. ');">³⁸</span> Three rulings may thus be inferred: It may be inferred that it was R. Akiba who ruled that the counting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the seven days of menstruation. ');">³⁹</span> must take place within our cognizance; and it may be inferred that it was R. Simeon who stated, 'The Sages have truly laid down that it is forbidden to do so since thereby she might be involved in a doubtful uncleanness';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 29b ad fin. q. v. notes. ');">⁴⁰</span> and it may also be inferred that it is a religious duty to perform immersion at the proper time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., at the earliest possible moment. ');">⁴¹</span> R. Jose son of R. Judah, however, ruled: It suffices if one immersion is performed after the final [period of uncleanness], and we do not uphold the view that it is a religious act to perform immersion at the proper time.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., at the earliest possible moment. ');">⁴¹</span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. IF A WOMAN MISCARRIED ON THE FORTIETH DAY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After presumed conception. ');">⁴²</span> SHE NEED NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION THE POSSIBILITY OF A VALID CHILDBIRTH; BUT IF ON THE FORTY-FIRST DAY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After presumed conception. ');">⁴²</span> SHE MUST CONTINUE [HER PERIODS OF UNCLEANNESS AND CLEANNESS AS] FOR BOTH A MALE AND A FEMALE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., since it is possible that the abortion was the embryo of a child either male or female, the restrictions of both are imposed upon her but none of the relaxations of either. ');">⁴³</span> AND AS FOR A MENSTRUANT.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It being possible that the embryo was neither male nor female so that there was no valid childbirth. ');">⁴⁴</span> R. ISHMAEL RULED: [IF SHE MISCARRIED ON] THE FORTY-FIRST DAY<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After presumed conception. ');">⁴²</span> SHE CONTINUES [HER PERIODS OF UNCLEANNESS AND CLEANNESS AS] FOR A MALE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., seven days of uncleanness even if there was no bleeding at the miscarriage. ');">⁴⁵</span> AND AS FOR A MENSTRUANT, BUT IF ON THE EIGHTY-FIRST DAY SHE MUST CONTINUE [THESE PERIODS AS] FOR A MALE AND A FEMALE AND A MENSTRUANT; BECAUSE A MALE IS FULLY FASHIONED<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'finished'. ');">⁴⁶</span> ON THE FORTY-FIRST DAY AND A FEMALE ON THE EIGHTY-FIRST DAY. THE SAGES, HOWEVER, MAINTAIN THAT BOTH THE FASHIONING<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'creation'. ');">⁴⁷</span> OF THE MALE AND THE FASHIONING<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'creation'. ');">⁴⁷</span> OF THE FEMALE TAKE THE SAME COURSE, EACH LASTING FORTY-ONE DAYS. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Why was MALE mentioned?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the ruling, FOR BOTH A MALE AND A FEMALE AND AS FOR A MENSTRUANT. ');">⁴⁸</span> If in respect of the days of uncleanness, FEMALE was mentioned;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose fourteen days of uncleanness obviously absorb the seven unclean days of a male birth. ');">⁴⁹</span> and if in respect of the days of cleanness,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. that she is only entitled to the thirty-three clean days of the male and not to the sixty-six days of the female. ');">⁵⁰</span>

Explore commentary for Niddah 59:37. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.