Niddah 145

(ויקרא טו, כה) בלא עת נדתה (על נדתה) סמוך לנדתה

Not in the time of her menstruation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. E.V., 'of her impurity'. ');">¹</span>

ואין לי אלא סמוך לנדתה מופלג לנדתה יום אחד מנין

implying,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cur. edd. in parenthesis, 'beyond the time of her menstruation'. ');">²</span>

ת"ל (ויקרא טו, כה) או כי תזוב

close to the time of her menstruation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the three consecutive days on which a discharge appears and which subject the woman to the restrictions of a major zabah must be close to (not within) the seven days of the menstruation period, viz., the first three days of the period of zibah. ');">³</span>

אין לי אלא יום אחד מנין לרבות מופלג שנים שלשה ארבעה חמשה ששה ושבעה שמונה תשעה עשרה מנין

Thus I only know about<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and I have not but'. ');">⁴</span>

אמרת

the three days that immediately follow<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'near to'. ');">⁵</span>

מה מצינו ברביעי שראוי לספירה וראוי לזיבה אף אני אביא העשירי שראוי לספירה וראוי לזיבה

the period of her menstruation, whence is it deduced that the same restrictions apply where the three days are separated from the period of her menstruation by one day? It was explicitly stated, Or if she have an issue.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">⁶</span>

ומנין לרבות אחד עשר

Thus I only know about an interval of one day, whence is it deduced that the restrictions extend [where the day or the days on which the discharge appeared were] separated [from the menstruation period] by two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or ten days? You may reason thus: As we find in the case of the fourth day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the menstruation period. ');">⁷</span>

ת"ל בלא עת נדתה

that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the discharge appeared on the first three days following menstruation and then ceased. ');">⁸</span>

יכול שאני מרבה אף שנים עשר

it is suitable for the counting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the prescribed seven days beginning with it. ');">⁹</span>

אמרת

and<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As has just been deduced from Lev. XV, 25: Or if she have an issue. ');">¹⁰</span>

לאו

is also appropriate as one for <i>zibah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the discharge first appeared on the second day following menstruation and was repeated on the third and fourth. ');">¹¹</span>

ומה ראית לרבות אחד עשר ולהוציא שנים עשר

so may I also introduce<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Under the zibah restrictions. ');">¹²</span>

מרבה אני אחד עשר שראוי לספירת או כי תזוב

the tenth day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And, much more so, the other days enumerated. ');">¹³</span>

ומוציא אני י"ב שאין ראוי לספירת או כי תזוב

since it is both suitable for the prescribed counting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where the discharge appeared on the first three days after menstruation. ');">¹⁴</span>

ואין לי אלא שלשה ימים שני ימים מנין

and appropriate as one for <i>zibah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the discharge occurred on it as well as on the preceding two days. ');">¹⁵</span>

ת"ל ימי

But whence is it deduced that the eleventh day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which, if the discharge appeared on the first three days, cannot be counted among the seven days prescribed. ');">¹⁶</span>

יום אחד מנין

is also included?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the restrictions, so that if a discharge appeared on it and on the preceding two days zibah is established. ');">¹⁷</span>

ת"ל כל ימי טמאה מלמד שמטמאה את בועלה כנדה

It was explicitly stated, Not in the time of her menstruation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. E.V. 'of her impurity'. ');">¹⁸</span>

היא היא מטמאה את בועלה ואין הזב מטמא מה שהוא בועל

Might I also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a deduction from the text just cited. ');">¹⁹</span>

והלא דין הוא

include<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the restrictions, so that if a discharge appeared on it and on the preceding two days zibah is established. ');">¹⁷</span>

ומה היא שאינה מטמאה בראיות כבימים מטמאה את בועלה הוא שמטמא בראיות כבימים אינו דין שמטמא מה שהוא בועל

the twelfth day?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the menstruation period. ');">⁷</span>

ת"ל היא היא מטמאה את בועלה ואין הזב מטמא מה שהוא בועל

You must admit that this cannot be done.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A discharge on the twelfth being regarded as one of menstruation that cannot be added to the zibah. ');">²⁰</span>

ומנין שהוא עושה משכב ומושב

But what reason do you see for including<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the restrictions, so that if a discharge appeared on it and on the preceding two days zibah is established. ');">¹⁷</span>

ת"ל (ויקרא טו, כו) כמשכב נדתה

the eleventh and for excluding the twelfth? I include the eleventh since it is suitable for being counted [as one of the seven clean days following the one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The fourth day. ');">²¹</span>

ואין לי אלא שלשה ימים שני ימים מנין

that is deduced<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra. ');">²²</span>

ת"ל ימי

from] 'or if she have an issue'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The seven days following a discharge on the fourth terminating on the eleventh. ');">²³</span>

יום אחד מנין

and I exclude the twelfth since it is not suitable for being counted as one of the seven clean days following the one that is deduced from 'or if she have an issue'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It being the first day of menstruation. ');">²⁴</span>

ת"ל כל ימי

But so far I only know that <i>zibah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That conveys uncleanness to couch and seat. ');">²⁵</span>

ומנין שסופרת אחד לאחד

is established after a discharge on<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and I have not but'. ');">²⁶</span>

ת"ל יהיה לה

three days, whence is it deduced that the restrictions apply to a discharge on two days? It was explicitly stated, Days.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">²⁷</span>

יכול תספור שבעה לשנים ודין הוא

Whence the deduction that the same applies also to a discharge on one day? It was explicitly stated, All the days.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">²⁷</span>

ומה הוא שאין סופר אחד לאחד סופר שבעה לשנים היא שסופרת אחד לאחד אינו דין שתספור שבעה לשנים

'Unclean',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">²⁷</span>

ת"ל יהיה לה אינה סופרת אלא יומה אלמא קראי נינהו

implies that she conveys uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her like a menstruant. 'She',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">²⁷</span>

לר"ע קראי לר' אלעזר בן עזריה הלכתא

implies that only she conveys uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her but that the <i>zab</i> conveys no uncleanness to the woman with whom he had intercourse. But is there not an argument [a minori ad majus]: If she, who does not contract uncleanness on account of observation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, e.g., she experienced three discharges on one day she is not regarded as a major zabah (v. foll. n.) to incur the obligation of a sacrifice. ');">²⁸</span>

א"ל רב שמעיה לר' אבא

as on account of days,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A discharge that appeared on three consecutive days confirms a woman as a major zabah (cf. prev. n.). ');">²⁹</span>

אימא ביממא תהוי זבה בליליא תהוי נדה

does convey uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her, is there not more reason that the man who does contract uncleanness on account of observation as on account of days<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A man is confirmed as a zab irrespective of whether he observed three discharges on three consecutive days respectively or all the three discharges on the same day (cf. B.K. 24a). ');">³⁰</span>

א"ל

should convey uncleanness to the woman with whom he had intercourse? It was expressly stated, 'she',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">²⁷</span>

עלך אמר קרא (ויקרא טו, כה) על נדתה סמוך לנדתה סמוך לנדתה אימת הוי

implying that only she conveys uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her but that a <i>zab</i> does not convey uncleanness to the woman with whom he had intercourse. But whence is it deduced that he conveys uncleanness to couch and seat? It was expressly stated, As the bed of her menstruation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 16. ');">³¹</span>

בליליא וקא קרי לה זבה

From this,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 16. ');">³¹</span>

תנא דבי אליהו

however, I would only know the case of a man who experienced a discharge on three days, whence the deduction that the restrictions apply to a discharge on two days? It was explicitly stated, 'Days'. But whence the deduction that the same applies to a discharge on one day? It was stated, 'All the days' — And whence do we infer that the woman must count one day to correspond to one day?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. if she experienced a discharge on one day she must allow one clean day to pass before she may be regarded as clean. ');">³²</span>

כל השונה הלכות בכל יום מובטח לו שהוא בן העולם הבא שנאמר (חבקוק ג, ו) הליכות עולם לו אל תקרי הליכות אלא הלכות

It was stated, She shall be.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'shall be to her', Lev. XV, 25. ');">³³</span>

<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך תינוקת וסליקא לה מסכת נדה</strong></big><br><br>

As it might have been presumed that she should count seven days after a discharge has appeared on two days only, this being arrived at by the following argument, 'If the man who does not count one day to correspond to one day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After one discharge on one day he performs immersion in the evening and resumes his cleanness. ');">³⁴</span> counts seven days after a discharge on two days, how much more reason is there that she who does count one day to correspond to one day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. if she experienced a discharge on one day she must allow one clean day to pass before she may be regarded as clean. ');">³²</span> should count seven days after a discharge on two days', it was explicitly stated, She shall be,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'shall be to her', Lev. XV, 25. ');">³³</span> implying that she counts one day only. It is thus evident,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The argument begun on 72b ad fin. is now resumed and concluded. ');">³⁵</span> is it not, that these<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The laws regarding the intervals between the menstruation periods, viz., that each interval extends over eleven days; that a discharge on three consecutive days of these eleven subjects the woman to the restrictions of a major zabah; that after a discharge on only one or two of these days no more than one clean day need be allowed to pass; that after the eleven days' period the menstruation period begins, and that a discharge on the first of these causes the woman to be unclean on that day and on the following six days. ');">³⁶</span> are derived from Scriptural texts?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then could it be stated supra that these laws were halachahs? ');">³⁷</span> — According to R. Akiba they are derived from Scriptural texts, but according to R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah they are traditional halachahs. Said R. Shemaiah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec., Isaiah (Yalkut). ');">³⁸</span> to R. Abba:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec., Raba (MS.M.). ');">³⁹</span> Might it be suggested that on account of a discharge in the day time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the text from which the laws of zibah are derived (Lev. XV, 25) speaks of days. ');">⁴⁰</span> a woman is a zabah, and that on account of one in the night<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When (cf. prev. n.) she cannot be regarded a zabah. ');">⁴¹</span> she is a menstruant? — For your sake,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. in order to avert the possibility of his deduction. ');">⁴²</span> the other replied, Scripture stated, By<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Al, E.V. 'beyond'. ');">⁴³</span> the time of her menstruation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. E.V. 'her impurity'. ');">⁴⁴</span> implying<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By the use of 'al ('by'). ');">⁴⁵</span> a discharge close to the time of her menstruation. Now which is a discharge that is close to the time of her menstruation? One that occurred in the night;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the menstruation period comes to an end at the sunset of the seventh day. ');">⁴⁶</span> and yet Scripture called her a zabah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The verb rendered by 'have an issue' (Lev. XV, 25) being derived from the same root as zabah. ');">⁴⁷</span> The Tanna debe Eliyahu<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A treatise bearing this name is mentioned in Keth., (Sonc. ed.,) p. 680, n. 2 ');">⁴⁸</span> [teaches]: Whoever repeats<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'learns'. ');">⁴⁹</span> <i>halachahs</i> every day may rest assured that he will be a denizen of the world to come, for it is said, Halikoth — <i>the world is his</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hab. III, 6. E.V. 'his goings are of old'. ');">⁵⁰</span> read not <i>halikoth</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Goings out'. ');">⁵¹</span> but <i>halakoth</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Or 'halachahs' (the Mishnah, Baraitha, and the oral laws that were handed down through Moses from Sinai). If a man studies these 'halachahs, the world (to come) is his'. ');">⁵²</span>