Niddah 51

Chapter 51

א גבי בכורות למאי הלכתא

1 in the laws of the firstborn,1

ב לבא אחריו בכור לנחלה ואין בכור לכהן

2 what practical law2

ג סנדל דתנן גבי כריתות למאי הלכתא

3 is thereby taught?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. since the birth of a sandal is always accompanied by the birth of an embryo how could the former's presence any more than its absence affect the birthright of a subsequently born son whose status would in any case be determined by that of the embryo. ');">3

ד שאם תלד ולד דרך דופן וסנדל דרך רחם דמייתא קרבן אסנדל

4 — That the son who follows it4

ה ולרבי שמעון דאמר יוצא דרך דופן ולד מעליא הוא מאי איכא למימר

5 is regarded as a firstborn son in respect of inheritance5

ו אמר רבי ירמיה שאם תלד ולד בהיותה עובדת כוכבים וסנדל לאחר שנתגיירה דמייתא קרבן אסנדל

6 but not [in regard to his redemption] from the priest.6 What practical law is taught by that of the sandal of which we learnt in the case of those who incur the penalty of kareth?7

ז אמרוה רבנן קמיה דרב פפא ומי איתנהו להני שינויי והא תניא כשהן יוצאין אין יוצאין אלא כרוכין

7 — That if the embryo8 is born from her side,9 and the sandal from her womb she10 must bring a sacrifice on account of the sandal. But according to R. Simeon who ruled that 'a foetus born from the side constitutes a valid birth',11

ח אמר רב פפא שמע מינה מכרך כריך ליה ולד לסנדל אפלגיה ומשלחיף ליה כלפי רישיה גבי בכורות כגון שיצאו דרך ראשיהם דסנדל קדים ונפיק גבי כריתות שיצאו דרך מרגלותיהם דולד קדים ונפיק

8 what can be said?12 — R. Jeremiah replied: That if a woman bears the child while she is an idolatress and the sandal after she has been converted [to Judaism] she13 must bring a sacrifice on account of the sandal.

ט רב הונא בר תחליפא משמיה דרבא אמר אפילו תימא מצומצמין ואיפוך שמעתתא גבי בכורות שיצאו דרך מרגלותיהם ולד דאית ביה חיותא סריך ולא נפיק סנדל דלית ביה חיותא שריק ונפיק גבי כריתות שיצאו דרך ראשיהן ולד דאית ביה חיותא מדנפיק רישיה הויא לידה סנדל עד דנפיק רוביה

9 The following was said by the Rabbis before R. Papa: But are all these answers14 tenable? Was it not in fact taught, 'When they15 issue they do so only while clinging to one another'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then is it possible, for instance, that a woman should be converted between the birth of the child and the birth of the sandal which are simultaneous processes or for one to be born by Caesarean section and the other by natural birth? ');">16

י <big>מתני׳</big> שליא בבית הבית טמא לא שהשליא ולד אלא שאין שליא בלא ולד

10 — R. Papa replied: From this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From (a) the law relating to those incurring the penalty of kareth which presumes the embryo to precede the sandal and (b) the law of the firstborn which presumes the sandal to precede the embryo and (c) the statement that embryo and sandal issue while clinging to one another. ');">17 it may be inferred that the embryo clings to the sandal at the middle of the latter18

יא רבי שמעון אומר נימוק הולד עד שלא יצא

11 which lies across the head of the former.19 Consequently, as regards the law of the firstborn, [the reference is to a case], for instance, where the embryo20

יב <big>גמ׳</big> תנו רבנן שליא תחלתה דומה לחוט של ערב וסופה דומה כתורמוס וחלולה כחצוצרת ואין שליא פחותה מטפח רבי שמעון בן גמליאל אומר שליא דומה לקורקבן של תרנגולין שהדקין יוצאין ממנה

12 issued with its head first21 so that the sandal22 issued first.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. before the birth of the embryo was consummated. As the sandal was the first to issue the embryo cannot be regarded as a firstborn son to be subject to the obligation of redemption from the priest. ');">23 As regards the law concerning those punishable by kareth it is a case where they24

יג תניא רבי אושעיא זעירא דמן חבריא חמשה שיעורן טפח ואלו הן שליא שופר שדרה דופן סוכה והאזוב

13 issued with their feet first so that the embryo was born first.25 R. Huna b. Tahlifa citing Raba explained: It may even be said that they26 cling together side by side, but reverse the previous statement:27

יד שליא הא דאמרן שופר דתניא כמה יהא שיעור שופר פירש רבי שמעון בן גמליאל כדי שיאחזנו בידו ויראה לכאן ולכאן טפח

14 As regards the law of the firstborn [the reference is to a case] where they26 issued with their feet first; so that the embryo, being animated hangs on and does not easily come out; while the sandal, not being animated, glides and comes speedily out. As regards the law concerning those subject to the penalty of kareth [the reference is to a case] where they issued with their heads first, so that the embryo, being animated is deemed to have consummated its birth as soon as its head came out; while the sandal [being inanimated cannot be deemed to have been born] until its greater part came out. MISHNAH. IF A PLACENTA IS WITHIN A HOUSE, THE HOUSE IS UNCLEAN;28 NOT BECAUSE A PLACENTA IS A CHILD BUT BECAUSE GENERALLY THERE CAN BE NO PLACENTA WITHOUT A CHILD. R. SIMEON SAID, THE CHILD MIGHT HAVE BEEN MASHED29

טו שדרה מה היא דא"ר פרנך אמר רבי יוחנן שדרו של לולב צריך שיהא יוצא מן ההדס טפח דופן סוכה דתניא שתים כהלכתן שלישית אפילו טפח אזוב דתני רבי חייא אזוב טפח

15 BEFORE IT CAME FORTH.30 GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: The placenta in its first stage resembles a thread of the woof and in its final stage it resembles a lupine. It is hollow like a trumpet; and no placenta is smaller than a handbreadth. R. Simeon b. Gamaliel stated: The placenta resembles the craw of a hen31 out of which the small bowels issue.32 R. Oshaia, the youngest of the fellowship,33 taught:34 Five things have a prescribed minimum of a handbreadth, and they are the following. A placenta, a shofar, a spine, a sukkah wall and a bundle of hyssop. As to the placenta there is the ruling just mentioned.35 'Shofar'?36

טז אמר רבי חנינא בר פפא דריש שילא איש כפר תמרתא תלת מתניתא ותרתי שמעתתא שיעורא טפח תרתי חדא היא אמר אביי אימא אמר רבי חייא אזוב טפח

16 For it was taught: What must be the size of a shofar?37 R. Simeon b. Gamaliel explained: It must be of such a size as can be held in one's hand and be seen at either end, viz.,38 a handbreadth.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A handbreadth is equal to the size of four thumbs which equals that of four fingers plus. Hence the prescription that when 'held in one's hand', sc. with the four fingers, it must 'be seen at either end', i.e., it must slightly project to make up the required size. ');">39 What is meant by 'spine'? The ruling which R. Parnak laid down in the name of R. Johanan: The spine of the lulab must be long enough to project a handbreadth above the myrtle.40 'The Sukkah41 wall'? As it was taught: Two walls42

יז ותו ליכא והאיכא טפח על טפח על רום טפח מרובע מביא את הטומאה וחוצץ בפני הטומאה

17 must be proper ones but the third is valid even if it is only one handbreadth wide. 'Hyssop'? As R. Hiyya taught: The bundle of hyssop43 must be a handbreadth long. R. Hanina b. Papa stated: Shila of the village of Tamartha discoursed on three Baraithas and two reported traditions dealing with the prescribed size of a handbreadth. 'Two'44

יח טפח קאמרינן טפח על טפח לא קאמרינן

18 [you say]; is it not only one?45

יט והא איכא אבן היוצא מן התנור טפח ומן הכירה שלש אצבעות חבור

19 — Abaye replied, read:46 R. Hiyya stated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As an Amora. R. Hiyya lived at the end of the period of the Tannas and the beginning of that of the Amoras. When he 'taught' he was citing a Baraitha but when he 'stated' or 'said' he was speaking only as an Amora. ');">47

כ כי קאמרינן היכא דבציר מטפח לא חזי אבל הכא כ"ש דבציר מטפח יד תנור הוא

20 'The bundle of hyssop must be a handbreadth long'. But are there no others?48

כא והאיכא

21 Is there not in fact [the law that an enclosed space of] one handbreadth square and one handbreadth in height, forming a cube49 conveys uncleanness<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By overshadowing. If an unclean object and a clean one were overshadowed by it the latter becomes unclean even though it had not come in direct contact with the former. ');">50 and constitutes a screen51 against uncleanness?52 — We spoke of the size of 'a handbreadth'; we did not speak of 'a handbreadth square'. But is there not the law concerning a stone that projected one handbreadth from an oven53 or three fingerbreadths from a double stove54 in which case it serves as a connecting link?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kel. V, 2. Between an object on the stone and the oven or stove. If the object was unclean its uncleanness is conveyed to the oven or stove and if one of the latter was unclean its uncleanness is conveyed to the object. ');">55 We spoke only of cases where the size of less than a handbreadth is invalid, but here the law would apply all the more to such a case where the size is of less than a handbreadth and it is a handle of the oven. But is there not

Previous Chapter Next Chapter