Niddah 52

תנורי בנות טפח דתניא

the law of ovens of the size of one handbreadth?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Used as toys (cf. Rashi and Gold.) ');">¹</span>

תנור תחלתו ארבעה ושיריו ד' דברי רבי מאיר

For we learnt:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. MS.M. Cur. edd., 'for it was taught'. ');">²</span>

וחכמים אומרים

— An oven [if it is to be susceptible to uncleanness must] ab initio<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When its manufacture is completed. ');">³</span>

במה דברים אמורים בגדול אבל בקטן תחלתו כל שהוא

be no less than four handbreadths high, and what remains of it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. of a big oven that contracted uncleanness and was then broken. ');">⁴</span>

משתגמר מלאכתו ושיריו ברובו

must<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If its uncleanness is to be retained. ');">⁵</span>

וכמה כל שהוא

be no less than four handbreadths high; so R. Meir. But the Sages ruled: This applies only to a big oven but if it is a small one [it is susceptible to uncleanness] ab initio, after its manufacture is completed, whatever its size, and what is left of it [remains unclean] if it was the greater part of it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Kel. V, 1. For a fuller explanation cf. Hul. 124a. ');">⁶</span>

אמר רבי ינאי

And [to the question] what is meant by 'whatever its size', R. Jannai replied: One handbreadth, since ovens of the height of one handbreadth are made!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Now why was not this law included among the five enumerated by R. Oshaia supra? ');">⁷</span>

טפח שכן עושין תנורי בנות טפח

— He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Oshaia. ');">⁸</span>

בפלוגתא לא קמיירי

did not speak of laws about which a divergence of view exists.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The size of the handbreadth in this case being disputed by R. Meir. ');">⁹</span>

השתא דאתית להכי הא נמי פלוגתא היא

Now that you have arrived at this argument that law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' About the stone that projected from an oven cited supra from Kel. V, 2. ');">¹⁰</span>

דקתני סיפא

[it may be explained]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a reason why it was not mentioned by R. Oshaia. ');">¹¹</span>

אמר ר' יהודה לא אמרו טפח אלא מן התנור ולכותל

is also one in dispute, for in the final clause it was stated: R. Judah said, They spoke of the length of a handbreadth only between the oven and the wall.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Near which the oven is placed. Where a stone is of greater length it prevents the oven from being brought up to the wall and is removed in consequence. Only in such a case is the size restricted to a handbreadth. Where, however, the stone projects on another side, since it would not be removed, it is regarded as a handle. ');">¹²</span>

והאיכא מסגרת טפח

But is there not also a border of a handbreadth?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXV, 25. ');">¹³</span>

בדכתיבן לא קא מיירי

— He does not deal with sizes that are prescribed in Scripture. But is there not the ark-cover that was one handbreadth thick?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Ex. XXV, 17, as explained in Suk. 4b. ');">¹⁴</span>

והאיכא כפורת טפח

— He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Oshaia. ');">⁸</span>

בקדשים לא קמיירי

does not discuss holy things. But is there not [the following law]: It suffices for a cross-beam<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Placed above the entrance to a blind alley in connection with the permissibility of the movement of objects on the Sabbath. ');">¹⁵</span>

והאיכא

to be one handbreadth wide?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Er. 13b. ');">¹⁶</span>

דיה לקורה שהיא רחבה טפח

— He<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Oshaia. ');">¹⁷</span>

בדרבנן לא קמיירי אלא בדכתיבן ולא מפרשי שיעורייהו

does not discuss Rabbinical laws.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ali the Sabbath laws in connection with an alley are merely Rabbinical. ');">¹⁸</span>

יתיב רב יצחק בר שמואל בר מרתא קמיה דרב כהנא ויתיב וקאמר אמר רב יהודה אמר רב

[He was concerned only] with such as are prescribed in Scripture and in connection with which no sizes<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'their sizes'. ');">¹⁹</span>

כל שלשה ימים הראשונים תולין את השליא בולד מכאן ואילך חוששין לולד אחר

have been specified.

אמר ליה

R. Isaac b. Samuel b. Martha once sat at his studies before R. Kahana and in the course of the session he observed: Rab Judah citing Rab laid down that throughout the first three days<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the birth of a child. ');">²⁰</span>

ומי אמר רב הכי

the placenta<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That issued after the childbirth. ');">²¹</span>

והאמר רב

is attributed to the child,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That was born. The days of the woman's uncleanness and cleanness are consequently reckoned from the day of the child's birth and not from the latter day on which the placenta issued. ');">²²</span>

אין הולד מתעכב אחר חבירו כלום

but henceforth the possibility of the birth of a second child<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who was crushed within the placenta and who might have been a female. ');">²³</span>

אישתיק

must be considered.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the restrictions of a female birth (fourteen unclean days instead of seven, for instance,) are imposed. ');">²⁴</span>

אמר ליה

Said the other to him: But could Rab have said such a thing? Did not Rab in fact state, 'One child is not detained at all after the other [had been born]'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then could he have ruled that after three days had passed the placenta might still be attributed to a second child? ');">²⁵</span>

דלמא כאן בנפל כאן בבן קיימא

The first remained silent. Said the other to him: Is it not possible that one statement<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to which a second child might be born three or more days after the birth of the first one. ');">²⁶</span>

אמר ליה

referred to an abortion, while the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'One child is not detained at all after the other'. ');">²⁷</span>

את אמרת לשמעתתיה דרב

referred to a child that was viable? — You, the first<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who, thanks to R. Kahana's suggestion, recollected Rab's actual words and as a result was grateful and complimentary (cf. R. Gershom, contra Rashi). ');">²⁸</span>

בפירוש אמר רב הכי

answered, have indeed stated Rab's actual rulings, for Rab has explicitly made the following statement: If a woman aborted an embryo and after that she aborted a placenta, if this occurred within three days<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the abortion of the embryo. ');">²⁹</span>

הפילה נפל ואחר כך הפילה שליא כל שלשה ימים תולין את השליא בולד מכאן ואילך חוששין לולד אחר

the placenta is attributed to the embryo, but if it occurred at any subsequent time the possibility of the abortion of a second embryo must be taken into consideration. If, however, she gave birth to a normal child and subsequently aborted a placenta, even if that occurred between that moment and ten days later,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'from here and onwards'. ');">³⁰</span>

ילדה ואח"כ הפילה שליא אפילו מכאן ועד עשרה ימים אין חוששין לולד אחר

the possibility of the abortion of a second child<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That may have been crushed in the placenta. ');">³¹</span>

שמואל ותלמידי דרב ורב יהודה הוו יתבי

need not be considered at all.

חליף ואזיל רב יוסף בריה דרב מנשיא מדויל לאפייהו באלי ואתי אמר

Samuel and the disciples of Rab and Rab Judah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who was a former disciple of Rab and joined Samuel's academy for some time after Rab's death. ');">³²</span>

אתי לן גברא דרמינן ליה בגילא דחטתא ומרמי ומדחי

were once sitting at their studies when R. Joseph the son of R. Menashya of Dewil passed along in great haste. 'There comes towards us', he exclaimed, 'a man whom we can throw down with a piece of straw<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'straw of the wheat'. Metaphor: The man could be upset by the simplest of arguments. Aliter: On whom we may throw wheat-chaff, i.e., embarrass with petty questions (Jast.). ');">³³</span>

אדהכי אתא

and he would allow himself to be thrown down and pushed out'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n. He would not be able to open his mouth in defence of his views. ');">³⁴</span>

אמר ליה שמואל

In the meanwhile he approached them. What, said Samuel to him, did Rab rule in regard to a placenta? — Thus, the other replied, said Rab: The placenta may be attributed only to a child that is viable.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As suggested supra by R. Kahana and confirmed by R. Isaac. ');">³⁵</span>

מאי אמר רב בשליא

Samuel then put the question to all the disciples of Rab and they told him the same thing. Thereupon he turned round and looked at Rab Judah with displeasure.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'He considered it a discourtesy on the part of Rab Judah (cf. supra n. 3) not to have informed him earlier of such an important ruling of Rab. ');">³⁶</span>

א"ל הכי אמר רב

R. Jose b. Saul enquired of Rabbi: What is the law where there was an abortion in the shape of a raven and [this was followed by] a placenta?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is the placenta, it is asked, attributed to the raven-shaped embryo or is it attributed to a human embryo that may have been crushed in it? ');">³⁷</span>

אין תולין את השליא אלא בדבר של קיימא

— The other replied: We can attribute a placenta only to an embryo in whose species<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Man and beast. ');">³⁸</span>

שיילינהו שמואל לכל תלמידי דרב ואמרי ליה הכי הדר חזייה לרב יהודה בישות

the placenta is [one of their organs].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Birds are, therefore, excluded. ');">³⁹</span>

בעא מיניה רבי יוסי בן שאול מרבי

What is the law where the placenta is tied to it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The raven-shaped object. ');">⁴⁰</span>

המפלת דמות עורב ושליא מהו

— You, the other replied, have asked a question about that which does not exist. He raised an objection against him: If a woman aborted something in the shape of a beast, a wild animal or a bird, and a placenta with them, whenever the placenta is attached to it there is no need to take into consideration the possibility of the existence of a second embryo, but if no placenta is attached to it the possibility of the existence of a second embryo<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That may have been crushed within the placenta. ');">⁴¹</span>

אמר ליה

must be considered, and one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'behold I'. ');">⁴²</span>

אין תולין אלא בדבר שיש במינו שליא

must [impose on the woman] on account of them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The two embryos. ');">⁴³</span>

קשורה בו מהו

אמר ליה

דבר שאינו שאלת

איתיביה

המפלת מין בהמה חיה ועוף ושליא עמהן בזמן שהשליא קשורה עמהן אין חוששין לולד אחר אין שליא קשורה עמהן חוששין לולד אחר הריני מטיל עליהן