Niddah 53

Chapter 53

א חומר שני ולדות שאני אומר שמא נמוח שפיר של שליא ונמוח שליא של שפיר תיובתא
1 the restrictions of the two births;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, for instance, the embryo aborted was a male, the placenta is presumed to contain the crushed embryo of a female, and the woman must, therefore, count fourteen unclean days (as for a female) and not only seven (as prescribed for a male). According to the Rabbis (who do not regard a bird or a beast as a valid birth) the restriction imposed would be to regard 'neither birth as valid and to deprive the woman in consequence of the advantage of the clean days prescribed for a woman after a childbirth. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> for it is assumed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'for I say'. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> that the foetus of the placenta may have been crushed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the placenta belonged to that foetus and not to the one in existence. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב אמר רבה בר שילא אמר רב מתנה אמר שמואל מעשה ותלו את השליא בולד עד עשרה ימים ולא אמרו תולין אלא בשליא הבאה אחר הולד
2 and that the placenta of the foetus<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is in existence. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> was also crushed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And lost. Hul. 77a. It is thus shown that a placenta is sometimes attached to the foetus. How then could Rabbi maintain (supra 26b ad fin.) that such a thing 'does not exist'? ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ג אמר רבה בר בר חנה אמר רבי יוחנן מעשה ותלו את השליא בולד עד כ"ג ימים אמר ליה רב יוסף עד כ"ד אמרת לן
3 This is indeed a refutation. Rabbah b. Shila citing R. Mattena who had it from Samuel stated: It once happened that a placenta was attributed to an embryo as late as<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until'. ');"><sup>6</sup></span> ten days [after the latter's birth].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Despite the long interval between the birth of the embryo and the expulsion of the placenta no assumption was made that the placenta of the embryo in existence was lost and that the placenta in existence belonged to a second embryo that was crushed. ');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ד אמר רב אחא בריה דרב עוירא א"ר יצחק מעשה ונשתהה הולד אחר חבירו ל"ג יום א"ל רב יוסף ל"ד אמרת לן
4 [The law, however, that it] is to be attributed [to the existing embryo] applies only<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and they only said'. ');"><sup>8</sup></span> where the expulsion of the placenta followed the birth of the embryo.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If, however, it preceded it the possibility must be taken into consideration that it belonged to another embryo that had been crushed; and consequently the restrictions applying to the two embryos must be imposed. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> Rabbah b. Bar Hana citing R. Johanan stated: It once happened that a placenta was attributed to an embryo as late as<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until'. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> twenty-three days [after the birth of the latter]. 'You once told us', said R. Joseph to him, 'as late as twenty-four days'. R. Aha son of 'Awira citing R. Johanan<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So BaH. Cur. edd., 'R. Isaac'. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ה הניחא למאן דאמר יולדת לתשעה יולדת למקוטעין משכחת לה אחד נגמרה צורתו לסוף שבעה ואחד נגמרה צורתו לתחלת תשעה אלא למ"ד יולדת לתשעה אינה יולדת למקוטעין מאי איכא למימר
5 stated: It once happened that the birth of an embryo was delayed for thirty-three days after that of its predecessor. 'You', said R. Joseph to him, 'have in fact told us thirty-four days.' [Such an incident may be explained] satisfactorily according to him who holds that a woman who bears at nine months does not necessarily complete the full number,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the nine months. Limekuta'in (from a rt. meaning 'to lop off'). ');"><sup>12</sup></span> since in such circumstances it is possible that the features of one embryo were completed at the end<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Within a day or two. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> of seven months<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In consequence of which it is viable. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ו איפוך שמעתתא ל"ג לשליא כ"ג לולד
6 and those of the other at the beginning<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Within a day or two. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> of the ninth month,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The eighth month consisting of twenty-nine or thirty days together with the odd days of the seventh and the ninth months (cf. prev. n. but one) making up the interval of thirty-three days. ');"><sup>15</sup></span>
ז א"ר אבין בר רב אדא אמר רב מנחם איש כפר שערים ואמרי לה בית שערים מעשה ונשתהה ולד אחד אחר חבירו ג' חדשים והרי הם יושבים לפנינו בבית המדרש ומאן נינהו יהודה וחזקיה בני רבי חייא
7 but according to him who maintains that a woman who bears at nine months does complete the full number,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the nine months. Limekuta'in (from a rt. meaning 'to lop off'). ');"><sup>12</sup></span> what can be said [in explanation of the incident]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Apparently nothing whatever. If the first was born in the seventh month (even if on the last day) and the second in the ninth month the interval would not be one of thirty-three days but one of no less than two months. If they were both born in the seventh month the interval would inevitably be less than thirty-three days (since a Hebrew month never contains more than thirty days). If again, one was born in the seventh and the other in the eighth month the latter could not be viable, whereas the incident which speaks of a welad ('child') and not of nefel ('abortion') seems to refer to two viable children. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> — Reverse the statements:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of R. Johanan. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> Thirty-three days in the case of the placenta<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first incident described supra. ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
ח והא אמר מר אין אשה מתעברת וחוזרת ומתעברת אמר אביי טיפה אחת היתה ונתחלקה לשתים אחד נגמרה צורתו בתחלת ז' ואחד בסוף ט'
8 and twenty-three days in that of the embryo.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The second of the incidents supra. This is quite possible where both embryos were born in the seventh month, since all agree that a child may be viable even if the full number of seven months was not completed. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> R. Abin b. R. Adda citing R. Menahem of Kefar She'arim or, as some say, Beth She'arim, stated: It once happened that a child was born three months later than its predecessor and lo, both sit before us in the schoolhouse. And who are they? — Judah and Hezekiah the sons of R. Hiyya. But did not a Master say that a woman in conception cannot conceive again?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'a woman does not conceive and conceive again'. How then was it possible for a child to be born three months after its predecessor. ');"><sup>20</sup></span> — Abaye replied: It was the same drop but it was divided in two sections; the features of one of these were completed at the beginning of the seventh month and those of the other were completed at the end of the ninth month. IF A PLACENTA IS WITHIN A HOUSE, THE HOUSE IS UNCLEAN. Our Rabbis taught: If a placenta is in a house, the house is unclean; not because a placenta is a child but because generally there can be no placenta with which there is no child; so R. Meir. R. Jose, R. Judah and R. Simeon regard [the house] as clean. 'Do you not agree', they said to R. Meir, 'that if it had been carried out in a bowl into an outer room it would be clean?' 'Indeed', he replied. 'But why?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Should then the first house be unclean. ');"><sup>21</sup></span>
ט שליא בבית הבית טמא תנו רבנן שליא בבית הבית טמא לא שהשליא ולד אלא שאין שליא שאין ולד עמה דברי רבי מאיר רבי יוסי ורבי יהודה ורבי שמעון מטהרין
9 'Because it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Having been mashed in the water. ');"><sup>22</sup></span> is no longer in existence'. 'As', they retorted, 'it is not in existence in the outer room so is it not in existence in the inner room'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since it was mashed in the placenta. ');"><sup>23</sup></span> 'What was mashed once', he replied, 'is not like that which was mashed twice.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'There is no comparison between one presumption that the embryo was mashed and two such suppositions (that the placenta of one embryo and the embryo of another placenta were mashed)'. Jast. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> R. Papa once sat behind R. Bubi in the presence of R. Hamnuna and in the course of the session he observed: What is R. Simeon's reason?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. granted that the embryo was mashed, does not a mashed corpse convey uncleanness? ');"><sup>25</sup></span> He is of the opinion that any uncleanness with which anything of a different kind of uncleanness has been mixed is neutralized. Said R. Papa to them: 'Is this also the reason of R. Judah and R. Jose?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who are of the same opinion as R. Simeon supra. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
י אמרו לו לרבי מאיר אי אתה מודה שאם הוציאוהו בספל לבית החיצון שהוא טהור אמר להן אבל ולמה לפי שאינו
10 They laughed at him. 'Is not this obvious', they said, 'why should there be any difference?'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' None whatever (cf. prev. n.). ');"><sup>27</sup></span> — 'Even such a question',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which might cause one to be an object of ridicule. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> said R. Papa, 'a man should submit to his Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To make sure of his tradition. ');"><sup>29</sup></span> and not be content with silence;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By relying on his own intelligence. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> for it is said, If thou hast done foolishly<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. asked what might appear to be a ridiculous question. ');"><sup>31</sup></span>
יא אמרו לו כשם שאינו בבית החיצון כך אינו בבית הפנימי אמר להן אינו דומה נמוק פעם אחת לנמוק ב' פעמים
11 thou art<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.V., 'in'. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> lifting up thyself;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One's knowledge is of the highest order and first hand. ');"><sup>33</sup></span> but<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.V., 'or'. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> if thou hast planned devices,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In seeking to escape possible ridicule. ');"><sup>35</sup></span>
יב יתיב רב פפא אחורי דרב ביבי קמיה דרב המנונא ויתיב וקאמר מאי טעמא דרבי שמעון קסבר כל טומאה שנתערב בה ממין אחר בטלה
12 lay thy hand upon thy mouth.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Prov. XXX, 32; he will not be able to give an authoritative answer when a question on the subject is addressed to him. ');"><sup>36</sup></span> R. Simeon<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In his ruling supra that 'Any uncleanness with which anything of a different kind&nbsp;… has been mixed is neutralized'. ');"><sup>37</sup></span>
יג אמר להו רב פפא היינו נמי טעמייהו דרבי יהודה ורבי יוסי אחיכו עליה מאי שנא פשיטא
13 follows the view he expressed elsewhere. For it was taught: If some earth fell into a ladleful of corpse-mould [the latter remains] unclean, but R. Simeon holds it to be clean. What is R. Simeon's reason? — Raba<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So MS.M. and BaH. Cur. edd., 'Rabbah'. ');"><sup>38</sup></span> replied: 'I met the Rabbis of the schoolhouse while they were sitting at their studies and explaining that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the earth is much less than the corpse-mould. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> it is impossible that [somewhere in the mixture] two particles of earth to one of the corpse-mould should not represent the larger portion, so that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since in that part of the mixture, at least, the corpse-mould is neutralized and loses its uncleanness. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> something is missing',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the prescribed minimum of a ladleful. The whole mixture is consequently clean. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> and I said to them, 'On the contrary! It is impossible that [somewhere in the mixture] two particles of the corpse-mould should not represent a part greater than
יד אמר רב פפא אפילו כי הא מילתא לימא איניש ולא נשתוק קמיה רביה משום שנאמר (משלי ל, לב) אם נבלת בהתנשא ואם זמות יד לפה
14 
טו ואזדא רבי שמעון לטעמיה דתניא מלא תרוד רקב שנפל לתוכו עפר כל שהו טמא ורבי שמעון מטהר
15 
טז מאי טעמא דרבי שמעון אמר רבה אשכחתינהו לרבנן דבי רב דיתבי וקאמרי אי אפשר שלא ירבו שתי פרידות עפר על פרידה אחת של רקב וחסיר ליה
16 
יז ואמינא להו אדרבה א"א שלא ירבו שתי פרידות רקב על
17