כד בעי רמי בר חמא פולטת שכבת זרע מהו שתסתור בזיבה רואה היתה וסותרת
24 rather an important safeguard for them? But the fact is that when they observe a discharge of red blood they treat it as supplementary to a previous discharge of yellow blood.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. relevant n. on our Mishnah. ');"><sup>38</sup></span> Another explanation: She includes the day on which her discharge ceases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the third day of three consecutive days (after the termination of her period of menstruation) on each of which she experienced a discharge and in consequence of which, she is a confirmed zabah. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> in the number of the seven days.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While in the case of a zabah the law requires seven full days clear of any discharge whatsoever. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> Rami b. Hama demurred: Why indeed should she not count it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As one of the seven clean days. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> and why should not we also count it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As one of the seven clean days. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> seeing that we have an established rule that part of a day is regarded as the whole of it? — Raba retorted: If so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That as regards the counting of the clean days after zibah a part of a day could be regarded as the whole of it. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> how could it be possible for an emission of semen to cause the counting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of any one of the seven days (cf. supra 22a). ');"><sup>43</sup></span> after a <i>zibah</i> to be void seeing that a part of the day is to be counted as the whole of it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And a part of the day presumably remains after the emission. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> If one had observed the discharge in the middle of the day the law might indeed be so,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The remaining part of the day being counted as a full day and the counting of the seven days is in no way interrupted. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> but here we might be dealing with one who observed the discharge near sunset?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that no part of the day remained, ');"><sup>46</sup></span> — Could it then definitely be assumed that<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and let him arise and say to him to'. ');"><sup>47</sup></span> the Scriptural text was written only [in regard to a discharge] near sunset? — Yes; you must indeed allow the text to be so explained, for it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In view of the accepted rule that part of a day counts as the whole of it. ');"><sup>48</sup></span> forces this interpretation upon itself. Rami b. Hama enquired: If a woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who had intercourse during her zibah. ');"><sup>49</sup></span> ejected some semen;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' While she was counting her clean days after her zibah had terminated. ');"><sup>50</sup></span> does she cause her counting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the one day on which the ejection occurred. ');"><sup>51</sup></span> after a <i>zibah</i> to be void? Is she regarded as one who observed an emission of semen and causes, therefore, the counting<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the one day on which the ejection occurred. ');"><sup>51</sup></span> to be void