Niddah 73

Chapter 73

א אזל שילא אמר לדביתהו צבית לי זוודתא דלא ליזיל ולימא ליה לרב מילי עילואי צביתה ליה זוודתא נח נפשיה דשילא חזו דפרחא אסא מהאי פוריא להאי פוריא אמרי ש"מ עבדו רבנן פייסא

1 Shila proceeded to his wife and said to her, 'prepare for me my shroud in order that he have no opportunity of going to Rab and saying things about me'. She prepared his shroud for him; and when the soul of Shila came to its eternal rest people saw a myrtle1 flying from the one bier to the other. 'We may conclude', they said, 'that the Rabbis have been reconciled.' Raba enquired: Does labour2 render all previous counting in zibah3 void? Does any discharge that causes uncleanness render all previous counting void and, therefore, this also [does it, since] it causes uncleanness like the days of menstruation; or is it possible that only that which4

ב בעי רבא קושי מהו שתסתור בזיבה

2 causes the uncleanness of zibah that renders all the previous counting void, and this, therefore, [does not do it, since] it is no cause of such uncleanness? — Abaye replied: A zibah that is due to an accident provides the answer,5 for this is no cause of the uncleanness of zibah6

ג דבר המטמא סותר והאי נמי מטמא כימי נדה הוא או דילמא דבר הגורם סותר והאי לאו גורם הוא

3 and yet renders all previous counting void.7 The other retorted: Indeed, this8

ד א"ל אביי אונס בזיבה יוכיח שאינו גורם וסותר

4 also is a cause of the uncleanness of zibah, for we have learnt: If he observed a first discharge he must be examined, if he observed a second discharge he must be examined, but if he observed a third he need not be examined.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Zabim II, 2. Thus it is shown that a third discharge, even if it was due to an accident, provided the first two discharges were not due to such a cause, renders a person a confirmed or major zab. ');">9 But according to R. Eliezer who ruled, 'Even after a third discharge he must be examined'10

ה אמר ליה לאיי האי נמי גורם הוא דתנן ראה ראייה ראשונה בודקין אותו שניה בודקין אותו שלישית אין בודקין אותו

5 would you also maintain that, since it is no cause of the uncleanness of zibah, it does not render the previous counting void? — The other replied: According to R. Eliezer the law is so indeed. Come and hear: R. Eliezer ruled, Even after a third discharge he must be examined, but after a fourth one he need not be examined.11 Does not this refer to the rendering of previous counting void?12

ו ולרבי אליעזר דאמר אף בשלישי' בודקין אותו ה"נ כיון דלא גרים לא סתר אמר ליה לרבי אליעזר ה"נ

6 — No, to the imposition on that drop of an uncleanness that may be conveyed through carriage. Come and hear: After a third discharge. R. Eliezer ruled, he must be examined; after a fourth one he need not be examined; and it is in regard to a sacrifice that I said this13 but not in regard to the rendering void of all previous counting.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The counting being always void and is in no way dependent on an examination. Now does not this then prove that even that which causes no uncleanness of zibah renders the counting void? ');">14

ז ת"ש רבי אליעזר אומר אף בשלישית בודקין אותו ברביעית אין בודקין אותו מאי לאו לסתירה

7 But the fact is that15 according to R. Eliezer you may well solve from here that even that which causes no uncleanness of zibah renders all previous counting void. What, however, [it is asked], is the solution of the problem according to the Rabbis? — Come and hear what the father of R. Abin learnt: 'What had his zibah caused him? Seven days.16 Hence it renders void the counting of seven days. What had his emission of semen caused him? The [uncleanness of] one day. Hence it renders void the counting of one day'. Now what is meant by 'seven days'? If it be suggested that it causes him to be unclean for seven days, [the objection would arise that] in that case it should have been said: As on account of his zibah he is unclean for seven days. Consequently17

ח לא לטמויה לההיא טיפה במשא

8 it follows, that only that which causes the uncleanness of zibah renders void the counting of the seven days, but that which does not cause the uncleanness of zibah does not render void all previous counting. This is conclusive. Abaye stated: We have an accepted tradition that labour does not render void all previous counting in zibah; and should you find a Tanna who said that it did render the counting void, that must be R. Eliezer.18

ט ת"ש בשלישית רבי אליעזר אומר בודקין אותו ברביעית אין בודקין אותו לקרבן אמרתי ולא לסתירה

9 It was taught: R. Marinus ruled, A birth does not render void the previous counting after a zibah.19 The question was raised: Is it included in the counting?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. if the birth took place during the seven days following a zibah, and the days following it were free from all discharge, are these days counted as clean ones and make up the required number of seven? ');">20

י אלא לר"א תפשוט דדבר שאינו גורם סותר לרבנן מאי

10 — Abaye replied: It neither renders void the days that were previously counted21

יא ת"ש דתני אבוה דרבי אבין מה גרם לו זובו שבעה לפיכך סותר שבעה מה גרם לו קריו יום אחד לפיכך סותר יום אחד

11 nor is it counted in the prescribed days.21 Raba replied: It does not render void the days counted and it is counted among the prescribed days.22

יב מאי שבעה אילימא דמטמא שבעה האי מה זובו טמא שבעה מבעי ליה אלא לאו דבר הגורם סותר דבר שאינו גורם אינו סותר ש"מ

12 Whence, said Raba, do I derive this? From what was taught: And after that she shall be clean,23 'after' means after all of them, implying that no uncleanness may intervene between them.24 Now if you agree that [these days]25

יג אמר אביי נקטינן אין קושי סותר בזיבה ואי משכחת תנא דאמר סותר ההוא ר"א היא

13 are included one can well see the justification for saying that no uncleanness may intervene between them, but if you contend that these days25 are not included the birth, surely, would cause a break between them. And Abaye?26 — He can answer you: The meaning is that the uncleanness of zibah shall not intervene between them.27

יד תניא רבי מרינוס אומר אין לידה סותרת בזיבה איבעיא להו מהו שתעלה אביי אמר אינה סותרת ואינה עולה רבא אמר אינה סותרת ועולה

14 Whence, said Raba, do I derive this? From what was taught: Of her issue,23 'of her issue' implies but not of her leprosy,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. as soon as she counted the days prescribed for zibah (cf. Lev. XV, 28) she brings the required sacrifice, and attains cleanness from zibah irrespective of whether she was or was not still afflicted with leprosy. ');">28 'of her issue' but not of her childbirth.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As soon as she is free from her zibah she begins to count the seven days and need not wait until the unclean days of childbirth had passed. It is thus obvious that a birth during the days of zibah does not render void the previous counting and that the days following birth are included in the counting. ');">29 And Abaye?30 — He can answer you: Deduce once 'Of her issue31 but not of her leprosy' and do not deduce again, 'but not of her childbirth'. And Raba?32 — What an argument is this!33 If you agree that 'of her issue'31

טו אמר רבא מנא אמינא לה דתניא (ויקרא טו, כח) ואחר תטהר אחר אחר לכולן שלא תהא טומאה מפסקת ביניהם

15 implies 'but not of her childbirth' one can well justify the text; for since it was required for the deduction about childbirth, leprosy also was mentioned on account of childbirth; but if you contend that 'of her issue' implies only 'but not of her leprosy', [the objection would arise] that this could be deduced from And when he that hath an issue is cleansed of his issue,34 which implies 'of his issue' and not of his leprosy. And Abaye?30

טז אי אמרת בשלמא עולה היינו דלא מפסקת טומאה אלא אי אמרת אינה עולה אפסיק ליה לידה ואביי אמר לך שלא תהא טומאת זיבה מפסקת ביניהם

16 — One35 refers to a zab and the other to a zabah, both being necessary. For if the All Merciful had only written

יז אמר רבא מנא אמינא לה דתניא מזובה מזובה ולא מנגעה מזובה ולא מלידתה ואביי אמר לך תני חדא מזובה ולא מנגעה ולא תתני ולא מלידתה

יח ורבא האי מאי אי אמרת בשלמא מזובה ולא מלידתה איידי דאצטריך ליה לידה תנא נגעה אטו לידה אלא אי אמרת מזובה ולא מנגעה האי (ויקרא ט״ו:י״ג) מוכי יטהר הזב מזובו נפקא מזובו ולא מנגעו

יט ואביי חד בזב וחד בזבה וצריכי דאי כתב רחמנא

Previous Chapter Next Chapter