Niddah 74

בזב משום דלא מטמא באונס אבל זבה דמטמיא באונס אימא לא צריכא

of a <i>zab</i> it might have been presumed to apply to him only, since he does not become unclean through a discharge that is due to an accident, but not to a zabah who becomes unclean even through a discharge that is due to an accident. Hence the necessity for the text about the zabah. And if the All Merciful had written only of a zabah, it might have been presumed to apply only to her, since she does not become unclean through observations [on less than three days] as on [three] days,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Only a discharge that made its appearance on three successive days causes her uncleanness. ');">¹</span>

ואי כתב רחמנא בזבה משום דלא מטמיא בראיות כבימים אבל זב דמטמא בראיות כבימים אימא לא צריכא

but not to a <i>zab</i> who becomes unclean through [three] observations<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even on the same day. ');">²</span>

אמר אביי

as [through observations on three] days.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. B.K. 24a. ');">³</span>

מנא אמינא לה דתניא

Hence both texts were required.

(ויקרא יב, ב) דותה תטמא לרבות את בועלה דותה תטמא לרבות את הלילות דותה תטמא לרבות את היולדת בזוב שצריכה שתשב שבעה נקיים

Said Abaye: Whence do I derive this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' His ruling supra 37a. ');">⁴</span>

מאי לאו נקיים מלידה

From what was taught: Her sickness shall she be unclean,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XII, 2. ');">⁵</span>

לא מדם

includes the man who had intercourse with her; 'her sickness shall she be unclean' includes the nights;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the text speaks only of days. ');">⁶</span>

ואמר אביי

'her sickness shall she be unclean' includes a woman who gave birth in <i>zibah</i> who is required to continue in her uncleanness until seven clean days have passed. Now does not this mean: Clean from the uncleanness of birth?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. that no birth must intervene; from which it follows that if it did intervene the days following it may not be included in the prescribed seven days. ');">⁷</span>

מנא אמינא לה דתניא

— No, clean from that of blood.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Only those days on which a discharge occurred may not be included in the counting, but where the birth was free from bleeding the days following it may well be included. ');">⁸</span>

כימי נדתה כך ימי לידתה מה ימי נדתה אין ראוין לזיבה ואין ספירת שבעה עולה מהן אף ימי לידתה שאין ראוין לזיבה אין ספירת שבעה עולה מהן

Abaye further stated, Whence do I derive this?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' His ruling supra 37a. ');">⁹</span>

ורבא הא מני רבי אליעזר היא דאמר מסתר נמי סתרה

From what was taught: As are the days of her menstruation so are the days of her bearing. As the days of her menstruation are not suitable [for counting as the days] after her <i>zibah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the zibah period follows that of menstruation and not vice versa, while a subsequent menstruation period cannot begin before seven clean days have passed after the zibah had ceased. ');">¹⁰</span>

וכי דנין אפשר משאי אפשר

and they cannot be included in the counting of the prescribed seven days, so also the days following her bearing which<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Like those of menstruation. ');">¹¹</span>

אמר רב אחדבוי בר אמי

are not suitable [for counting as the days] after her <i>zibah</i> may not<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If birth took place during the counting. ');">¹²</span>

ר' אליעזר היא דאמר דנין אפשר משאי אפשר

be included in the counting of the seven prescribed days. And Raba? — This is in agreement with<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'this whose'. ');">¹³</span>

ורב ששת אמר

R. Eliezer who ruled: It<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Childbirth. ');">¹⁴</span>

על כרחך הקישן הכתוב

also renders void all previous counting.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From which it is self-evident that the days following it cannot be included in the counting of the seven days. According to the Rabbis, however, whose view Raba follows, birth does not render void all previous counting and the days following, it may well be included in the prescribed seven days. ');">¹⁵</span>

איכא דאמרי אמר רב אחדבוי בר אמי אמר רב ששת

But may an inference be drawn from the impossible<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Menstruation during zibah. ');">¹⁶</span>

רבי אליעזר היא דאמר דנין אפשר משאי אפשר ורב פפא אמר

for the possible?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Birth, which may well occur during a zibah period. ');">¹⁷</span>

על כרחך הקישן הכתוב

R. Ahadboy b. Ammi replied: This is the view of R. Eliezer who holds that the possible may be inferred from the impossible.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Men. 82b. ');">¹⁸</span>

קשתה שלשה ימים וכו'

R. Shesheth, however, replied: Scripture has perforce compared them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Birth and menstruation. ');">¹⁹</span>

איבעיא להו

to one another.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Only a gezerah shawah (v. Glos.) may be questioned, but not a comparison made in the Biblical text itself (hekkesh) despite any argument that might be raised against it. ');">²⁰</span>

שפתה מזה ומזה מהו

There are some who say: R. Ahadboy b. Ammi citing R. Shesheth replied. This represents the view of R. Eliezer who holds that the possible may be deduced from the impossible; but R. Papa replied: Scripture has perforce compared them to one another.

רב חסדא אמר

IF HAVING BEEN IN LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS etc. The question was raised: What is the ruling where she was relieved from both?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pain and bleeding. ');">²¹</span>

טמאה רבי חנינא אמר

— R. Hisda replied: She is unclean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since at any rate she had relief from pain it is obvious that the previous bleeding was not due to childbirth. ');">²²</span>

טהורה

R. Hanina replied: She is clean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The relief from both is an indication that the bleeding also was due to childbirth. Only where the bleeding continued and the pain ceased is it manifest that the former was not due to the labour. ');">²³</span>

א"ר חנינא

R. Hanina explained: This may be compared to a king who, when going on a tour, is preceded<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By a day or two. ');">²⁴</span>

משל למלך שיצא וחיילותיו לפניו בידוע שחיילותיו של מלך הן

by his troops and it is known that they are the king's troops.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Similarly the pains and bleeding that precede childbirth must be ascribed to it despite the interval (cf. prev. n.) between them. ');">²⁵</span>

ורב חסדא אמר

But R. Hisda, said: [Immediately before his arrival] he would require even more troops.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As the bleeding ceased it must be obvious that the childbirth had no connection with it. ');">²⁶</span>

כל שכן דבעי נפיש חיילות טפי

We learnt: R. JOSHUA RULED, THE RELIEF FROM PAIN MUST HAVE CONTINUED FOR A NIGHT AND A DAY. AS THE NIGHT AND THE DAY OF THE SABBATH. THE RELIEF [SPOKEN OF IS ONE] FROM PAIN, NOT FROM BLEEDING. The reason then<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why the woman is unclean. ');">²⁷</span>

תנן רבי יהושע אומר

is because [she had relief] FROM PAIN and NOT FROM BLEEDING, but if she had relief from both<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pain and bleeding. ');">²¹</span>

לילה ויום כלילי שבת ויומו ששפתה מן הצער ולא מן הדם

she is clean. Does not this present an objection against R. Hisda? — R. Hisda can answer you: There was no need to state that, if she had relief from both, she is unclean, since [metaphorically] the troops completely disappeared; but even where she had relief from pain and not from bleeding where it might have been presumed that as she had not ceased to bleed she has not ceased to labour either and that it was merely stupor that seized her. Hence we were informed [that even in this case she is unclean].

טעמא דמן הצער ולא מן הדם הא מזה ומזה טהורה

We learnt: IF HAVING BEEN IN LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS OF THE ELEVEN DAYS, SHE WAS RELIEVED FROM HER PAINS FOR TWENTY-FOUR HOURS AND THEN GAVE BIRTH. SHE IS REGARDED AS HAVING GIVEN BIRTH IN <i>ZIBAH</i>. Now, how are we to imagine the circumstances? If it be suggested: As it was stated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS, relief FOR TWENTY-FOUR HOURS, and bleeding all the time. ');">²⁸</span>

תיובתא דרב חסדא

[the objection would arise:] What need was there to mention THREE seeing that it suffices<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the woman to be unclean. ');">²⁹</span>

אמר לך רב חסדא

if the labour lasted two days and the relief<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From pain but not from bleeding. ');">³⁰</span>

לא מבעיא מזה ומזה דטמאה דפסקי להו חיילות לגמרי אבל מן הצער ולא מן הדם אימר

one day? Consequently it must be this that was meant: IF HAVING BEEN IN LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS she was relieved from both,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Pain and bleeding. ');">³¹</span>

כי היכי דמדם לא פסקה מקושי נמי לא פסקה והא תונבא בעלמא הוא דנקט לה קמ"ל

or if having been in labour for two days, SHE WAS RELIEVED FROM HER PAINS FOR TWENTY-FOUR HOURS, SHE IS REGARDED AS HAVING GIVEN BIRTH IN <i>ZIBAH</i>, and this presents, does it not, an objection against R. Hanina? — R. Hanina can answer you: No; the circumstances may in fact be as stated,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS, relief FOR TWENTY-FOUR HOURS, and bleeding all the time. ');">³²</span>

תנן

but it is this that we were informed, that although the labour continued<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. Rashal. Cur. edd. 'began'. ');">³³</span>

קשתה שלשה ימים בתוך אחד עשר יום ושפתה מעת לעת וילדה הרי זו יולדת בזוב

[for a part only] of the third day and she was relieved from her pains for twenty-four hours<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And not for a full night and a full day. ');">³⁴</span>

היכי דמי

she is nevertheless unclean, contrary to the view<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'to take out'. ');">³⁵</span>

אילימא כדקתני למה לי שלש

of R. Hanina.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. Hananiah the son of the brother of R. Joshua who stated (supra 36b), 'Provided her pains of labour were experienced on her third day&nbsp;… she is not regarded as having given birth in zibah'. ');">³⁶</span>

בתרי בקושי וחד בשופי סגי

HOW LONG MAY PROTRACTED LABOUR CONTINUE? R. MEIR RULED etc. Now since protracted labour may continue for FIFTY DAYS is there any necessity to mention FORTY? — R. Hisda replied: This is no difficulty, the one<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'here', the number fifty. ');">³⁷</span>

אלא לאו הכי קאמר

referring to an ailing woman and the other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Forty. ');">³⁸</span>

קשתה שלשה ושפתה מזה ומזה או שקשתה שנים ושפתה מעת לעת הרי זו יולדת בזוב ותיובתא דר' חנינא

to a woman in good health.

אמר לך רבי חנינא

R. Levi ruled: [The birth of] a child is a cause of the cleanness of those days only in which a woman may normally become a zabah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the eleven days between the menstruation periods. If a birth, however, takes place after these 'days the woman becomes unclean as a menstruant (as stated supra). ');">³⁹</span>

לא לעולם כדקתני והא קא משמע

but Rab ruled: Even in the days that are suitable for the counting prescribed for a zabah.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. if labour began during the eleven days of zibah not only are these days clean but also the seven days that follow them. Only when the bleeding continued beyond these seven days does the woman become unclean as a menstruant. ');">⁴⁰</span>

לן דאע"ג דמתחיל קישוי בשלישי ושפתה מעת לעת טמאה לאפוקי מרבי חנינא

Said R. Adda b. Ahabah: And according to Rab's view<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That even the days following the zibah period are clean if the labour began during the zibah days. ');">⁴¹</span>

כמה היא קשויה ר"מ אומר וכו'

השתא חמשים מקשיא ארבעים מיבעיא

אמר רב חסדא

ל"ק כאן לחולה כאן לבריאה

א"ר לוי

אין הולד מטהר אלא ימים הראויין להיות בהן זבה

ורב אמר

אפי' בימים הראויין לספירת זבה

אמר רב אדא בר אהבה

ולטעמיה דרב