Niddah 74

Chapter 74

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

1 of a zab 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,1

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

2 but not to a zab who becomes unclean through [three] observations2

ג אמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא (ויקרא יב, ב) דותה תטמא לרבות את בועלה

3 as [through observations on three] days.3 Hence both texts were required. Said Abaye: Whence do I derive this?4

ד דותה תטמא לרבות את הלילות דותה תטמא לרבות את היולדת בזוב שצריכה שתשב שבעה נקיים

ה מאי לאו נקיים מלידה לא מדם

5 From what was taught: Her sickness shall she be unclean,5 includes the man who had intercourse with her; 'her sickness shall she be unclean' includes the nights;6

ו ואמר אביי מנא אמינא לה דתניא 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

6 'her sickness shall she be unclean' includes a woman who gave birth in zibah 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?7 — 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 Abaye further stated, Whence do I derive this?9

ז ורבא הא מני רבי אליעזר היא דאמר מסתר נמי סתרה

7 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 zibah<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

ח וכי דנין אפשר משאי אפשר

8 and they cannot be included in the counting of the prescribed seven days, so also the days following her bearing which11

ט אמר רב אחדבוי בר אמי ר' אליעזר היא דאמר דנין אפשר משאי אפשר ורב ששת אמר על כרחך הקישן הכתוב איכא דאמרי אמר רב אחדבוי בר אמי אמר רב ששת רבי אליעזר היא דאמר דנין אפשר משאי אפשר ורב פפא אמר על כרחך הקישן הכתוב

9 are not suitable [for counting as the days] after her zibah may not12 be included in the counting of the seven prescribed days. And Raba? — This is in agreement with13 R. Eliezer who ruled: It14 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 But may an inference be drawn from the impossible16 for the possible?17 R. Ahadboy b. Ammi replied: This is the view of R. Eliezer who holds that the possible may be inferred from the impossible.18

י קשתה שלשה ימים וכו'

10 R. Shesheth, however, replied: Scripture has perforce compared them19

יא איבעיא להו שפתה מזה ומזה מהו רב חסדא אמר טמאה רבי חנינא אמר טהורה

11 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 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. IF HAVING BEEN IN LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS etc. The question was raised: What is the ruling where she was relieved from both?21 — R. Hisda replied: She is unclean.22 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

יב א"ר חנינא משל למלך שיצא וחיילותיו לפניו בידוע שחיילותיו של מלך הן

12 R. Hanina explained: This may be compared to a king who, when going on a tour, is preceded24 by his troops and it is known that they are the king's troops.25

יג ורב חסדא אמר כל שכן דבעי נפיש חיילות טפי

13 But R. Hisda, said: [Immediately before his arrival] he would require even more troops.26 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 then27

יד תנן רבי יהושע אומר לילה ויום כלילי שבת ויומו ששפתה מן הצער ולא מן הדם טעמא דמן הצער ולא מן הדם הא מזה ומזה טהורה תיובתא דרב חסדא

14 is because [she had relief] FROM PAIN and NOT FROM BLEEDING, but if she had relief from both21 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]. 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 ZIBAH. Now, how are we to imagine the circumstances? If it be suggested: As it was stated,28 [the objection would arise:] What need was there to mention THREE seeing that it suffices29

טו אמר לך רב חסדא לא מבעיא מזה ומזה דטמאה דפסקי להו חיילות לגמרי אבל מן הצער ולא מן הדם אימר כי היכי דמדם לא פסקה מקושי נמי לא פסקה והא תונבא בעלמא הוא דנקט לה קמ"ל

15 if the labour lasted two days and the relief30 one day? Consequently it must be this that was meant: IF HAVING BEEN IN LABOUR FOR THREE DAYS she was relieved from both,31 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 ZIBAH, 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,32

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

16 but it is this that we were informed, that although the labour continued33 [for a part only] of the third day and she was relieved from her pains for twenty-four hours34

יז היכי דמי אילימא כדקתני למה לי שלש בתרי בקושי וחד בשופי סגי

17 she is nevertheless unclean, contrary to the view35 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 … she is not regarded as having given birth in zibah'. ');">36 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 one37

יח אלא לאו הכי קאמר קשתה שלשה ושפתה מזה ומזה או שקשתה שנים ושפתה מעת לעת הרי זו יולדת בזוב ותיובתא דר' חנינא

18 referring to an ailing woman and the other38 to a woman in good health.

יט אמר לך רבי חנינא לא לעולם כדקתני והא קא משמע לן דאע"ג דמתחיל קישוי בשלישי ושפתה מעת לעת טמאה לאפוקי מרבי חנינא

19 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 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 Said R. Adda b. Ahabah: And according to Rab's view41

כ כמה היא קשויה ר"מ אומר וכו' השתא חמשים מקשיא ארבעים מיבעיא אמר רב חסדא ל"ק כאן לחולה כאן לבריאה

כא 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

Previous Chapter Next Chapter