In what ways are the laws different for a girl who hasn’t yet reached an age where girls generally menstruate and yet she has seen blood?
Niddah 10
11.02.2019 | ד׳ בחשון תש״פ
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Niddah 10
הֲדַר קָחָזְיָא בְּעוֹנוֹת, מַאי? אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל אָמַר רַב: פַּעַם רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנִיָּה — דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ, שְׁלִישִׁית — מְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה.
The Gemara asks: What is the halakha if she then sees menstrual blood at regular intervals of thirty-day cycles? Is her time sufficient, or does she transmit impurity retroactively? Rav Giddel says that Rav says: With regard to the first time and the second time that she sees menstrual blood, her time is sufficient. After the third time, she transmits impurity retroactively for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination.
וְעוֹד עָבְרוּ עָלֶיהָ שָׁלֹשׁ עוֹנוֹת, וְרָאֲתָה — דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ. הֲדַר קָחָזְיָא בְּעוֹנוֹת, מַאי?
The baraita further teaches, with regard to a young girl who did not experience bleeding for three typical cycles and then saw blood, and three further expected menstrual cycles passed without her experiencing bleeding and then afterward she saw menstrual blood, that her time is sufficient. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha if she then sees menstrual blood at regular intervals of thirty-day cycles?
אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא, אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל, אָמַר רַב: פַּעַם רִאשׁוֹנָה — דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ, שְׁנִיָּה — מְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה.
The Gemara answers: Rav Kahana says that Rav Giddel says that Rav says: The first time that she sees menstrual blood, her time is sufficient. After the second time, she transmits impurity retroactively for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination.
מַנִּי? רַבִּי הִיא, דְּאָמַר: בִּתְרֵי זִימְנֵי הָוֵי חֲזָקָה.
The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna of the baraita? The Gemara answers: Since the baraita teaches that she attains the status of a regular adult woman upon the third sighting of menstrual blood, apparently it is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who said that presumption is established by two occasions.
אֵימָא סֵיפָא: עָבְרוּ עָלֶיהָ שָׁלֹשׁ עוֹנוֹת וְרָאֲתָה — דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ, אֲתָאן לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר!
The Gemara raises a difficulty: Say the latter clause: If she then passed three expected menstrual cycles without experiencing bleeding, and then she saw menstrual blood, she returns to the status of a young girl and her time is sufficient. In this ruling we come to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that any woman who passed three expected menstrual cycles without experiencing bleeding is presumed not to be menstruating and her time is sufficient. Is the baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi or Rabbi Eliezer?
וְכִי תֵימָא רַבִּי הִיא, וּבְעוֹנוֹת סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר, וּמִי סָבַר לַהּ? וְהָא לְאַחַר שֶׁנִּזְכַּר קָאָמַר! אֶלָּא רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר הִיא, וּבִוְסָתוֹת סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי.
And if you would say that the tanna of the baraita is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and in the case of a woman who passes three menstrual cycles without experiencing bleeding, he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, but does he really hold in accordance with this opinion? Doesn’t the baraita state that after Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi remembered that several authorities disagreed with the ruling of Rabbi Eliezer, he said: Rabbi Eliezer is worthy to rely upon in exigent circumstances, i.e., only in exigent circumstances. The Gemara concludes: Rather, the tanna of the baraita is Rabbi Eliezer, and with regard to menstrual cycles he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, that a presumptive cycle is established after two occasions of seeing menstrual blood.
כֶּתֶם שֶׁבֵּין רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנִיָּה — טָהוֹר, שֶׁבֵּין שְׁנִיָּה וּשְׁלִישִׁית — חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר: טָמֵא, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: טָהוֹר. חִזְקִיָּה אָמַר: טָמֵא, כֵּיוָן דְּאִילּוּ חָזְיָא מְטַמְּאָה — כִּתְמַהּ נָמֵי טָמֵא, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: טָהוֹר, כֵּיוָן דְּלָא אִתַּחְזַקָה בְּדָם — כִּתְמַהּ נָמֵי לָא מְטַמֵּינַן לַהּ.
§ With regard to a young girl who was just starting to menstruate, the Gemara states: If she finds a blood stain between the first and second time that she sees menstrual blood, she is pure. If it is between the second and the third time, Ḥizkiyya says: She is impure; Rabbi Yoḥanan says: She is pure. The Gemara explains the reasoning behind their respective opinions. Ḥizkiyya says: She is impure, since if she had seen menstrual blood it would render her impure. Consequently, her blood stain is also impure. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: She is pure, since she has not yet attained the presumptive status of one who sees menstrual blood. Therefore, we also do not render her impure on account of her blood stain.
מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַבִּי אִלְעַאי: וְכִי מָה בֵּין זוֹ לִבְתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִין? אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא: זוֹ שִׂירְפָהּ מָצוּי וְזוֹ אֵין שִׂירְפָהּ מָצוּי.
Rabbi Ilai objects to this ruling of Ḥizkiyya: And what is the difference between this case of a girl who has not yet started menstruating and a recently married menstrual virgin whose stain is deemed pure for as long as her blood is pure, since the stain is presumed to be from her torn hymen? Rabbi Zeira said to him: With regard to this menstrual virgin, her secretion [sirfah] is common, i.e., blood from her torn hymen is normally found during this period. Therefore, any blood stain that is found is also assumed to be from her hymen. But in the case of this young girl, her secretion is not common. Therefore, if a blood stain is found, it is assumed to be menstrual blood.
אָמַר עוּלָּא, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוֹצָדָק: תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת, וְרָאֲתָה פַּעַם רִאשׁוֹנָה וּשְׁנִיָּה — רוּקָּהּ וּמִדְרָסָהּ בַּשּׁוּק טָהוֹר, כִּתְמָהּ נָמֵי טָהוֹר. וְלָא יָדַעְנָא אִם דִּידֵיהּ, אִם דְּרַבֵּיהּ.
§ Ulla says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: With regard to a young girl whose time to see the flow of menstrual blood has not arrived and she saw menstrual blood one time and then a second time, but not the third time that would render her a woman who regularly sees menstrual blood, her saliva and her garment that she treads upon that are found in the marketplace are pure if we do not know whether she has menstruated. Likewise, her blood stain is also pure. Ulla added: And I do not know if this ruling with regard to the stain is merely Rabbi Yoḥanan’s own conclusion or if that is also part of the opinion of his teacher.
לְמַאי נָפְקָא מִינָּה? לְמִיהְוֵי דְּבָרָיו שֶׁל אֶחָד בִּמְקוֹם שְׁנַיִם.
The Gemara asks: What difference is there? That is, what does it matter who said it? The Gemara explains: It makes a difference for it to be considered the statement of one Sage in the place of two dissenting opinions. As stated above, Ḥizkiyya disagrees with this ruling and maintains that a young girl’s blood stain is impure after she sees menstrual blood twice. If this statement is both Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak’s opinion and that of Rabbi Yoḥanan, then Ḥizkiyya’s ruling is opposed by two Sages, which means that his is a minority opinion. If it is Rabbi Yoḥanan’s opinion alone, then the two sides are equal, with one Sage maintaining each opinion.
כִּי אֲתָא רָבִין וְכֹל נָחוֹתֵי יַמָּא, אַמְרוּהָ כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יְהוֹצָדָק.
When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia along with all the seafarers [naḥotei yamma], they stated this ruling as the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak. If so, Rabbi Yoḥanan was relating his own opinion, which echoed that of his teacher, Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak, and therefore the halakha is in accordance with this majority opinion.
אֲמַר רַב חִלְקִיָּה בַּר טוֹבֵי: תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת, אֲפִילּוּ שׁוֹפַעַת כׇּל שִׁבְעָה — אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא רְאָיָה אַחַת. אֲפִילּוּ שׁוֹפַעַת, וְלָא מִבַּעְיָא פּוֹסֶקֶת? אַדְּרַבָּה, פּוֹסֶקֶת הָוְיָא לַהּ כִּשְׁתֵּי רְאִיּוֹת!
§ Rav Ḥilkiya bar Tovi says: With regard to a young girl whose time to see menstrual blood has not arrived, even if she continuously discharges menstrual blood for all seven days of a typical menstrual period, it is considered as only one sighting of blood and she remains in the category of one who lacks blood until she sees menstrual blood twice more. The Gemara asks: Why did Rav Ḥilkiya bar Tovi stress: Even if she continuously discharges menstrual blood, which indicates that it is not necessary to teach that this is the halakha if she stops seeing a discharge and then starts again? On the contrary, if she stops and restarts it is as though she has had two sightings of menstrual blood.
אֶלָּא, תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת, וְשׁוֹפַעַת כׇּל שִׁבְעָה — אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא רְאָיָה אַחַת.
The Gemara answers: Rather, this is what Rav Ḥilkiya bar Tovi meant: With regard to a young girl whose time to see menstrual blood has not arrived, and she then continuously discharges menstrual blood for all seven days of a typical menstrual period, it is considered as only one sighting of blood. In other words, he did not state the word: Even.
אָמַר רַב שִׁימִי בַּר חִיָּיא: מַדְלֶפֶת אֵינָהּ כְּרוֹאָה, וְהָא קָחָזְיָא! אֵימָא: אֵינָהּ כְּשׁוֹפַעַת, אֶלָּא כְּפוֹסֶקֶת.
Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya says: The case of woman who constantly drips menstrual blood is not considered like a full sighting of blood. The Gemara expresses surprise at this claim: But she saw blood. The Gemara answers: Say that what Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya meant was that she is not considered like one who continuously discharges blood, but rather like one who stops and starts again, even if she drips constantly.
מִכְּלָל דְּשׁוֹפַעַת (נָמֵי) כִּי נַהֲרָא? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: אֵינָהּ אֶלָּא כְּשׁוֹפַעַת.
The Gemara raises a difficulty: From the fact that Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya claims that a different halakha applies to a woman who constantly drips menstrual blood, it can be inferred that the blood of one who continuously discharges menstrual blood streams like a river for seven days. But this is physically impossible. The Gemara explains: Rather, say that Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya meant that the status of a woman who constantly drips menstrual blood is nothing other than the status of a woman who continuously discharges blood. In both cases, it is all considered as one sighting.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: חֲזָקָה בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל עַד שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעוּ לְפִרְקָן — הֲרֵי הֵן בְּחֶזְקַת טׇהֳרָה, וְאֵין הַנָּשִׁים בּוֹדְקוֹת אוֹתָן. מִשֶּׁהִגִּיעוּ לְפִרְקָן — הֲרֵי הֵן בְּחֶזְקַת טוּמְאָה, וְנָשִׁים בּוֹדְקוֹת אוֹתָן.
§ The Sages taught in a baraita: The presumption with regard to the daughters of Israel is that until they have reached their physical maturity they have the presumptive status of ritual purity, and adult women do not need to examine them to check if they are ritually pure before they handle consecrated items or teruma. Once they have reached their physical maturity, they have the presumptive status of ritual impurity, due to the possibility of an unnoticed menstrual discharge, and if they are still minors, adult women must examine them to check if they are ritually pure.
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אֵין בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָן בַּיָּד, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁמְּעַוְּותוֹת אוֹתָן, אֶלָּא סָכוֹת אוֹתָן בְּשֶׁמֶן מִבִּפְנִים, וּמְקַנְּחוֹת אוֹתָן מִבַּחוּץ, וְהֵן נִבְדָּקוֹת מֵאֵילֵיהֶן.
Rabbi Yehuda says: They should not examine them by hand, because that is likely to scratch them and ruin their status, as it will be assumed that they are ritually impure with menstrual blood. Rather, they should smear them with oil inside and wipe them off on the outside. And through this method they are automatically examined, i.e., if at that age they are ready to menstruate, the oil will cause the blood to flow.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְכוּ׳. תָּנֵי תַּנָּא קַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מְעוּבֶּרֶת וּמְנִיקָה שֶׁעָבְרוּ עָלֶיהָ שָׁלֹשׁ עוֹנוֹת דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: פְּתַחְתְּ בִּ״תְרֵי״ וְסַיֵּימְתְּ בַּ״חֲדָא״!
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to a pregnant woman and a nursing woman for whom three expected menstrual cycles passed during which they saw no menstrual blood, if she then saw blood, her time is sufficient. A tanna taught a baraita before Rabbi Elazar: Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to a pregnant woman and a nursing woman for whom three expected menstrual cycles passed during which they saw no menstrual blood, if she then experienced bleeding her time is sufficient. Rabbi Elazar said to him: The structure of your baraita is inconsistent. You opened with two categories of women: A pregnant woman and a nursing woman, and you ended your quote with one, as you concluded in the singular form: Her time is sufficient.
דִּלְמָא מְעוּבֶּרֶת וְהִיא מְנִיקָה קָאָמְרַתְּ, וּמִילְּתָא אַגַּב אוֹרְחֵיהּ קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן — דִּימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ עוֹלִין לָהּ לִימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ, וִימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ עוֹלִין לָהּ לִימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ. כִּדְתַנְיָא: יְמֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ עוֹלִין לָהּ לִימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ, וִימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ עוֹלִין לָהּ לִימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ.
Rabbi Elazar continued: Perhaps you are saying that this is a case of a pregnant woman who was also nursing. And if so, the baraita teaches us a matter in passing, that with regard to tallying three menstrual cycles in which she saw no menstrual blood, her days of pregnancy count toward, i.e., combine with, her days of nursing and her days of nursing count toward her days of pregnancy. As it is taught in a baraita: Her days of pregnancy count toward her days of nursing and her days of nursing count toward her days of pregnancy.
כֵּיצַד? הִפְסִיקָה שְׁתַּיִם בִּימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ, וְאַחַת בִּימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ; שְׁתַּיִם בִּימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ, וְאַחַת בִּימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ; אַחַת וּמֶחֱצָה בִּימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ, וְאַחַת וּמֶחֱצָה בִּימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ — מִצְטָרְפוֹת לְשָׁלֹשׁ עוֹנוֹת.
The baraita continues: How so? If a woman stopped seeing menstrual blood for two expected menstrual cycles during her days of pregnancy and then for one more cycle during her days of nursing, or she passed two expected menstrual cycles during her days of nursing and one more during her days of pregnancy, or one and a half cycles during her days of pregnancy and one and a half cycles during her days of nursing, in all these cases the missed cycles spanning her pregnancy and nursing combine to a total of three missed cycles, and therefore her time is sufficient.
בִּשְׁלָמָא יְמֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ עוֹלִין לָהּ לִימֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ, מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ דְּקָמְנִיקָה וְאָזְלָא וּמִיעַבְּרָה, אֶלָּא יְמֵי מְנִיקוּתָהּ עוֹלִין לָהּ לִימֵי עִיבּוּרָהּ, הֵיכִי מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ?
The Gemara asks: Granted, with regard to the claim that her days of pregnancy count toward her days of nursing, you can find it in a case where she was nursing continuously and then she became pregnant. But the scenario mentioned in the baraita where her days of nursing count toward her days of pregnancy, how can you find these circumstances? Since she certainly experienced bleeding when she gave birth, how can there be three consecutive menstrual cycles where she did not experience any discharge of blood?
אִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: בְּלֵידָה יַבִּשְׁתָּא, וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: דַּם נִדָּה לְחוֹד וְדַם לֵידָה לְחוֹד, וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: תְּנִי חֲדָא.
The Gemara provides several answers: If you wish, say that it is referring to a case of a dry birth, i.e., one without any discharge of blood. Or, if you wish, say: The blood of a menstruating woman is discrete and the blood seen during birth is discrete. Blood seen during birth does not disrupt the count of menstrual cycles during which a woman does not see menstrual blood. Therefore, the cycles before and after the birth combine to form the requisite three cycles according to Rabbi Eliezer. Or, if you wish, say: Teach only one of these scenarios. In other words, teach only the case where the days of pregnancy count toward the days of nursing, but not the case where the days of nursing count toward the days of pregnancy.
בַּמֶּה אָמְרוּ דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב: אַכּוּלְּהוּ.
§ The mishna teaches: And with regard to what did they say that her time is sufficient? It is with regard to the first sighting of blood. But with regard to the second sighting, her status is like that of any other woman and she transmits impurity for a twenty-four-hour period or from her last examination. The Gemara inquires concerning which case this clause is referring to. Rav says: This qualification is stated with regard to all of them, i.e., all four cases of the mishna: The menstrual virgin, the elderly woman, the pregnant woman, and the nursing woman.
וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּתוּלָה וּזְקֵנָה, אֲבָל מְעוּבֶּרֶת וּמְנִיקָה — דַּיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי עִיבּוּרָן, דַּיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי מְנִיקוּתָן.
And Shmuel says: They taught it only with regard to a menstrual virgin and an elderly woman. But in the case of a pregnant woman and a nursing woman, their time is sufficient for all their days of pregnancy and their time is sufficient for all their days of nursing.
וְכֵן אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: אַכּוּלְּהוּ, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּתוּלָה וּזְקֵנָה, אֲבָל מְעוּבֶּרֶת וּמְנִיקָה — דַּיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי עִיבּוּרָן, דַּיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי מְנִיקוּתָן. כְּתַנָּאֵי: מְעוּבֶּרֶת וּמְנִיקָה שֶׁהָיוּ
The Gemara notes that another pair of Sages had the same dispute. And similarly, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: This qualification applies to all of them; and Rabbi Yoḥanan says: They taught it only with regard to a menstrual virgin and an elderly woman. But in the case of a pregnant woman and a nursing woman, their time is sufficient for all their days of pregnancy and their time is sufficient for all their days of nursing. The Gemara suggests: This is like a dispute between tanna’im in the following baraita: With regard to a pregnant woman and a nursing woman who were
Follow
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Beth Kissileff
Pittsburgh, United States
I had no formal learning in Talmud until I began my studies in the Joint Program where in 1976 I was one of the few, if not the only, woman talmud major. It was superior training for law school and enabled me to approach my legal studies with a foundation . In 2018, I began daf yomi listening to Rabbanit MIchelle’s pod cast and my daily talmud studies are one of the highlights of my life.
Terri Krivosha
Minneapolis, United States
תמיד רציתי. למדתי גמרא בבית ספר בטורונטו קנדה. עליתי ארצה ולמדתי שזה לא מקובל. הופתעתי.
יצאתי לגימלאות לפני שנתיים וזה מאפשר את המחוייבות לדף יומי.
עבורי ההתמדה בלימוד מעגן אותי בקשר שלי ליהדות. אני תמיד מחפשת ותמיד. מוצאת מקור לקשר. ללימוד חדש ומחדש. קשר עם נשים לומדות מעמיק את החוויה ומשמעותית מאוד.
Vitti Kones
מיתר, ישראל
About a year into learning more about Judaism on a path to potential conversion, I saw an article about the upcoming Siyum HaShas in January of 2020. My curiosity was piqued and I immediately started investigating what learning the Daf actually meant. Daily learning? Just what I wanted. Seven and a half years? I love a challenge! So I dove in head first and I’ve enjoyed every moment!!
Nickie Matthews
Blacksburg, United States
I heard about the syium in January 2020 & I was excited to start learning then the pandemic started. Learning Daf became something to focus on but also something stressful. As the world changed around me & my family I had to adjust my expectations for myself & the world. Daf Yomi & the Hadran podcast has been something I look forward to every day. It gives me a moment of centering & Judaism daily.
Talia Haykin
Denver, United States
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Shira Krebs
Minnesota, United States
I tried Daf Yomi in the middle of the last cycle after realizing I could listen to Michelle’s shiurim online. It lasted all of 2 days! Then the new cycle started just days before my father’s first yahrzeit and my youngest daughter’s bat mitzvah. It seemed the right time for a new beginning. My family, friends, colleagues are immensely supportive!
Catriella Freedman
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
After experiences over the years of asking to join gemara shiurim for men and either being refused by the maggid shiur or being the only women there, sometimes behind a mechitza, I found out about Hadran sometime during the tail end of Masechet Shabbat, I think. Life has been much better since then.
Madeline Cohen
London, United Kingdom
With Rabbanit Dr. Naomi Cohen in the Women’s Talmud class, over 30 years ago. It was a “known” class and it was accepted, because of who taught. Since then I have also studied with Avigail Gross-Gelman and Dr. Gabriel Hazut for about a year). Years ago, in a shiur in my shul, I did know about Persians doing 3 things with their clothes on. They opened the shiur to woman after that!
Sharon Mink
Haifa, Israel
I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!
Dena Lehrman
אפרת, Israel
I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!
Anne Mirsky
Maale Adumim, Israel
I learned Talmud as a student in Yeshivat Ramaz and felt at the time that Talmud wasn’t for me.
After reading Ilana Kurshan’s book I was intrigued and after watching the great siyum in Yerushalayim it ignited the spark to begin this journey. It has been a transformative life experience for me as a wife, mother, Savta and member of Klal Yisrael.
Elana Storch
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Rhondda May
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
While vacationing in San Diego, Rabbi Leah Herz asked if I’d be interested in being in hevruta with her to learn Daf Yomi through Hadran. Why not? I had loved learning Gemara in college in 1971 but hadn’t returned. With the onset of covid, Daf Yomi and Rabbanit Michelle centered me each day. Thank-you for helping me grow and enter this amazing world of learning.
Meryll Page
Minneapolis, MN, United States
My family recently made Aliyah, because we believe the next chapter in the story of the Jewish people is being written here, and we want to be a part of it. Daf Yomi, on the other hand, connects me BACK, to those who wrote earlier chapters thousands of years ago. So, I feel like I’m living in the middle of this epic story. I’m learning how it all began, and looking ahead to see where it goes!
Tina Lamm
Jerusalem, Israel
When I was working and taking care of my children, learning was never on the list. Now that I have more time I have two different Gemora classes and the nach yomi as well as the mishna yomi daily.
Shoshana Shinnar
Jerusalem, Israel
When the new cycle began, I thought, If not now, when? I’d just turned 72. I feel like a tourist on a tour bus passing astonishing scenery each day. Rabbanit Michelle is my beloved tour guide. When the cycle ends, I’ll be 80. I pray that I’ll have strength and mind to continue the journey to glimpse a little more. My grandchildren think having a daf-learning savta is cool!
Wendy Dickstein
Jerusalem, Israel
See video
Susan Fisher
Raanana, Israel
My curiosity was peaked after seeing posts about the end of the last cycle. I am always looking for opportunities to increase my Jewish literacy & I am someone that is drawn to habit and consistency. Dinnertime includes a “Guess what I learned on the daf” segment for my husband and 18 year old twins. I also love the feelings of connection with my colleagues who are also learning.
Diana Bloom
Tampa, United States
I decided to give daf yomi a try when I heard about the siyum hashas in 2020. Once the pandemic hit, the daily commitment gave my days some much-needed structure. There have been times when I’ve felt like quitting- especially when encountering very technical details in the text. But then I tell myself, “Look how much you’ve done. You can’t stop now!” So I keep going & my Koren bookshelf grows…
Miriam Eckstein-Koas
Huntington, United States
Niddah 10
ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ·ΧΧ? ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅ΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ: Χ€Φ·ΦΌΧ’Φ·Χ Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧ Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ β ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ’ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, Χ©Φ°ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ©Φ΄ΧΧΧͺ β ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ’Φ΅Χͺ ΧΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χͺ ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ€Φ°ΦΌΧ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ€Φ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ.
The Gemara asks: What is the halakha if she then sees menstrual blood at regular intervals of thirty-day cycles? Is her time sufficient, or does she transmit impurity retroactively? Rav Giddel says that Rav says: With regard to the first time and the second time that she sees menstrual blood, her time is sufficient. After the third time, she transmits impurity retroactively for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination.
ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ Χ’ΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌ Χ’ΦΈΧΦΆΧΧΦΈ Χ©ΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ©Χ Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ β ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ’ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ. ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ·ΧΧ?
The baraita further teaches, with regard to a young girl who did not experience bleeding for three typical cycles and then saw blood, and three further expected menstrual cycles passed without her experiencing bleeding and then afterward she saw menstrual blood, that her time is sufficient. The Gemara asks: What is the halakha if she then sees menstrual blood at regular intervals of thirty-day cycles?
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦΈΦΌΧΦ²Χ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅ΦΌΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ: Χ€Φ·ΦΌΧ’Φ·Χ Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ’ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, Χ©Φ°ΧΧ Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ β ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ’Φ΅Χͺ ΧΦ°Χ’Φ΅Χͺ ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ€Φ°ΦΌΧ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ€Φ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ.
The Gemara answers: Rav Kahana says that Rav Giddel says that Rav says: The first time that she sees menstrual blood, her time is sufficient. After the second time, she transmits impurity retroactively for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination.
ΧΦ·Χ Φ΄ΦΌΧ? Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧͺΦ°Χ¨Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ°Χ Φ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ§ΦΈΧ.
The Gemara asks: Who is the tanna of the baraita? The Gemara answers: Since the baraita teaches that she attains the status of a regular adult woman upon the third sighting of menstrual blood, apparently it is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who said that presumption is established by two occasions.
ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ‘Φ΅ΧΧ€ΦΈΧ: Χ’ΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌ Χ’ΦΈΧΦΆΧΧΦΈ Χ©ΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ©Χ Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ β ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ’ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧΧ ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ±ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’ΦΆΧΦΆΧ¨!
The Gemara raises a difficulty: Say the latter clause: If she then passed three expected menstrual cycles without experiencing bleeding, and then she saw menstrual blood, she returns to the status of a young girl and her time is sufficient. In this ruling we come to the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, who holds that any woman who passed three expected menstrual cycles without experiencing bleeding is presumed not to be menstruating and her time is sufficient. Is the baraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi or Rabbi Eliezer?
ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ ΧͺΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ Χ‘ΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ±ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’ΦΆΧΦΆΧ¨, ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ Χ‘ΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ? ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ©ΦΆΧΧ Φ΄ΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ¨ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨! ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ±ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’ΦΆΧΦΆΧ¨ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ‘ΦΈΧͺΧΦΉΧͺ Χ‘ΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ.
And if you would say that the tanna of the baraita is Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, and in the case of a woman who passes three menstrual cycles without experiencing bleeding, he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer, but does he really hold in accordance with this opinion? Doesnβt the baraita state that after Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi remembered that several authorities disagreed with the ruling of Rabbi Eliezer, he said: Rabbi Eliezer is worthy to rely upon in exigent circumstances, i.e., only in exigent circumstances. The Gemara concludes: Rather, the tanna of the baraita is Rabbi Eliezer, and with regard to menstrual cycles he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, that a presumptive cycle is established after two occasions of seeing menstrual blood.
ΧΦΆΦΌΧͺΦΆΧ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧ Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧ Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ β ΧΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ¨, Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ©Φ΄ΧΧΧͺ β ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ, Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ¨. ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ, ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ β ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧͺΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ, ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ¨, ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦ·ΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ β ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧͺΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧ Φ·Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ.
Β§ With regard to a young girl who was just starting to menstruate, the Gemara states: If she finds a blood stain between the first and second time that she sees menstrual blood, she is pure. If it is between the second and the third time, αΈ€izkiyya says: She is impure; Rabbi YoαΈ₯anan says: She is pure. The Gemara explains the reasoning behind their respective opinions. αΈ€izkiyya says: She is impure, since if she had seen menstrual blood it would render her impure. Consequently, her blood stain is also impure. And Rabbi YoαΈ₯anan says: She is pure, since she has not yet attained the presumptive status of one who sees menstrual blood. Therefore, we also do not render her impure on account of her blood stain.
ΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°Χ§Φ΅ΧΧ£ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·ΧΧ: ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧ ΧΧΦΉ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΆΧΧΦΈ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ? ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧ: ΧΧΦΉ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΧ¨Φ°Χ€ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΈΧ¦ΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉ ΧΦ΅ΧΧ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΧ¨Φ°Χ€ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΈΧ¦ΧΦΌΧ.
Rabbi Ilai objects to this ruling of αΈ€izkiyya: And what is the difference between this case of a girl who has not yet started menstruating and a recently married menstrual virgin whose stain is deemed pure for as long as her blood is pure, since the stain is presumed to be from her torn hymen? Rabbi Zeira said to him: With regard to this menstrual virgin, her secretion [sirfah] is common, i.e., blood from her torn hymen is normally found during this period. Therefore, any blood stain that is found is also assumed to be from her hymen. But in the case of this young girl, her secretion is not common. Therefore, if a blood stain is found, it is assumed to be menstrual blood.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΧΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΆΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ¦ΦΈΧΦΈΧ§: ΧͺΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ ΧΦΉΧ§ΦΆΧͺ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦΉΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ’Φ· ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ ΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄Χ¨Φ°ΧΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ Χ€Φ·ΦΌΧ’Φ·Χ Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧ Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ β Χ¨ΧΦΌΧ§ΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ‘ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ©ΦΌΧΧΦΌΧ§ ΧΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ¨, ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧͺΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΌ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ¨. ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ’Φ°Χ ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ, ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨Φ·ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧΦΌ.
Β§ Ulla says that Rabbi YoαΈ₯anan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: With regard to a young girl whose time to see the flow of menstrual blood has not arrived and she saw menstrual blood one time and then a second time, but not the third time that would render her a woman who regularly sees menstrual blood, her saliva and her garment that she treads upon that are found in the marketplace are pure if we do not know whether she has menstruated. Likewise, her blood stain is also pure. Ulla added: And I do not know if this ruling with regard to the stain is merely Rabbi YoαΈ₯ananβs own conclusion or if that is also part of the opinion of his teacher.
ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΧ Χ ΦΈΧ€Φ°Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΦΈΦΌΧ? ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΧ Χ©ΦΆΧΧ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΦ°Χ§ΧΦΉΧ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ Φ·ΧΦ΄Χ.
The Gemara asks: What difference is there? That is, what does it matter who said it? The Gemara explains: It makes a difference for it to be considered the statement of one Sage in the place of two dissenting opinions. As stated above, αΈ€izkiyya disagrees with this ruling and maintains that a young girlβs blood stain is impure after she sees menstrual blood twice. If this statement is both Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadakβs opinion and that of Rabbi YoαΈ₯anan, then αΈ€izkiyyaβs ruling is opposed by two Sages, which means that his is a minority opinion. If it is Rabbi YoαΈ₯ananβs opinion alone, then the two sides are equal, with one Sage maintaining each opinion.
ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ Χ ΦΈΧΧΦΉΧͺΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΈΦΌΧ, ΧΦ·ΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧΦΈ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΆΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ¦ΦΈΧΦΈΧ§.
When Ravin came from Eretz Yisrael to Babylonia along with all the seafarers [naαΈ₯otei yamma], they stated this ruling as the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak. If so, Rabbi YoαΈ₯anan was relating his own opinion, which echoed that of his teacher, Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak, and therefore the halakha is in accordance with this majority opinion.
ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ¨ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ: ΧͺΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ ΧΦΉΧ§ΦΆΧͺ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦΉΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ’Φ· ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ ΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄Χ¨Φ°ΧΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ²Χ€Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧ€Φ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΧΦΌΧ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ. ΧΦ²Χ€Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧ€Φ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ’Φ°ΧΦΈΧ Χ€ΦΌΧΦΉΧ‘ΦΆΧ§ΦΆΧͺ? ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨Φ·ΧΦΈΦΌΧ, Χ€ΦΌΧΦΉΧ‘ΦΆΧ§ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧͺΦ΅ΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ°ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ!
Β§ Rav αΈ€ilkiya bar Tovi says: With regard to a young girl whose time to see menstrual blood has not arrived, even if she continuously discharges menstrual blood for all seven days of a typical menstrual period, it is considered as only one sighting of blood and she remains in the category of one who lacks blood until she sees menstrual blood twice more. The Gemara asks: Why did Rav αΈ€ilkiya bar Tovi stress: Even if she continuously discharges menstrual blood, which indicates that it is not necessary to teach that this is the halakha if she stops seeing a discharge and then starts again? On the contrary, if she stops and restarts it is as though she has had two sightings of menstrual blood.
ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ, ΧͺΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ ΧΦΉΧ§ΦΆΧͺ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦΉΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ’Φ· ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ ΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄Χ¨Φ°ΧΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧ€Φ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ ΧΧΦΌΧ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ.
The Gemara answers: Rather, this is what Rav αΈ€ilkiya bar Tovi meant: With regard to a young girl whose time to see menstrual blood has not arrived, and she then continuously discharges menstrual blood for all seven days of a typical menstrual period, it is considered as only one sighting of blood. In other words, he did not state the word: Even.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ¨ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧΧ: ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΆΧ€ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ! ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ€Φ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ, ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ€ΧΦΉΧ‘ΦΆΧ§ΦΆΧͺ.
Rav Shimi bar αΈ€iyya says: The case of woman who constantly drips menstrual blood is not considered like a full sighting of blood. The Gemara expresses surprise at this claim: But she saw blood. The Gemara answers: Say that what Rav Shimi bar αΈ€iyya meant was that she is not considered like one who continuously discharges blood, but rather like one who stops and starts again, even if she drips constantly.
ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ€Φ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ (Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ) ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ Χ Φ·ΧΦ²Χ¨ΦΈΧ? ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ©ΧΧΦΉΧ€Φ·Χ’Φ·Χͺ.
The Gemara raises a difficulty: From the fact that Rav Shimi bar αΈ€iyya claims that a different halakha applies to a woman who constantly drips menstrual blood, it can be inferred that the blood of one who continuously discharges menstrual blood streams like a river for seven days. But this is physically impossible. The Gemara explains: Rather, say that Rav Shimi bar αΈ€iyya meant that the status of a woman who constantly drips menstrual blood is nothing other than the status of a woman who continuously discharges blood. In both cases, it is all considered as one sighting.
ΧͺΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦΌ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΈΦΌΧ Φ·Χ: ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ©Φ°ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ·Χ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦΉΦΌΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ’ΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ€Φ΄Χ¨Φ°Χ§ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ²Χ¨Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΆΧΦ°Χ§Φ·Χͺ ΧΧΧΦ³Χ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦ·Χ ΦΈΦΌΧ©Φ΄ΧΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧΦ°Χ§ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ. ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΆΦΌΧΧΦ΄ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧ’ΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ€Φ΄Χ¨Φ°Χ§ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ²Χ¨Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦΆΧΦ°Χ§Φ·Χͺ ΧΧΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°Χ ΦΈΧ©Φ΄ΧΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧΦ°Χ§ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ.
Β§ The Sages taught in a baraita: The presumption with regard to the daughters of Israel is that until they have reached their physical maturity they have the presumptive status of ritual purity, and adult women do not need to examine them to check if they are ritually pure before they handle consecrated items or teruma. Once they have reached their physical maturity, they have the presumptive status of ritual impurity, due to the possibility of an unnoticed menstrual discharge, and if they are still minors, adult women must examine them to check if they are ritually pure.
Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧΦ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧ, ΧΦ΄Χ€Φ°ΦΌΧ Φ΅Χ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦ°ΦΌΧ’Φ·ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΧͺΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ, ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ Χ‘ΦΈΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ©ΦΆΧΧΦΆΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ€Φ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΦΌΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΧΦΌΧ₯, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΦΌΧ§ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΆΧ.
Rabbi Yehuda says: They should not examine them by hand, because that is likely to scratch them and ruin their status, as it will be assumed that they are ritually impure with menstrual blood. Rather, they should smear them with oil inside and wipe them off on the outside. And through this method they are automatically examined, i.e., if at that age they are ready to menstruate, the oil will cause the blood to flow.
Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ‘Φ΅Χ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ³. ΧͺΦΈΦΌΧ Φ΅Χ ΧͺΦ·ΦΌΧ ΦΈΦΌΧ Χ§Φ·ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΦΆΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨: Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ‘Φ΅Χ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ Χ©ΦΆΧΧ’ΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌ Χ’ΦΈΧΦΆΧΧΦΈ Χ©ΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ©Χ Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ’ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ. ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ: Χ€Φ°ΦΌΧͺΦ·ΧΦ°ΧͺΦ°ΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ΄ΧͺΦ°Χ¨Φ΅ΧΧ΄ ΧΦ°Χ‘Φ·ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧΦ°ΧͺΦ°ΦΌ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ΄ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΧ΄!
Β§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to a pregnant woman and a nursing woman for whom three expected menstrual cycles passed during which they saw no menstrual blood, if she then saw blood, her time is sufficient. A tanna taught a baraita before Rabbi Elazar: Rabbi Yosei says: With regard to a pregnant woman and a nursing woman for whom three expected menstrual cycles passed during which they saw no menstrual blood, if she then experienced bleeding her time is sufficient. Rabbi Elazar said to him: The structure of your baraita is inconsistent. You opened with two categories of women: A pregnant woman and a nursing woman, and you ended your quote with one, as you concluded in the singular form: Her time is sufficient.
ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧͺΦ°ΦΌ, ΧΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ¨Φ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·Χ©Φ°ΧΧΦ·Χ’ ΧΦ·Χ β ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ. ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΦ°ΧͺΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ.
Rabbi Elazar continued: Perhaps you are saying that this is a case of a pregnant woman who was also nursing. And if so, the baraita teaches us a matter in passing, that with regard to tallying three menstrual cycles in which she saw no menstrual blood, her days of pregnancy count toward, i.e., combine with, her days of nursing and her days of nursing count toward her days of pregnancy. As it is taught in a baraita: Her days of pregnancy count toward her days of nursing and her days of nursing count toward her days of pregnancy.
ΧΦ΅ΦΌΧΧ¦Φ·Χ? ΧΦ΄Χ€Φ°Χ‘Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ Χ©Φ°ΧΧͺΦ·ΦΌΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ; Χ©Φ°ΧΧͺΦ·ΦΌΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ; ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦΌΧΦΆΧΦ±Χ¦ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦΌΧΦΆΧΦ±Χ¦ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ β ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ¨Φ°Χ€ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ°Χ©ΦΈΧΧΦΉΧ©Χ Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΉΧͺ.
The baraita continues: How so? If a woman stopped seeing menstrual blood for two expected menstrual cycles during her days of pregnancy and then for one more cycle during her days of nursing, or she passed two expected menstrual cycles during her days of nursing and one more during her days of pregnancy, or one and a half cycles during her days of pregnancy and one and a half cycles during her days of nursing, in all these cases the missed cycles spanning her pregnancy and nursing combine to a total of three missed cycles, and therefore her time is sufficient.
ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ·Χ©Φ°ΧΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°ΦΌ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ§ΦΈΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΧ’Φ·ΧΦ°ΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ©Φ°ΧΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°ΦΌ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ?
The Gemara asks: Granted, with regard to the claim that her days of pregnancy count toward her days of nursing, you can find it in a case where she was nursing continuously and then she became pregnant. But the scenario mentioned in the baraita where her days of nursing count toward her days of pregnancy, how can you find these circumstances? Since she certainly experienced bleeding when she gave birth, how can there be three consecutive menstrual cycles where she did not experience any discharge of blood?
ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΦΌΧ’Φ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ°ΦΌΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧͺΦΈΦΌΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΦΌΧ’Φ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ·ΦΌΧ Χ Φ΄ΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΦΌΧ’Φ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧͺΦ°ΦΌΧ Φ΄Χ ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ.
The Gemara provides several answers: If you wish, say that it is referring to a case of a dry birth, i.e., one without any discharge of blood. Or, if you wish, say: The blood of a menstruating woman is discrete and the blood seen during birth is discrete. Blood seen during birth does not disrupt the count of menstrual cycles during which a woman does not see menstrual blood. Therefore, the cycles before and after the birth combine to form the requisite three cycles according to Rabbi Eliezer. Or, if you wish, say: Teach only one of these scenarios. In other words, teach only the case where the days of pregnancy count toward the days of nursing, but not the case where the days of nursing count toward the days of pregnancy.
ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌ ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΦΌ Χ©Φ°ΧΧ’ΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ³. ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ: ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦ°ΦΌΧΧΦΌ.
Β§ The mishna teaches: And with regard to what did they say that her time is sufficient? It is with regard to the first sighting of blood. But with regard to the second sighting, her status is like that of any other woman and she transmits impurity for a twenty-four-hour period or from her last examination. The Gemara inquires concerning which case this clause is referring to. Rav says: This qualification is stated with regard to all of them, i.e., all four cases of the mishna: The menstrual virgin, the elderly woman, the pregnant woman, and the nursing woman.
ΧΦΌΧ©Φ°ΧΧΧΦΌΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦΉΧ Χ©ΦΈΧΧ ΧΦΌ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧͺΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ§Φ΅Χ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΧ ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΧ ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ.
And Shmuel says: They taught it only with regard to a menstrual virgin and an elderly woman. But in the case of a pregnant woman and a nursing woman, their time is sufficient for all their days of pregnancy and their time is sufficient for all their days of nursing.
ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ Χ©Φ΄ΧΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΆΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧ§Φ΄ΧΧ©Χ: ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦ°ΦΌΧΧΦΌ, ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ΄ΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦΉΧ Χ©ΦΈΧΧ ΧΦΌ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΦΌΧͺΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ§Φ΅Χ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ β ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΧ ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ·ΦΌΧΦΈΦΌΧΧ ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ. ΧΦ°ΦΌΧͺΦ·Χ ΦΈΦΌΧΦ΅Χ: ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΌΧΦΆΦΌΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ Χ©ΦΆΧΧΦΈΧΧΦΌ
The Gemara notes that another pair of Sages had the same dispute. And similarly, Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: This qualification applies to all of them; and Rabbi YoαΈ₯anan says: They taught it only with regard to a menstrual virgin and an elderly woman. But in the case of a pregnant woman and a nursing woman, their time is sufficient for all their days of pregnancy and their time is sufficient for all their days of nursing. The Gemara suggests: This is like a dispute between tannaβim in the following baraita: With regard to a pregnant woman and a nursing woman who were
Follow
