The gemara continues to discuss and explain the various opinions regarding the time in which a woman who has contractions before birth with bleeding is not considered a zava. What is the status of the blood of a woman who has bleeding with contractions in the middle of her days of pure blood after pregnancy – Rabbi Eliezer and the rabbis disagree regarding whether or not they are considered niddah/zava and are impure or not.
Niddah 38
11.30.2019 | ב׳ בכסלו תש״פ
Share this shiur:
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Niddah 38
אֲפִילּוּ יָמִים הָרְאוּיִין לִסְפִירַת סְתִירַת זָבָה.
even if she continues to experience bleeding during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava, she remains pure. If a woman experiences bleeding during her seven clean days, she negates any days counted thus far, and must begin a new count of seven clean days. Accordingly, all the days that follow her days of ziva are effectively considered days that are fit for the counting of a zava. Therefore, blood emitted due to labor pains during these days is also ritually pure. Consequently, the blood that accompanies labor pains is ritually impure only if she begins to emit it during her days of menstruation.
תְּנַן: כַּמָּה הוּא קִשּׁוּיָהּ? רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם.
The Gemara poses a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Levi: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure.
בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב, מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ כְּרַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה, אֶלָּא לְלֵוִי — קַשְׁיָא.
The Gemara explains the difficulty: Granted, the mishna is clear according to Rav, as you find that it is possible that she will remain pure for such a long period, i.e., in accordance with the explanation of Rav Adda bar Ahava that Rav deems the blood pure even during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava. Accordingly, as long as the woman begins to experience labor pains during her days of ziva, she remains pure until birth, provided the labor pains continue without a twenty-four-hour period of resting. But according to Levi, who maintains that blood accompanying labor pains is pure only during the days of ziva, the mishna is difficult, as it is impossible for her blood to remain pure due to labor pains for fifty days.
אָמַר לָךְ לֵוִי: מִי קָתָנֵי ״טְהוֹרָה בְּכוּלָּן״? בִּימֵי נִדָּה — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָה — טְהוֹרָה.
The Gemara explains that Levi could say to you: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all these days, i.e., that she remains pure throughout the days of menstruation and ziva? Not so. Rather, if she emitted blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she emitted the blood during the days of ziva she is pure. The mishna is teaching only that she will not be deemed a zava on account of this blood.
לִישָּׁנָא אַחֲרִינָא אָמְרִי: אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי: אֵין הַוָּלָד מְטַהֵר אֶלָּא יָמִים הָרְאוּיִין לִהְיוֹת בָּהֶן זָבָה גְּדוֹלָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? דָּמָהּ ״יָמִים רַבִּים״ כְּתִיב.
Some Sages state another version of the above disagreement: Rabbi Levi says: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure only if she experienced bleeding during the eleven days that are fit for her to become a greater zava, i.e., if she experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during that time. But if she experienced bleeding on only one or two days she is rendered a lesser zava, and she must observe a clean day for each day she experiences a discharge. What is the reason? It is written: “And if a woman has an issue of her blood many days…all the days of the issue of her impurity she shall be as in the days of her menstruation: She is impure” (Leviticus 15:25). The verse is referring specifically to a greater zava, indicating that the halakha that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of an emission of blood caused by labor pains applies only to a greater zava.
אַבָּא שָׁאוּל מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ יָמִים הָרְאוּיִין לִהְיוֹת בָּהֶן זָבָה קְטַנָּה, מַאי טַעְמָא? ״יְמֵי״ וְ״כׇל יְמֵי״ הָתָם כְּתִיבִי.
Abba Shaul says in the name of Rav: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure even if she experienced bleeding on the days that are fit for her to become a lesser zava. What is the reason? “Days” and “many days” are written there, from which the impurity of a lesser zava is derived. Accordingly, the verse includes a lesser zava in this halakha as well.
תְּנַן: כַּמָּה הוּא קִשּׁוּיָהּ? רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם. קַשְׁיָא לְתַרְוַיְיהוּ! מִי קָתָנֵי ״טְהוֹרָה בְּכוּלָּן״? קִשְּׁתָה בִּימֵי נִדָּתָהּ — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָתָהּ — טְהוֹרָה.
The Gemara raises a difficulty: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure. If so, the mishna is difficult according to both opinions, as all agree that only emissions of blood due to labor pains that occur during her days of ziva are pure. The Gemara responds: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all fifty days? Not so. Rather, if she experienced labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she experienced them during the days of ziva she is pure.
תַּנְיָא, הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: יֵשׁ מְקַשָּׁה מֵאָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד? שְׁנַיִם בְּלֹא עֵת.
With regard to the above statement of Rabbi Meir, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for one hundred and fifty days, and the impurity of ziva is not included in those days, i.e., she will not be rendered a greater zava. How so? First, a woman emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, e.g., she experiences bleeding on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva. She is not rendered a menstruating woman by these emissions, as they occurred during the days of ziva, nor does she become a greater zava, since she experienced bleeding on only two days.
וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה, וַחֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁהַוָּלָד מְטַהֵר.
Rabbi Meir continues: And then she continues to experience bleeding throughout the seven days of menstruation. She is not considered to have experienced bleeding of ziva for three consecutive days, as the third emission occurred during her days of menstruation. And she then experiences bleeding for the first two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., on the first and second days of the eleven days of ziva. And on the third day of ziva she begins the period of fifty days before giving birth, during which the child renders her pure. This constitutes a period of sixty-one days during which she is not rendered a greater zava.
וּשְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה.
Rabbi Meir continues: And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, for a total of 141 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted. And there are then seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., the first and second days of ziva, during which she experiences bleeding, for a total of 150 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִם כֵּן, יֵשׁ מְקַשָּׁה כׇּל יָמֶיהָ, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן!
The Rabbis said to Rabbi Meir: If so, there is also a scenario in which a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains for all the days of her life, and the impurity of ziva is not included in them. For example, she gives birth to a female, and at the conclusion of her days of impurity engages in intercourse with her husband and becomes pregnant. She continues to experience bleeding throughout her days of purity, after which she experiences bleeding during the seven days of menstruation and the first two days of the next cycle of ziva. She then experiences labor pains accompanied by blood for fifty days, after which she miscarries a female. She subsequently becomes pregnant again within eighty days of the miscarriage, and the above process repeats itself. In this manner, she will never become a greater zava.
אָמַר לָהֶן: מַאי דַּעְתַּיְיכוּ? מִשּׁוּם נְפָלִים? אֵין קוֹשִׁי לִנְפָלִים.
Rabbi Meir said to them: What is your opinion, that a woman is not rendered a zava due to the birth of non-viable newborns? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: יֵשׁ רוֹאָה מֵאָה יוֹם, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד? שְׁנַיִם בְּלֹא עֵת, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה, וּשְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה.
The Sages taught in a baraita: There is a scenario in which a woman sees blood for one hundred days, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, and then throughout the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, and seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation. This amounts to one hundred days.
מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן? לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִמַּאן דְּאָמַר אִי אֶפְשָׁר לִפְתִיחַת הַקֶּבֶר בְּלֹא דָּם, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּאֶפְשָׁר לִפְתִיחַת הַקֶּבֶר בְּלֹא דָּם.
The Gemara asks: What is this baraita teaching us? The Gemara responds: The baraita serves to exclude the opinion of the one who said that it is impossible for there to be an opening of the womb [hakever] without an emission of blood. According to this opinion, if a woman gives birth after experiencing bleeding on the first two days after the days of menstruation, it is certain she experienced bleeding on the third day as well, as every birth is accompanied by an emission of blood. Consequently, she has experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during the days of ziva and is rendered a greater zava. The baraita teaches us that it is possible for there to be an opening of the womb without an emission of blood. Therefore, if she gave birth on the third day of ziva and she did not experience bleeding, she is not rendered a greater zava.
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר דַּיָּהּ וְכוּ׳. תַּנְיָא: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן: דַּיָּהּ חׇדְשָׁהּ, וְיֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר.
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: It is sufficient that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains only from within one month of her due date. In this regard, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Tarfon: It is sufficient for her not to be rendered a zava from within one month of her due date. And there is an aspect of leniency and an aspect of stringency in the matter.
כֵּיצַד? קִשְּׁתָה שְׁנַיִם בְּסוֹף שְׁמִינִי וְאֶחָד בִּתְחִלַּת תְּשִׁיעִי, וַאֲפִילּוּ בִּתְחִלַּת תְּשִׁיעִי יָלְדָה — הֲרֵי זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.
The baraita explains: How so? If she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for two days at the end of her eighth month of pregnancy, which are days in which she can be rendered a zava, and for one day at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the beginning of the ninth month, the one day from the ninth month joins together with the two days from the eighth month, and this woman is considered one who gives birth as a zava. This is an aspect of stringency.
אֲבָל קִשְּׁתָה יוֹם אֶחָד בְּסוֹף שְׁמִינִי וּשְׁתַּיִם בִּתְחִלַּת תְּשִׁיעִי, וַאֲפִילּוּ בְּסוֹף תְּשִׁיעִי יָלְדָה — אֵין זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.
But if she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for one day at the end of her eighth month, and for only two days at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the end of the ninth month, this woman is not considered one who gives birth as a zava, and she is pure. This is an aspect of leniency.
אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ קָסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה שִׁיפּוּרָא גָּרֵים. אִינִי? וְהָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אֵין אִשָּׁה מִתְעַבֶּרֶת וְיוֹלֶדֶת אֶלָּא לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד יוֹם, אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנַיִם יוֹם, אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה!
Rav Adda bar Ahava says: Conclude from the baraita that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the blast of the shofar at the beginning of the ninth month causes the blood emitted during that month to be pure. That is to say, once the ninth months begins, any blood emitted does not render her a zava. The Gemara asks: Is that so, that the entire ninth month of pregnancy is suitable for giving birth, and therefore any blood seen during the ninth month is attributed to the imminent labor? But doesn’t Shmuel say that a woman becomes pregnant and gives birth only after 271 days, which is a full nine months, or after 272 days, or after 273 days? She will not, however, give birth during the ninth month itself.
הוּא דְּאָמַר כַּחֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, דְּתַנְיָא: חֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים לֹא הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשִׁין מִטּוֹתֵיהֶן אֶלָּא בִּרְבִיעִי בְּשַׁבָּת, שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹאוּ נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶן
The Gemara responds: Shmuel said his statement in accordance with the opinion of the early generations of pious men. As it is taught in a baraita: The early generations of pious men would engage in sexual intercourse only on a Wednesday, so that their wives should not come
לִידֵי חִלּוּל שַׁבָּת. בִּרְבִיעִי וְתוּ לָא? אֵימָא: מֵרְבִיעִי וְאֵילָךְ.
to a desecration of Shabbat. If they were to engage in sexual intercourse on a Sunday, Monday, or Tuesday, their wives might give birth on Shabbat, either 271, 272, or 273 days after conception either. The Gemara asks: If this was indeed the concern of the early generations of pious men, why would they engage in intercourse only on a Wednesday, and nothing more? After all, if they engaged in intercourse on a Thursday, Friday, or Shabbat, they would likewise avoid any desecration of Shabbat. The Gemara answers: Say that the baraita means that the early generations of pious men would engage in intercourse each week only from Wednesday onward.
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא: מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דַּחֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים? דִּכְתִיב ״וַיִּתֵּן [ה׳] לָהּ הֵרָיוֹן״ — ״הֵרָיוֹן״ בְּגִימַטְרִיָּא מָאתַן וְשִׁבְעִים וְחַד הָווּ.
Mar Zutra said: What is the reasoning of the early generations of pious men, who state that a woman does not give birth before 271 days have passed from the time of insemination? As it is written with regard to Boaz and Ruth: “And he went in unto her, and the Lord gave her conception [herayon]” (Ruth 4:13). The letters that constitute the word herayon are 271 in numerical value.
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יוֹלֶדֶת לְתִשְׁעָה אֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת לִמְקוּטָּעִים, יוֹלֶדֶת לְשִׁבְעָה יוֹלֶדֶת לִמְקוּטָּעִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וַיְהִי לִתְקוּפוֹת הַיָּמִים וַתַּהַר חַנָּה וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן״, מִיעוּט ״תְּקוּפוֹת״ — שְׁנַיִם, מִיעוּט ״יָמִים״ — שְׁנַיִם.
Mar Zutra says: Even according to the one who said, e.g., Shmuel and the early generations of pious men, that a woman who gives birth at nine months does not give birth after an incomplete number of months, i.e., she carries for a full nine months, nevertheless, a woman who gives birth at seven months can give birth after an incomplete number of months. As it is stated with regard to the birth of Samuel: “And it came to pass, when the seasons of the days had come, that Hannah conceived, and bore a son” (I Samuel 1:20). The minimal number of “seasons” is two, and as each season of the year is three months, this amounts to six months. And the minimal number of “days” is two. If so, Samuel was born in the seventh month of Hannah’s pregnancy.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: אֵין קוֹשִׁי יוֹתֵר מִשְּׁתֵּי שַׁבָּתוֹת. אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּרַבָּנַן? דִּכְתִיב: ״וְטָמְאָה שְׁבוּעַיִם כְּנִדָּתָהּ״ — כְּנִדָּתָהּ וְלֹא כְּזִיבָתָהּ, מִכְּלָל דְּזִיבָתָהּ טְהוֹרָה. וְכַמָּה שְׁבוּעַיִם?
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Labor pains do not occur more than two weeks before birth. Shmuel said: What is the reasoning of the Rabbis, i.e., Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon? As it is written with regard to a woman who gives birth to a female: “And she shall be impure two weeks, as in her menstruation” (Leviticus 12:5). The verse indicates that she is impure as in her menstruation but not as in her ziva. By inference, one may conclude that her ziva is pure, i.e., if she emits blood accompanied by labor pains she is not rendered a zava. And for how long is this the case? For two weeks.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: יֵשׁ מְקַשָּׁה עֶשְׂרִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה יוֹם, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד? שְׁנַיִם בְּלֹא עֵת, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁלְּאַחַר נִדָּה, וְאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר שֶׁהַוָּלָד מְטַהֵר.
With regard to the halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not impart impurity of ziva, the Sages taught: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-five days before birth, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, i.e., on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva, and then for the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days of ziva that come after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by fourteen days during which the impending birth of a child renders pure the blood she sees.
וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁתִּתְקַשֶּׁה עֶשְׂרִים וְשִׁשָּׁה יוֹם בְּלֹא וָלָד, וְלֹא תְּהֵא יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.
The baraita continues: And it is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days without a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. Since a span of twenty-six days includes at least five days of ziva, there will inevitably be three consecutive days of ziva during which she experienced bleeding, therefore rendering her a greater zava.
בְּלֹא וָלָד? בִּתְלָתָא נָמֵי סַגִּי! אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: אֵימָא ״בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ וָלָד״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: וְהָא ״בְּלֹא וָלָד״ קָתָנֵי!
The Gemara analyzes the baraita: Is the baraita really dealing with a case without a child, i.e., where she is not even pregnant? If there is no child, then experiencing bleeding on three consecutive days after the days of menstruation is also sufficient to render her a greater zava. Rav Sheshet said one should say the baraita as follows: Twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, i.e., where she is pregnant. Rava said to Rav Sheshet: But the baraita explicitly teaches: Without a child.
אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא, הָכִי קָאָמַר: אִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁתִּתְקַשֶּׁה עֶשְׂרִים וְשִׁשָּׁה יוֹם בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ וָלָד וְלֹא תְּהֵא יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב, וּבִמְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין וָלָד אֶלָּא נֵפֶל — בִּתְלָתָא נָמֵי הָוְיָא זָבָה, מַאי טַעְמָא? אֵין קוֹשִׁי לִנְפָלִים.
Rather, Rava said that this is what the baraita is saying: It is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. And in a case where there is no child born but there is a non-viable newborn, with three consecutive days of emissions she also becomes a zava. What is the reason? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.
מַתְנִי’ הַמְקַשָּׁה בְּתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה — כׇּל דָּמִים שֶׁהִיא רוֹאָה טְהוֹרִין עַד שֶׁיֵּצֵא הַוָּלָד, וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא.
MISHNA: A woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, e.g., she conceived during the sixty-six days of purity, or she initially conceived twins and she gave birth to a female and the birth of the second fetus was delayed, all blood that she sees is ritually pure, as she is currently within her days of purity. And this remains the halakha until the child emerges from the womb, at which point she is rendered impure as a woman who gives birth. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: וּמָה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר בְּדַם הַשּׁוֹפִי, הֵיקֵל בְּדַם הַקּוֹשִׁי; מְקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל בְּדַם הַשּׁוֹפִי, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנָּקֵל בְּדַם הַקּוֹשִׁי?
The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely if a pregnant woman emits blood after her days of purity without any labor pains she is rendered impure, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, i.e., during a woman’s days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains?
אָמַר לָהֶן: דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, מִמָּה הֵיקֵל עָלֶיהָ? מִטּוּמְאַת זִיבָה, אֲבָל טְמֵאָה טוּמְאַת נִדָּה.
Rabbi Eliezer said to them: When deriving a halakha by means of an a fortiori inference, there is a principle that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. In other words, the status of blood emitted due to labor pains during her days of purity should not be more lenient than that of blood emitted due to labor pains after her days of purity. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But she may still be rendered ritually impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.
גְּמָ’ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״תֵּשֵׁב״ — לְרַבּוֹת הַמְקַשָּׁה בְּתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה, שֶׁכׇּל דָּמִים שֶׁהִיא רוֹאָה טְהוֹרִין עַד שֶׁיָּצָא הַוָּלָד, וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא.
GEMARA: With regard to the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis concerning a woman who emits blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, the Sages taught a baraita that addresses a verse discussing a woman who gives birth to a female: “And sixty-six days she shall observe the blood of purity” (Leviticus 12:5). The term “She shall observe” serves to include a woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, teaching that all blood that she sees is ritually pure. And this remains the case until the child emerges from the womb. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: וּמָה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַוָּלָד, הֵיקֵל בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַוָּלָד; מְקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַוָּלָד, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנָּקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַוָּלָד?
The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child, as such blood renders her a zava, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted while resting after the birth of the child, i.e., during her days of purity; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted due to labor pains before the birth of the child, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains after the birth of the child?
אָמַר לָהֶם: דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, מִמָּה הֵיקֵל עָלֶיהָ? מִטּוּמְאַת זִיבָה, אֲבָל מְטַמְּאָה טוּמְאַת נִדָּה.
Rabbi Eliezer said to them: It is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: הֲרֵי אָנוּ מְשִׁיבִין לְךָ לָשׁוֹן אַחֵר, וּמָה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַוָּלָד — הֵיקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁעִמּוֹ. מָקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַוָּלָד — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנָּקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁעִמּוֹ?
The Rabbis said to him: But we will respond to you with another version of the a fortiori inference: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains that come with it, i.e., which precede the birth of the child; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely during a woman’s days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains that come with it?
אָמַר לָהֶם: אֲפִילּוּ אַתֶּם מְשִׁיבִין כׇּל הַיּוֹם כּוּלּוֹ, דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, מִמָּה הֵיקֵל עָלֶיהָ מִטּוּמְאַת זִיבָה, אֲבָל מְטַמְּאָה טוּמְאַת נִדָּה.
Rabbi Eliezer said to them: Even if you respond by citing a fortiori inferences of that type throughout the entire day, the principle remains that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman.
אָמַר רָבָא: בְּהָא זַכִּינְהוּ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לְרַבָּנַן, לָאו אָמְרִיתוּ ״דָּמָהּ״ — דָּמָה מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד, הָכִי נָמֵי ״וְטָהֲרָה מִמְּקוֹר דָּמֶיהָ״ — דָּמֶיהָ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד.
Rava said: With this response Rabbi Eliezer triumphed over the Rabbis: Didn’t you say that the reason why a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains before birth is because the verse states: “And if a woman has an issue of her blood many days” (Leviticus 15:25)? The term “her blood” indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is impure due to ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child. So too, one can say that as the verse states with regard to a woman who gives birth: “And she shall be purified from the fountain of her blood” (Leviticus 12:7), this indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is pure from ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child.
אֵימָא: בִּימֵי נִדָּה — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָה — טְהוֹרָה? אָמַר קְרָא ״תֵּשֵׁב״ — יְשִׁיבָה אַחַת לְכוּלָּן.
This Gemara raises a difficulty against the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer: If so, one can say that if she emits blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she is a menstruating woman, but if she emits blood in the days of ziva, i.e., after the days of menstruation, she is pure. The Gemara explains that the verse states: “She shall observe the blood of purity” (Leviticus 12:5), which indicates that there is one observance for all the days of her purity, i.e., all the blood she emits due to labor pains during her days of purity is either pure or impure.
מַתְנִי’ כׇּל אַחַד עָשָׂר יוֹם בְּחֶזְקַת טׇהֳרָה.
MISHNA: For all the eleven days of ziva that follow the seven days of menstruation, a woman has the presumptive status of ritual purity, as it is unusual for her to experience bleeding on these days.
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.
I’ve been studying Talmud since the ’90s, and decided to take on Daf Yomi two years ago. I wanted to attempt the challenge of a day-to-day, very Jewish activity. Some days are so interesting and some days are so boring. But I’m still here.
Wendy Rozov
Phoenix, AZ, United States
Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .
Goldie Gilad
Kfar Saba, Israel
I was moved to tears by the Hadran Siyyum HaShas. I have learned Torah all my life, but never connected to learning Gemara on a regular basis until then. Seeing the sheer joy Talmud Torah at the siyyum, I felt compelled to be part of it, and I haven’t missed a day!
It’s not always easy, but it is so worthwhile, and it has strengthened my love of learning. It is part of my life now.
Michelle Lewis
Beit Shemesh, Israel
A Gemara shiur previous to the Hadran Siyum, was the impetus to attend it.It was highly inspirational and I was smitten. The message for me was התלמוד בידינו. I had decided along with my Chahsmonaim group to to do the daf and take it one daf at time- without any expectations at all. There has been a wealth of information, insights and halachik ideas. It is truly exercise of the mind, heart & Soul
Phyllis Hecht
Hashmonaim, Israel
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Debbie Engelen-Eigles
Minnesota, United States
I start learning Daf Yomi in January 2020. The daily learning with Rabbanit Michelle has kept me grounded in this very uncertain time. Despite everything going on – the Pandemic, my personal life, climate change, war, etc… I know I can count on Hadran’s podcast to bring a smile to my face.
Deb Engel
Los Angeles, United States
I was exposed to Talmud in high school, but I was truly inspired after my daughter and I decided to attend the Women’s Siyum Shas in 2020. We knew that this was a historic moment. We were blown away, overcome with emotion at the euphoria of the revolution. Right then, I knew I would continue. My commitment deepened with the every-morning Virtual Beit Midrash on Zoom with R. Michelle.
Adina Hagege
Zichron Yaakov, Israel
A friend mentioned that she was starting Daf Yomi in January 2020. I had heard of it and thought, why not? I decided to try it – go day by day and not think about the seven plus year commitment. Fast forward today, over two years in and I can’t imagine my life without Daf Yomi. It’s part of my morning ritual. If I have a busy day ahead of me I set my alarm to get up early to finish the day’s daf
Debbie Fitzerman
Ontario, Canada
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
A beautiful world of Talmudic sages now fill my daily life with discussion and debate.
bringing alive our traditions and texts that has brought new meaning to my life.
I am a מגילת אסתר reader for women . the words in the Mishna of מסכת megillah 17a
הקורא את המגילה למפרע לא יצא were powerful to me.
I hope to have the zchut to complete the cycle for my 70th birthday.
Sheila Hauser
Jerusalem, Israel
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
When we heard that R. Michelle was starting daf yomi, my 11-year-old suggested that I go. Little did she know that she would lose me every morning from then on. I remember standing at the Farbers’ door, almost too shy to enter. After that first class, I said that I would come the next day but couldn’t commit to more. A decade later, I still look forward to learning from R. Michelle every morning.
Ruth Leah Kahan
Ra’anana, Israel
I started learning at the beginning of this Daf Yomi cycle because I heard a lot about the previous cycle coming to an end and thought it would be a good thing to start doing. My husband had already bought several of the Koren Talmud Bavli books and they were just sitting on the shelf, not being used, so here was an opportunity to start using them and find out exactly what was in them. Loving it!
Caroline Levison
Borehamwood, United Kingdom
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
In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.
Lisa Berkelhammer
San Francisco, CA , 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
Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .
Goldie Gilad
Kfar Saba, Israel
Having never learned Talmud before, I started Daf Yomi in hopes of connecting to the Rabbinic tradition, sharing a daily idea on Instagram (@dafyomiadventures). With Hadran and Sefaria, I slowly gained confidence in my skills and understanding. Now, part of the Pardes Jewish Educators Program, I can’t wait to bring this love of learning with me as I continue to pass it on to my future students.
Hannah Greenberg
Pennsylvania, United States
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Debbie Engelen-Eigles
Minnesota, United States
I started learning Daf Yomi in January 2020 after watching my grandfather, Mayer Penstein z”l, finish shas with the previous cycle. My grandfather made learning so much fun was so proud that his grandchildren wanted to join him. I was also inspired by Ilana Kurshan’s book, If All the Seas Were Ink. Two years in, I can say that it has enriched my life in so many ways.
Leeza Hirt Wilner
New York, United States
Niddah 38
אֲפִילּוּ יָמִים הָרְאוּיִין לִסְפִירַת סְתִירַת זָבָה.
even if she continues to experience bleeding during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava, she remains pure. If a woman experiences bleeding during her seven clean days, she negates any days counted thus far, and must begin a new count of seven clean days. Accordingly, all the days that follow her days of ziva are effectively considered days that are fit for the counting of a zava. Therefore, blood emitted due to labor pains during these days is also ritually pure. Consequently, the blood that accompanies labor pains is ritually impure only if she begins to emit it during her days of menstruation.
תְּנַן: כַּמָּה הוּא קִשּׁוּיָהּ? רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם.
The Gemara poses a difficulty with regard to the opinion of Levi: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure.
בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב, מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ כְּרַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה, אֶלָּא לְלֵוִי — קַשְׁיָא.
The Gemara explains the difficulty: Granted, the mishna is clear according to Rav, as you find that it is possible that she will remain pure for such a long period, i.e., in accordance with the explanation of Rav Adda bar Ahava that Rav deems the blood pure even during the days that are fit for the new counting following the negation of the days counted by a zava. Accordingly, as long as the woman begins to experience labor pains during her days of ziva, she remains pure until birth, provided the labor pains continue without a twenty-four-hour period of resting. But according to Levi, who maintains that blood accompanying labor pains is pure only during the days of ziva, the mishna is difficult, as it is impossible for her blood to remain pure due to labor pains for fifty days.
אָמַר לָךְ לֵוִי: מִי קָתָנֵי ״טְהוֹרָה בְּכוּלָּן״? בִּימֵי נִדָּה — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָה — טְהוֹרָה.
The Gemara explains that Levi could say to you: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all these days, i.e., that she remains pure throughout the days of menstruation and ziva? Not so. Rather, if she emitted blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she emitted the blood during the days of ziva she is pure. The mishna is teaching only that she will not be deemed a zava on account of this blood.
לִישָּׁנָא אַחֲרִינָא אָמְרִי: אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי: אֵין הַוָּלָד מְטַהֵר אֶלָּא יָמִים הָרְאוּיִין לִהְיוֹת בָּהֶן זָבָה גְּדוֹלָה. מַאי טַעְמָא? דָּמָהּ ״יָמִים רַבִּים״ כְּתִיב.
Some Sages state another version of the above disagreement: Rabbi Levi says: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure only if she experienced bleeding during the eleven days that are fit for her to become a greater zava, i.e., if she experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during that time. But if she experienced bleeding on only one or two days she is rendered a lesser zava, and she must observe a clean day for each day she experiences a discharge. What is the reason? It is written: “And if a woman has an issue of her blood many days…all the days of the issue of her impurity she shall be as in the days of her menstruation: She is impure” (Leviticus 15:25). The verse is referring specifically to a greater zava, indicating that the halakha that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of an emission of blood caused by labor pains applies only to a greater zava.
אַבָּא שָׁאוּל מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרַב אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ יָמִים הָרְאוּיִין לִהְיוֹת בָּהֶן זָבָה קְטַנָּה, מַאי טַעְמָא? ״יְמֵי״ וְ״כׇל יְמֵי״ הָתָם כְּתִיבִי.
Abba Shaul says in the name of Rav: The birth of a child renders the mother ritually pure even if she experienced bleeding on the days that are fit for her to become a lesser zava. What is the reason? “Days” and “many days” are written there, from which the impurity of a lesser zava is derived. Accordingly, the verse includes a lesser zava in this halakha as well.
תְּנַן: כַּמָּה הוּא קִשּׁוּיָהּ? רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם. קַשְׁיָא לְתַרְוַיְיהוּ! מִי קָתָנֵי ״טְהוֹרָה בְּכוּלָּן״? קִשְּׁתָה בִּימֵי נִדָּתָהּ — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָתָהּ — טְהוֹרָה.
The Gemara raises a difficulty: We learned in the mishna: How long before birth is pain attributable to her labor pains? Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days before the birth. Rabbi Meir apparently maintains that a woman who experiences continuous labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for forty or fifty days remains pure. If so, the mishna is difficult according to both opinions, as all agree that only emissions of blood due to labor pains that occur during her days of ziva are pure. The Gemara responds: Does the mishna teach that she is pure during all fifty days? Not so. Rather, if she experienced labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood during the days of menstruation she has the status of a menstruating woman, whereas if she experienced them during the days of ziva she is pure.
תַּנְיָא, הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: יֵשׁ מְקַשָּׁה מֵאָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד? שְׁנַיִם בְּלֹא עֵת.
With regard to the above statement of Rabbi Meir, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir would say: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for one hundred and fifty days, and the impurity of ziva is not included in those days, i.e., she will not be rendered a greater zava. How so? First, a woman emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, e.g., she experiences bleeding on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva. She is not rendered a menstruating woman by these emissions, as they occurred during the days of ziva, nor does she become a greater zava, since she experienced bleeding on only two days.
וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה, וַחֲמִשִּׁים שֶׁהַוָּלָד מְטַהֵר.
Rabbi Meir continues: And then she continues to experience bleeding throughout the seven days of menstruation. She is not considered to have experienced bleeding of ziva for three consecutive days, as the third emission occurred during her days of menstruation. And she then experiences bleeding for the first two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., on the first and second days of the eleven days of ziva. And on the third day of ziva she begins the period of fifty days before giving birth, during which the child renders her pure. This constitutes a period of sixty-one days during which she is not rendered a greater zava.
וּשְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה.
Rabbi Meir continues: And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, for a total of 141 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted. And there are then seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation, i.e., the first and second days of ziva, during which she experiences bleeding, for a total of 150 days during which she does not become a greater zava on account of blood emitted.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: אִם כֵּן, יֵשׁ מְקַשָּׁה כׇּל יָמֶיהָ, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן!
The Rabbis said to Rabbi Meir: If so, there is also a scenario in which a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains for all the days of her life, and the impurity of ziva is not included in them. For example, she gives birth to a female, and at the conclusion of her days of impurity engages in intercourse with her husband and becomes pregnant. She continues to experience bleeding throughout her days of purity, after which she experiences bleeding during the seven days of menstruation and the first two days of the next cycle of ziva. She then experiences labor pains accompanied by blood for fifty days, after which she miscarries a female. She subsequently becomes pregnant again within eighty days of the miscarriage, and the above process repeats itself. In this manner, she will never become a greater zava.
אָמַר לָהֶן: מַאי דַּעְתַּיְיכוּ? מִשּׁוּם נְפָלִים? אֵין קוֹשִׁי לִנְפָלִים.
Rabbi Meir said to them: What is your opinion, that a woman is not rendered a zava due to the birth of non-viable newborns? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: יֵשׁ רוֹאָה מֵאָה יוֹם, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד? שְׁנַיִם בְּלֹא עֵת, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה, וּשְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁל אַחַר הַנִּדָּה.
The Sages taught in a baraita: There is a scenario in which a woman sees blood for one hundred days, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, and then throughout the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by eighty days of purity from ziva after giving birth to a female, and seven days of menstruation following her days of purity, and another two days after the days of menstruation. This amounts to one hundred days.
מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן? לְאַפּוֹקֵי מִמַּאן דְּאָמַר אִי אֶפְשָׁר לִפְתִיחַת הַקֶּבֶר בְּלֹא דָּם, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּאֶפְשָׁר לִפְתִיחַת הַקֶּבֶר בְּלֹא דָּם.
The Gemara asks: What is this baraita teaching us? The Gemara responds: The baraita serves to exclude the opinion of the one who said that it is impossible for there to be an opening of the womb [hakever] without an emission of blood. According to this opinion, if a woman gives birth after experiencing bleeding on the first two days after the days of menstruation, it is certain she experienced bleeding on the third day as well, as every birth is accompanied by an emission of blood. Consequently, she has experienced bleeding on three consecutive days during the days of ziva and is rendered a greater zava. The baraita teaches us that it is possible for there to be an opening of the womb without an emission of blood. Therefore, if she gave birth on the third day of ziva and she did not experience bleeding, she is not rendered a greater zava.
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר דַּיָּהּ וְכוּ׳. תַּנְיָא: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן: דַּיָּהּ חׇדְשָׁהּ, וְיֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר לְהָקֵל וּלְהַחֲמִיר.
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yehuda says: It is sufficient that a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains only from within one month of her due date. In this regard, it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Yehuda says in the name of Rabbi Tarfon: It is sufficient for her not to be rendered a zava from within one month of her due date. And there is an aspect of leniency and an aspect of stringency in the matter.
כֵּיצַד? קִשְּׁתָה שְׁנַיִם בְּסוֹף שְׁמִינִי וְאֶחָד בִּתְחִלַּת תְּשִׁיעִי, וַאֲפִילּוּ בִּתְחִלַּת תְּשִׁיעִי יָלְדָה — הֲרֵי זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.
The baraita explains: How so? If she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for two days at the end of her eighth month of pregnancy, which are days in which she can be rendered a zava, and for one day at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the beginning of the ninth month, the one day from the ninth month joins together with the two days from the eighth month, and this woman is considered one who gives birth as a zava. This is an aspect of stringency.
אֲבָל קִשְּׁתָה יוֹם אֶחָד בְּסוֹף שְׁמִינִי וּשְׁתַּיִם בִּתְחִלַּת תְּשִׁיעִי, וַאֲפִילּוּ בְּסוֹף תְּשִׁיעִי יָלְדָה — אֵין זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.
But if she experienced labor pains accompanied by an emission of blood for one day at the end of her eighth month, and for only two days at the beginning of her ninth month, then even if she gave birth at the end of the ninth month, this woman is not considered one who gives birth as a zava, and she is pure. This is an aspect of leniency.
אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ קָסָבַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה שִׁיפּוּרָא גָּרֵים. אִינִי? וְהָא אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אֵין אִשָּׁה מִתְעַבֶּרֶת וְיוֹלֶדֶת אֶלָּא לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד יוֹם, אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וּשְׁנַיִם יוֹם, אוֹ לְמָאתַיִם וְשִׁבְעִים וּשְׁלֹשָׁה!
Rav Adda bar Ahava says: Conclude from the baraita that Rabbi Yehuda holds that the blast of the shofar at the beginning of the ninth month causes the blood emitted during that month to be pure. That is to say, once the ninth months begins, any blood emitted does not render her a zava. The Gemara asks: Is that so, that the entire ninth month of pregnancy is suitable for giving birth, and therefore any blood seen during the ninth month is attributed to the imminent labor? But doesn’t Shmuel say that a woman becomes pregnant and gives birth only after 271 days, which is a full nine months, or after 272 days, or after 273 days? She will not, however, give birth during the ninth month itself.
הוּא דְּאָמַר כַּחֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים, דְּתַנְיָא: חֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים לֹא הָיוּ מְשַׁמְּשִׁין מִטּוֹתֵיהֶן אֶלָּא בִּרְבִיעִי בְּשַׁבָּת, שֶׁלֹּא יָבוֹאוּ נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶן
The Gemara responds: Shmuel said his statement in accordance with the opinion of the early generations of pious men. As it is taught in a baraita: The early generations of pious men would engage in sexual intercourse only on a Wednesday, so that their wives should not come
לִידֵי חִלּוּל שַׁבָּת. בִּרְבִיעִי וְתוּ לָא? אֵימָא: מֵרְבִיעִי וְאֵילָךְ.
to a desecration of Shabbat. If they were to engage in sexual intercourse on a Sunday, Monday, or Tuesday, their wives might give birth on Shabbat, either 271, 272, or 273 days after conception either. The Gemara asks: If this was indeed the concern of the early generations of pious men, why would they engage in intercourse only on a Wednesday, and nothing more? After all, if they engaged in intercourse on a Thursday, Friday, or Shabbat, they would likewise avoid any desecration of Shabbat. The Gemara answers: Say that the baraita means that the early generations of pious men would engage in intercourse each week only from Wednesday onward.
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא: מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דַּחֲסִידִים הָרִאשׁוֹנִים? דִּכְתִיב ״וַיִּתֵּן [ה׳] לָהּ הֵרָיוֹן״ — ״הֵרָיוֹן״ בְּגִימַטְרִיָּא מָאתַן וְשִׁבְעִים וְחַד הָווּ.
Mar Zutra said: What is the reasoning of the early generations of pious men, who state that a woman does not give birth before 271 days have passed from the time of insemination? As it is written with regard to Boaz and Ruth: “And he went in unto her, and the Lord gave her conception [herayon]” (Ruth 4:13). The letters that constitute the word herayon are 271 in numerical value.
אָמַר מָר זוּטְרָא: אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר יוֹלֶדֶת לְתִשְׁעָה אֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת לִמְקוּטָּעִים, יוֹלֶדֶת לְשִׁבְעָה יוֹלֶדֶת לִמְקוּטָּעִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וַיְהִי לִתְקוּפוֹת הַיָּמִים וַתַּהַר חַנָּה וַתֵּלֶד בֵּן״, מִיעוּט ״תְּקוּפוֹת״ — שְׁנַיִם, מִיעוּט ״יָמִים״ — שְׁנַיִם.
Mar Zutra says: Even according to the one who said, e.g., Shmuel and the early generations of pious men, that a woman who gives birth at nine months does not give birth after an incomplete number of months, i.e., she carries for a full nine months, nevertheless, a woman who gives birth at seven months can give birth after an incomplete number of months. As it is stated with regard to the birth of Samuel: “And it came to pass, when the seasons of the days had come, that Hannah conceived, and bore a son” (I Samuel 1:20). The minimal number of “seasons” is two, and as each season of the year is three months, this amounts to six months. And the minimal number of “days” is two. If so, Samuel was born in the seventh month of Hannah’s pregnancy.
רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: אֵין קוֹשִׁי יוֹתֵר מִשְּׁתֵּי שַׁבָּתוֹת. אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּרַבָּנַן? דִּכְתִיב: ״וְטָמְאָה שְׁבוּעַיִם כְּנִדָּתָהּ״ — כְּנִדָּתָהּ וְלֹא כְּזִיבָתָהּ, מִכְּלָל דְּזִיבָתָהּ טְהוֹרָה. וְכַמָּה שְׁבוּעַיִם?
§ The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say: Labor pains do not occur more than two weeks before birth. Shmuel said: What is the reasoning of the Rabbis, i.e., Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon? As it is written with regard to a woman who gives birth to a female: “And she shall be impure two weeks, as in her menstruation” (Leviticus 12:5). The verse indicates that she is impure as in her menstruation but not as in her ziva. By inference, one may conclude that her ziva is pure, i.e., if she emits blood accompanied by labor pains she is not rendered a zava. And for how long is this the case? For two weeks.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: יֵשׁ מְקַשָּׁה עֶשְׂרִים וַחֲמִשָּׁה יוֹם, וְאֵין זִיבָה עוֹלָה בָּהֶן. כֵּיצַד? שְׁנַיִם בְּלֹא עֵת, וְשִׁבְעָה נִדָּה, וּשְׁנַיִם שֶׁלְּאַחַר נִדָּה, וְאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר שֶׁהַוָּלָד מְטַהֵר.
With regard to the halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not impart impurity of ziva, the Sages taught: There is a scenario in which a woman experiences labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-five days before birth, and the impurity of greater ziva is not included in them. How so? She emits blood for two days not at the time of her menstruation, i.e., on the tenth and eleventh days of ziva, and then for the seven days of menstruation, and then for the first two days of ziva that come after the days of menstruation. And this period is followed by fourteen days during which the impending birth of a child renders pure the blood she sees.
וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁתִּתְקַשֶּׁה עֶשְׂרִים וְשִׁשָּׁה יוֹם בְּלֹא וָלָד, וְלֹא תְּהֵא יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.
The baraita continues: And it is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days without a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. Since a span of twenty-six days includes at least five days of ziva, there will inevitably be three consecutive days of ziva during which she experienced bleeding, therefore rendering her a greater zava.
בְּלֹא וָלָד? בִּתְלָתָא נָמֵי סַגִּי! אָמַר רַב שֵׁשֶׁת: אֵימָא ״בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ וָלָד״. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רָבָא: וְהָא ״בְּלֹא וָלָד״ קָתָנֵי!
The Gemara analyzes the baraita: Is the baraita really dealing with a case without a child, i.e., where she is not even pregnant? If there is no child, then experiencing bleeding on three consecutive days after the days of menstruation is also sufficient to render her a greater zava. Rav Sheshet said one should say the baraita as follows: Twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, i.e., where she is pregnant. Rava said to Rav Sheshet: But the baraita explicitly teaches: Without a child.
אֶלָּא אָמַר רָבָא, הָכִי קָאָמַר: אִי אֶפְשָׁר שֶׁתִּתְקַשֶּׁה עֶשְׂרִים וְשִׁשָּׁה יוֹם בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ וָלָד וְלֹא תְּהֵא יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב, וּבִמְקוֹם שֶׁאֵין וָלָד אֶלָּא נֵפֶל — בִּתְלָתָא נָמֵי הָוְיָא זָבָה, מַאי טַעְמָא? אֵין קוֹשִׁי לִנְפָלִים.
Rather, Rava said that this is what the baraita is saying: It is impossible for a woman to experience labor pains accompanied by emissions of blood for twenty-six days in a case where there is a child, such that she will not be a woman who gives birth as a zava. And in a case where there is no child born but there is a non-viable newborn, with three consecutive days of emissions she also becomes a zava. What is the reason? The halakha that blood emitted due to labor pains does not render a woman a zava does not apply to non-viable newborns.
מַתְנִי’ הַמְקַשָּׁה בְּתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה — כׇּל דָּמִים שֶׁהִיא רוֹאָה טְהוֹרִין עַד שֶׁיֵּצֵא הַוָּלָד, וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא.
MISHNA: A woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, e.g., she conceived during the sixty-six days of purity, or she initially conceived twins and she gave birth to a female and the birth of the second fetus was delayed, all blood that she sees is ritually pure, as she is currently within her days of purity. And this remains the halakha until the child emerges from the womb, at which point she is rendered impure as a woman who gives birth. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: וּמָה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר בְּדַם הַשּׁוֹפִי, הֵיקֵל בְּדַם הַקּוֹשִׁי; מְקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל בְּדַם הַשּׁוֹפִי, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנָּקֵל בְּדַם הַקּוֹשִׁי?
The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely if a pregnant woman emits blood after her days of purity without any labor pains she is rendered impure, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, i.e., during a woman’s days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains?
אָמַר לָהֶן: דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, מִמָּה הֵיקֵל עָלֶיהָ? מִטּוּמְאַת זִיבָה, אֲבָל טְמֵאָה טוּמְאַת נִדָּה.
Rabbi Eliezer said to them: When deriving a halakha by means of an a fortiori inference, there is a principle that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. In other words, the status of blood emitted due to labor pains during her days of purity should not be more lenient than that of blood emitted due to labor pains after her days of purity. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But she may still be rendered ritually impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.
גְּמָ’ תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״תֵּשֵׁב״ — לְרַבּוֹת הַמְקַשָּׁה בְּתוֹךְ שְׁמוֹנִים שֶׁל נְקֵבָה, שֶׁכׇּל דָּמִים שֶׁהִיא רוֹאָה טְהוֹרִין עַד שֶׁיָּצָא הַוָּלָד, וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר מְטַמֵּא.
GEMARA: With regard to the dispute between Rabbi Eliezer and the Rabbis concerning a woman who emits blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, the Sages taught a baraita that addresses a verse discussing a woman who gives birth to a female: “And sixty-six days she shall observe the blood of purity” (Leviticus 12:5). The term “She shall observe” serves to include a woman who experiences labor pains within eighty days of giving birth to a female, teaching that all blood that she sees is ritually pure. And this remains the case until the child emerges from the womb. And Rabbi Eliezer deems ritually impure the blood that occurs due to these labor pains.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: וּמָה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַוָּלָד, הֵיקֵל בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַוָּלָד; מְקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַוָּלָד, אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנָּקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַוָּלָד?
The Rabbis said to Rabbi Eliezer: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child, as such blood renders her a zava, the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted while resting after the birth of the child, i.e., during her days of purity; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted due to labor pains before the birth of the child, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains after the birth of the child?
אָמַר לָהֶם: דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, מִמָּה הֵיקֵל עָלֶיהָ? מִטּוּמְאַת זִיבָה, אֲבָל מְטַמְּאָה טוּמְאַת נִדָּה.
Rabbi Eliezer said to them: It is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Rabbi Eliezer elaborates: Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman. So too, if a woman experiences emissions of blood due to labor pains during her days of purity, she is rendered a menstruating woman.
אָמְרוּ לוֹ: הֲרֵי אָנוּ מְשִׁיבִין לְךָ לָשׁוֹן אַחֵר, וּמָה בִּמְקוֹם שֶׁהֶחְמִיר בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַוָּלָד — הֵיקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁעִמּוֹ. מָקוֹם שֶׁהֵיקֵל בְּשׁוֹפִי שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַוָּלָד — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁנָּקֵל בְּקוֹשִׁי שֶׁעִמּוֹ?
The Rabbis said to him: But we will respond to you with another version of the a fortiori inference: And what, if in an instance where the verse was stringent with regard to blood that is emitted while resting before the birth of the child the verse was lenient with regard to blood that is emitted due to labor pains that come with it, i.e., which precede the birth of the child; then in an instance where the verse was lenient with regard to blood emitted while resting, namely during a woman’s days of purity, is it not right that we will be lenient with regard to blood that accompanies the labor pains that come with it?
אָמַר לָהֶם: אֲפִילּוּ אַתֶּם מְשִׁיבִין כׇּל הַיּוֹם כּוּלּוֹ, דַּיּוֹ לַבָּא מִן הַדִּין לִהְיוֹת כַּנִּדּוֹן, מִמָּה הֵיקֵל עָלֶיהָ מִטּוּמְאַת זִיבָה, אֲבָל מְטַמְּאָה טוּמְאַת נִדָּה.
Rabbi Eliezer said to them: Even if you respond by citing a fortiori inferences of that type throughout the entire day, the principle remains that it is sufficient for the conclusion that emerges from an a fortiori inference to be like its source. Concerning what type of impurity was the verse lenient with regard to a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor pains? Concerning the impurity of ziva. But an emission of blood renders her impure with the impurity of a menstruating woman.
אָמַר רָבָא: בְּהָא זַכִּינְהוּ רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר לְרַבָּנַן, לָאו אָמְרִיתוּ ״דָּמָהּ״ — דָּמָה מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד, הָכִי נָמֵי ״וְטָהֲרָה מִמְּקוֹר דָּמֶיהָ״ — דָּמֶיהָ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד.
Rava said: With this response Rabbi Eliezer triumphed over the Rabbis: Didn’t you say that the reason why a woman is not rendered a zava on account of blood that is emitted due to labor pains before birth is because the verse states: “And if a woman has an issue of her blood many days” (Leviticus 15:25)? The term “her blood” indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is impure due to ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child. So too, one can say that as the verse states with regard to a woman who gives birth: “And she shall be purified from the fountain of her blood” (Leviticus 12:7), this indicates that only her blood that comes due to herself is pure from ziva, but not blood that comes due to her child.
אֵימָא: בִּימֵי נִדָּה — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָה — טְהוֹרָה? אָמַר קְרָא ״תֵּשֵׁב״ — יְשִׁיבָה אַחַת לְכוּלָּן.
This Gemara raises a difficulty against the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer: If so, one can say that if she emits blood due to labor pains during the days of menstruation she is a menstruating woman, but if she emits blood in the days of ziva, i.e., after the days of menstruation, she is pure. The Gemara explains that the verse states: “She shall observe the blood of purity” (Leviticus 12:5), which indicates that there is one observance for all the days of her purity, i.e., all the blood she emits due to labor pains during her days of purity is either pure or impure.
מַתְנִי’ כׇּל אַחַד עָשָׂר יוֹם בְּחֶזְקַת טׇהֳרָה.
MISHNA: For all the eleven days of ziva that follow the seven days of menstruation, a woman has the presumptive status of ritual purity, as it is unusual for her to experience bleeding on these days.
Follow
