ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafNidah 9
(a) If a woman's pregnancy becomes noticeable, immediately after she has
seen blood, then pregnancy does not work retroactively, and she is Temei'ah
Mei'es Le'es', in spite of it.
The reason for this is, that pregnancy only creates the leniency of 'Dayah
Sha'atah', due to the woman's sick state that generally accompanies
pregnancy, and which removes the blood of Nidus. But in this case, where
her pregnancy was not yet recognizable, there will not have been any
sickness, and there is therefore no reason to say Dayah Sha'atah.
(b) Rebbi Meir says that a woman who was in hiding, and the time of her
Veses arrived, is not Temei'ah, even though she failed to examine herself.
Clearly, if she had not been in hiding and frightened, we would have
assumed that 'Orach bi'Zemano Hu Ba', and she would be Temei'ah.
Since Rebbi Meir holds that a woman is automatically Temei'ah when her
Veses arrives, even though she did not feel a flow of blood, he must be of
the opinion that Vestos are d'Oraysa (Halachah le'Moshe mi'Sinai).
(c) In any event, says Rebbi Yochanan, we see that, even though Vestos are
d'Oraysa, the fear that sent her into hiding is sufficient cause for us to
say that there is no blood and that she is Tehorah.
By the same token then, if a pregnant woman failed to examine herself on
the day that her Veses falls due, she should be Tehorah, because pregnancy,
like fear, removes her flow of blood, so she is definitely Tehorah, whether
she examined herself or not.
(a) Therefore, Rebbi Meir continues, since two years is not decisive, only
the actual feeding, if she continued to feed for four or five years, there
will still be no blood, and we will say 'Dayah Sha'atah'.
(b) Rebbi Yossi and his Chaveirim maintain that it is her sickness that
stops the blood, and that it takes twenty-four months for her to return to
normal, whether she is actually feeding or not.
Consequently, once the twenty-four month period has passed, the blood
returns, and she will be Metam'ah Mei'es Le'es, even if she still continues
(c) Rebbi Yossi adds 'Lefichach', because we might otherwise have said
that, although Rebbi Yossi's initial reason is because her sickness removes
the blood, perhaps he also agrees with Rebbi Meir, that as long as she is
feeding, her blood turns into milk, 'Dayah Sha'atah' will still apply;
'Lefichach' teaches us that he disagrees with Rebbi Meir totally.
(a) Rebbi Meir explains the Pasuk "Mi Yitein" etc. to mean that who other
than Hashem could possibly transform Tamei blood into Tahor milk!
(b) Rebbi Yochanan (according to the Rabbanan), explains that the Pasuk is
referring to the uniqueness of Hashem, inasmuch as only He is able to
create a Tahor human-being from Tamei Semen.
(a) The Gemara initially thinks that "Mazeh" in the Pasuk refers to Nogei'a
(touching), but then concludes that it refers to Nosei (someone who carries
(b) The reason the Torah writes Mazeh is to teach us that the Nosei only
becomes Tamei if he carries the amount Mei Nidah that is required for
(c) Even those who hold that the ashes of the Parah Adumah do not require a
Shiur, that is only as far as the ashes which touch the person being
sprinkled is concerned; but even *they* will agree that there must be
sufficient ashes (cum water) in the vessel to sprinkle on the Mitaher with
the hyssop which is dipped into it, after it has absorbed some of the
(d) Someone who touches the ashes of the Parah Adumah becomes Tamei,
whereas someone who carries them also transmits Tum'ah to the clothes that
he is wearing.
(a) Some say that a woman is considered close to old age with regard to
'Dayah Sha'atah' as soon as her friends refer to her as an old woman.
others maintain that she is still not considered old until she no longer
becomes *embarrassed* when they call her old.
And others again, ammend the second opinion to read that she is already
considered old when she no longer gets angry when they call her old, even
though she still gets embarrassed.
(b) According to others, she is not considered old, even if she is
embarrassed to be called so, until she actually gets angry, when people
refer to her as being old.
(c) Some say that one Onah (of the three Onos that cause an old woman to
change to the Din of 'Dayah Sha'atah') is thirty days, others say twenty.
Those who say twenty, include only a woman's period of Taharah, whereas the
other opinion includes also the days of Tum'ah - seven days of Nidus and
three days of Zivus, which altogether make thirty.
(a) If an old woman, who did not see blood for three consecutive Onos,
sees again after three Onos - on two more occasions, she is then Metam'ah
'Mei'es Le'es' from then.
(b) Strictly speaking, she ought now to be Metam'ah retroactively, even on
the first two sightings, which have now turned out to be part of her
Chezkas Tum'ah, and not a casual sighting, as we first believed. Chazal
however, were simply not strict by any of the first cases of 'Mei'es Le'es'
which were not known at the time to be Tamei, and only discovered later.
(c) Kivnah, Pichsah and Hosirah respectively, mean: exactly ninety days,
three consecutive times; ninety-three, ninety-two and ninety-one days; and
ninety-one, ninety-two and ninety-three days consecutively.
In the cases of both Pichsah and Hoseira there is no real Kevi'us Veses,
because we do not have the correct sequence to create a Veses (See Tosfos).
In that case, why does the Beraisa write '*Afilu* Pichsah' *va'Afilu*
Hosirah', which suggests that by Kivnah it is obvious that she is Temei'ah
'Mei'es Le'es', and that Pichsu and Hosiru are the Chidush. On the
contrary, by Kivnu, which actually comprises a Kevi'us Veses, we would have
thought to say 'Dayah Sha'atah', and it is a bigger Chidush to say that she
is Metam'ah 'Mei'es Le'es' (like the Rabbanan of Rebbi Dosa, who say 'Dayah
Sha'atah' by the four women).
(d) The Gemara amends the Beraisa to read 'Lo she'Pichsah ve'Hosira, Ela
Afilu Kivnah' - and the Beraisa goes like the Rabbanan of Rebbi Dosa.
Alternatively, the Beraisa reads 've'Lo she'Kivna, Ela she'Pichsah
ve'Hosirah'; (but by Kivnah, we will say 'Dayah Sha'atah' - like Rebbi
(a) A woman whose time has arrived to see blood (at twelve), is Metam'ah
'Mei'es Le'es' the second time that she sees, whereas a Besulah, whose time
has not yet arrived to see blood, is Metam'ah only at the third time.
(b) Although the author of this Beraisa is Rebbi Eliezer, who holds that we
say 'Dayah Sha'atah' by any woman who does not see blood for three
consecutive Onos, nevertheless, Rebbi Eliezer must hold like Rebbi, in
whose opinion a Chazakah is effective after two times, and not three. This
is clearly the opinion of the Beraisa, which writes that, a girl whose time
has not yet arrived to see blood, is Metamei 'Mei'es Le'es' after seeing
three times, because her Chazakah became established after seeing twice.
We have already written that in all cases of 'Mei'es Le'es' which were not
known at the time, and became established only later, Chazal did not
enforce this Chumra retroactively.
(c) Even though we established the author of the Beraisa as being Rebbi,
nevertheless, in the case of a Besulah whose time to see blood was not yet
due, and who then saw three times (in the form of Pichsah or Hosirah), we
treat the following break of three Onos, as if she had now returned to her
former status of Besulah, so that the first sighting after that (the first
time that she sees after three Onos), is like the first sighting of a
Besulah, and is not counted as a change of status. It is only when she sees
again after the next break of three Onos (the second sighting after three
Onos), that we count the first change of status (not the second, like we
thought). Consequently, it is only after the next (the third time after
three Onos) that she sees blood (in this sequence) that she will be
Metam'ah 'Mei'es Le'es', or 'mi'Pekidah li'Pekidah'.