ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafNidah 36
(a) Three Onos means three periods of thirty days. If a woman who is
pregnant or a Yoledes do not see blood for ninety days, they are no longer
Metamei Mei'es Le'es, because the Din of 'Dayah Sha'atah' now takes effect.
(b) According to Levi, who learns that there are two separate Ma'ayanos,
what the Beraisa is saying is that if she stops seeing blood even for a
very short while, then she can complement however many days are missing
from the three Onos (which were not completed during the days of pregnancy)
during the time that she is feeding - even if she should see then.
(a) If the Beraisa in which Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel agree that 'Dayah
Sha'atah' extends beyond the days of Tohar speaks even by a few days, then,
according to Rav, who maintains that the blood of both sets of days are
from the same Ma'ayan, why should we say 'Dayah Sha'atah', since the Torah
now declares this Ma'ayan Tamei?
(b) The Beraisa is speaking, answers the Gemara, when she saw blood, not a
few days after the termination of the days of Tohar, but within twenty-four
hours. Consequently, even Rav will have to admit that she is not Temei'ah
'Mei'es Le'es'. Why?
Because even if she had actually seen blood twenty-four hours earlier -
during her days of Tohar, she would have been Tehorah; so how can we render
her Temei'ah retroactively at that time?
What then, is the Chidush?
(c)&(d) The Chidush is that since 'Mei'es Le'es' does not apply, neither
does mi'Pekidah li'Pekidah'; which explains why the Gemara could not
explain that we are speaking when she saw blood within the time of one
Pekidah - because then, there would be no Chidush, according to Rav.
(a) According to Levi, why should a Yoledes be'Zov be Temei'ah according to
Beis Hillel, if she counts seven clean days and then sees blood. Since she
counted seven clean days, the Ma'ayan of Tum'ah has closed, and what she
sees now is from the Ma'ayan of Taharah?
The Halachah is entirely like Rav. This means that both sets of days
are fed by the same Ma'ayan. Consequently, even if she sees from the days
of Tum'ah into the days of Taharah, she is Tehorah.
(b) The Gemara's second answer is that the Beraisa speaks when she
continued to see into the days of Taharah, so that the Ma'ayan of Tum'ah
did not close.
(c) She did indeed count seven clean days. However, we are speaking after
the birth of a girl; during the first seven days after the birth she did
not see blood, but during the second seven days she did, continuing into
the days of Tohar, as we explained.
The Beraisa comes to teach us that nevertheless, the seven clean days that
she saw during her days of Tum'ah count as 'Shiv'ah Neki'im'.
On the other hand, if she sees from the days of Taharah into the days of
Tum'ah, she will be Temei'ah.
(a) We learn from 'Zov Damah' that a woman is a Zavah only if the blood
flows on its own, not if it flows due to something else, such as
(b) A woman is a Zavah only if the pains of childbirth stopped at least for
one day after she saw Zivus for three consecutive days. If she did not,
then the blood is attributed to the birth, and she is Tehorah.
(c) Rebbi Yehoshua maintains that the woman must have relief from the pains
of childbirth for twenty-four hours - beginning with night and then day, in
order to be a Yoledes be'Zov (just like Shabbos, which begins with night).
Otherwise, she is Tehorah.
(a) Although, according to Rav, a woman who has birth-pains and sees blood
during the days of Zivus is not a Zavah Ketanah, she is nevertheless
Temei'ah until night-time.
(b) Shmuel explains the Mishnah to mean that, although she is not a Zavah
de'Oraysa, she is nevertheless a Shomeres Yom ke'Neged Yom mi'de'Rabbanan -
just in case she has relief from the pain, and will turn out to be a Zavah
(c) According to Rav Yitzchak, the Mishnah means that, if she has
birth-pains during the days of Nidus, she is a Nidah, in spite of the
pains; whereas if she has them during the days of Zivus, she is not
Temei'ah at all.
(d) Chananya adds that it is not necessary for the woman to suffer the
pains for the entire third day, nor do they need to be at the end of the
third day; as long as there were pains any time during the third day
(meaning that the relief from the pain did not last for the full duration
of the third day, she is considered to be a 'Maksheh Leileid', and will not
be a Zavah.
(a) There is more reason to be lenient and to render Tehorah, a 'Zavah' who
has pains during childbirth than one who sees be'O'nes, because child-birth
itself carries with it the leniency that, after one or two weeks, she is
automatically Tehorah, a leniency which is not found by O'nes (it is
irrelevant that the Din of O'nes is lenient by a Zav, because we are
dealing with a Zavah, and not a Zav).
In addition, it would be a paradox to be lenient by O'nes, and strict by a
Yoledes, since there is no bigger O'nes than a Yoledes.
(b) Refer to the brackets in a.
(c) "ve'Tam'ah Shevu'ayim ke'Nidasah" implies, that at child-birth, the
woman is Temei'ah like her Nidus - but not like her Zivus, in other words,
if she sees blood during her days of Zivus, she does not become a Zavah.
(d) We learn from "Damah", that she is Tehorah only if she has no relief
from her pain, but if she does (according to the various opinions cited
earlier, then she is indeed Temei'ah).
(a) Rav told Rav Asi before he died, that he had retracted from his Din of
one day Nidus for a Zavah who saw whilst suffering the pains child-birth
(see 6a) and that Shilo bar Avina, who held like his Rebbe, should be made
When a myrtle branch was seen to jump from one's bed (coffin) to the
other's, they knew that the two had made peace.
(b) Rav Asi understood Rav to have said, not 'Garyei' (encourage him), but
'Gadyei' (place him in Cheirem, should he refuse).
Shilo bar Avina did not believe Rav Asi, because, he maintained, *he* was a
close disciple of Rav, and therefore, had Rav retracted, he would have
(c) An 'Asisa (which is similar to his name - Asi) de'Nachsha' means a
copper mortar, and it was a warning to Shilo to relent.
(d) Shilo replied that Rav Asi should also beware of him, because he was an
iron pestle, which could break a copper mortar.