Not in the time of her menstruation,1 implying,2 close to the time of her menstruation.3 Thus I only know about4 the three days that immediately follow5 the period of her menstruation, whence is it deduced that the same restrictions apply where the three days are separated from the period of her menstruation by one day? It was explicitly stated, Or if she have an issue.6 Thus I only know about an interval of one day, whence is it deduced that the restrictions extend [where the day or the days on which the discharge appeared were] separated [from the menstruation period] by two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine or ten days? You may reason thus: As we find in the case of the fourth day7 that8 it is suitable for the counting9 and10 is also appropriate as one for zibah11 so may I also introduce12 the tenth day13 since it is both suitable for the prescribed counting14 and appropriate as one for zibah.15 But whence is it deduced that the eleventh day16 is also included?17 It was explicitly stated, Not in the time of her menstruation.18 Might I also19 include17 the twelfth day?7 You must admit that this cannot be done.20 But what reason do you see for including17 the eleventh and for excluding the twelfth? I include the eleventh since it is suitable for being counted [as one of the seven clean days following the one21 that is deduced22 from] 'or if she have an issue'23 and I exclude the twelfth since it is not suitable for being counted as one of the seven clean days following the one that is deduced from 'or if she have an issue'.24 But so far I only know that zibah25 is established after a discharge on26 three days, whence is it deduced that the restrictions apply to a discharge on two days? It was explicitly stated, Days.27 Whence the deduction that the same applies also to a discharge on one day? It was explicitly stated, All the days.27 'Unclean',27 implies that she conveys uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her like a menstruant. 'She',27 implies that only she conveys uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her but that the zab conveys no uncleanness to the woman with whom he had intercourse. But is there not an argument [a minori ad majus]: If she, who does not contract uncleanness on account of observation28 as on account of days,29 does convey uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her, is there not more reason that the man who does contract uncleanness on account of observation as on account of days30 should convey uncleanness to the woman with whom he had intercourse? It was expressly stated, 'she',27 implying that only she conveys uncleanness to the man who had intercourse with her but that a zab does not convey uncleanness to the woman with whom he had intercourse. But whence is it deduced that he conveys uncleanness to couch and seat? It was expressly stated, As the bed of her menstruation.31 From this,31 however, I would only know the case of a man who experienced a discharge on three days, whence the deduction that the restrictions apply to a discharge on two days? It was explicitly stated, 'Days'. But whence the deduction that the same applies to a discharge on one day? It was stated, 'All the days' — And whence do we infer that the woman must count one day to correspond to one day?32 It was stated, She shall be.33 As it might have been presumed that she should count seven days after a discharge has appeared on two days only, this being arrived at by the following argument, 'If the man who does not count one day to correspond to one day34 counts seven days after a discharge on two days, how much more reason is there that she who does count one day to correspond to one day32 should count seven days after a discharge on two days', it was explicitly stated, She shall be,33 implying that she counts one day only. It is thus evident,35 is it not, that these36 are derived from Scriptural texts?37 — According to R. Akiba they are derived from Scriptural texts, but according to R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah they are traditional halachahs.
Said R. Shemaiah38 to R. Abba:39 Might it be suggested that on account of a discharge in the day time40 a woman is a zabah, and that on account of one in the night41 she is a menstruant? — For your sake,42 the other replied, Scripture stated, By43 the time of her menstruation,44 implying45 a discharge close to the time of her menstruation. Now which is a discharge that is close to the time of her menstruation? One that occurred in the night;46 and yet Scripture called her a zabah.47
The Tanna debe Eliyahu48 [teaches]: Whoever repeats49 halachahs every day may rest assured that he will be a denizen of the world to come, for it is said, Halikoth — the world is his;50 read not halikoth51 but halakoth.52
Original footnotes renumbered.
- Lev. XV, 25. E.V., 'of her impurity'.
- Cur. edd. in parenthesis, 'beyond the time of her menstruation'.
- Sc. the three consecutive days on which a discharge appears and which subject the woman to the restrictions of a major zabah must be close to (not within) the seven days of the menstruation period, viz., the first three days of the period of zibah.
- Lit., 'and I have not but'.
- Lit., 'near to'.
- Lev. XV, 25.
- After the menstruation period.
- Where the discharge appeared on the first three days following menstruation and then ceased.
- Of the prescribed seven days beginning with it.
- As has just been deduced from Lev. XV, 25: Or if she have an issue.
- If the discharge first appeared on the second day following menstruation and was repeated on the third and fourth.
- Under the zibah restrictions.
- And, much more so, the other days enumerated.
- Where the discharge appeared on the first three days after menstruation.
- If the discharge occurred on it as well as on the preceding two days.
- Which, if the discharge appeared on the first three days, cannot be counted among the seven days prescribed.
- In the restrictions, so that if a discharge appeared on it and on the preceding two days zibah is established.
- Lev. XV, 25. E.V. 'of her impurity'.
- As a deduction from the text just cited.
- A discharge on the twelfth being regarded as one of menstruation that cannot be added to the zibah.
- The fourth day.
- The seven days following a discharge on the fourth terminating on the eleventh.
- It being the first day of menstruation.
- That conveys uncleanness to couch and seat.
- Lit., 'and I have not but'.
- Lev. XV, 25.
- If, e.g., she experienced three discharges on one day she is not regarded as a major zabah (v. foll. n.) to incur the obligation of a sacrifice.
- A discharge that appeared on three consecutive days confirms a woman as a major zabah (cf. prev. n.).
- A man is confirmed as a zab irrespective of whether he observed three discharges on three consecutive days respectively or all the three discharges on the same day (cf. B.K. 24a).
- Lev. XV, 16.
- Sc. if she experienced a discharge on one day she must allow one clean day to pass before she may be regarded as clean.
- Lit., 'shall be to her', Lev. XV, 25.
- After one discharge on one day he performs immersion in the evening and resumes his cleanness.
- The argument begun on 72b ad fin. is now resumed and concluded.
- The laws regarding the intervals between the menstruation periods, viz., that each interval extends over eleven days; that a discharge on three consecutive days of these eleven subjects the woman to the restrictions of a major zabah; that after a discharge on only one or two of these days no more than one clean day need be allowed to pass; that after the eleven days' period the menstruation period begins, and that a discharge on the first of these causes the woman to be unclean on that day and on the following six days.
- How then could it be stated supra that these laws were halachahs?
- Var. lec., Isaiah (Yalkut).
- Var. lec., Raba (MS.M.).
- Since the text from which the laws of zibah are derived (Lev. XV, 25) speaks of days.
- When (cf. prev. n.) she cannot be regarded a zabah.
- Sc. in order to avert the possibility of his deduction.
- 'Al, E.V. 'beyond'.
- Lev. XV, 25. E.V. 'her impurity'.
- By the use of 'al ('by').
- Since the menstruation period comes to an end at the sunset of the seventh day.
- The verb rendered by 'have an issue' (Lev. XV, 25) being derived from the same root as zabah.
- A treatise bearing this name is mentioned in Keth., (Sonc. ed.,) p. 680, n. 2
- Or 'learns'.
- Hab. III, 6. E.V. 'his goings are of old'.
- 'Goings out'.
- Or 'halachahs' (the Mishnah, Baraitha, and the oral laws that were handed down through Moses from Sinai). If a man studies these 'halachahs, the world (to come) is his'.