TOSFOS DH v'Shavin b'Ro'ah Achar Dam Tohar she'Dayah Sha'atah
úåñôåú ã"ä åùåéï áøåàä àçø ãí èåäø ùãéä ùòúä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains how nursing helps to get the status of Dayah Sha'atah.)
åà"ú ìøáé éåñé ãàîø áô"÷ (ìòéì ãó æ.) îòåáøú åîðé÷ä öøéëåú ùìù òåðåú åîôøù ãîöèøôé á' òåðåú ãòéáåøä åàçú ãîðé÷úä ìîä ìé òåðä ãîðé÷úä
Question: According to R. Yosi, who said above (7a) that a pregnant or nursing woman needs three Onos (periods without seeing Dam Nidah, before she is Dayah Sha'atah), and [the Gemara on 10b] explains [R. Yosi based on the Beraisa here,] that two Onos of pregnancy join with one of nursing, why does he need an Onah of nursing?
äà àîø äëà ãàçø ãí èåäø ãéä ùòúä
It says here [in the Beraisa "v'Shavin.."] that after Dam Tohar, she is Dayah Sha'atah!
åé"ì äà ãìà ëø' éåñé
Answer #1: This is unlike R. Yosi. ("V'Shavin" refers to Shamai and Hillel.)
àé ðîé áäôñé÷ä â' òåðåú åøàúä øàùåðä îàåðñ àó ùðéä ãéä ùòúä ëãàîø áô"÷ (ùí:)
Answer #2: If she ceased to see for three Onos, and saw the first sighting b'Ones, she is Dayah Sha'atah even for the second sighting, like it says above (7b);
àáì àçø ãí èåäø àéï ãéä ùòúä àìà áøàééä øàùåðä àáì ùðéä ìà àôé' äéúä äøàùåðä îàåðñ ëéåï ùðôúç îòéï èîà
However, after Dam Tohar, she is Dayah Sha'atah only for the first sighting, but not for the second, even if the first was due to Ones, since the Tamei Mayan was opened.
åà"ú ìø"î åìàéãê úðàé ãàéú ìäå áô"÷ (ùí:) îðé÷ä ãéä ùòúä úéôå÷ ìéä ãäåä àçø ãí èåäø
Question: According to R. Meir and the other Tana'im who hold (7b) that a nursing woman is Dayah Sha'atah, [why do we specify that she is nursing? In any case she is Dayah Sha'atah] for this is after Dam Tohar!
åîéäå ìúéøåõ ùðé àúé ùôéø ãé"ì (äâäú îøàä àù) ãîèòí ùäåà àçø ãí èåäø àéï ãéä ùòúä àìà ìøàééä øàùåðä
Partial answer: This is not difficult according to Answer #2. The reason of being after Dam Tohar causes her to be Dayah Sha'atah only for the first sighting;
àáì îèòí îðé÷ä ãéä ùòúä ëì éîé îðé÷åúä ëø"î ãô"÷ (ùí ãó éà.)
Since she is nursing, she is Dayah Sha'atah as long as she nurses, according to R. Meir (above, 11a).
åà"ú åäëà ìîä ìé îùåí ãí èåäø úéôå÷ ìéä ãîðé÷ä äéà
Question: Here, why must we say that she is after Dam Tohar? It should suffice that she is nursing!
åé"ì ãð"î ìäéëà ãîú áðä àå âîìúå ìøáé îàéø ãàîø ìòéì äøé äéà ëëì äðùéí
Answer: This is relevant when her son died or she weaned him. According to R. Meir, she is like all women (the 24 hours of retroactive Tum'ah apply to her);
åìøáé éåñé ðîé ãàîø áô"÷ àôé' âîìúå àå ðúðä áðä ìîðé÷ä ãéä ùòúä ðô÷à îéðä ìàçø ãí èåäø ìäéëà ãìà øàúä òã ìàçø ë"ã çãù
Also according to R. Yosi, who says that even if she weaned him or gave her son to a wet-nurse, she is Dayah Sha'atah, being after Dam Tohar affects when she did not see until after 24 months;
åèòîà ãîðé÷ä àéöèøéê ìøàééúä äøàùåðä áàåðñ ãàó äùðéä ãéä ùòúä ëãôøéùéú.
The reason of nursing is needed for when the first sighting was b'Ones. She is Dayah Sha'atah even for the second sighting, like I explained.
TOSFOS DH d'Leika Shahos
úåñôåú ã"ä ãìéëà ùäåú
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses cases in which me'Es la'Es applies.)
àáì àéëà ùäåú îèîàä îòú ìòú ìøá ãàîø îòéï àçã äåà
Inference: However, if there was time (24 hours after Dam Tohar ended), she is retroactively Teme'ah for 24 hours according to Rav, who says that there is one Mayan.
åàò"â ããéä ùòúä ëì éîé îðé÷åúä
Implied question: She is Dayah Sha'atah as long as she nurses!
äëà îééøé áîú áðä àå áäôéìä ëãôøéùéú
Answer: The case is, her son died, or she miscarried, like I explained.
åà"ú ãáôø÷ àìå ðòøåú (ëúåáåú ãó ìæ.) àîø äâéåøú ùøàúä ãí áúåê îòú ìòú ãéä ùòúä øáé éåñé àåîø äøé äéà ëëì äðùéí
Question: In Kesuvos (37a), it says that if a convert saw blood within me'Es la'Es (24 hours of converting), Dayah Sha'atah; R. Yosi says, she is like all women (me'Es la'Es applies to her)!
åé"ì ñåâéà ãäëà ìà àúéà ëø' éåñé ãäúí
Answer #1: Our Sugya is unlike R. Yosi there.
à"ð äúí äéúä áú èåîàä àí äéúä îúâééøú î÷åãí àå îùåí ãàéúà áâåä èåîàä ãøáðï.
Answer #2: There, [me'Es la'Es applies to her, for] she could have become Teme'ah had she converted earlier, or because Tum'ah applied to her mid'Rabanan (24 hours ago. A woman in Dam Tohar cannot become Teme'ah, even mid'Rabanan.)
TOSFOS DH v'Iy Bo'is Eima b'Shofa'as v'Ha Safrah ka'Tani
úåñôåú ã"ä åàéáòéú àéîà áùåôòú åäà ñôøä ÷úðé
(SUMMARY: Tosfos resolves this with Beis Hillel's attempted proof above.)
åà"ú îàé ÷àîø á"ä ìòéì éåìãú áæåá úåëéç ùàí èáìä åøàúä èäåøä
Question: How did Beis Hillel say above (35b) that Yoledes b'Zov is Yochi'ach (after counting her clean days, before immersing her blood is Tamei, but) if she immersed and saw, she is Tehorah?
åäà ëéåï ãùåôòú àôé' èáìä èîàä ììåé ãàîø ùðé îòééðåú äï ãäà îòéï èîà äåà
Since she is spurting, even if she immersed, she is Teme'ah according to Levi, who says that there are two Mayanos, for this is from the Tamei Mayan!
åé"ì ãìãáøé á"ù ÷àîøé ìäå ãàéú ìäå îòéï àçã äåà.
Answer: They brought a proof according to Beis Shamai's opinion, since [Levi agrees that Beis Shamai] hold that there is one Mayan.
TOSFOS DH Shavu'a Basra Lo Paskah
úåñôåú ã"ä ùáåò áúøà ìà ôñ÷ä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses what we may infer about Stirah after the clean days finished.)
îëàï àåîø ø"ú ãéåìãú áæåá àå áæîï äæä ãëåìäå ðùéí çùáéðäå ëéåìãú áæåá ùñåôøéï àçø éîé èåîàú äìéãä ùáòä ð÷ééí åøàúä áéîé èåäø ÷åãí èáéìä àéðä ñåúøú
Inference: R. Tam learned from here that Yoledes b'Zov, or nowadays that we consider all women to be Yoledes b'Zov, that they count seven clean days after the days of Tum'as Leidah, if she saw in Yemei Tohar before immersing, she does not Soser (cancel the clean days that she counted).
ãäà àîø äëà ãëé øàúä ùáåò ùìéùé ãìà ñúøä àò"â ããí èîà äåà ë"ù ãøàééú ãí èåäø àéðä ñåúøú
It says that when she saw the third week, she is not Soser, even though the blood is Tamei. All the more so seeing Tahor blood is not Soser!
ãàôé' á"ä ãîèîàéï ìç åéáù îåãå ãòìúä ìä ñôéøúä
Even Beis Hillel, who are Metamei wet and dry, agree that her clean days count for her.
åîëàï àéï ìäåëéç òì æáä ùàéðä éåìãú ùñôøä æ' ð÷ééí åøàúä ùìà úñúåø
Suggestion: We can prove from here that a Zavah who was not a Yoledes who counted seven clean days and saw, that she is not Soser.
ãàéëà ìîéîø ãäëà ãå÷à ìà ñúøä îùåí ãøàééä æå àéðä âåøîú ìä èåîàä ãëì ùáåòéí èîàéí áìàå äëé
Rejection: We can say that only here she is not Soser because this sighting is not Metamei her, for all two weeks she is Teme'ah even without this [blood].
åàò"â ãáùáåò â' âåøí ìä èåîàä
Implied question: In the third week it causes Tum'ah to her [since it was flowing from Yemei Tum'ah, according to Levi, who holds that there are two Mayanos].
î"î àéðä ðòùéú áä (äâäú éòá"õ) ðãä åìà æáä åëùúôñ÷ èäåøä îéã
Answer: In any case, she does not become a Nidah or Zavah through it, and when she ceases, she [can immerse and become] Tehorah immediately.
åî"î ðøàä ãàùä ãòìîà ðîé ìà ñúøä ãîñúáøà ãàéï ñúéøä îåòìú àìà áúåê äçùáåï
Assertion: In any case (even though there is no proof), it seems that also a regular woman is not Soser, for presumably Stirah applies only during the time that must be counted;
ëãàîø åàçø úèäø ùìà úäà èåîàä îôñ÷ú áéðéäí àáì ìàçø ñôéøä ìà
This is like it says "v'Achar Tithar" - Tum'ah may not interrupt between [the days she must count], but after counting, it is not [Soser].
îéäå ìãéãï ãàéú ìï çåîøà ãøáé æéøà ôùéèà ãñåúøú ãäà àôé' èáìä åøàúä öøéëä æ' ð÷ééí.
Pesak: However, we hold like R. Zeira's stringency [to count seven clean days after every sighting], so obviously it is Soser. Even if she immersed, she needs seven clean days!
TOSFOS DH Hilchesa k'Rav l'Chumra
úåñôåú ã"ä äìëúà ëøá ìçåîøà
(SUMMARY: 1. Tosfos justifies being stringent like both opinions. 2. Tosfos asks against Levi, and answers for him.)
åàí úàîø äà úøé çåîøé ãñúøé àäããé ðéðäå
Question: These are two stringencies that contradict each other!
åé"ì ãäëà ãîñô÷à ìï ôñé÷ ëîø ìäçîéø åëîø ìäçîéø
Answer: Here, we are unsure, so we rule like both opinions to be stringent.
åëé äàé âååðà àéëà ùìäé éåöà ãåôï (ì÷îï ãó îæ:) äìëä ëãáøé ëåìï ìäçîéø âáé ñéîðé áâøåú åçöø öåøéú
Support: We find like this below (47b) "the Halachah follows all of them to be stringent" regarding Simanim of Bagrus and a Chatzer Tzuris (one may not eat Tevel casually after it is brought into such a Chatzer).
ä÷ùä äøá øáé îøãëé áø éöç÷ ììåé ãàîø ùðé îòéðåú äï äà ãúðéà áôø÷ éù áëåø (áëåøåú ãó îå:)
Question #1 (R. Mordechai bar Yitzchak): According to Levi, who says that there are two Mayanos, a Beraisa in Bechoros (46b) is difficult;
âéåøú ùéöà ôãçú åìãä áäéåúä òåáãú ëåëáéí åàçø ëê ðúâééøä àéï ðåúðéï ìä éîé èåîàä åéîé èäøä
Citation (46b - Beraisa): If the forehead of a convert's baby left [the womb] while she was a Nochris, and afterwards she converted, we do not give to her days of Tum'ah (Leidah) and Yemei Tohar.
åàé ùðé îòéðåú äï àîàé àéï ðåúðéï ìä éîé èäøä äìà îòéï èîà ñúåí
If there are two Mayanos, why don't we give to her Yemei Tohar? The Tamei Mayan is closed!
åáøéù éåöà ãåôï (ì÷îï ãó î.) ðîé úðï ãàéï éåùáéï òìéå éîé èåîàä åéîé èäøä
Question #2: Also below (40a), a Mishnah says that women do not sit for him (a Yotzei Dofen) days of Tum'ah and Taharah!
åîääéà áøééúà ãáëåøåú (ãó îå:) ìà ÷ùä ëì ëê ììåé ãîå÷é ëá"ù ãàîøé îòéï àçã äåà
Answer #1 (to Question #1): The Beraisa is not so difficult for Levi. He can establish it like Beis Shamai, who say that there is one Mayan.
36b----------------------------------------36b
à"ð ëãîùðé äëà àðà ãàîø ëúðà ãùåéï
Answer #2 (to Question #1): Levi can say like we answered here "I hold like the Tana of the Beraisa "v'Shavin (they agree that after Dam Tohar, she is Dayah Sha'atah)."
àáì ñúí îúðéúéï ãéåöà ãåôï ÷ùä
However, the Stam Mishnah (40a) is difficult. (Levi should not hold like a Beraisa against a Stam Mishnah!)
åé"ì ãàéï ðåúðéï ìä éîé èåäø àéëà ìàå÷îé ìòðéï ùàí øàúä áéåí æ' ìæëø àå áéåí é"ã ìð÷áä ãäåéà úçìú ðãä ãàéï èåîàú ìéãä òìéä
Answer #1 (and Answer #3 to Question #1): We can establish "we do not give to her Yemei Tohar", regarding if she saw on day seven after a male, or day 14 after a female. It is the beginning of Nidah, for she has no law of Tum'as Leidah.
àé ðîé àò"â ãùðé îòéðåú äï éù ìèîà äãí ãîï äî÷åø ÷àúé àìà ãå÷à áî÷åí ùäúåøä îèäøúå.
Answer #2 (and Answer #4 to Question #1): Even though there are two Mayanos, we should be Metamei the blood, for it is from the Makor, except for where the Torah is Metaher it.
TOSFOS DH k'Leilei Shabbos v'Yomo
úåñôåú ã"ä ëìéìé ùáú åéåîå
(SUMMARY: Tosfos rules like R. Yehoshua.)
÷éí ìéä ìøáé éäåùò ãàí ìà ùôúä ìéìä åéåí àò"ô ùùôúä îòú ìòú îçîú åìã äéä.
Pesak: We hold like R. Yehoshua, that if she did not cease a day and night, even though she ceased [from pain] for 24 hours, [the blood] is due to the fetus [and she is not Yoledes b'Zov].
TOSFOS DH Nidah l'Yoma
úåñôåú ã"ä ðãä ìéåîà
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains that we are lenient even regarding her husband.)
ðøàä ãàó ìáòìä ìà çééùéðï ùîà úùôä ãàæìéðï áúø øåá ðùéí î÷ùåú ãàéðï ùôåú ìéìä åéåí
Assertion: It seems that even regarding [Heter to] her husband, we are not concerned lest she cease [from pain], for we follow the majority of women, who are Maksheh (have labor pains) and do not cease for a day and night.
ãäà òåáãà ãùéìà áø àáéðà ðøàä ãìáòìä äåé åìà ìèäøåú.
Source: The case with Shila bar Avina connotes that [the ruling] was for her husband, and not for Taharos.
TOSFOS DH Oh she'Shafsah v'Kashsah v'Chazrah v'Shafsah
úåñôåú ã"ä àå ùùôúä å÷ùúä åçæøä åùôúä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos discusses whether this is a Chidush.)
ëãé ðñáä ãäà îøéùà ùîòéðï ìä ã÷úðé ÷ùúä ùðéí åùôúä éåí àçã åë"ù äà ãèîàä
Explanation #1: There was no need to teach this. We learn this from the Reisha, which teaches that if she had Koshi for two days and Shofi for one day she is Teme'ah (Yoledes b'Zov), and all the more so this case!
åëï áñéôà ìà äéä öøéê ìîúðé ÷ùúä åùôúä å÷ùúä ëéåï ãúðà ùôúä ùðéí å÷ùúä éåí àçã ãèäåøä
Similarly, in the Seifa there was no need to teach if she had Koshi, and Shofi, and Koshi [she is not Yoledes b'Zov], since he taught that if she had Shofi for two days and Koshi one day she is Tehorah.
àé ðîé àúà ìàùîåòéðï àò"â ãìà ÷ùúä ëì éåí äñîåê ììéãä àìà î÷öúå
Explanation #2: Alternatively, [the Seifa] comes to teach that even though she did not have Koshi the entire day adjacent to the birth, rather, only part of it [she is Tehorah];
åëï áøéùà áëé äàé âååðà.
Also the Reisha teaches about such a case. (Aruch l'Ner - this is like R. Eliezer, who says that 24 hours of Shofi suffice, even if it is not an entire Halachic day. Maharsha - Tosfos means that the Reisha was taught Agav the Seifa.)
TOSFOS DH v'Eima Koshi b'Yemei Nidah
úåñôåú ã"ä åàéîà ÷åùé áéîé ðãä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains why Reish Lakish was not concerned for this.)
åø"ì ñ"ì (äâäú áàøåú äîéí) ãîñúáø èôé ìàå÷åîéä áæéáä îùåí ãàùëçï æá àåðñ ãèäåø äåà.
Explanation: Reish Lakish holds that it is more reasonable to establish it regarding Zivah, for we find regarding a Zav that Ones is Tahor.
TOSFOS DH Gadyei
úåñôåú ã"ä âãééä
(SUMMARY: Tosfos explains Rav Asi's misunderstanding.)
ôøù"é ãøá àñé èòä áéï øé"ù ìãìé"ú
Explanation #1 (Rashi): Rav Asi erred between Reish and Dalet.
åàéï ðøàä àìà ðøàä ãàéäå àîø ìéä âãééä áãìé"ú øôä ëìåîø îùëäå áãáøé èòí òã ùéçæåø
Objection (and Explanation #2): This is unreasonable. Rather, [Rav] said Gadyei with a soft Dalet (without a Dagesh (dot) in it), i.e. persuade him with reasons until he retracts;
ëîå (ùîåú éá) îùëå ãîúøâîéðï ðâåãå åëîå (á"á ãó éâ.) âåã àå àéâåã
This is like "Mishchu" (take), for which the Targum (Yonason) is "Negudu", and (Bava Basra 13a) "Gud Oh Agud."
åäåà ñáø âãééä áãâù ëîå âåãå àéìðà.
He (Rav Asi) thought that [Rav] said Gadyei with a Dagesh in the Dalet, like "Godu (cut down) a tree."
TOSFOS DH Isi ben Mehalalel
úåñôåú ã"ä àéñé áï îäììàì
(SUMMARY: Tosfos proves that this is Yosef ha'Bavli.)
áòøáé ôñçéí (ôñçéí ãó ÷éâ:) éù úðà ãéù ìå ëì äùîåú äììå åòåã ÷øé ìéä äúí äåà éåñó äááìé äåà éåñó àéù äåöì
Opinion #1: In Pesachim (113b) there is a Tana with all these names, and they call him also Yosef ha'Bavli. He is Yosef Ish Hutzal;
åìà úðà àçø äåà ëîå ùéù îôøùéï ùí
Opinion #2: Some explain that he is a different Tana.
ãäà áôø÷ äåöéàå ìå (éåîà ãó ðá:) ôøéê îàéñé áï éäåãä ìéåñó àéù äåöì
Rejection: In Yoma (52b), we ask a contradiction from Isi ben Yehudah to Yosef Ish Hutzal.
åäëà
Implied question: [According to Opinion #1, why didn't it list] here [also Yosef ha'Bavli and Yosef Ish Hutzal among his names]?
ìà îééúé àìà ùîåú ãàéñé ããîé ìøá àñé.
Answer: Here he lists only names of Isi, which resemble Rav Asi.