The Eddie B. Sit Edition, an audio series of the Talmud Bavli, specifically Masechet Niddah, has been dedicated by Ron Yaish in honor of his children, Ovadya Avraham ben Raizel Shifra and Levi Yitzchak ben Raizel Shifra, and also in honor of his Eshet Chayil, Raizel Shifra bat Tova Yocheved. We bless Ron Yaish and his wife that, with the help of b'ezrat Hashem, they should continue to have more children and that they should see much nachat from their current children, both spiritually and materially, Amen.
Today's daf is Daf Lamed Zayin, and we begin our study on Lamed Vav Amud Bet. We are at the phrase mina hani milei, which is the last word on the line, right across from the Tosafot of Issi ben Mahallel, one line up from that. Yesterday, we learned in the Mishnah that if a lady has contractions and sees blood at the time of these contractions during her days of zivah, she is not considered a zivah. The blood does not classify her as such. Zivah can only arise from itself; if it is caused by external factors, she does not become a zavah. This is referred to as Dam Koshi, the blood of the contractions, and she remains tehorah.
The Gemara seeks a source for this ruling. De’tanu rabbanan states the portion of zivah, which mentions, “And a woman when she has a flow of blood…” (v'ishah ki yazuv zov damah). The Gemara derives a teaching: the blood must come from its own reason (damah machmat atzmah), and not due to the child (v'lo machmat ha'velad). If it comes from the child, she is not a zavah. One might suggest that it could be due to external factors, such as jumping or other actions. However, the verse states, “And a woman when she has a flow of blood…” indicating that even if it comes from an external cause, it is still classified as a flow. Thus, the Gemara concludes that blood caused by the child does not classify her as a zavah.
There are two rulings here: if the blood comes from the child, she is not a zavah, but if it is due to external factors, she is a zavah. The Gemara then questions why there is a distinction between these cases. Why is the child considered tehorah while the external factor is tameh? The answer is that with the child, there is a potential for taharah afterwards, while the external factors do not provide such a possibility.
As the Gemara continues, it presents a counter-argument: perhaps we should consider the case of a male zav, where external factors do not classify him as tameh. However, the Gemara clarifies that this ruling is specific to women and does not apply to men.
Next, the Gemara presents a case where a woman who is a zavah becomes pregnant. If she sees blood during her pregnancy, how does this affect her status? The Gemara explores if the blood seen during the pregnancy can interrupt her count of seven clean days. As we know, the only time a woman does not become a zavah is when it results from contractions, but if it is a typical flow, she must count seven days.
The Gemara poses a question: does the blood seen during contractions interrupt the count? It suggests that something which can cause tumah might also interrupt the count. However, it also considers that if the blood does not lead to zivah, it may not interrupt.
Abaye asserts that blood seen during contractions does not interrupt the count. The Gemara supports this by referencing a case of a male zav who sees blood due to external factors; this blood does not cause tumah, yet it interrupts the count of seven clean days. Thus, it concludes that blood from contractions does not interrupt.
As the discussion continues, the Gemara introduces a new point regarding childbirth. Rabbi Marinos states that childbirth does not interrupt the count of zivah. The Gemara then queries whether the day of childbirth can be counted as a clean day. Abaye maintains that it cannot be counted, while Rava argues that it can.
Rava supports his view by citing a verse that indicates a woman must count seven clean days without interruption. This leads to the conclusion that if childbirth does not interrupt, it must also be counted as a clean day. Abaye counters that the verse refers specifically to blood, and since there was no blood during the childbirth, those days cannot be counted.
Ultimately, the Gemara concludes that the discussions around zivah, tumah, and childbirth reveal the complexity of these laws. Each case presents unique considerations that require careful examination to determine the appropriate halachic ruling.