POINT BY POINT OUTLINE
prepared by Rabbi P. Feldman of Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Yerushalayim
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
1) THE FIRST SIGHTING OF ZOV
(a) Question (Rav Yosef): If a Metzora saw one sighting of Zov, is it Metamei b'Masa (one who moves it)?
1. Is Zov a Mayan (which has Tum'as Masa)?
(b) Answer #1 (Rava - Beraisa): "Zovo Tamei Hu" teaches that his Zov has Tum'as Masa.
1. Question: What is the case?
i. Suggestion: He is a normal Zav.
ii. Rejection: The Zov causes him to have Tum'as Masa, all the more so it itself has Tum'as Masa! (We would not need a verse to teach this.)
2. Answer: Rather, a Metzora became a Zav. (He was already Tamei, so the Kal va'Chomer does not apply.)
3. Since a verse is needed to teach that the second sighting has Tum'as Masa, this shows that it is not a Mayan!
(c) Rejection (Rav Yehudah of Diskarta): Perhaps he is a normal Zav. Some things are Tahor, yet they are Metamei others, e.g. the goat sent to Azazel. (It is Metamei the one who sends it.)
(d) Answer #2 (Abaye): (Why did Rava seek to learn from a Beraisa?) He should answer his question from his own teaching (at the end of 34b), "Zos Toras ha'Zav" -- whether he is a minor or an adult! (This is according to our text. Aruch la'Ner -- in Rashi's text, Rav Yosef himself expounded "Zos Toras ha'Zav," therefore Rashi explains that Abaye asks why Rav Yosef did not answer his own question from his teaching.)
1. Since we do not need "la'Zachar" to teach about a minor, it teaches Mayanos of a Metzora. "Vela'Nekevah" teaches about Mayanos of a Metzora'as!
2. The Torah equates a Metzora with a Zav. Just like his Mayanos have Tum'as Masa, also the first sighting of Zov.
(e) (Rav Huna): The first sighting of Zov is Metamei even if it was b'Ones. "Zos Toras ha'Zav va'Asher Tetzei Mimenu Shichvas Zera," teaches that just like semen is Metamei b'Ones, also the first sighting of Zov.
(f) Question (Mishnah): If a man saw Zov, we check him (for seven possible causes -- overeating... )
1. Suggestion: If there was a cause, he is Tahor!
(g) Answer: No, if there was a cause, it does not count towards three sightings to obligate a Korban (but he is Tamei).
(h) Question (Seifa): If a man had a second sighting of Zov, we check him.
1. Question: Why do we check?
i. Suggestion: We check regarding his obligation to bring a Korban, but in any case he is Tamei.
ii. Rejection: (Zov is Metamei if it came by itself) "mi'Besaro," but not from an external cause.
2. Answer: Rather, if there was a cause, he is not a Zav.
3. Summation of question: Just like the Seifa discusses checking for Tum'ah, also the Reisha!
(i) Answer: No, the Reisha discusses checking for Korban, and the Seifa discusses checking for Tum'ah.
(j) Question (the same Mishnah - R. Eliezer): We check even on the third sighting, due to the Korban.
1. Inference: The first Tana holds that we check due to Tum'ah!
(k) Answer: No, also the first Tana says that we check due to the Korban;
1. They argue about whether or not we expound "Es":
2. Chachamim do not expound "Es". They expound "veha'Zav (first sighting) Es Zovo (second sighting) la'Zachar vela'Nekevah" to teach that after two sightings, a Zav is equated to a Zavah (who is Teme'ah even b'Ones);
3. R. Eliezer expounds "Es". "Veha'Zav (first) Es (second) Zovo (third) la'Zachar vela'Nekevah" equates a Zav to a Zavah after three sightings. (Even sightings b'Ones are Mevatel clean days he may have.)
(l) Question (Beraisa - R. Yitzchak): We already knew that a Zav is like a Ba'al Keri (a man who had a seminal emission). The Torah wrote Zav separately to be more lenient and more stringent than a Ba'al Keri;
1. Zav is more lenient. His Tum'ah does not come through Ones;
2. Zav is more stringent. He is Metamei Mishkav and Moshav (to be an Av ha'Tum'ah).
3. Question: Which sighting of Zov is discussed?
i. Suggestion: It discusses the second.
ii. Rejection: He is a full Zav (regarding Tum'ah). It would not say that he is like a Ba'al Keri!
4. Answer: Rather, it discusses the first, and it says that Tum'ah of Zov does not come through Ones!
5. Rejection: It cannot refer to the first sighting. It says that he is Metamei a Mishkav!
(m) Answer: Rather, the Beraisa means that we already knew that a man who saw Zov once is like a Ba'al Keri;
1. The Torah wrote the law of Zov on the second sighting to be more lenient and more stringent than a Ba'al Keri. The Tum'ah does not come b'Ones, and he is Metamei a Mishkav.
(n) (Rav Huna): Zov is like water of a dough of barley. It comes without erection. Semen comes from an erection;
1. Zov is loose, like the white of a Muzeres egg (one that cannot produce a chick). Semen is sticky, like an egg yolk that is not Muzeres.
2) DAM TOHAR OF A WOMAN WHO DID NOT IMMERSE
(a) (Mishnah): Dam Tohar of a Yoledes who did not immerse... (Beis Shamai is Metamei only if it is wet. Beis Hillel is Metamei even if it is dry).
(b) (Beraisa - Beis Hillel (to Beis Shamai)): Don't you agree that if a Nidah did not immerse after seven days, her Dam is Tamei (mid'Oraisa, and hence even dry)?
(c) Beis Shamai: Nidah is different. Even if she had immersed, her blood would be Tamei (it would be Dam Zivah or Nidah). If a Yoledes had immersed (after her Tum'ah), her Dam would be Tahor!
(d) Beis Hillel: We learn from Yoledes b'Zov. If she immersed after counting her clean days, her blood would be Tahor, but if she saw blood before immersing, it is Tamei!
(e) Beis Shamai: We say that Yoledes b'Zov after counting her clean days is like a Yoledes after Yemei Tum'ah. Even without immersing, her blood is Tahor!
(f) Inference: They argue about Yoledes b'Zov.
(g) Contradiction (Mishnah): Beis Shamai agrees that blood of a Yoledes b'Zov is Tamei wet or dry.
(h) Answer: They argue when she counted her clean days. They agree when she did not.
(i) Support (Beraisa): If a Yoledes b'Zov counted her clean days but did not immerse, Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel argue like they do about a Yoledes.
3) THE SOURCE OF DAM TOHAR
(a) (Rav): Dam Tohar comes from the same source as Dam Tamei (of a Yoledes, Nidah or Zavah). The Torah decreed that during Yemei Tohar it is Tahor, and at all other times it is Tamei;
(b) (Levi): Dam Tohar comes from a different source. During Yemei Tohar, the source of Dam Tamei is closed, and the source of Dam Tohar is open.
(c) Question: What is the difference between these answers?
(d) Answer: They argue about blood that flowed before and after the moment Yemei Tohar began (or ended. Surely, Levi attributes all the blood to one source, i.e. the one that was open until now):
1. Rav is lenient if this happened at the start of Yemei Tohar (all blood after it began is Tahor). He is stringent if this happened at the end of Yemei Tohar (all blood after it ended is Tamei);
2. Levi is stringent at the start of Yemei Tohar (as long as it flows, all the blood is from the Tamei source), and he is lenient at the end. (All the blood is Tahor.)
(e) Question (against Levi - Mishnah - Beis Shamai): If a Yoledes did not immerse, her Dam Tohar is Tamei like her spit and urine;
1. Beis Hillel say, it is Tamei wet or dry.
2. Assumption: The case is, the blood has not been flowing continuously from the days of Tum'ah.
3. According to Rav, we understand Beis Hillel. The Torah decreed that it is Tamei!
4. However, according to Levi, the blood is from the Tahor source. If she did not immerse, it should not be more Tamei than other Mayanos of a Teme'ah! (They are Teme'im only when wet.)
(f) Answer: The case is, the blood was flowing continuously from Yemei Tum'ah. It is from the Tamei source.
(g) Question: If so, why does Beis Shamai argue?
(h) Answer: Levi admits that Beis Shamai holds like Rav.
(i) Question: According to Levi, we understand the argument of Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai;
1. According to Rav, what do they argue about?
(j) Answer: Beis Shamai says that Dam Tohar depends only on days (whether or not she immersed). Beis Hillel says that Dam Tohar depends on days and immersion.
(k) Question (against Levi - Mishnah): Beis Shamai agrees that blood of a Yoledes b'Zov is Tamei wet or dry.
1. Assumption: The blood was not flowing continuously from Yemei Tum'ah.
2. According to Rav, we understand this. The Torah decreed that it is Tamei!
3. However, according to Levi, the blood is from the Tahor source. It should not be Tamei when dry!
(l) Answer: Here also, the blood was flowing continuously from Yemei Tum'ah.
(m) Question: If so, what is the Chidush?
(n) Answer: The Chidush is according to Beis Shamai;
1. Beis Shamai holds that there is one source for all the blood, the Torah decreed that during Yemei Tohar it is Tahor. However, we do not consider Yemei Tohar of Yoledes b'Zov to begin until she counts seven clean days.
(o) Question (Beraisa): "Devosah Titma" includes Bo'el Yoledes (he is like Bo'el Nidah), and the nights (we do not expound "ki'Yemei (like the days) Nidas" to exclude the nights), and Yoledes b'Zov, that she must count seven clean days (like a regular Zavah).
1. According to Rav, we understand why Yoledes b'Zov must count seven clean days. She has the law of a Zavah;
2. However, according to Levi, even if she ceased to bleed for a moment (after the days of Tum'ah), even if she later sees blood, it is from the source of Dam Tohar, and the days should be considered clean!
(p) Answer: It means that aYoledes b'Zov must cease to bleed for a moment in order that the next seven days will count as clean days.