ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
THE MIREL BAS YAKOV MORDECHAI KORNFELD
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler of Kollel Iyun Hadaf
Rosh Kollel: Rabbi Mordecai Kornfeld
(a) According to Rav, a woman who sees on the fifteenth of one month, the sixteenth of the next, and the seventeenth of the next, has already fixed a 'Veses le'Dilug', by which he means - that she will be forbidden on the eighteenth of the fourth month, the nineteenth of the fifth, and so on.
(b) Sh'muel says - that she only fixes a Veses in this way once she sees on the eighteenth of the fourth month.
(c) Initially, we base their Machlokes on - whether a Chazakah takes place after two times (Rav) or three (Shmuel).
(d) Rebbi and Raban Shimon ben Gamliel (whom we have already cited) in a Beraisa, argue over the same point. In a case where a woman's first husband dies, and after she remarries, her second husband dies too - Rebbi forbids her to marry a third time; whereas Raban Shimon ben Gamliel permits it (until three husbands have died).
(a) We reject this suggestion however, establishing both opinions like Raban Shimon ben Gamliel. And the basis of the Machlokes between Rav and Shmuel is - whether we count the first sighting (which she did not see be'Dilug) as one of the three (Rebbi) or not (Raban Shimon ben Gamliel).
(b) We query Rav from a Beraisa however, which discusses a woman who had a Veses on the fifteenth, and who changed the next month to the sixteenth, and the following month, to the seventeenth. The Beraisa rules that after ...
1. ... the first change, both the fifteenth and the sixteenth of the next month are Asur.
2. ... after the second change - that the sixteenth becomes Mutar, and the fifteenth and seventeenth are Asur.
(c) If on the following month, she sees on the eighteenth - she will have fixed a new Veses on the eighteenth, and all the other dates are permitted.
(a) Rav will reconcile his ruling with the Beraisa, which requires a fourth time to create a Veses le'Dilug - by pointing out that the latter is speaking about a woman whose sightings on the fifteenth were based on a Veses (whereas he is not).
(b) This answer appears obvious. However, when we asked the Kashya, we thought - that in reality, whether she has a Veses or not, she requires three Dilugim to create a Veses, and the Tana mentioned the fact that she had a Veses, to teach us that in spite of it, she loses it after the two Dilugim that followed.
(c) Another Beraisa rules that a woman who sees on the twenty-first of one month, the twenty-second of the next month and ...
1. ... the twenty-third of the third month - has fixed a Veses.
2. ... the twenty-fourth of the third month - has not.
(d) To reconcile his opinion with the Tana, who declares a Veses le'Dilug after the third time, Shmuel will explain - that the Tana is speaking where the woman had previously been seeing on the twentieth.
(e) And we prove this answer - by pointing out that it is otherwise difficult to understand why the Tana began with the twenty-first, and not with the twentieth (a round figure which the Tana'im regularly begin with).
(a) With regard to our Mishnah's ruling that a woman who sees less than three times on the same day does not fix a Veses, Rav Papa comments - that she is nevertheless obligated to suspect that she might see when that day comes around.
(b) We query this however, on the grounds that we already know this from our Mishnah - where we learned that a woman who tended to see on the fifteenth, and who changes to the twentieth, is Asur on both days when they come round again.
(c) We answer - that (bearing in mind that every subsequent sighting follows the previous day of Tevilah [and not the previous sighting]) from our Mishnah we would ...
1. ... only know that we still contend with the original day if it falls during the days of Nidus (such as from the fifteenth to the twentieth, in which case the following fifteenth actually falls four days after the termination of the days of Zivus), but ...
2. ... we would not know that we do so in a case for example, where she changed from the fifteenth to the tenth, where the following fifteenth will fall still within the days of Zivus. And that is what Rav Papa is coming to teach us.
(d) We might have thought otherwise - because of the Chezkas Taharah that every woman has during the eleven days of Zivus (as we learned in the fourth Perek).
(a) With regard to our Mishnah's ruling that a woman does not lose her Veses until she has seen three times on a different date, Rav Papa comments - that the Tana only speaks about a case where she already had a Chazakah, but where she only saw even twice, seeing once on a different day will suffice to uproot the first fixture.
(b) Here too, we ask that we already know this from the ruling in our Mishnah 'Ein ha'Ishah Kova'as Lah Veses ad she'Tikba'enah Shalosh Pe'amim' - a proof that she does not require three consecutive sightings on a different date to uproot one or even two previous sightings.
(c) We answer - that were it not for Rav Papa, we would have thought that, even though she will not require three sightings changes to break the two previous ones, she will however require two.
(a) In support of Rav Papa, we cite a Beraisa which discusses a woman who changed her fixed sighting from the twentieth day to the thirtieth, where the Tana rules - that the following twentieth and thirtieth days are both forbidden.
(b) The Beraisa rules that if, after her first sighting on the thirtieth day, she misses the next twentieth day but sees on the thirtieth, then sees on the twentieth, misses the thirtieth and sees on the following twentieth day - she does not need to contend with the next thirtieth day ...
(c) ... despite having seen twice on the thirtieth (a proof for Rav Papa).
(d) She remains forbidden on the twentieth day however - due to the principle 'Orach bi'Zemano Ba' (her Chazakah remains intact [until it has been broken three consecutive times]).
(a) Our Mishnah compares a woman and her blood to a vine in two respects. One with reference to the fact that some vines produce red wine, and others, black (purple) wine, and so does a woman vis-a-vis her blood - the other, inasmuch as all women have blood of Nidus and blood of Besulim; some, a lot, others, only a little, just like vines.
(b) Rebbi Yehudah adds that a vine that does not produce (much) wine is called 'Durk'ti' - the acronym (the Beraisa points out) of 'Dor Keti'a' (a cut off nation), which means that a woman who has little blood, will not have many children.
(a) Rebbi Chiya learned another Beraisa that compares a woman's blood to yeast in a dough, in that - blood is good for a woman, just like yeast is good for a dough.
(b) And yet another Beraisa, quoting Rebbi Meir, states that a woman who has a lot of Dam Nidus - will have a lot of children.
Hadran Alach 'ha'Ishah'
(a) According to Beis Shamai in our Mishnah, a girl who has not yet reached the age of Nidus has four nights, meaning - that even if she sees blood during that period, she remains Tahor.
(b) According to Beis Hillel however - she is Tahor until the wound heals (which will be explained in the Sugya).
(c) Assuming that she has reached the age of Nidus - Beis Shamai gives her the first night only.
(d) Beis Hillel give her until Motza'ei Shabbos - four nights (since it was customary to marry on Wednesday [as we learned in Kesuvos]).
(e) If she is still in her father's house, Beis Shamai allow her only the Bi'as Mitzvah. Beis Hillel say - the entire night (even if this entails many Bi'os [see Tiferes Yisrael]).
(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak establishes the Reisha of our Mishnah (where Beis Hillel give a girl whose time had not yet arrived to see blood, up to the time that the wound heals) even if she did have a sighting - on the basis of the fact that the Tana does not draw a distinction in the Reisha, as he does in the Seifa.
(b) We substantiate Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak's ruling - by citing a Beraisa to the same effect.
(c) When Shmuel interprets 'ad she'Tichyeh ha'Makah' to mean 'as long as their is spit to be found in her mouth on account of Tashmish', he means - as long as bleeding accompanies each Tashmish.
(d) When Rav Yehudah quoting Rav told Shmuel that it means 'Kol Z'man she'Tichyeh' - the latter did not understand what he meant. Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak however, citing Rav himself, explained that if she continues to see blood ...
1. ... whist sitting down but not whilst standing up - the wound has not healed, and the same will apply if she continues to see it ...
2. ... when sitting on the ground, but not when sitting on a cushion. And it is only if she continues either to see blood ...
3. ... in all of the above cases or not to see it - that the wound has healed.
(a) Rav maintains that, with regard to the middle case (where her time arrived to see blood) if they are intimate by day, Beis Hillel will permit her until Motza'ei Shabbos. But according to Levi - for each day that they are intimate, she loses one night.
(b) Levi extrapolates from - 'Arba Leilos' that she is permitted four Onos (either nights or days); whereas Rav infers from - 'ad Motza'ei Shabbos', that she is permitted both the nights and the days.
(c) According to ...
1. ... Rav, Beis Hillel sees fit to add 'Arba Leilos' - because it is the norm. to perform Tashmish by night, whereas according to ...
2. ... Levi, they find it necessary to mention 'ad Motza'ei Shabbos' - to teach us that even the Bi'ah of a Besulah is permitted on Shabbos (see Tosfos DH 'de'Shari').
(d) We would otherwise have thought that the later case is forbidden - because, seeing as the womb is still tight, he might create a wound on Shabbos.
(a) Rebbi Chanina rules that a Besulah who bleeds by the second Bi'ah but not by the first is Tamei. According to Rebbi Asi - she is Tahor.
(b) He counter Rebbi Chanina's argument that had there been Dam Besulim, it would have emerged during the first Bi'ah - by suggesting that perhaps he inadvertently copied Shmuel, who was able to perform many Bi'os without causing a Besulah to bleed.
(c) Rebbi Asi counters however - by stating that Shmuel was different, inasmuch as he was a particularly agile man, and that it would be extremely rare for anybody else to emulate his example.
(a) According to Rav - we give a Bogeres who gets marries one night of Taharah.
(b) Rav qualifies his own ruling, by confining it to where she had not yet had a sighting, because if she had - she only has the Be'ilas Mitzvah, and no more (see Rashba).