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?

It says here [in the Beraisa "v'Shavin.."] that after Dam Tohar, she is Dayah Sha'atah!

Answer #1: This is unlike R. Yosi. ("V'Shavin" refers to Shamai and Hillel.)

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);

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.

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!

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;

Since she is nursing, she is Dayah Sha'atah as long as she nurses, according to R. Meir (above, 11a).

Question: Here, why must we say that she is after Dam Tohar? It should suffice that she is nursing!

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);

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;

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.

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.

Implied question: She is Dayah Sha'atah as long as she nurses!

Answer: The case is, her son died, or she miscarried, like I explained.

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)!

Answer #1: Our Sugya is unlike R. Yosi there.

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.)

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?

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!

Answer: They brought a proof according to Beis Shamai's opinion, since [Levi agrees that Beis Shamai] hold that there is one Mayan.

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).

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!

Even Beis Hillel, who are Metamei wet and dry, agree that her clean days count for her.

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.

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].

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].

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.

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;

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].

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!

Question: These are two stringencies that contradict each other!

Answer: Here, we are unsure, so we rule like both opinions to be stringent.

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).

Question #1 (R. Mordechai bar Yitzchak): According to Levi, who says that there are two Mayanos, a Beraisa in Bechoros (46b) is difficult;

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.

If there are two Mayanos, why don't we give to her Yemei Tohar? The Tamei Mayan is closed!

Question #2: Also below (40a), a Mishnah says that women do not sit for him (a Yotzei Dofen) days of Tum'ah and Taharah!

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.

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)."

However, the Stam Mishnah (40a) is difficult. (Levi should not hold like a Beraisa against a Stam Mishnah!)

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.

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.

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].

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.

Source: The case with Shila bar Avina connotes that [the ruling] was for her husband, and not for Taharos.

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!

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.

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];

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.)

Explanation: Reish Lakish holds that it is more reasonable to establish it regarding Zivah, for we find regarding a Zav that Ones is Tahor.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): Rav Asi erred between Reish and Dalet.

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;

This is like "Mishchu" (take), for which the Targum (Yonason) is "Negudu", and (Bava Basra 13a) "Gud Oh Agud."

He (Rav Asi) thought that [Rav] said Gadyei with a Dagesh in the Dalet, like "Godu (cut down) a tree."

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;

Opinion #2: Some explain that he is a different Tana.

Rejection: In Yoma (52b), we ask a contradiction from Isi ben Yehudah to Yosef Ish Hutzal.

Implied question: [According to Opinion #1, why didn't it list] here [also Yosef ha'Bavli and Yosef Ish Hutzal among his names]?

Answer: Here he lists only names of Isi, which resemble Rav Asi.