Arakhin 8b — the Talmud in English

Twelve

days I saw as impure;

its opening

was

eight

clean days afterward. For either way that you understand it, the ninth day is the opening of niddah. Whether all of them were days of ziva, or whether the first two days were the end of the days of ziva, the following seven days were days of niddah, and the remaining three days were days of ziva—she has already counted seven clean days, and eleven days of ziva have also passed, when we combine the eight clean days with the three days of seeing. It follows that the ninth day of the clean days is the opening of niddah.

Thirteen

days I saw as impure;

its opening

was

seven

clean days afterward. For either way that you understand it, the eighth day is the opening of niddah. For if everything was ziva, seven clean days have already passed; and even if the first two days were ziva, the seven days afterward were niddah, and the last four were ziva, eleven days of ziva have already passed and she has counted seven clean days, and the eighth day of the clean days is the opening of niddah.

The general principle is: there is no concern that the first three days of seeing were days of ziva and afterward the seeing continued into the days of niddah, for once she saw three consecutive days of ziva, she does not leave the days of ziva until she counts seven clean days.

And this is what the Mishna says:

“that the opening for one who is mistaken is no fewer than seven,”

for even if she saw for fourteen days, she does not return to the opening of niddah until she counts seven clean days,

“and no more than seventeen,”

for even if she saw for only one day, after seventeen days she has left the status of uncertainty, as explained at the beginning of the beraita.

Rav Adda bar Ahava said to Rabba: “Why do I need all this?”

Rav Adda erred and thought that all these days which the Mishna requires are in order to permit her to her husband. Therefore he asked:

“Let her count seven”

clean days alone—

“and she will be permitted.”

For whether she is a woman of niddah or a woman of ziva, she is permitted to her husband after seven clean days.

He said to him:

The Mishna is not discussing the permission of the woman to her husband, but

“we are saying [that it is] to restore her to the status of niddah and its opening.”

So that she can return to the reckoning of the days of niddah and the days of ziva. And there is a practical difference from this for many laws, as explained.

The Sages taught: All those who are mistaken

with regard to the days of niddah and ziva mentioned above, we are stringent with them according to the law of

women of ziva.

They shall

bring a sacrifice

of a woman with ziva, which is two turtledoves: one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering. But the bird sin-offering

is not eaten,

because it is a doubtful sacrifice, possibly unconsecrated property. Perhaps they are not women of ziva but women of niddah, and they are not obligated to bring a sacrifice, and the bird sin-offering is pinioned. If it is unconsecrated property, it is like a carcass. Only as a sin-offering did the Torah permit a pinioned bird to be eaten by priests. The turtledove for the burnt-offering is sacrificed conditionally: if she is a woman of ziva, it shall be offered for her obligation; and if she is a woman of niddah, it shall be for a voluntary offering.

Except for one whose opening is seven

[in a woman who sees for thirteen days],

and one whose opening is eight

[in a woman who sees for twelve days],

who bring a sacrifice and it is eaten

as definite women of ziva. For certainly among these twelve days there are three consecutive days of ziva. Even if we say that the first two days were the end of the ziva, and the seven days after them were seeing of niddah, there still remain at their end three consecutive days in which she saw, and it is certainly seeing of ziva.

And all the more so if all seven of the first days were seeing of niddah, for then all five of the last days are seeing of ziva.

And he challenges the first clause of the beraita:

“Is that so? ‘All those who are mistaken are women of ziva’?”

[This wording implies that they are certainly women of ziva.] But they are only a matter of uncertainty.

And furthermore,

he challenges: Is one who sees

“one day or two days,”

[which are included among all those who are mistaken, as taught in the Mishna,]

fit to bring a sacrifice?

But the obligation of a sacrifice applies only to a major woman of ziva, who saw three consecutive days, and not to one who observes one day corresponding to one day.

And we answer:

Rather,

the intention of the beraita is:

all women of ziva who are mistaken

[meaning, all those concerning whom there is uncertainty regarding ziva, namely, one who sees three days or more]

bring a sacrifice and it is not eaten, except for one whose opening is seven and one whose opening is eight, who bring a sacrifice and it is eaten.

Mishna:

There is no

purity with regard to afflictions

in fewer than one week

of

confinement.

Nor

is it ever necessary

for more than three weeks

of confinement in order for the purity to become clear.

Gemara:

That which is written, that there is no

fewer than one week,

refers

to afflictions of a person 17 .

For among them there are cases for which one week of confinement suffices. For example, a bright spot in a boil or in a burn: if it does not have one of the signs of impurity, such as white hair or spreading, the kohein confines him for seven days; and if within seven days these signs appear, he is a confirmed leper, and if not, he becomes pure.

And that which is written,

“and no more than three weeks,”

refers

to afflictions of houses.

For example, the kohein saw it and confined it for seven days. At the end of seven days, the affliction remained as it was and had not spread, so he confines it for an additional week. If at the end of the second week it still remained as it was, he removes the affected stones, scrapes and plasters the house, and confines it for an additional seven days. At the end of the third week, if the affliction returns, he demolishes the entire house. And if it does not return, it is pure.

Rav Pappa said: “Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains of the Almighty”—these are afflictions of a person.

They become clear in one week, whether he is declared confirmed or becomes pure, and this is like righteousness for the leper.

“Your judgments are a great deep”—these are afflictions of houses.

For their law is difficult, as they become clear only after three weeks.

And they ask:

“With regard to what is the plain meaning of the verse written?”

Rav Yehuda said: “Were it not for Your righteousness being like the mighty mountains of the Almighty, who could stand before Your judgments,”

which are like

“a great deep.”

Rabba said:

This is how the verse is interpreted:

“Your righteousness is like the mighty mountains of the Almighty, because Your judgments are a great deep.”

And we explain:

“With regard to what do they disagree? In the dispute between Rabbi Elazar and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina.”

For it was stated: Rabbi Elazar says: He suppresses

the Almighty suppresses and conceals the sins beneath the foundation of the Throne of Glory, so that the merits will prevail.

Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina, says: He carries

the Almighty carries the pan of sins and raises it upward, so that the pan of merits will prevail.

And the amoraim above also disagree about this.

Rabba

holds

in accordance with Rabbi Elazar

and explains as follows: Your righteousness, by which You justify us, is great like the mighty mountains of the Almighty, because You suppress and conceal Your judgments—that is, the sins—in a great deep.

And Rav Yehuda

holds

in accordance with Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Hanina,

and explains: Were it not that You raise the pan of our sins like the mighty mountains of the Almighty, who could stand before Your judgments, which are the sins that would prevail as far as a great deep?

Mishna:

They do not make fewer than four months

that are full

[of thirty days]

in a year, and it did not appear

to the Sages to make

more than eight

months deficient in a year. In the Gemara, the amoraim disagree whether the intention is eight full months or deficient months.

The two loaves are not eaten before two

days after their baking. They are baked on the eve of Shavuot, because their baking does not override Shabbat or a Festival. Therefore, when they are eaten on Shavuot, it is at least the second day after their baking.

And no more than three days.

For if Shavuot falls on the first day of the week, so that they are baked on the eve of Shabbat, it follows that their eating is on the third day after their baking; but more than this there is not.

The showbread is not eaten before nine

days, because its baking does not override Shabbat or a Festival. It is baked on the eve of Shabbat and arranged on the table on Shabbat, and it is eaten on the following Shabbat, which is the ninth day after its baking.

And no more than eleven,

for example, when Rosh Hashana falls on Thursday, and Friday is the second Festival day of Rosh Hashana. In that case its baking is on Wednesday, and it is eaten on the following Shabbat, which is the eleventh day after its baking. But more than this there is not.

A minor is not circumcised before eight,

and this is circumcision at its proper time.

And no more than twelve

days. For example, if he was born during twilight on the eve of Shabbat, so that it is uncertain whether it was Friday or the night of Shabbat. He is not circumcised on the following Shabbat, since it is uncertainly the ninth day, and circumcision not at its proper time does not override Shabbat or a Festival. And if Sunday and Monday are Rosh Hashana, he is circumcised only on Tuesday, which is the twelfth day from his birth.

Gemara:

And we consider the matter:

What is the meaning of “it did not appear [proper] for more than eight,”

which we learned in the Mishna?

Rav Huna said: It did not appear proper to the Sages to intercalate more than eight

months. And they make at least four deficient months of twenty-nine days.

A Torah year is a lunar year, which is twelve cycles of the lunar conjunction called months. [Or thirteen months in an intercalated year.] Between one conjunction and the next there are twenty-nine and a half days and seven hundred ninety-three parts of an hour, [the hour being composed of one thousand eighty parts]. But since it is impossible to sanctify the month in the middle of the day, because of the halakha that “you calculate days for months, but you do not calculate hours,” therefore some of the months are made full, of thirty days, and some deficient, of twenty-nine days. And if one month is full and one deficient, every two months will be fifty-nine days, corresponding to the time of two conjunctions, which is also approximately fifty-nine days.

According to this calculation, between the conjunction of Tishrei of this year and the conjunction of Tishrei of the following year there is an advance of four days in the days of the week. For according to this, a year, which is twelve months, contains 354 days, which are fifty weeks and four days [4 + 50=7: 354], [as well as eight hours and eight hundred seventy-six parts of an hour]. And if six months are made full and six deficient, the change between Rosh Hashana of this year and Rosh Hashana of the following year will also be this way. For example, if Rosh Hashana this year falls on Shabbat, the following year it will fall on Wednesday. It follows that Rosh Hashana falls on the day of the conjunction of Tishrei.

But if there are seven full months and five deficient months, Rosh Hashana will be delayed by one day after the conjunction; and if there are eight full months and four deficient months, Rosh Hashana will be delayed by two days after the conjunction. If there are nine full months, it will be delayed by three days after the conjunction.

And according to this we ask:

What is different about nine

full months

that

we do not make? And its reason was explained,