Niddah 30a — the Talmud in English

And the Gemara asks:

Now, the days of purity

during which, because of the lack of knowledge of when they ended, she must immerse every evening,

how many are they? —

Sixty-six [66].

But it is impossible to add all of them to the count of the thirty-five immersions that she performed during the first three weeks, because the third week overlaps the first seven days of the count of the sixty-six days of purity.

And therefore

subtract [

subtract] from the count of the sixty-six

the third week, during which we immerse her

because of a woman who gave birth to a female while in a state of ziva, and these immersions also served for the uncertainty lest the days of purity ended on those nights. And these immersions have already been counted.

There remain

and only the following remains to be added to the count of immersions:

sixty less one! [59]

And now one must join

sixty less one [59]

the immersions that she performs because of the uncertainty that the days of purity ended

and

and

thirty-five [35]

the immersions that she performs during the first three weeks, and altogether

they are ninety-four!

And if so, it is difficult:

Ninety-five

immersions that the House of Shammai required —

what are they for?!

And for what purpose does she perform one additional immersion?

And the Gemara answers:

Rav Yirmeya of Difti said: For example,

that she came before us,

at the outset,

at twilight, in which case we give her an additional immersion,

because at the beginning of her coming we immerse her at night, lest the days of impurity ended on the preceding day, whereas we begin counting the ninety-four immersions only from the immersion of the following night , because there is concern that perhaps she gave birth during this twilight; and if this twilight belongs already to the night, it follows that she gave birth on the day on which she came, and the count of the days begins from this day and not from the preceding day.

And the Gemara explains the view of the House of Hillel:

And according to the House of Hillel, who say, “one immersed on a long day,”

that is, a woman who gave birth at the end of the days of purity, who immerses in order to eat teruma,

she does not require an immersion

an additional one at the conclusion of the eighty days —

thirty-five

immersions,

what are they for?

Twenty-eight

the first ones,

as we said

with regard to the view of the House of Shammai: seven on the nights of the first week because of a woman who gave birth to a male , seven on the nights of the second week because of a woman who gave birth to a female, plus seven during the day because of a woman who gave birth to a male while in a state of ziva, plus seven during the day in the third week because of a woman who gave birth to a female while in a state of ziva; and in addition to them

this fifth week

in which

we immerse her every night; say, she is at the end of her menstruation!

for during the fourth week she saw on every day, and it is not known on each day whether this is a sighting during the days of purity, or whether the days of purity ended on the preceding day and she now begins her days of menstruation. Therefore, on every day of the following week [which is the fifth week], there is concern lest the days of menstruation that began during the preceding week ended, and she must immerse at night in order to become pure from her menstrual impurity .

And the Gemara further investigates the matter of the ten weeks in the beraita:

Ten weeks,

which the beraita mentioned for the purpose of the count of ninety-five immersions —

why do I need this?

For

eight and a half suffice,

because during the last week and a half she does not immerse. For together with the three weeks of purity and another eight and a half weeks [5. 1 1], eighty days have already passed [5. 80=7 \ 5. 1 1], during which there is concern that perhaps she completes the count of the eighty days of childbirth; and from here onward there is no longer room for uncertainty. If so, why did the tan in the Mishna count ten weeks?!

And the Gemara answers:

Since the tan mentioned half a week,

for the tan needed to count half of the ninth week,

he extends it

and counted the whole of it,

and since he mentioned “an impure week,”

which is the ninth week,

he also mentioned a pure week

that follows it , in order to complete the alternating order, in which there was always a pure week after the impure one .

And the Gemara asks: according to the House of Hillel, why is it sufficient for her to perform thirty-five immersions?

But there is the immersion of a zava!

for beginning with the sixth week she is an uncertain zava throughout the entire period. For she does not know whether the sighting of the fourth week was a sighting of pure blood, and consequently the sighting of the sixth week is the beginning of menstruation, or whether the sighting of the fourth week was the beginning of menstruation, in which case the sighting of the sixth week is a sighting of ziva [which occurs within eleven days after seven days of menstruation]. And consequently the same uncertainty recurs with the sighting of the eighth week: if the sighting of the sixth was menstruation, in the eighth it is ziva, and if in the sixth it was ziva, in the eighth the days of menstruation have already returned; and so it continues until the tenth week.

And if so, at the end of every pure week she must be uncertain lest the seven days of purity are the seven clean days of a zava, and she must immerse on the seventh day. Should one add to the count of the thirty-five immersions of the House of Hillel the four immersions at the end of the seventh, ninth, eleventh, and thirteenth weeks? And the Gemara answers: immersions

that precede marital relations

which were permitted only on day thirty-five,

the House of Hillel counts. But the immersions

—Beit Hillel counts. But immersions

that follow marital relations,

beginning from day thirty-five onward,

it does not count.

And the Gemara asks:

And according to the House of Shammai, who counts

also the immersions

that follow marital relations

within the count of ninety-five immersions,

let him also count the immersion of a zava,

which are during the day and were not included in the count of ninety-five immersions, so that the count of immersions would be ninety-nine?

And it answers: with immersions belonging

to childbirth he is dealing,

but with immersions belonging

to ziva he is not dealing.

And the Gemara objects:

But there is “a woman who gave birth while in a state of ziva,”

whose immersions the House of Shammai counted during the second and third weeks, when she immerses during the day as well because of the concern of ziva?

And it answers:

“A woman who gave birth while in a state of ziva” he counts,

for the count of the days of purity of the ziva was delayed on account of the count of the days of childbirth impurity, and it belongs to childbirth. But

ordinary ziva he does not count!

And the Gemara asks about the count of the immersions during the first week:

The first week, when she comes before us —

let her immerse,

in addition to the nighttime immersions, also

during the day, lest on each and every day her “counted days” be completed

for it is possible that she gave birth while in a state of ziva during the third week before her arrival, and the count of fourteen days of impurity and seven clean days ended during the first week of her arrival?

And it answers:

Whose opinion is this? —

It is Rabbi Akiva’s, who says, we require “

seven clean days”

“counted before us.”

For it is stated concerning a zava, “And if she becomes pure from her ziva, she shall count for herself seven days, and afterward she shall become pure”; that is, only days on which she examined herself and knows that she was pure count toward the seven clean days. And this woman, who did not examine herself, even if in truth she was pure, these days do not count for her, since she does not know their purity and there is no counting in them.

And the Gemara asks further:

At the end of the first week

on the seventh day, after she counted seven clean days before us,

let her immerse

in the morning, lest it be the seventh day of the counting of the seven clean days of a zava, and let us add this immersion to the count of immersions; and why does she immerse only at night throughout the first week?

And it answers: an immersion that is only

once a week, he is not dealing with,

and therefore we did not add it to the count of immersions .

And the Gemara asks further:

On the first day when she comes before us —

let her immerse,

in the morning, because

perhaps she is one who observes one day for one day?

For let us be concerned that she saw during the days of ziva only one or two days, becoming a minor zava, whose law is that she counts one clean day and immerses in the morning of that day.

And it answers:

With a major zava

who saw during her days of ziva for three consecutive days and must count seven clean days

he is dealing; with a minor zava

who saw during her days of ziva only for one or two days and must observe one day for one day

he is not dealing!

And the Gemara concludes:

Infer from it

from the laws of the beraita

three:

A.

Infer from it that it is Rabbi Akiva’s opinion, who says, “we require [the days] counted before us.”

For this reason she does not immerse in the mornings during the first week.

B.

And infer from it that it is Rabbi Shimon’s opinion

who said that a zava who immerses on the seventh day, even though according to the essential law she can have marital relations on it,

but the Sages said that it is forbidden to do so, lest she come to a state of uncertainty,

for if she sees later during the day, she will invalidate her days of purity and her immersion, and it will follow that she had marital relations in prohibition. Therefore, she has relations only on the night of the thirty-fifth, and not also during the day of the twenty-first.

C.

And infer from it that immersion at its proper time is a mitzva,

and therefore we immerse her every day even though she is still forbidden marital relations.

And the Gemara concludes its explanation of the beraita:

And Rabbi Yose son of Rabbi Yehuda says: Her final immersion is sufficient,

and she performs only one immersion, when she becomes permitted marital relations,

and we do not say that immersion at its proper time is a mitzva!

Mishna:

A woman who miscarries

a placenta

on the fortieth day

from the beginning of the pregnancy —

she need not be concerned for a fetus,

for it is certain to us that its limbs had not yet been formed. A woman who miscarries

on the forty-first day —

shall observe [the periods] for a male, for a female, and for menstruation,

for perhaps its limbs had been formed, and it is not known whether it was a male or a female. And, on the other hand, perhaps it is not a fetus at all, and she has no days of purity; rather, she is an ordinary menstruant .

Rabbi Yishmael says:

A woman who miscarries

on the forty-first day —

shall observe [the periods] for a male and for menstruation,

but not for a female.

A woman who miscarries on the eighty-first day —

shall observe [the periods] for a male, for a female, and for menstruation.

And Rabbi Yishmael’s reason is:

the male is completed at forty-one days, whereas the female,

according to him, is completed

at eighty-one

days.

And the Sages say —

both the formation of the male and the formation of the female, this one and that one —

forty-one

days.

Gemara:

It was stated in the Mishna that a woman who miscarries “on the forty-first day shall observe [the periods] for a male, for a female, and for menstruation,” and the Gemara asks:

Why was “male” mentioned

in our Mishna?

If [it is] for the days of impurity

of a male,

it has already taught

that she observes fourteen days of impurity of a

female

and the seven days of impurity of a male are included within them.