Nidah 67
Summary
- Today's שיעור on מסכת נדה דף ס"ז (beginning from דף ס"ו עמוד ב') sets out a series of הלכות מקוה and חציצה that shape how טבילה is performed and when it is valid, and it repeatedly treats realistic impediments—fear, mud, public exposure, seasonal river conditions, bodily residues, and timing concerns—as reasons חז"ל restrict otherwise possible immersions. The גמרא’s rulings generate major מחלוקות among the ראשונים and פוסקים, including the רמב"ם versus ראב"ד about whether standing on certain surfaces is invalid because of fear alone or also because of a גזירת מרחצאות, competing explanations of why טבילה in a harbor is problematic, and how to apply rules about night-only immersion because of *serakh bitah* alongside cases of danger or impediment. The שיעור then builds the foundation of חציצה law—what counts מדאורייתא and what becomes forbidden מדרבנן—while applying it to concrete cases like scabs, eye mucus, *kachol* in the eye, opening or closing the eyes, and knots in hair. The sugya ends by framing how far apart חפיפה and טבילה may be scheduled, presenting precedent-based leniencies for שבת and ימים טובים and concluding with a practical boundary on how much separation is acceptable.
- Today's שיעור begins with אמר רבא that אשה לא תעמוד על גבי כלי חרס ותטבול. רב כהנא initially explains the reason as משום גזירת מרחצאות, since חרס fixtures in bathhouses could cause confusion between a bathhouse and a מקוה, and he therefore assumes a wooden bench would be permitted because it is not typical of bathhouses. רב חנן מהני דורא rejects that and states the reason is משום דבעיתא, because standing on כלי חרס makes her afraid and the fear may prevent proper immersion, and the גמרא applies the same fear concern to a wooden bench as well. The שיעור presents a מחלוקת ראשונים where the רמב"ם reads the מסקנא as eliminating the גזירת מרחצאות and leaving only fear, while the ראב"ד maintains there are two גזירות, fear and גזירת מרחצאות, producing a נפקא מינה whether בדיעבד the immersion stands or requires returning to the מקוה.
- The גמרא states אמר רב שמואל בר רב יצחק that אשה לא תטבול בנמל, and רש"י explains the concern as mud that can lodge between toes or fingers as a חציצה, even if after immersion no mud is visible because it may have washed away during the immersion. The שיעור records a ראשונים debate whether the concern applies to any harbor mud or to a uniquely sticky harbor mud particularly likely to create חציצה. The שיעור connects this to the משנה in מסכת מקואות פרק ז about immersing a bed in a muddy mikveh floor and the principle מפני שהמימיו מקדמין, and it presents answers including that נמל mud is different, that a person stepping creates greater pressure than a bed, and that the concern may be mud picked up on the beach before entering rather than mud on the mikveh floor itself. תוספות explains the harbor case as a public-place concern, creating both a rushing problem that can compromise immersion and a צניעות problem, and the שיעור applies this to a practical מחלוקת הפוסקים about whether צניעות concerns can outweigh going to the מקוה בזמנה and advises that if one anticipates such a conflict one should not invite guests.
- The שיעור introduces the תורה’s two valid water sources for טבילה, a מעיין and a מקוה, and states that the fundamental difference is that a מעיין may be flowing while a מקוה must be stationary, with rainwater being unable to qualify as a מעיין. The גמרא reports that אבוה דשמואל made מקואות for his daughters ביומי ניסן, and the שיעור cites תשובת הגאונים explaining he is called אבוה דשמואל because people claimed שמואל was not his son and the title publicly established the relationship. רש"י’s main approach in the שיעור is that in ניסן the river contains abundant rainwater and is flowing, so immersion in it is problematic, and therefore he built a כשרה מקוה for that season; the ראשונים debate whether the phrase means specifically ניסן or a broader rainy-water period such as ניסן through תשרי. The שיעור also brings an alternate approach tying the issue to מים חיים for a זב and then notes the difficulty that the תורה states this for a זב and not explicitly for a זבה, while reporting opinions that either extend it מדאורייתא to זבה or apply it מדרבנן.
- The גמרא adds ומפצי בימי תשרי, and the שיעור presents the practical question whether mats were placed in the water itself—implying standing on a mat is acceptable—or on the shore to prevent mud or sand from sticking to the feet before immersion. The שיעור also records that some ראשונים interpret the mats as serving צניעות needs, creating a barrier when many people are present so immersion is not rushed and privacy concerns are reduced.
- The גמרא states אמר רב גידל אמר רב that if a woman נתנה תבשיל לבנה and then immerses and emerges, she may be completely clean and still לא עלתה לה טבילה because residue could have been present during immersion and washed off afterward. The גמרא then teaches אמר רמי בר אבא that הני ריבדי דכוסילתא, scabs from bloodletting, are not a חציצה up to three days but are a חציצה מכאן ואילך, and the שיעור explains proposed reasons including formation and water penetration or whether the person is מקפיד based on visibility. The שיעור notes a מחלוקת whether the rule is limited to bloodletting scabs or applies to all wounds, and it cites the חתם סופר that “three days” means 72 hours, three times 24.
- The גמרא rules through אמר מר עוקבא that לפלוף שבעין is not a חציצה when moist and becomes a חציצה when dry, with dryness defined as משעה שמתחיל להוריק. The שיעור reports a view among מפרשים distinguishing mucus inside the eye from mucus around the eye, treating the latter as always a חציצה while emphasizing the גמרא’s wording לפלף שבעין. אמר שמואל teaches that כחול שבתוך העין is not a חציצה while on the eyelid it is, unless her eyes can still flutter, in which case even on the eyelid it is not a חציצה, and the שיעור frames this as רפואי powder rather than cosmetic use while stating the practical rule that לכתחילה makeup should be removed before immersion. The שיעור attributes to various פוסקים that makeup may be treated more leniently בדיעבד than medicine because the wearer is more intent on preserving medicine than cosmetics. אמר רב יוחנן rules that opening the eyes excessively or closing them tightly invalidates immersion, and the שיעור applies this to contact lenses by stating that all agree they should be removed לכתחילה and recording a dispute about בדיעבד validity, with the מנחת יצחק and Rav Wosner suggesting possible leniency in some cases and Rav Elyashiv requiring returning to the מקוה, removing the lens, and immersing again.
- The גמרא states אמר ריש לקיש that אשה לא תטבול אלא כדרך גדילתה, meaning immersion should be in a natural standing posture rather than crouching so water reaches folds and creases. The שיעור links this to a משנה in מסכת נגעים describing male and female postures, with the man appearing like one plowing or harvesting olives and the woman like one weaving or nursing. The שיעור cites the רמ"א that a mikveh should be deep enough that a person can stand with water up to the navel plus a זרת above it, so that immersion need not be performed by lying flat.
- The גמרא teaches אמר רבה בר רב הונא that one tied hair is a חציצה, three tied hairs are not, and with two hairs he is unsure, while רב יוחנן rules that only one tied hair is treated as a חציצה. The שיעור brings the אבני נזר’s question from the כלל מין במינו אינו חוצץ and answers that hair knots are not governed by that כלל but by the requirement that water must actually reach the area, and tight knots prevent penetration. The שיעור then explains that a single knotted hair is too small to qualify under the later rules of רוב and מיעוט, and therefore מפרשים interpret the case as describing a מצב where many hairs are knotted individually so the cumulative effect can become a רוב. The שיעור sets out three approaches among ראשונים and פוסקים for measuring רוב and מיעוט: evaluating the body as a whole including hair, treating hair and body as separate entities, or subdividing hair areas further such as head hair, beard, and other body hair.
- The גמרא states אמר רבי יצחק that מדאורייתא only רובו המקפיד עליו is a חציצה, while רובו ואינו מקפיד עליו is not, but חז"ל decreed on רוב שאינו מקפיד משום רוב המקפיד and also decreed on מיעוט המקפיד משום רוב המקפיד. The גמרא refuses to decree on מיעוט שאינו מקפיד because that would be גזירה לגזירה, stated as היא גופא גזירה ואנן ניקום ונגזור גזירה לגזירה. The שיעור presents Rav Elchanan’s קשיא that once חז"ל define רוב שאינו מקפיד as invalid, everyone should become מקפיד in order to comply, and it presents his two answers: מקפיד means it personally bothers the person rather than merely wanting to fulfill חז"ל, and רב חיים’s approach that one can reduce the covered area below רוב without removing all of it, creating a practical space for “not מקפיד” while avoiding a רוב.
- The שיעור introduces the דאורייתא distinction between a נדה, who immerses at night after seven days, and a זבה גדולה with שבעה נקיים, who may immerse by day on the seventh day though she should not have relations that day. Rav rules that נדה בזמנה immerses only at night while שלא בזמנה may immerse by day or night, and רבי יוחנן rules that both בזמנה and שלא בזמנה immerse only at night משום סרך בתה so the daughter will not infer that daytime immersion is valid for a נדה at her earliest time. The שיעור presents three ראשונים approaches to *serakh bitah*: allowing daytime immersion but delaying returning home until night, prohibiting even leaving for the mikveh until night, and the accepted approach distinguishing whether חפיפה is done at the mikveh so a daughter assumes immersion itself occurs at night. The גמרא then concludes that Rav retracts and rules that נדה between בזמנה and שלא בזמנה immerses only at night משום סרך בתה. The שיעור cites the חתם סופר that this concern arose after טהרות practice ended and immersion became associated only with נדה, removing earlier ambiguity about why a woman might be immersing.
- The גמרא reports cases where women immersed on the day of the eighth day due to אונס: danger from lions, thieves, cold, and in מחוזא משום אבולא, explained as gatekeepers closing the mikveh at night or concerns about unsupervised interaction with improper gatekeepers. The שיעור applies this to a contemporary question of Friday-night immersion when the mikveh is accessible only by car and states that פוסקים say the גמרא is not proof for permitting a private, individual daytime solution because the גמרא’s leniencies address citywide dangers affecting everyone rather than an individual circumstance, while also stating that practical questions should be asked to a רב.
- The גמרא raises that nowadays כולהו ספק זבות שוינהו רבנן and asks why women should not immerse on the day of the seventh clean day like a זבה. The גמרא answers with רבי שמעון from a ברייתא, reading אחר תטהר to require that seven clean days be consecutive so that טומאה does not interrupt them, and the שיעור states that this means a break restarts counting rather than resuming where one left off. The שיעור also brings רבי שמעון’s view that after the last act of counting she could immerse that morning מדאורייתא, but חכמים forbid doing so שמא תבוא לידי ספק, since relations that day followed by bleeding would create retroactive doubt.
- The גמרא teaches through Rav Huna that a woman may do חפיפה earlier and immerse later, deriving precedent from cases where immersion is מוצאי שבת and חפיפה cannot be done on שבת because of combing concerns of תולש and the need for hot water. The גמרא extends the precedent to cases where יום טוב follows שבת and even to a two-day ראש השנה scenario where immersion is delayed further, and the שיעור notes the calendar question that ראש השנה cannot fall on Sunday under לא אדו ראש and answers that the case applies when months were sanctified by בית דין. The שיעור records two explanations for why ראש השנה is chosen: it is universally two days even in ארץ ישראל, and it avoids a case of יום טוב שני של גלויות where some might argue for different rules. Rav Chisda accepts the listed cases but rejects deriving broader practice from them and limits leniency to situations of necessity, while Rav Yeimar allows using precedent but rejects the most extended gap of חפיפה on Sunday with immersion on Wednesday night because the particular ראש השנה setup does not require that much separation. The sugya concludes with מרימר ruling הלכתא כרב חסדא but adopting Rav Yeimar’s limitation that the last, most distant scheduling is not accepted.
Previous Page
Next Page
Daf Images are property of Vagshal and may not be reproduced.
Suggestions