ד Hilchos Nida Rav Baruch Simon shlit

בס"ד

R’ Simon shlit”a - Hilchos Nida 5769

*R’ Simon has not reviewed these notes. Any mistakes should be attributed to me. Any comments in brackets [ ] are my own additions. They were not said in the שיעור.

- Beni Krohn

שיעור #1 (packet 1a)- 9.3.08 /3 Elul 5768

Hagdaras Nida min HaTorah (Hargasha)
I. Source of Issur Nida

A. Vayikra 20:18- Man who sleeps with woman who is a nida, es mekora heara, both get kareis. See from this pasuk that dam nida has to be dam that comes from the Makor, the uterus. Otherwise, not dam nida.

B. Mishna Nida 17B- gives a mashal for anatomy of woman: hallway/entranceway (prozdor), main room (cheder), and the second floor (aliya): Cheder is the uterus, prozdor is the vaginal canal which leads into that room, and the aliya is something on top (bladder, urethra, something from urinary tract).

The Mishna explains that dam from the cheder is tamei, from the aliya is tahor, and if the dam is found in the prozdor, sfeiko tamei b/c chezkaso min hamakor. We assume this dam came from the makor and she is temei’a (רש"י- misafeik we make her tmeia b’vaday).

*When talk about dam nida as tamei, we are saying that the dam itself is tamei and is mitamei other things.
C. רמ' IB 5:2-5: All women become temeim once dam enters the beis hachitzon (which is still inside her body), d’haynu that the dam passes the bein hashinayim. And the bein hashinayim is the area to which the ever reaches during gmar bia.

*Important haara being that woman becomes temeia even if dam never leaves her body.

D. רי"ף Shvuos 3A- learn din that has to be: 1) dam, and 2) it has to come from the makor, from pasuk v’he gilsa es mekor dameha, and says lashon dam.

II. Requirement of Hargasha

A. Vayikra 16:19- “dam yihiye zova bivsara”

B. Gm Nida 57B- Shmuel: Woman sits on ground, and beforehand checks and doesn’t see anything, and then she gets up and she finds blood on the ground, she’s tehora. Why? B/c pasuk says bivsara, has to be margish bivsara. Needs to have a hargasha. And this woman didn’t have any sensation. And gm explains further that use this pasuk for another din as well, that she can become tamei bifnim k’bachutz.
Questions

1- What exactly is considered a hargasha?

2- How does hargasha fit into status of nida? 2 possibilities:

(a) I need dam from makor and need hargasha  2 Sep requirements.

(b) Need to know the dam came from the uterus and Hargasha is how I know

 One requirement. [Siman vs Siba]

III. What role does hargasha play in giving woman status of a nida?

A. רמב"ן Hilchos Nida- Even if you know for sure that the dam came from her, still not nida or zava midoraysa until she has a hargasha (Separate requirement/Siba)

B. תוס' Rid- Need hargasha and yedia that it came from her, and she is muteres in the gm’s case (57B) b/c assume lo badka yafe yafe.

*Some understand that he is arguing with רמב"ן, that hargasha tells us that the dam came from her, while others think even תוס' rid thinks hargasha is absolute requirement as well.

C. שו"ת Maharam Lublin (written to the Shela): Discusses this shayla. If woman doesn’t have a hargasha do we always says she’s not nida doraysa or are there times when don’t need it, d’haynu when it’s clear as day that the dam came from her? (Brings case of woman who became a nida in middle of night and then they were mishamesh mitasam and then realized what had happened, what kind of teshuva do they have to do?)

 Quotes רמ' IB 9:1/2- woman not mitama unless she has a hargasha. However, if woman does bedika and finds dam in the prozdor, she becomes temeia min haTorah from the time she finds it b/c chezkas sheba b’hargasha.

* If hargasha is just vehicle to know it comes from her, why do we need to assume it was ba b’hargasha? Here we know 100% that it came from her body! Ela mai, seems clear that רמ' thinks that requirement of hargasha is separate from requirement of having dam min hamakor. Maharam brings more rayos to support this svara.

- Different ways of understanding רמ': (We’ll speak about this later as well)

1. She was distracted by feeling of the cloth inside and couldn’t feel the hargasha, but the hargasha was right now.

2. There was a hargasha earlier when the dam originally came out and she wasn’t aware of it.

IV. Three possible definitions of Hargasha

A. רמ' IB 5:17- Nizdazeia Gufa: Woman sees dam when she is going to the bathroom, whether she is standing or sitting, she is tehora, assume the dam is from a maka, and even though nizdazeia gufa, b/c this is just hargashas mei raglayim.

*Funny, though, b/c רמ' only says it backhanded, never comes out and says woman needs hargasha, and this is it. Mentions it derech agav.

B. Trumas HaDeshen 246- Pesichas Pi HaMakor: woman feels sheniftach mekora, and then when she got inside, she did a bedika and found a white discharge on the cloth. Is she tehora or not?

- Says would think to be mitamei her b/c she had a hargasha, so even if she doesn’t find dam, should still be temeia b/c assume there was dam there and it got lost. And says hargasha is svara doraysa just like veses, and by veses we say that even if she checks and finds cloth clean, still assura. However, here, she found something white, and could say that was the reason for the hargasha, and don’t have to assume there was dam here at all.

However, at the end he doesn’t want to be meikil b/c depends on what’s on the cloth, certain things can be confused with others, so wants to be machmir. But ממ"נ, see that he thinks that the definition of hargasha is that she felt the opening of the uterus, pesichas pi hamakor. (mentioned somewhat backhanded as well).

1. שו"ת Chassam Sofer YD- Holds like the Trumas HaDeshen. Discusses machlokes Shev Yaakov and MOZ”a (not sure who this is) about this very point.
C. Node B’Yehuda (M”K YD 55)- Zivas Davar Lach: thinks that pesichas hamakor is for sure a hargasha, but also discusses possibility that zivas davar lach, feeling dam move down the vaginal canal, is also a hargasha. And brings 2 rayos:

1. Pasuk “bivsara” from which learn hargasha also learn that mitamei bifnim k’bachutz, and that’s only once the dam is past the bein hashinayim, in the prozdor. Im kein, the other drasha from the pasuk that need hargasha, should be in the same place, in the prozdor.

2. There is gm that asks kashas on Shmuel who says need hargasha, never asks from mishna 17 that dam hanimtza b’prozdor sfeiko tamei. Why not? Could have said what’s the safeik? Was there hargashas pesichas pi hamakor or not? If there was, she’s temeia, if not, she’s tehora! Ela mai, see that hargasha isn’t necessarily hargashas pesichas pi hamakor, ela zivas davar lach, and can’t know if that came from the makor or from the aliya, and that’s the safeik. (Not rejecting the trumas hadeshen, just saying that there must be another possibility as well).

(a) Chavas Daas 190:1- Likes svara of Node B’Yehuda but changes it a little: The feeling of zivas davar lach has to be at the time the dam is leaving the makor. B/c all has to come at once, the leaving of the dam from the makor and feeling that it is leaving.

D. רמב"ן Hilchos Nida: woman is not nida doraysa until she is margish b’shaa shehadam yotzei bivsara. Adding that the hargasha has to be at the time that the dam is yotzei.

R’ Gedalya Berger- likes to point out that those who argue that modern-day cramps won’t be considered a hargasha use this רמב"ן b/c she doesn’t feel them at the time the dam is coming out, ela beforehand.
Big Question: What about today? Which of these happen today? Do any of them happen?

-Pesichas Pi haMakor: Scientifically, the uterus is always open and when lining sheds dam comes out. In metzius, it’s hard to understand.

- Zivas davar lach: Could be that some women do feel this in some cases.

- Chavas Daas: Not clear if there are even nerves there to feel dam at that point.

*If this is all true, could be difficult to say that there are hargashos bizman haze, but at the same time, very difficult to say that all nida b’zman haze is only midirabanan.

**Continuation of this discussion in the next שיעור.

שיעור #2 (packet 1b)- 9.8.08/ 8 Elul 5768

Hagdaras Nida min HaTorah  Bizmaneinu

We have all the definitions, but limaaseh women say they don’t feel these things. So how do the poskim define nida midoraysa nowadays?

I. Three categories of dam:

A) Reiya- her actual period. Gm defines this as reiya w/ hargasha. This is dam nida doraysa.

B) Kesem- In gm explained as reiya w/out hargasha. Only issur dirabanan. Has three ways it won’t be mitamei her to her husband even midirabanan:

1. Smaller than k’gris v’od (penny, nickel, etc.).

2. Found on davar she’eino mikabel tuma.

3. Found on colored garment.

C) Maka- dam either not coming from uterus, or from the uterus but from cut/bruise there.
*Very important to know which dam is which. Has tremendous נ"מ. And b/c nowadays the hargasha is not felt, the lines have become blurred. And we would rather not say that e/thing is the same nowadays, either e/thing doraysa or e/thing dirabanan.
II. Shitos of the contemporary Poskim

A. Aruch HaShulchan 183:61- Women feel hargasha, they just don’t know it. Women who say they don’t feel pesichas pi hamakor don’t know what they’re talking about. They’re not lying, they just don’t know. And chazal are more neemanim than they are. HKBH created the world that any time the body lets something out, opening opens up, הה"נ here.

[Igros Moshe 4:?:12- thinks women feel, and know they feel, they just don’t know what they feel. Therefore, when they find kesamim “shelo yadu mize”, only assuros midirabanan (not clear how to define “shelo yadu mize”).
B. Sidrei Tahara 190:54- A number of reasons why kesamim could be dirabanan:

1. No hargasha, even though we see the dam coming out of her.

2. Kesem means we’re not sure if it came migufa, so can be tole on other things. And even though usually say safeik doraysa l’chumra, here have gzh”k (Nida 58b) “dam v’lo kesem” that kesem is mutar l’gamrei. Similar to mamzer and orlas chu”l, safeik is mutar.

*נ"מ: If know its coming vaday migufa and no hargasha. Acc to 2^nd deia, will still be nida doraysa. Don’t feel, and don’t need to feel.

[R’ Willig wants to say based on Sidrei Tahara that kesem is like orlas chu”l, that just like by orla if don’t know it’s orla, can eat it, and even if you know, can give it to s/one who doesn’t know and let them eat it (apparently this din is mefurash in שו"ע). Im kein, even if the Dr knows, won’t have to tell the woman he sees dam. But not so muchrach to make the Sd”t’s comparison in the first place, and then to extend it this far is not so pashut either.]
- However, this definition is far from pashut b/c have to remember the רמ' IB 9:1- If woman sees dam inside chazaka sheba b’hargasha. R’ Abadie- a/ time its vaday migufa will have chazaka of the רמ', assume there was hargasha just didn’t realize. (And isn’t mechaleik btwn if find the dam inside or outside). And many poskim hold this way. And this is assuming that hargasha is separate requirement.
C. Kovetz Teshuvos (R’ Elyashiv shlit”a) Siman 84- quotes Tzafnas Paneiach (Rugachover), who quotes gm that tinok bas yom echad who has tipas dam is mitamei. So he asks, where’s the hargasha, and says ela mai, see that hargasha is not an absolute requirement in all scenarios. Rather, it functions as a reiyasa when it is shayach and she doesn’t feel it. Therefore, woman who finds dam on pad, the dam is vaday migufa and no reiyasa that she’s not margeshes b/c women nowadays are never margishos, so maybe won’t have kula of kesamim b/c this is her derech.
- R’ Willig wants to say similar idea in Beis Yitzchak article based on רשב"א that maybe all defined by derech reiyasa.
III. Defining Ribui Dam

*Contemporary poskim basically use definition of ribui dam. If there is ribui dam, regular period, say chazaka that came from her, there was a hargasha, and nida doraysa, no kulas of tzivonim, etc. If there isn’t ribui dam, treated like a kesem.

 Question, though, is where do we draw the line btwn reiya and kesem?
A. R’ Moshe (footnote in R’ Eider) - If there is so much dam that it could not have come w/out a hargasha, then should be machmir (i.e. consider this nida doraysa).
B. Sefer Chok U’zman Hilchos Kesamim 2:10 (Collection of psakim) - quotes R’ Bluth, that if whole undergarment is filled w/ dam, consider that ba b’hargasha.

- And many poskim hold that even if it’s less than what she would get in a normal period, if there is a lot of dam, considered ba b’hargasha. But אה"נ there is no definitive שיעור of ribui dam.

C. R’ Ausch (From R’ Yechezkel Roth’s Beis Din): if have size of ½ of dollar bill filled with blood, considered ribui dam (R’ Simon quoted this b’shmo).
D. R’ Kellemer: R’ Elyashiv used to treat heavy staining as nida doraysa. (R’ Simon quoted this b’shmo as well).

[It was asked in שיעור if poskim take into account at which stage of the cycle she is in. Later, R’ Simon told me he asked R’ Abadie who said it did not matter to him what time of the month it was, but not clear to me why not].

- Some used to quote this idea that if stain is more than a silver dollar then have to treat it as a reiya. But this is probably not such an authentic shita.
**If she does a bedika and finds dam, we generally assume this is nida doraysa. This is based on the רמ' IB 9:1. B/c we always have assumption that there was a hargasha. And this is why it won’t matter if the stain on bedika cloth is less than a gris or colored, etc. b/c treated as dam doraysa. And this will be true for anything placed inside (will discuss this more in the future).

E. What if woman sees the dam come out of her body and lands on s/thing eino mikabel tuma?

- On one hand, could be muteres ligamrei and could be issur doraysa.

*Chok Uzman quotes שו"ע HaRav who at first was meikil, said that treat it as a kesem and has all the kulos. However, in Mahadura Basra changes his mind, says like the רמ', that if vaday migufa have to be machmir (even though רמ' himself is only talking about finding dam inside). And then he quotes machlokes achronim about this issue.
F. Birth Control pills: There are some that give woman regular period, others wipe it out entirely, and some have just a drop of dam once a month. Question is how do you treat that last case? On one hand, it’s only one drop. On other hand, this is now her derech reiyasa b’kach? R’ Willig has discussion about this case. Many Rabbonim wanted to consider this a kesem (R’ Ausch, R’ Abadie). R’ Dovid Feinstein told R’ Simon that he thought this becomes regular nida doraysa.

- There are some morei horaa that say to do a bedika when there is a safeik about reiya vs kesem. R’ Dovid Feinstein says this way. R’ Ausch says this way when there is more than just a little drop.

G. R’ Soloveitchik- thought there was no need for hargasha nowadays (see inside). R’ Schachter says that this makes it difficult b/c basically never have kesem.
H. R’ Schachter’s Chidush

1. Tzafnas Paneiach (Rogochover) - If use forceps to deliver a baby boy is there a pidyon haben?

Some poskim say that this is problem b/c of chatzitza b/c there is gm that says if pulling out animal and there is something separating btwn the rechem and the baby, no kedushas bechor.

2. Igros Moshe O”ch 4:?- Thinks that even if there was a chatzitza doesn’t matter, have pidyon haben w/ a bracha b/c not a din of kedushas bechor by pidyon haben b/c no real kedusha. Im kein, nothing to worry about.

• 
  Tzafnas Paneiach himself says that yotzei dofen doesn’t just mean C Section, ela anytime the rechem doesn’t force the baby out, d’haynu, if use forceps, won’t be considered bechor. But agrees that if use forceps after baby is almost at the end, won’t be called a yotzei dofen b/c rechem already basically pushed out the baby. (R’ Willig thinks that even Rogochover would be maskim that inducing labor, using Pitocin [medication used to induce contractions] wouldn’t be considered that the rechem isn’t pushing out the baby. Just using medication to induce the body to do its normal actions).
  

**R’ Schachter quotes this Rogochover and wants to say that maybe the hagdara of a reiya would be the same, that has to be that it’s pushed out by the rechem. Im kein, anytime the dam is being pulled out by something else (medical instrument) wouldn’t be considered nida. [However, R’ Simon added that according to this, would have many kesamim, especially after birth control, that would be considered reiya doraysa].

IV. Svaras that assume the רמ' doesn’t apply bizmaneinu:

A. One could argue that when do bedika no ribui dam, so shouldn’t be nida doraysa. This would have to assume that the רמ'’s chazaka sheba b’hargasha is not applicable nowadays. R’ Willig entertains this possibility, but not generally accepted and even R’ Willig didn’t want to say this limaaseh.

B. R’ Schachter (quoted by R’ Willig) has an even a bigger chidush that since we know that beis hastarim (inside of the body) isn’t mikabel tuma b/c it is balua, so maybe if Dr would see dam inside a woman during gynecological exam wouldn’t be considered nida doraysa. This also assumes that the רמ' doesn’t apply. However, we usually assume that Dr seeing dam inside is like seeing on bedika cloth.

שיעור #3 (packet 2)- 9.10.08/ 10 Elul 5768

Zmanei Nidus, Zivus, Chumra D’R’ Zeira, and Infertility Issues
I. Source of these dinim and the chiluk btwn them

A. Vayikra 15:19- Whole process of nida is only 7 days. If she sees dam even one day, waits out the rest of the seven, then goes to the mikva after day seven. But no matter how many days of the seven she sees, she goes to mikva after day seven (as long as she stops bleeding.

B. 15:25- Woman who is Zava, has to wait 7 days after she stops bleeding, and then she can go to mikva. Shiva nekiyim only applies to zava midoraysa.

- No difference physically between the flow of zivus and nidus, all has to be dam from the makor, just depends on the timing. (Zav and Baal Keri by men are actually different physical emissions).

C. Gm Nida 72B- Din that there are 11 days between nida cycles is a Halacha liMoshe MiSinai.
II. Two ways of understanding yimei nidus and zivus:

A. רמב"ן Hilchos Nida 1:12- When woman starts bleeding this month, for first 7 days, considered yimei nida. If bleeds any of the next 11 days then if bleeds 1 or 2 days, only zava kitana, needs 1 clean day and then goes to mikva. But if sees for three days in a row during this period, then needs 7 nekiyim. And then once the 11 days are over, the next nida days only begin once she starts bleeding the next month. (Nowadays, we treat all women as zavos and these 7 nekiyim are usually only midirabanan).

B. רמ' IB 6:4- When woman has her period the first time, that starts the cycle for the rest of her life. 7, 11, 7, 11, etc forever whether or not she bleeds during these times. When a woman gives birth, then the cycle starts again.
1. Chidushei רמב"ן Nida 54a- attacks the רמ' based on the Mishna Eiruchin 8a: Talks about case of woman who makes a mistake, doesn’t know if this is yimei nida or zava. How do we get this woman back on track? Says that if she saw dam for one day, if she doesn’t see dam for another 17 days, then she knows that the next time she sees dam will be yimei nida. (B/c worst case this is 1^st day of nida, then she needs another 17 for the entire 7, 11 to be over. And if really it’s really further along, then she’s for sure in the clear b/c 11 days were over even earlier). So says the רמב"ן, acc to the רמ' how would waiting these days help, she still won’t know where she is b/c it’s not dependent on the next time she sees dam, it continues on its own!?
2. Chavas Daas 183:2- defends the רמ': This whole din of the רמ' of 7, 11, 7, 11, etc. only applies to woman who doesn’t have veses kavua, but a woman who has a veses kavua, then she has a good eis nidasa and zava is called in the pasuk lo eis nidasa, so just go based on when she sees (like the רמב"ן), but woman with no veses kavua, then we make an artificial veses for her.

And woman can’t set a veses in yimei ziva b/c by definition they are lo eis nidasa. So says woman can never set veses kavua in 11 that come after 7 in which she saw dam. But if she sees dam in the random 11 when she hasn’t seen dam in the previous 7, then she can set a veses kavua. So the gm is talking about woman who wants to set a veses kavua, so gm says that if wait 17 days, then even if seeing dam now in yimei zivus, they are yimei zivus that were not preceded by 7 in which she saw dam.

-In the end of the day, we don’t assume like the רמ' halacha limaaseh.
III. Chumra D’ R’ Zeira

A. Gm Nida 66A- Rebbi made a takana for the Sados- i.e. places where there weren’t Bnei Torah (רש"י), said that anyone who sees dam one day, should wait another 6 (could be day 1 of nidus, so most you need is another 6, and if its zivus, only need 1 day, so being machmir to cover all our bases). If she sees 2 days, same thing (b/c maybe the 2^nd day was first day of nida). If she sees 3 days, then has to wait 7 days (b/c might be yimei ziva, then need full 7 nekiyim). R’ Zeira- bnos yisrael were machmir on themselves that even if only saw tipas dam k’chardal they wait 7 nekiyim.

1. Gm Brachos 31A- Ein omdim lihispalel ela mitoch halacha psuka (רש"י- pashut din that nothing to discuss), and the example the gm gives is the Chumra D’R’ Zeira.

2. רמ'’s Siddur- has this din included in that which is said after Birchas HaTorah.

B. What’s the svara behind the chumra of the Bnos Yisrael?

1. R’ Yona Brachos 22A- Gives two possibilities and rejects them, but then Explains that the chumra is as follows: When see a lot of dam, could assume that it has been collecting over the last three days, and that’s why even just seeing one day should need to wait 7 nekiyim, and that itself would be a chumra, but they are assuming that even this tipas dam k’chardal is a collection of the last three days, and that is a very big chumra.

2. רמב"ן Hilchos Nida 1:18- The women just wanted to have a standardized way of counting. B/c a zava who sees tipas dam during 7 nekiyim will cause another 7 nekiyim. So since there is a case where tipas dam causes 7 nekiyim midoraysa, decided to do this across the board. 19- The Chachamim liked this chumra, and they made it a halacha pesuka b’chol makom, Lifikach assur l’adam l’hakeil ba rosho li’olam.

3. מאירי Brachos 5^th perek- Says similar idea that this din became a halacha pesuka she’ein alav teshuva.

IV. Is it ever possible to be meikil against this chumra (feritility shaylos)?

- Situations where woman will miss time of her ovulation because waiting 7 nekiyim. And if could go to mikva a little earlier would be able to catch it. But this is very controversial.

A. שו"ת Galya Mesechta (R’ Dovid Novordik) siman 4- looking for kula in this area. Says this din is not miGzeiras chachamim, rather it is a chumra of the bnos yisrael. Quotes רמ' hilchos mamrim that on e/ gzeiras/takanas chazal have issur of lo sasur and asei of v’asisa k’chol asher yorucha. But quotes din in שו"ע about gid hanashe where he is mechaleik btwn three parts of gid, issur doraysa, dirabanan, and minhag, and wants to say that in general have chiluk btwn real issurei dirabanan and minhagim that have been accepted. (Some say he must not have seen the רמב"ן who says chazal ratified this minhag into halacha or argued that halacha psuka is still a lower level). So he thinks that whenever there is a tzorech can be meikil (b’kal niftarim mimenu).