Go to Our New Site
| Go to Our New Site
|
Read-Only Topic|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
 |
How do you judge Chahmah?
According to you thing will always stay the same. We will keep on doing things that don't make sense for ever, and Judaism will continue to be disconected with reality. It doesn't matter if women suffer. It doesn't matter if we put womens' health at risk. All of this just because a Gzera was put into practice 1500 years ago when they didn't have the medical knowlege that we do today. |
|||
|
  |
Rav Chaim,
Torah teaches that eventually there will be a Beit Hamikdash and a Beit Din Hagadol. The function of the Beit Din HaGadol is to make Torah a living and organic system. The Beit Din HaGadol is the last word in that particular generation. In our generation we don't have a functioning Beit Din HaGadol that's why we defer to the last Beit Din Hagadol we had. Is teaching that halacha will never change consistent with this idea. What's the purpose this future Beit Din haGadol if it has no authority to make rulings? Avi |
|||
|
|
|
Baruch,
Chill out, a little. Yes, today certain women will assume some risk in order to conceive. The rabbanim thought that the risk was worth the mitzvah and they gave the women such a choice. A Beit Din HaGadol in the future may decide differently. If Rav Cahim would have his way, that ruling should not stick. But I think most of us think such a ruling would stick. Avi |
|||
|
|
|
I once read part of a small book on mathematics in Torah which went into detail about the number of times that mikvah water can be half emptied out and replaced with regular water and still be a kosher mikvah. The conclusion was that the number they came up with was accurate when using logarithm tables of 3 decimal places, and that remains our halacha. However with 4 or more decimal places to the logarithm table, or an abitrary precision calculator such as we have today, we can calculate by the physics that yet one more time would still result in a majority of mikvah water remaining in the mikvah. All of this based upon a one-time reading over a decade ago. Even when the greater precision calculation is done, we don't change the halacha, right? And from somewhere else, I heard someone say over a commentary on a mikvah taking note of the few droplets of water left on a person's body as he is stepping out of the mikvah, that there could be just enough water that if he remains with one foot in the mikvah, that all those droplets remain connected to the mikvah, and it will remain kosher for the next person to talk into. Thus I can think of a possible reason why the buffer of 1 in possible calculation error could in fact have been inspired to account for some other loss of original mikvah source water, such as droplets clinging to a person's body. |
|||
|
|
|
Are there any other factors which can influence a woman's cycle or a couple's collective fertility? I remember once learning that single women dwelling together, for example in a college dormitory, will tend to have their natural cycles synchronize over time. And I think with it came a theory that there was something like a pheramone scent to the hormone level that effected this synchronization. Perhaps there is another technique that women with short cycles could utilize with less risk than hormonal supplements? Perhaps a social group to effect a longer term group exposure could help women in need of cycle-lengthening tendencies could be orchestrated? Have there been any statistical correlations noticed of lack of social connection to women with short cycles? |
|||
|
|
|
Avi,
I agree with most of what you say. The difference between me and you is that I am not mainstream. I believe my views are shared by many others, but I am not afraid to say what I think. I have very strong faith in the Tora. I believe that there are many problems with halacha today simply because we haven't had a Beith Din Gadol in over 1500 years. I think we need a Beith Din Gadol urgently. The examples I bring with the chumras of Nida are a clear and extremem example of the type of change that is needed. However there is much more. Until we have a Beith Din Gadol who will have the flexibility to psak halacha like Chazal did we won't be able to make Judaism a living religon. I realize that the type of change I am talking about won't happen over night and it shouldn't happen over night. But I will voice my opinion in order to influence others. I will also reiterate that I like every other Orthodox Jew, see myself obligated to follow the rullings of the Rabbis and am not calling on anyone to change or drop any halacha on their own. |
|||
|
|
|
Rob, It was already pointed out that these short cycles of 21 days are perfectly normal. As of today there is no other known methods other than hormones to change the cycle length. |
|||
|
GY Teacher  |
Chachmas Hatorah of course. (What else? how much you know Shakepere?
There final ruling must be in the confines of halacha. just like they may not make a rule contrary to Torah, they cannot go against the rules and decrees of a superiour BEis Din. There is plenty that they can Paskin for. BAruch, Also, besides everything else, where do you get that just to help a woman out to get pregnant easier is enough of a reason to knock off a Rabanan. We don't allow someone to put out a fire on his home on Shabbos, though it's only a Drabanan (Melacha Shein Tzricha L'Gufa) We also cancel someone from making a Bris on Shabbos and from bringing a Korbon Pesach (though they are Mitzvos that have Kores to them. We also forbid blowing the SHofer, taking the Lulav etc. on Shabbos for all generations for a Drabanan. Nor did they allow someone with a splitting headache take asprin on Shabbos. So why is your cause any better than theirs. Chazal knew what the power of an Aveira is, and they made drastic measures to make sure people are not Over them. Though they make people give up a lot (Bein in GAshmeus and RuChnius.) There are some people in Klal Yisrael that Aveiros are something that are "necassery evils" to avoid. But they don't grasp the severity of them. Of how our lives are shaped by them. How tradgedies happen because of them. Thus they take them very lightly, and any Heter (real or imaginary) would do. But Chazal did not take this view, that's why they were so tough on these things. ____________ http://limudtorah.jewishweb.org Please help the Global Yeshiva to continue spreading high quality Torah by sponsoring a Shiur in the "Understanding Mishna Brurah" forum. All sponsorships are tax deductible. |
|||
|
|
|
Some get a Bris on Shabbos... and I might add a very fine job can be done on Shabbos. |
|||
|
|
|
B"H
Dear Rebbe Yisroel and Baruch, In the final analysis, we will all have to agree that there is a "machalokes poskim" regarding the Niddah, and whether or not she must continue in her state of impurity for seven whole days before she begins to count another seven days - this time in cleanness, even though she had seen blood for only one or two days. Rambam disagrees, and says in Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah, chapter 11: ×–×” ×©×ª×ž×¦× ×‘×ž×§×¦×ª מקומות ×©×”× ×“×” יושבת שבעת ×™×ž×™× ×‘× ×“×ª×”, ו××£ על פי ×©×œ× ×¨×ת ×“× ××œ× ×™×•× ×חד, ו×חר השבעה תשב שבעת ימי × ×§×™×™×--×ין ×–×” ×ž× ×”×’, ××œ× ×˜×¢×•×ª ×”×™× ×ž×ž×™ שהורה ×œ×”× ×›×š ו×ין ר×וי ×œ×¤× ×•×ª לדבר ×–×” כלל--××œ× ×× ×¨×תה ×™×•× ×חד סופרת ×חריו שבעה וטובלת בליל ×©×ž×™× ×™ ×©×”×•× ×œ×™×œ ×©× ×™ של×חר ימי × ×“×ª×” ומותרת לבעלה "Although you find in some places where the Niddah will sit seven days in her separation, even though she had seen blood only one day, and after the [first] seven days she continues to wait seven clean days - this is no custom, but rather, an error from he who instructed them to do so. It is not fitting that they resort to this matter at all, but rather, if she had seen [blood] for one day, she counts after it seven [days] and [forthwith] immerses on the night of the eighth [day], which falls on the night of the second [week-day] after the day in which her menstrual flow [had ceased], and she is then permitted [unto her husband]." The Rabbi whose responsum we quoted above has mentioned this Rambam, which Rebbe Yisroel failed to notice. Rambam's ruling is similar to what we find in Halachos Gedolos, which, in turn, is based on the Gemara (Niddah 63b): רגילה ×“×—×–×™× ×“× ×‘×¡×•×£ ×œ×™×œ×™× ×¤×¨×™×© מ×ורת×, חליף ×™×ž×ž× ×•×œ× ×—×–×™×, שרי×. וכן בסוף ×™×ž×ž× ×•×ª×—×œ×ª ×œ×™×œ×™× "She who is accustomed [to see blood on a given day] and who saw blood towards the end of the night, separates herself beginning from that evening, and when the [following] day is passed without seeing [additional blood], she is permitted [unto her husband]. And so it is with [the menstruant who saw blood] towards the end of the day and the beginning of the night." Here, Baal Halachos Gedolos refers to the status of the woman before all women were required to wait seven clean days. Nowadays, however, they all wait seven clean days after their blood flow has stopped. He goes on to write: ו××™×ª×ª× ×›×“ ×—×–×™× × ×“×”, כד פסק×, ×©×‘×§× ×”×”×•× ×™×•×ž× ×“×¤×¡×§×” ביה, והדר ×ž× ×™× ×©×‘×¢×” × ×§×™×™× ×•×˜×‘×œ× ×œ××•×¨×ª× "And any woman who sees that she has begun her menstrual flow, when it [finally] ceases, she leaves off the remainder of that day wherein she ceased [from her flow], and then begins to count seven clean [days] and immerses in the evening." Note that he does not require 14 days! As for the allegations that "the Rambam has a different Shita which was rejected by all others," I wouldn't be too rash to say so. The great Rabbis and Talmudic scholars of Yemen, for example, have always respected his opinion, while some women have been instructed by their husbands to abide strictly by his rulings. Note that I say, "some," but not all. Maharitz (acronym for Moreinu Harav Yehiya Tzalach), the great Rabbi and exponent of Jewish law in Yemen and who was contemporary with the Gaon of Wilna, wrote in his book "Sha'arei Taharah:" "Now you should know that there are [some] people who have it as their custom that the menstruant woman never [begins] counting seven clean days except after seven days [have first expired since that time when she first saw blood], even though she had not seen [blood] but [only] one day. But this is not an actual custom, but rather, an erroneous practice. Now Maimonides, of blessed memory, has already said in the eleventh chapter of 'Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah' that it is not fitting for anyone to have such a practice, since it is an error. Rather, if she saw [blood] one day, let her [forthwith] count after it seven clean days, and immerse herself on the eighth night. We have already given instruction to this effect many times." Even Rabbi Moshe Iserlisch has written in section # 196, item # 11, of Yoeh De'ah, Hilchos Niddah, that "nowadays, we do not make a distinction between she that co-habited [with her husband when she saw blood], and she that did not co-habit [when she saw blood]. [Rather], any woman who sees even a [blood] stain must wait five days and then conclude [her period of waiting] until the evening, and [only] then [begin to] count seven clean [days]." Even here, for that woman who had seen blood only one day, we do not see any requisite that she continue to sit seven whole days in her separation before she begins to count her seven clean days! David |
|||
|
GY Moderator |
R' David, that we can agree upon. But you stated quite categorically that the Torah doesn't require a minimum of 7 days in any event (not 7 clean days, merely 7 days from the commencement of the period), and that is plainly wrong. Nothing you have brought suggests otherwise.
What you seem to have failed to notice is that the Rambam is talking about the 7 clean days; nowhere does he say that the woman is permitted to her husband immediately she stops seeing blood.
Are you sure that is the correct translation? It looks to me that it is talking about a couple having to separate at the time she expects her period and that if it does not arrive they are permitted tio each other.
But he does require at least 7 days! You repeatedly said that the Torah doesn't require even 7 days.
But she still needs 7 days, even Min HaTorah! Will you please admit you are wrong in that regard. All you have brought are Poskim who argue on when the 7 clean days need to start. No one says that a woman can wait less than 7 days before going to the Mikveh. |
|||
|
|
|
B"H
Rebbe Yisroel, I hope I can allay here, once and for all, the confusion that some seem to have about my statements on this thread. You wrote: "What you seem to have failed to notice is that the Rambam (Hilchos Issurei Bi'ah, ch. 11) is talking about the 7 clean days; nowhere does he say that the woman is permitted to her husband immediately when she stops seeing blood." Of course! Rambam is talking here about our own time when now all women are required to wailt seven clean days before accompanying with their husbands. But nowhere did he say that the ordinary menstruant (Niddah) remains a Niddah for seven days before she begins her count. In other words, nothing precedes those seven clean days, except her blood mamash! If she had seen blood for only one day, she immediately begins counting thereafter seven clean days. I believe, Rebbe Yisroel, that someone on this thread taught that a Niddah remains a Niddah for seven complete days before she begins to count her required seven days of cleanness by a rabbinic enactment. Before this rabbinic enactment which now requires all women to count seven clean days because of a doubt, what would an ordinary menstruant do when she saw blood for only one or two days? Would she wait seven days before she'd be allowed to co-habit with her husband? According to Rambam, no. The verse in the Torah (Veyikra 15:19) which allegedly assigns a seven day period of impurity to the ordinary menstruant is explained in the Talmud as implying that she is not permitted to immerse in the day, but only at night. If that's a pashat or an asmakhta, I don't know. Notwithstanding all that was said, you are indeed correct. The Halachos Gedolos should rather have been translated: "She who is accustomed to see [blood] towards the end of the night, [and] who separated herself beginning with that evening, and when the [following] day is passed without her seeing [blood], she is [forthwith] permitted [unto her husband]. And so it is [with the woman who expects blood] towards the end of the day and the beginning of the night." In my rush to show proof of Rambam's opinion, I failed to use exactness. שגי×ות מי יבין ×ž× ×¡×ª×¨×•×ª × ×§× ×™ With all respect, David |
|||
|
|
GY Moderator |
Phew! At last we agree! Or do we? Some of what you wrote previously was not exact and open to more than one interpretation. For example, you wrote:
What you wrote here implies that she doesn't have to wait at all after her hefsek taharah. But of course she must still wait 7 days. Then you wrote:
Clearly wrong. Min HaTorah she is a Niddah for 7 days, whether she saw blood on 1 day or on all 7 days. And then you wrote:
Again, clearly wrong.
Again, wrong. This is what the Rambam writes: רמב"× ×”×œ×›×•×ª ×יסורי בי××” פרק ד הלכה ב ו×חד ×”×‘× ×¢×œ ×”× ×“×” כל שבעת ×”×™×ž×™× ×•×פילו ×œ× ×¨×תה ××œ× ×™×•× ×¨×שון, ו×חד ×”×‘× ×¢×œ יולדת זכר כל שבעה ×ו על יולדת × ×§×‘×” כל ×רבעה עשר, ×ו על הזבה כל ימי זובה וספירתה, בין שפחה בין משוחררת הכל בכרת ×©× ×מר ×‘× ×“×” שבעת ×™×ž×™× ×ª×”×™×” ×‘× ×“×ª×”, ובזבה × ×מר כל ימי זוב טומ×תה כימי × ×“×ª×” תהיה, וביולדת זכר ×”×•× ×ומר כימי × ×“×ª דותה ×ª×˜×ž× ×•×‘×™×•×œ×“×ª × ×§×‘×” וטמ××” ×©×‘×•×¢×™× ×›× ×“×ª×”. |
|||
|
|
|
You know what I meant. How do we compare someone's chochma in Tora to Chachamim of the Talmud Bavli? Will you ever consider anyone as great as them? So we will never bring Judaism back to what it is meant to be.
True, and Chazal also used common sense and ruled upon the situation at the time. Today we have a collection of chumrot of various generations. Many of them don't make sense. The same can be said about Kulot (leniencies) that we have. You are grouping various rabinical laws together as if they are the same. Pages can be written about each one of your examples. How they started and the reason behind them. A few examples --------------- Lets take Shofar on Shabat The mishna tells us that the shofar was blown on Shabat in Beith Hamikdash. The shofar was never blown in Shul. When Beith Hamikdash was destroyed Chazal saw the need to extend that mitzva to a Beit Din in order not to cancel the mitzva all together. There is a machloket among Rishonim what kind of Beith Din is required. The Talmud Bavli explains that the reason it wasn't extended to everywhere was the fear that one may take it 4 amoth in Reshut harabim. The Yerushalmi simply says that on Shabat the shofar should not be blown (outside Beith Hamikdash) In any case there isn't really a problem with the fact that we don't blow shofar on Shabat in Shul as it never was done. It was only done in Beith Hamikdash. In this example we can see the courage Chazal had to extend the mitzva to a Beith Din. Situation Today? This last Rosh Hashana which came out on Shabat I noticed everyone around me carrying their Talith bag, and carrying their machzor in their hands on their way to Shul. Kind of strange. We go to Shul for 4-5 hours and chant many nice piyutim but don't hear the Shofar because a fear that it won't be carried in Reshut Harabim, yet most people are carrying their machzorim. Oh yes, there is an eruv. To me this Eruv is very questionable. And it was also questionable to the Mishna Brura and many others. Our Eruv would not be valid according to 1/2 of the Rishonim. Also according to the other half it may be very questionable. It is based on the assumption that we don't have a reshut Harabim today since we don't have 600000 people passing through the street in one day. Well certainly in the days of the Talmud there weren't 600000 people passing through the streets, but Chazal were still concerned that we will be carrying the Shofar. The Gmara never mentions this condition. We also have other chidushim today such as the houses making a fence around the neighborhood with gaps in them. We have a machloket among Poskim which brings a big big Safek Deoraita. Why aren't todays Poskim concerned about a big big Aveira? Now for sake of arguement lets assume that our Eruv is 100% kosher. we still have a problem. If you go to certain neighborhoods in the US where there is no Eruv you will still see some people who are not meticulous about mitzvoth carrying their machzor on Shabat. Why isn't there a Gzeira on the use of a Machzor on Shabat. After all the use of a Machzor is not even biblical. A shofar is much less likely to be taken out of Shul than a Machzor is. I will take it a step further. In the neighborhood I lived in Tel-Aviv which was not religous there was a bank across the street of the Shul. The bank's parking lot was usually empty on Shabat as the bank is closed. But when there was a Bar Mitzva the parking lot was full of cars of guests comming to participate in Bar Mitzva. Big Chilul Shabat of driving in order to participate in a Bar Mitzva. This happens all over Israel and the US. Whey don't the poskim make it assur for a bar mitzva boy to go up to the Tora on Shabat and prohibit Bar Mitzva on Shabat. That would prevent many Jews from desecrating the Shabat. After all we are not required to perform the Bar Mitzva on Shabat. It can be done during the week. BOTTOM LINE JUDAISM TODAY IS NOT CONNECTED TO REALITY. WE DO THINGS BECAUSE OF RULINGS CHACHAMIM MADE 1500 YEARS AGO. -------------------------------- Lulav on Shabat See excellent essay by Rav David Bar Hayim http://www.israelnationalnews.com/article.php3?id=6589 To summarize some of that. Unlike Shofar on Shabat, in Israel it is a problem that we don't take lulav on Shabat. It is a mitzva deoraita on Shabat to take a lulav on the first day of Succoth even out side Beith Hamikdash. The mishna tells us that we are supposed to take the lulav before shabat to shul so we can perform the mitzva of lulav in shul on shabat. The Talmud Bavli tells us that in Bavel since they weren't sure of the exact day of Succoth they decided that lulav not be taken on Shabath. The Talmud says that in Israel they do take the lulav on Shabat. A few pages later in Succot the Bavli tells us that since in Bavel they don't take the lulav they souldn't take it in Israel either in order for their to be unity. The mepharshim had a difficulty with this reason. As we don't have unity with regards to other aspects of the Chagim. One day vs. two ... So the only reason we don't take lulav in Israel is because the center of Judaism at some point was in Bavel and the majority of Jews were there so their minhag became the standard. There is no good reason not to take Lulav on Shabat in Israel. The Yerushalmi also does not mention it. Today when the center of Judaism is in Israel isn't it time that we start performing the mitzva deoraita as it used to be in the past? Well it doens't matter. For 1500 years it has been done this way so we must continue for no good reason. ----------------------------------- We need a Beith Din Gadol who will psak halacha for us according to the rules of the Torah that will also be connected to the situation today. ------------------------------------ |
|||
|
|
|
Rebbe Yisroel, Granted that sometimes I have my lapses and periods of forgetfulness, in my most frail and wretched state of mind, but here, I wish to test your words and to try them, if perchance I might have recourse to your own understanding of things portrayed as halacha. If a Niddah, from the standpoint of the Torah alone, remains unclean for seven days, even if she had seen blood for one day, then what necessity was there for the daughters of Israel to take upon themselves additional stringency and to count another seven days before accompanying with their husbands? Altogether, 14 days of uncleanness!? Furthermore, what Rambam wrote in his Commentary on the Mishnah (Niddah 10:1), why didn't he make any mention of the Niddah remaining in such a state of impurity before she begins to count seven clean days? Quoting Rambam, he only says this: וכבר ידעת פסק ההלכה ××¦×œ×™× ×• ×”×™×•× ×©×”×™× ×‘× ×•×ª ישר×ל הן החמירו על עצמן ש×פילו רו×ות ×“× ×˜×¤×” כחרדל יושבות עליה שבעת ימי × ×§×™×™×. וכן פסק ההלכה בכל בתולה ו×פילו היתה ×§×˜× ×” מ×ד בועל בעילת מצוה ופורש. ×•× ×ž×¦× ×”×“×™×Ÿ לכל מי ×©× ×©× ×‘×ª×•×œ×” ו×פילו היתה השעה ×©×œ× ×”×’×™×¢ ×–×ž× ×” לר×ות ×•×œ× ×¨×ת ×“× ×ž×™×ž×™×” ×©×”×•× ×‘×•×¢×œ בעילה ×חת ופורש ×ž×ž× ×” עד שתספור שבעת ימי × ×§×™×™× ×חר שיפסק ×”×“× ×•×ª×˜×‘×•×œ בליל ×©×ž×™× ×™ ו××– תהיה מותרת לבעלה כדין כל × ×“×” ×‘×–×ž× ×™× ×• ×–×” "Already you know the halachic ruling with us today, which is [this]: 'The daughters of Israel, they have taken upon themselves stringency, insomuch that if they should only see a drop [of blood] resembling mustard, they sit on it seven clean days.' So, too, is the halachic ruling with every virgin, and even if she were very small, he performs his marital duty [upon her] after the injunction given in the Law, and then withdraws himself [from her]. The case [whereof we have spoken] is such with anyone who marries a virgin, and even if her time for receiving her period has not yet come, and she has never seen blood, he performs his marital duty upon her one time, and withdraws himself from her until she counts seven clean days AFTER THE BLOOD HAS STOPPED, and she immerses on the eighth night. Only then is she permitted unto her husband, just as the manner of any Niddah in, this, our time." No mention is made here about some impending impurity until she concludes her initial "seven days of Niddah," as you would call them. Are you saying that the Rabbis ordered seven clean days in order to make up for what she would have ordinarily been seen as unclean? This cannot be! We learn that the seven clean days were enacted simply because the Rabbis were uncertain if women were capable of recognising when they were "Zavah," a condition which warrants that she wait seven clean days before immersing herself. Where, then, according to your opinion, are the compulsory 14 days of uncleaness for every Jewish woman? (Seven by biblical command, and seven by rabbinic command.) As for the Rambam which you quoted, allegedly assigning seven impure days to every Niddah, it seems to me that it was taken out of context. The continuation of that same teaching says: במה ×“×‘×¨×™× ××ž×•×¨×™× ×©×”×˜×•×ž××” תלויה בימי×, בשטבלה במי מקוה ×חר ×”×™×ž×™× ×”×¡×¤×•×¨×™×. ×בל × ×™×“×” וזבה ויולדת ×©×œ× ×˜×‘×œ×• במי מקוה--×”×‘× ×¢×œ ×חת מהן, ×פילו ×חר כמה ×©× ×™×--חייב כרת, ×©×‘×™×ž×™× ×•×˜×‘×™×œ×” תלה הכתוב: ×©× ×מר "ורחצו במי×"--×‘× ×™×™×Ÿ ×ב לכל טמ×, ×©×”×•× ×‘×˜×•×ž×תו עד שיטבול So, here, it seems that Rambam was speaking about a case where the Niddah, who had seen blood for only one day, had not immersed herself. Anyone who sleeps with her is liable to extirpation! Please answer me, my most respected friend and Rabbi. I stand in need of learning. Respectfully yours, David |
|||
|
|
GY Moderator |
R' David, I think the Tur puts it well:
טור יורה דעה סימן קפג הלכות × ×“×”: ו×שה ×›×™ תהיה זבה ×“× ×™×”×™×” זובה בבשרה שבעת ×™×ž×™× ×ª×”×™×” ×‘× ×“×ª×” ולמדו ×—×›×ž×™× ×ž×ž×“×¨×© ×”×¤×¡×•×§×™× ×©×œ× ×‘×›×œ ×ž×§×•× ×©×ª×–×•×‘ ×ž×ž× ×” ×“× ×˜×ž××” ××œ× ×“×•×§× ×“× ×”×‘× ×ž×Ÿ המקור. ×•×œ× ×›×œ ×“× ×”×‘× ×ž×Ÿ המקור ×˜×ž× ××œ× ×“×•×§× ×”' ×ž×™× ×™ ×“×ž×™× ×›×שר יתב×ר בעז"×” ו××£ ב×לו ××™× ×” טמ××” עד שתרגיש ביצי×תו ומיהו משתרגיש בו ×©× ×¢×§×¨ ממקומו ×•×™×¦× ×œ×‘×™×ª החיצון טמ××” ו××¢"פ ×©×œ× ×™×¦× ×œ×—×•×¥ וזה משפטה משתר××” טיפת ×“× ×פי' כחרדל ×ו פחות בין ב××•× ×¡ בין ברצון ×ž×•× ×” ×–' ×™×ž×™× ×¢× ×™×•× ×¨×ייתה וטובלת בליל ×—' וכך הדין ×פילו שופעת כל ×–' רק שתפסוק בטהרה ×‘×™×•× ×–' ×§×•×“× ×‘×™×Ÿ השמשות ובערב טובלת בליל ×—' ×•×ž×™×•× ×–' ו×ילך עד ×™"× ×™×•× × ×§×¨××™× ×™×ž×™ זיבה והן ×©×”×—×›×ž×™× ×§×•×¨×ין ×œ×”× ×™"× ×™×•× ×©×‘×™×Ÿ × ×“×” ×œ× ×“×” ומשפטה בהן ×× ×¨×תה בהן ×™×•× ×חד לבד בין שתר××” בתחלת הלילה ×ו בסוף ×”×™×•× ×¨×§ שתפסוק בטהרה משמרת כל הלילה ש××—"×› ×× ×œ× ×ª×¨××” ×ª×©×›×™× ×œ×ž×—×¨ ותטבול מיד מ×חר ×”× ×¥ החמה ×× ×ª×¨×¦×” ומ"מ ×סורה לשמש כל ×”×™×•× ×©×ž× ×ª×¨××” ותסתור וזו ×”×™× ×©× ×§×¨×ת שומרת ×™×•× ×›× ×’×“ ×™×•× ×¨×תה ×’× ×‘×™×•× ×”×©× ×™ ופסקה בו משכמת ×‘×™×•× ×”×©×œ×™×©×™ וטובלת ×•×œ× ×ª×©×ž×© כל ×”×™×•× ×›×שר פירשתי ×•×’× ×–×• בכלל שומרת ×™×•× ×›× ×’×“ ×™×•× ×•×–×• ×”×™× ×©× ×§×¨×ת זבה ×§×˜× ×” ר×תה ×’× ×‘×™×•× ×”×’' × ×¢×©×™×ª זבה גדולה ×•×œ× ×ª×˜×”×¨ עד שיהיו לה ×–' ×™×ž×™× × ×§×™×™× ×—×•×¥ ×ž×™×•× ×©×¤×•×¡×§×ª בו וטובלת ×‘×™×•× ×–' ל×חר ×”× ×¥ החמה מיד ××œ× ×©×סורה לשמש ×©×ž× ×ª×¨××” ותסתור ו×× ×œ× ×¨×תה בכל ×™"× ×™×•× ×¢×“ ×™×•× ×”×חרון טובלת מיד למחרתו ו××™× ×” צריכה לשמור לו ×™×•× ××—' לטהרתו ×•×‘×™×•× ×”×¢×©×™×¨×™ פליגי ×× ×¦×¨×™×›×” לשמור לו ×™×•× ×חד בטהרה ×× ×œ×ו עברה כל ×™"× ×™×ž×™× ×•×œ× ×¨×תה חוזרת לתחלת ימי × ×“×•×ª ו×× ×¨×תה ×‘×”× × ×¢×©×” זבה ו××™× ×” חוזרת לימי ×”× ×“×•×ª עד שיהיו לה ×–' × ×§×™×™× ×•××– יתחילו ימי ×”× ×“×•×ª ו×חריהן ימי הזיבות ×›×שר פירשתי וכן ×œ×¢×•×œ× ×ž×©×¨×‘×• הגליות ותכפו הצרות ×•× ×ª×ž×¢×˜×• הלבבות חשו ×©×ž× ×™×‘×ו לטעות ב×יסור כרת ×©×ž× ×ª×¨××” ×שה בימי × ×“×ª×” ששה ×™×ž×™× ×•×™×”×™×” הכל ×“× ×˜×•×”×¨ ובשביעי ×©×ž× ×ª×¨××” ×“× ×˜×ž× ×•×¡×‘×•×¨×” לטבול בליל ×©×ž×™× ×™ וצריכה עוד שבעה ×™×ž×™× ×”×—×ž×™×¨×• ×œ×˜×ž× ×›×œ מר××” ×“× ××“×•× ×•×›×“×™ ×©×œ× ×™×‘×ו לידי טעות בין ימי × ×“×” וימי זיבה הוסיפו ×—×•×ž×¨× ×חר ×—×•×ž×¨× ×¢×“ ש×מרו ש×פילו ×× ×œ× ×ª×¨××” ××œ× ×˜×™×¤×ª ×“× ×›×—×¨×“×œ תשב עליה ×–' × ×§×™×™× ×›×–×‘×” גדולה: The Beis Yosef, commenting on the point I have been trying to get over to you, writes: בית יוסף יורה דעה סימן קפג ומ"ש ×ž×•× ×” שבעה ×™×ž×™× ×¢× ×™×•× ×¨×ייתה וכך הדין ×פילו שופעת כל שבעה רק שתפסוק בטהרה ×‘×™×•× ×–' ×§×•×“× ×‘×™×Ÿ השמשות. כן משמע בכמה דוכתי ממסכת × ×“×” (כט:, × ×“., סו.) וכן כתב הרי"×£ בפרק ×©× ×™ דשבועות (×’., ×’  והר×"ש בסוף × ×“×” (פ"×™ סי' ו) וכן פירש רש"×™ בריש פרק ×©× ×™ דערכין (×—. ×‘×ž×©× ×” ד"×” פתח) וכן כתב הרמב"× ×‘×¤×¨×§ ו' מהלכות ×יסורי בי××” (×”"ב, ובפ"×– ×”×™"×’) והרשב"× ×‘×ª×•×¨×ª הבית (×רוך ב"×– ש"×’ ×™×.):You see that he quotes the Rambam (and Rashi, as it happens) who in Chapter 6 writes: רמב"× ×”×œ×›×•×ª ×יסורי בי××” פרק ו הלכה ב כיצד כשתר××” ×”×שה ×“× ×ª×—×œ×” ×ו כשתר××” בשעת וסתה ×•×”×•× ×”×¢×ª שקבעה ×œ× ×“×ª×” הרי זו × ×“×” כל שבעת הימי×, בין ר×תה כל שבעה בין ×©×œ× ×¨×תה ××œ× ×˜×™×¤×” ר××©×•× ×” בלבד, ר×תה ×“× ×‘×™×•× ×”×©×ž×™× ×™ הרי ×–×” ×“× ×–×™×‘×” ×ž×¤× ×™ ×©×”×•× ×‘×œ× ×¢×ª × ×“×ª×”. All I have written is the Torah Din. What you brought in your very first message on this topic is regarding the chumra of 7 clean days - Shiva Nekiyim - and when they should commence. Kol Tuv. |
|||
|