Hilchos Vestos: A Ketanah’s Three Re’iyos, Akiras Veses, and Siluk Damim

Transcript

Shelo higia zman liros. But tonight is her time didn't come. Come, come, rabosai. Hiktanah shelo higi'a leiman urim. So we asked the question, tinokes shelo higi'a zman liros. Why talk about tinokes sheadayin lo ra'asa? Why this zman? What are you referring to, zman? And then you explain, v'hiktanah — just say ketanah shelo higi'a leiman urim. It's a double lashon here, meaning it looks like you're trying to set up a standard. Tinokes shelo higi'a zman liros. Just say a woman who never saw yet, and that's all, finished. Ketanah shelo higi'a leiman urim. Ketanah sheadayin lo ra'asa, that's all, finished. Afilu v'yeshtei sa'iros, kein afilu higi'a leiman urim, but kavua lo yeshtei sa'iros. So we asked the shaila over here: batkuah v'lo yeshtei sa'iros. What about lo batkuah? So pashut pshat is, lo batkuah is a shum mistama. There's a chazakah — not a shum, a chazakah — that probably, mistama, if she higi'a leimei na'arus. So it comes out that misafek we would be mechayev. If you hold vestos d'Rabbanan, would that work? Maybe not, I don't know. Maybe batkuah v'lo matzasu. But lo batkuah, maybe not, because, I mean, the poskim takke say that if it's twelve, if it's twelve and she didn't bring, we'll say probably what? Probably she had. But I don't know why we say probably. Why should we do that? Ves is the Rabbanan, unless it's more than just a chazakah, veis safek. It's a chazakah stama, the probably that's there. Maybe, maybe. Efsher kamei klarin andersh. Maybe we could say a little different. Al kol panim, what's the halacha? Hi kovas ves k'shar nashim. Kovea ves what? B'shalosh re'iyos. Now what do you mean k'shar nashim? Kovea ves. What k'shar nashim? We soon learn that it's not like shar nashim, so what do you want? Kovea ves k'shar nashim. It's not true. Unless you're trying to say in the kvius it's the same, and the akirah will be different. Maybe that's the lashon of the Shulchan Aruch. In the kvius it's one way, and in the akirah it's not k'shar nashim. What do you need it for? Just say kovea ves, and it's not. How is it? B'shalosh re'iyos, three re'iyos. B'shar a ves, u'be'arba ves, haflagos, ela sheyesh beinah l'gedolah, and the chiluk between her and a gedolah. Sha'af al pi shehuchzekah, ro'eh v'kovea la ves, im paskah gimel ones, shehi tzadikah, lo raasah, nechshes l'ves echad, chazakah kadmusa. So here there's a machlokes, the Shach and the Drisha. The Shach learns that it's dafka tzadik yom. It's dafka ninety days, even if her haflagos are thirty-five. Let's say her haflagos are thirty-five, we don't care. It doesn't make a difference, as long as— Gimmel years is pesses, it's good enough. The drisha — hagah on the Priisha — seems like he paskens like the Shach, but the drisha says that no, it's lav davka. When we talk about gimmel years, I mean, Hagah says it. He says, huh? Huh? Yeah, he says, says klah. But still, the drisha says lav davka. The drisha says that it's even if it's 35, then it's 35. So what's the machlokes? What's the hesber of the machlokes? What are they arguing? Shach learns 90 days. He learns that it's not 90 days, but it's whatever she was kovea with 35, so then she'll have to be 35 three times it didn't come. I think the answer to the question, and the answer to all above questions, can be found in understanding another prat. When we say that she's oiker, so the story is she never saw again, or the story is she saw again but she didn't see back in the three months. So the Taz learns, ... I'm sorry, v'lo ra'asa eina choshesh, פירוש, אם לא ראתה עד אחר תשעים יום, ועז ראתה. The story is that she takteh saw again. ...

So the pshat is in the story is that she taka saw again. When? After 90 days. She stopped 90 days, but then she saw again, but she didn't see with the old vest. Ma she'ein kein, the Shach seems to learn that the story, the Knesses HaKesef, he seems to learn that the story is that she never came into. If she would see again, then she has to be choshesh, nacha mal, a second time for the vest she'eina kavua. You don't have to restart another kvius vest to mechayev her shmira. Yeah, you with me, Rafi? So far so good? Okay. What's the hesber of that machlokes? What are they arguing? Let me show you another machlokes. The Taz in se'if katan mem-gimmel holds that you don't need even the first three, that it should be boif kavua, as long as she saw, meaning it doesn't have to be mechuven exactly, right? If she saw three times, it's also good enough. Let's do the Taz. Mem-gimmel, go ahead. הכלל בזה, כיוון שהפסיקה שלוש עונות, הלך לה וסת הראשון לגמרי, וכאילו עדיין לא ראתה מעולם, וצריכה מחדש שלוש ראיות כבתחילה, שאז הוחזקה בראיית דם. ואפילו אם תפסיק שניים, ותפסוק ולא תראה ג' עונות, right? And even if she'll be mafsik a second time. פתח שתחזור ולתיר ג' עונות. לא אמרינן שחוזר גם עכשיו לקדמותה, ותצטרך ג' ראיות אחרי הפסקה שנייה. זה אינו, דכולה. הא לא אמרינן אלא הריעה ראשונה, שאחר הפסקה ראשונה מעסקה לא להיות מוחזקת. ממילא יש כאן שני דרכים בג' ראיות, שאחר הפסקה ראשונה, הן בדרך שאפשר שתיקבע לו וסת, שהן מכוונות ביום ידוע ג' פעמים, ובהפלגה ארבע פעמים, אם ראיה, אז קבע לה וסת כשאר נשים. ויש לה עוד וסת הפלגה אפילו בשתי פעמים. אחר ראיה ראשונה, שאחר הפסקה, דהיינו שתראה אחר כך מצדקת לצאת בשתי פעמים, עוד נצטרך גם ראיה ראשונה שעשתה הפסקה. So it doesn't have to be mechuvanim, right? It doesn't have to be mamash the exact same, right? It doesn't have to be the exact same. She wants to talk pshat. Why not? You want to explain? I'm getting very tired. Explain to them the mechuvanim. If she sees exactly on the same number of days or the same date, I mean, after she was mafsik already once. Let's say after ninety days she was mafsik, then she saw, and then again she saw, and again she saw. Either vestah chodesh or vestah flagot. Then we'll say that she already has a vest. You can't say that now she missed, and therefore she's chazarah l'kadmuta. She only has that patur of chazarah l'kadmuta one time. If she missed three months, that one time we'll see chazarah l'kadmuta. If she then sees again and then missed three months, we don't say chazarah l'kadmuta. She's already muchzekes. Her vest is changing. So he says if she is kovea a vest after her first hafsakah, it's a real vest. And if she doesn't have exactly the same dates, so she will be a vest she'eino קבוע, but it would still be some... You don't need the exact dates on the second time, on the second time, as long as she sees three times, yeah? So I want to explain what's going on over here. I hold the yesod of this seif is, besides the lomdus that we spoke before, which I'll get to later, are we choshesh for the vest, or are we choshesh she's not a mesulekes dam? Are we choshesh for her vest? Is the vest mechayev it, or the fact that she has a vest means she's not a mesulekes dam? The Taz, I hold, learns that the sugya is not about her vest. The sugya is, it's a siman that she's not a mesulekes dam. So even if her second time is not the same vest as the first time, it doesn't really make a difference, because as long as she saw three times, even if it was in such a lashon, he says it. No, but he says it is. She's a huchzeka b'ra'iyah dam.

According to the Taz, the yesod of this halacha is not that the vest is mechayev, that she's muchzekes to not be a mesulekes dam. Kumt ois, a ger veshmaka zach, that the second time comes out, it's not like the first time. So what do you say? So should we be oiker the vest? We don't care about it; it's not nogea. You see she's a ra'ayah dam. The three times being a ra'ayah dam is enough to come and say that she has to be choshesh k'ves she'eino kavua, and she's not a mesulekes dam. Ma she'ein kein, if you learn that it's the vest that's mechayev, so how could a vest that shows you a different vest be mechayev? And the second time, if you don't have the same vest, it should be patur. With this, I think we can come and say pshat in the first original machlokes. The Shach says that she's oiker — you hear? — she's oiker not with the thirty-five, right? She's oiker with the thirty. So I asked you a kasha: what do you mean? But her zmanim are thirty-five. And the Teretz is, it's not because of her vest. It's about what's called a mesulekes dam. In ninety days she's called a — for ninety days she didn't see, so the beinoni, the normal women who see, and she didn't see, so then we can say she's a mesulekes dam. We're not trying to be oiker the original vest. Where you have to be oiker the original vest — and I don't understand, her vest is thirty-five, so how would you want to be oiker ninety days? The Shach is saying you missed the point. We're not trying to be oiker her vest. We're trying to make her ois mesulekes dam. Maybe she is; if ninety days she didn't see, she's ois mesulekes dam. This, we could also explain the sugya chazrah liros. What's chazrah liros? Taz comes along and says, right, the Taz comes along and says that the story is she was chazrah liros. She saw again. If she saw again, chayevet shecome out. She can't come and say she's a mesulekes dam. How can you say she's a mesulekes dam? She didn't see, and then she saw again. Not mesulekes. What she is is maybe she doesn't have her vestes anymore. After three times, and then again she stopped, and then she saw again. Three times, mikra can't be a three times. The only thing is like this: if you're going to come and say that she's now not a— she's now mesulekes damim, so the three months of not seeing makes her now a mesulekes dam. Those three months makes her now a mesulekes dam. So in order to bring back the mesulekes damim, says the Taz, okay, so one is good enough. I'm sorry, one itself wouldn't be good enough, so she would still be mesulekes damim. Hasheini, the shach is taining, wait a minute. It's not the pshat that you're oiker. In the akirah you're not oiker. In the akirah you're not oiker. No, the pshat is in the akirah you make a new vest that you don't have to be choshesh. If you learn that the pshat is that she's a mesulekes damim, so on a mesulekes damim, one time's not mechayev yet. But if you learn that the akirah works, that you're oker the vest, good, so the vest came, you're oker the vest, so now it becomes like a vest she'eino kavua. In other words, in kvias vest, we could come and say it's about psiluk dam and not siman, but the Shach is saying, but on the akirah sheboi, on the akirah sheboi, it could be it's oker the vest. That's all it is. It's not oker the mesulekes damim. I know, I'm just saying, I'm saying a tremendous chiddush, only because you could say. In other words, the pashut way to learn the Shach, it has to be shein see again, because you're trying to tie she's a mesulekes damim. The pashut pshat in the Shach, it has to be a story that she never saw again, because you're called that she's a mesulekes damim, so you have to say that she's a mesulekes damim. Like dilma there's a yesod here in the Shach, that the way the—

It works. It's an akirah's vest. It doesn't work that she's a mesulekes. So again, let me say it one more time. If it's actually an akirah's vest, why is it not poreves? Good, that's a good... it's a good... I'm just saying, I'm asking. But this is the way I learned it. The way I learned it was that in the akirah, we could come and say she's oiker, not pshat she's oiker the vest. She makes her new vest that she's a mesulekes damim. Kumt the shach and he says, therefore she can't see again, because if she saw again, it's a סתירה to the vest that she's a mesulekes; you see she's seeing again. Mashenkin, there's tos, no. She's mesulekes damim. So she's back to where she started, so she has to start over again. This... Too many papers today. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I want everybody to look at Shulchan Aruch, siman kuf tzadik se'if gimmel. We don't have. I think you have. Did you understand what I'm saying? You understood? It's a very nice vort. Yafi, it's nice, nice. You're maskim? Very nice. Charasho, charasho. Kuf tzadik? I'm so tired, I can't think. Kuf tzadik se'if gimmel. Kur tzaddik ... siv gimmel. היתה שופעת כמה ימים, או שהיתה מדלפת טיפה אחר טיפה בלא הפסק, אין לה ראייה אחת עד שתפסוק. אבל אם פסקה מעט וחזרה וראתה שלוש פעמים, אפילו ביום אחד, הרי זו מוחזקת בדמים וקטנה טמאה. ויש מי שאומר שאין קטנה טמאה אלא אם כן ראתה דם שלושה וסתות. Oh, so there's one side that holds that you don't need vestes, but tamim, just three re'iyos. As long as there's three re'iyos without hafsakah. Huh? So the whole thing is going to be... So the kashya, of course, is what's the difference? Why is it that by ketanim it's one way, and by vestes, no, you need ones? What's the chiluk? Notice here he uses the word מסולק and not מסולק דמים. Notice he uses those words. Read it again. הרי היא בחזקת... הרי היא מוחזקת בדמים. Does he use the word over here, מוחזקת בדמים? No. Does he use the word מסולק or not מסולק, or יהיה מסולק or כן מסולק or לא מסולק? Also not. You know where the word מסולק comes by Skeinah? The next se'if it comes from. I told you last week, and I hold this again: סילוק דמים is not about סילוק דמים. It's different than זקינה, different than מבורסת. זקינה מבורסת is סילוק דמים. Tan is lei, hi is mana lira'is. It's not siluk. There's no reason to be mechayev, so we have to wait till the vest comes to be mechayev. It's not about siluk damim. Ah, you'll ask me, where did I get this chiddush from? Raffi's gonna say, last week he was talking, tell me, nervous twitches here. Tell me, you did the Beis Yosef? You have to do it. Do it the way the Beis Yosef says clearly that muberes and skenah is different than tanah. It says it clearly. Read it, read it. He did that one? That's why he's saying he didn't do it. You're his lawyer. His conscience. Started. He did it. Go ahead. Tanah, muberes — what's the chiluk between muberes and tanah with kvias vest? It's here, it's here, it's here. Muberes and tanah. Go ahead, go ahead, read, read.

There, mesulekes, damim katav. You have to be choshesh l'divrei ha'omer, af al pi she'eino kovad bo, nevertheless, mekomom chosheshin lizman re'iyah shetihyeh afilu paam achas, k'shem shechosheshes sha'ar nashim. There's a shita that holds that even if there's no issur, whatever, but you still have to be choshesh. V'chein hu adin b'tinok shelo higi'a zman re'iyah, af al pi shelo huchzak l'aves, mekomom chosheshes lo afilu paam achas, k'din sha'ar nashim. Yeah. Kol shekein b'me'uberes u'menikah she'einah kovedes ves, afilu b'kamah pe'amim, v'tzarich. ... shehein reuyos liros, ela shemikerev ha'ibur v'hanakah mechakev al yadan. ... af al pi she'eino kovad ves, chosheshes mi'a l're'iyah shera'atah b'toch yemei ibur. Aval ktanah she'einah reuyah lire'iyah, mitzad tiva eina chosheshes. Taam zeh shayach nami b'zekeinah shenislakah damah. ... shekinokes shelo higi'a zman lire'iyos, ... shtei nashim eilu einan chosheshos l'veses she'eino kavua klal. Sounds familiar? Tinokes and zekeinah are the same. Naturally not shayach. Lo higi'a zman lire'iyos. There's a siluk damim, which means she doesn't have. Then there's something called a new sugya. She's not shayach to it. Lo higi'a zman lire'iyos is another halachah, another halachah. So the same, but not the same. Yeah, it holds a different yesod, different sugya. ... there used the lashon of what? ... that's a different sugya. Here the sugya is, therefore it's the geit to the taanis, the geit to shiurah. It's not about her. It's about higi'a zman. There's a zman where she's a ktanah. That's why in Shulchan Aruch, it's what's called a skeinah. Why don't you ask where is she holding? She's ... I don't know the story. So if you look at the poskim, they bring down 50, 60, 70, 45, 50. You saw the game they play, what's called a skeinah. She wants to be called a grandma. She doesn't want to be called grandma. Some people have a baby and then they're grandparents, they don't want to be called grandparents. You saw the poskim? Okay, go look at the poskim. We'll talk about either 45, 50, 55, 60, 65, 70. Anybody for 75? Good. Okay, that's what's going on in the poskim. This one says 45, this one says 50, this one says 50, and this one says ... she wants to be called ... And today they're more embarrassed to be called grandmother because of ... What's the story? What does that have to do? We're not discussing her. We're discussing there's a patur called skeinah, and there's a patur called tanah. V'hik tanah shelo higia limenu. Especially if you don't call her ktanah, she's a gedolah. Not she's called. Talmud skeinah. Skeinah means there's a zman for ziknah. No, there's a zman. It's not what you call her now. But I'm saying, how do you know the zman for tanah? For skeinah. What is the zman? The answer is she's called a skeinah. She has a din of a mesulekes damim. If they don't call her, there's mesulek damim and there's a din of mesulek damim. I know it's true, but it's very strange. Why in the Shas does it say 60 years old and that's it? So what it says, my job is not to know why. I can hear. I mean, if you want to say ... Now let's go back. That's the shaylah. I asked you, tanah shelo higia lireiza keshar nashim. What do you want, reiza keshar nashim? What do you want with this? Reiza keshar nashim ... that there's such a thing called vestes. She activated herself. That's the... she's now officially activated. Activated. That's pshat. Even though it's not a geirus, you may... Maybe you can say that that hagufa is the raya that she became that now. Good, no, again, she makes a kinyan now. Oh, so I discussed it. That we discussed on the... Maybe takke she become a... because of it. It doesn't mean that. It doesn't mean her. It's not about her. What does it mean? It means about choshesh. When do we start being choshesh? Gabi issur vestos, when do you have to start being choshesh? That's why I asked you kashya: vest only d'rabbanan, so loy bedukah. Maybe the pshat is you weren't bodek, so it's a safek, right? And vest d'rabbanan. Harei zeh k'shar nashim; you're missing the point. We're not coming to talk about her. Is she, isn't she, did she, she didn't see. Does a ketanah have to be machmir? She has a vest; do you have to be machmir? Loy bedukah is not a sevara because maybe she's ketanah. Once she's osek ketanah, then there's no reason to be choshesh that she's not a... she's not a... she's not a... Which means, let's say she's five years old and she mamash has a vest since five until twelve.

Mr. Hilchos vestes, you have to consider kishar noshim. And it's not pashut that she's already mature in body. I mean, that's what the chakirah I asked you: is it the vestes, or that she's not a mesulekes dam? I got clear. That's what I'm telling you. Because according to what we're saying now, she's really mesulekes dam. But the vestes is mechayev me to listen to it. That's exactly what I clarified. Maybe the vestes is mechayev. הרי זה כשאר נשים, הלכות וסתות. And the taich is, it's not a shaylah of taning dayo. The vestes is mechayev. Maybe there's a chiluk between a mesulekes dam and not a mesulekes dam. Okay, this is where we're going to stop. Good?