Hilchos Niddah: Blood in Urine—Rashi, Tosafos, and the Mechaber and Rema

Transcript

This siman is about dam bahashton, blood in the urine. Ha'isha sheishtina mayim veyatza dam im mei ragleha. So we'll soon see, shetinah omedes, shetinah yosheves, al kol panim, according to shitas hamechaber lechumra kipshutoi, it makes no difference. She's always tahor, always. What's the reason? If she sees dam, she should be a nidah. Why should she be tahor? We're going to learn the Rama. There's cases that we want to be metaher. Ein letaher in the case of the Mechaber, but b'etzem it's a Gemara, and it's different shitos, and the Mechaber paskens like the shitah in the Gemara that she's tahor. Why? Why? So the truth is, kimuvan, it's obviously not dam nidah, otherwise she would be tahor. So that's step number one. That is halachah number one. It's got to be that it's not dam nidah, otherwise there's nothing what to talk about. But maybe it is. So that becomes the sugya. The sugya is not is it or isn't it, because if she's tahor, it isn't. But the shailah is why isn't there a cheshbon? Maybe, maybe it is. So Rashi, nun tes amud beis, says, because ein darkah v'tivah liros. It's not her way to see dam nidah when she is mashtin mei raglayim. That's not the normal. Now I would ask you to please read the Rashi, because I thought it was a very interesting lashon that Rashi used. Go ahead. Yeah. Ein derech. It's not the derech. So, I guess it's just not norm. It's not the norm. Ein derech. Does he mean that it can't be? Does he mean that it's not possible? Oh, usual. So we don't know that. That's why I wanted to make sure that we read the lashon Rashi properly. And the next thing I want to make sure is you open the window and give me some fresh air, because it's a shayla of—it's a shayla of hachnasas orchim. I come here from a very long trip and I need some fresh air. Okay? So my question is, Hagon Reb Refoel Shlita, and the chavrei habeis din, Reb Chaim and all the other chavrei habeis din here, okay? Rebinu Gershom me'or hagolah, me'or bechara, okay? I'm asking a pashtus shayla. What does it mean, ein derech? Ein derech means it's not common, unusual, or ein derech means it can't be, it's not the way? Not the way. It can't be. Possible, not probable. All right, maybe, we'll see. Tosfos says a different reason. Tosfos says she didn't see before she went. She didn't see after. Punkt at that moment she saw. It's very, very not מסתבר. Very, very. Very, very. What? Very, very not מסתבר. Um, you know, I'll tell you, I remember asking you this question by bedika. You know, she sticks a bedika in, yeah, then it's possible, that second. She didn't see before, and she didn't see after. Yeah, and punk that second she saw. Tosafos, I don't know, you're arguing with the halacha of bedika? Bedika is also, huh? Bedika is also a one of the chaveis hitting the jackpot, as they say, as we spoke in the shiur. Rashi learns a different reason than Tosafos. Rashi learns the reason is because it's ein derech, it's not the way. Tosafos says, why should we say that she saw niddah now? She didn't see before, she didn't see after. Punk that moment she was meiraglayim, so the stam has to do with the meiraglayim; it has nothing to do. So I asked you the same question. I asked you the same question by bedika. We have also the same cheshbon. Oh, at that second? You remember such halacha? Wait one second, you're saying good, because if you want to ... you're saying good. So the shaila is a gevaldige shaila.

Yeah? Okay. So the truth is, I was thinking of an interesting teretz. An interesting teretz. Mei raglayim could cause taka dam. Does that make your tummy? I don't know, you're missing my point. Chezben of saying, punkt that second. Yeah, because there is an explanation to the dam. The explanation to the dam is mei raglayim, so we're not going to say punkt it happens to be at that moment she saw niddah. But by bedikah, that there's nothing to attribute it to, even though we said that there was—remember such a shiur, remember we spoke about this—is the bedikah a reason? Was that gorim anything? L'choira, from Tosafos I would have to mechalek and say not, because otherwise then why by mei raglayim? Why by mei raglayim do we use a sevara? No. What are the chances that at that split second she saw dam niddah? Nothing. You're talking about a fluke. So we'd rather say it's from the mei raglayim. So why by bedikah don't we say that? And the teretz is because by bedikah we can't say attributed to the bedikah. If we were able to attribute it to the bedikah, like we could attribute it to the mei raglayim, so ein hachi nami, by bedikah too we'd say, Ah, why should we think it happened that second? By bedikah we're saying stam, no. By bedikah we say that it happened that second. Something happened that second she saw dam niddah. So the sevara is the same sevara. She didn't see before, she didn't see after, just punkt this second she saw. Now, there's a problem with that. I can say the meiraglayim caused the dam. That's exactly what I just said. You know why you can't say that? Because you could, because I just said that. That's what I'm saying. It's exactly what I'm saying. What I'm saying is that by meiraglayim, I have something to attribute it to. So why should I say it's from the dam nidah? It wasn't there before. By sheinkin, by the bedikah, when I attribute it to the bedikah. I'll tell you what my problem is. I'll tell you what my problem is. You understand what I just said? You should, because it's a very, very reasonable thing. Meiraglayim could cause it. Ma sheinkin over here, there's— so therefore, even though the odds of it happening at that split second, we'll still say it happened that split second. You know what the problem is? Because it's not true. What I'm saying to you is I'm misleading you. Because the question is not where the dam is. The dam might have been there before without the hargashah. So why don't we say the dam was there, just like the meiraglayim caused dam, the dam was there, and poof, that second she had a hargashah and dam came out with hargashah. Maybe she made a bedikah. The blood is there, but it's not with hargashah. To come and say that poof, that that second— poof means exactly that second, yeah? Okay, that second. So, but we see that we say that's svara by bedikah. You can't give me my teretz anymore. See, I was— because you don't understand. I was saying a teretz like this: by meiraglayim, we have a reason why there's blood. To attribute it to something else, in a one-in-a-million chance, why should we do it? Ma sheinkin by bedikah, there's nothing to attribute, because the bedikah can't cause. But that's not the question. The question is there was dam. The dam is there. So we have where to attribute the dam. Was my chelek. We have nothing to attribute the dam to. It's not true, we do have. But that's not the point. If it came out with dam, so either the dam was there, or it came out b'hargasha. So why should we come and say that at that split second it came b'hargasha? Say that it came from that it was there before. What are the chances that at that split second? You still have the same problem. If there's no reason by bedikah to have dam and then all of a sudden there is dam, so the sevara is a one in a million chance, let's say, where the dam comes from. But here we have a truth place to attribute the dam from, that it was there anyway. We can attribute the dam was there anyway. We made a bedikah and there was dam over there. So why should we say at that split second there was hargasha? I don't see why we should say that. Isn't she with cheskas nekiyah right now? Why would you attribute it to being there, so that you don't have that? And by bedikah, same thing. By bedikah also. Here too she has. Why the bedikah? That's what Ravoka is asking. Why would you think that there's already dam, that she's nekiyah? She's making a bedikah. There's a reason for it. But she found the blood now. You see, she found those blood. Now there's a re'usa. You see, the re'usa is what, that right now she had hargasha? Why should you say that? You don't have to say there was anything before. That's all it's trying to say. You're saying she was muchleches from before already. Who said? I didn't say she was muchleches. I mean, she made a bedikah for a reason.

One second. There's a reason why you make a bedikah. Why? Why? She's from. If she's from, and what—first of all, we spoke about those bedikos, brother. I don't know if those are like—we spoke about that. But the pashut bedikos is during the shivah nekiyim, during the yemei haves, so there is a reason to be choshesh. I don't know why you're saying that. It's not only though, but there is a reason when you make a bedikah that there should be a cheshbon, there could be blood there. So why should you be choshesh that that split second there was hargashah? I mean, it's the same sevara. It's the same exact sevara. And I even hold it's even more than that, because your sevara of meira glayim, it wasn't there before, it wasn't there after. Here maybe it was there before by bedikah. That's all you say of the bedikah, maybe it was there before. It's even worse. By bedikah it was before? I'm trying to ask you a simple question. תוספות אומר שאי אפשר להגיד... אבל תו דקא... מֵרַגְלַיִם יצאה דם מהנידה, מכתה. אבל רואים תוספות, we see this sevara by bedikah. I don't see what— we never, we didn't learn bedikah, I don't know what you're talking about. That was the sevara by bedikah, that that split second she had hargashah. So I'm saying maybe by mei raglayim there's a reason to attribute the blood. יש חשבון לדם. So להגיד שיש חשבון אחר, שזה בא מנידה, מכתה. אבל פה, למה תגיד? הבדיקה גרם שיהיה דם. הבדיקה לא גרם שיהיה דם. אז לכן יש סברא, אולי אותו רגע היה בה הרגשה. אבל אני אומר שזה לא מוכח. It's not really מוכח, because the blood could have been there from before, so you have a reason to attribute the blood. You don't have to attribute it to the hargashah of now. You could have said the same thing. His blood, you're right. You know the blood was there before. To make it into a de'oraisa because of that, who said? You're saying the same svara, that's split second. Who said? I want to tell you another thing. Our case is with hargasha also, afilu hirgisha. Why are you lost? There's nothing to be lost. I didn't say anything. I'm telling you the truth. You know, there's nothing. You're thinking. Oh, I didn't see the smoke coming out of the ears, so I wasn't sure why you... Oh, you don't think like that. Okay. You have to win the... It'll be a long day for me, I see it. Okay, yeah? I remember, I think, talking about last year or two years ago. I know. I attributed that to bedikah, that's exactly. But I said that. I said, even though it's not like what I'm saying. I don't know, something is different. יש משהו משונה בין מראה דמים לבדיקה. וצריכים להסביר את זה. For some reason, Tosafos felt that by me'arei damim, eh, that split second it happened, you got to be crazy to think like that. And by bedikah, we do say it, so why? That's the question. Okay, so I'm just giving you, you know, like kach, like, the kashas are very good questions, l'choira. Now, we're talking about with hargasha. There is hargasha. So here, l'choira, we're talking about an even worse case. There was hargasha, afilu hirgisha, v'nizdazea. She got the real hargasha, yeah. By the case of bedika, you don't have hargasha, but we're afraid maybe there was hargasha. Unless you say the case by bedika is that she felt something, and she's attributing that something to the bedikas eid, then really it's to the hargashas nidah. We discussed this also. Let's say she feels taka nothing. So what are you gonna say? She made a mistake? She made a mistake in what? She didn't feel anything. So we said maybe that can't be. We discussed this. On the tzad that the pshat is we don't know if she had hargasha, but af al pi kein maybe she had. This case a lot worse. You know why? She had hargasha. By bedika, lo hirgisha. So if there's any reason to say worse, lachshosh lenidah d'Oraisa is here more than there. Over here she had a hargasha, and af al pi kein, eh, it's meirea glayim. Over there, again, we discussed this. Maybe she had hargasha, and the pshat is she wasn't sure what she felt. She thought it was the bedikas eid. You felt like something like that. I remember you saying something like that. We discussed it. We had a tzad like that. And then we said it's not muchach. Pashut pshat is she doesn't know, and af al pi kein we have to be choshesh, whatever.

Mashgiach, mashgiach in the yeshiva. Okay. By bedika, yeah, she didn't feel. So l'choira, if we should say a sevara, lachshosh l'nidah, it's more here than there, right? That's what I want to get at. Or you could come and say the opposite, that here it's better. You know why it's better? Because there is a derech, okay, to feel b'shaas mei raglayim. That's how the poskim explain. Eino chosheshes, hargashas mei raglayim, hei zu. Not it might be. It is. Not it might be. It is. We don't say possible. It is. Because the derech, because the poskim say the derech is that she does have these hargashos when she goes. But by bedika, that there should be no reason for hargasha. So there we choshesh for a safek hargasha. So I'm just clarifying, is this worse, that's worse? I'm just trying to understand why over here does Tosafos say, Eh, it can't be that that second she saw dam nidah, while by bedika we do say it. So what's the chiluk? Okay, that's the beginning, part one of the hakdamah to this sugya, okay? You understood what I said? Did you understand what I was talking about? I ask you, very fair. Me'od mevusas hashe'eilah zu. Po? Fair is fair. Mevusas she'eilah. Tzadekes. Tzadekes. She'eilah tzadekes. Harei po omrim yesod. Lefi Tosfos, lo hayah lifnei, lo yachrei. Oh, boto dakah, yeah. Harav Reb Teisvis, omrim zeh b'bedikah. Mai shno? Mai shno b'bedikah ken omrim? This is the shaylah. Because that's what we're saying. That's the sevara. The sevara is because she does have. Because she does. The metzius is when a person meiraglayim, there is a hargashah. Lo, lo. Achshav nilmad, lefi Rashi, ein derech bichlal lhotzi dam b'shaas meiraglayim. Ein derech bichlal lhotzi b'shaas meiraglayim. Okay. So the shaylah becomes a very nice shaylah. Lefi Tosfos, lefi Tosfos, yeah, lefi Tosfos, he doesn't say it has to do with she'ein derech. Tosfos says mechteisa. So it comes out an interesting chiddush. Mechteisa, it's nidah. There was a hargashah, and we're saying that the hargashah was meiraglayim. Maybe it's nidah. You didn't say it can't be nidah. Bishlama Rashi, Rashi says that it can't be nidah. Tosfos never said it can't be nidah. So af al pi kein, we're saying that it's this, that it's meiraglayim, unless it's more common, makes more sense, it's more shachiach, it's more common, and that's what Tosfos means. The chances... That it's mei nida, and that that gasha is more this than that. Right? According to Tosafos, the same way he says the chances are that it's not nida, so then the chances are on the hargasha also that it's not hargashas nida; it's hargashas meireglayim. It's the same chances, right? You have to stick that back into the chances. So I'm asking, according to Rashi, could we say that it's vadai, while according to Tosafos we say that it has to do with probability? Right? So we don't know a derech. Maybe ein derech means it just doesn't happen. I don't know. You have to know what Rashi means. Maybe it does happen. Maybe not. I don't know. I'm just saying, I'm trying to see. Could be there's a machlokes Rashi and Tosafos. Rashi held that it's not going to happen, while Tosafos held it could happen, but the chances are. And therefore there's meireglayim, let's say it's from the meireglayim. Let's say it's from hargasha; the hargasha is from the meireglayim also. It's like a tliya. Tliya chazakah. Okay? Rabbi Faul, you're maskim so far? Not maskim. Why not? What did I say? I didn't say anything. Which part you're not maskim to? Why? What's wrong?

No, I'm saying, he bothered you? Huh? No, but tell me what's bothering you. No, I'm fine, I'm fine. I understand everything you're saying. Yeah, but so tell me what bothers you. Let me hear. I want to hear it. I want to work with you. I understand why Rabbi is to say maybe b'shas bedikah there was dam already there anyway, any dam that's... Forget about the teretz. You like the kashi, like better? Okay, so you get stuck on one detail, you can't go further. I'm just saying, maybe, I don't know, I'm clarifying, I don't know. Can I say vadai one thing? The kashya is a ... kashya. Vadai one thing. L'choira there's machlokes Rashi and Tosafos. Either they're saying the same thing from different angles, or Rashi holds ein derech means b'metzius it's not going to happen, while Tosafos holds why should I say it happened? I'd rather say it's from the meirea. So there's a chiluk in the degrees of how tahor she really is. According to Rashi, she's tahor because there's nothing to talk about. While according to Tosafos, we're going to pasken that she's tahor. Misafek there's a problem, not true, let's say, we'll say that it's that, okay? Now, is there a chiluk between Rashi and Tosafos l'maaseh? I don't know, we'll see. Okay. The next thing I have to point out to you: what is the halacha for the sefardim l'maaseh? I mean, because the Mechaber says you're tahor. And it's pretty clear and cut. There's no if, and, but, when, what, why. There's nothing. It's just tahor, finished. You're not going to find it there. It's not there. The Rama, it's not. It's not there, and it's not anywhere. Found in one place. The Rama comes and gives you, yesh l'hachmir, yesh l'hachmir. This way yesh l... yesh l'... I'm sorry, not yesh l... yesh l'lehakel, yesh l'lehatir. So l'choira the sefardim should be meikil, right? So I went to look. I didn't see Rav Asher doesn't even bring it. Just in the stomach he felt that the mechaber holds it's tahor. There's nothing to talk about. I guess. I went to look at the Ben Ish Chai, not there either. No show. No talk about it. Huh? I have everything. When I need it, I have everything. Okay, I am a Ben Ish Chai. Okay? No, I have it. What do you think Ben Ish Chai means? You're also Ben Ish Chai. No, not everybody. I don't have everybody. Most people, I'm saying, sitting at this table at least. Okay, now you hear? So the pshat is that l'choira, because we pasken, so I found that the Little Green Sefer, Darkei Taharah, which we use here a lot, he brings down the Shulchan Aruch, and he says, אבל למעשה, the Rama, and then chumra, and the poskim held the Rama was right, so therefore you should be machmir like the Rama. There's a chiddush to me. So now it gives me the license to learn it with you, otherwise I have to skip it. I have to say mechaber and then say, okay, Reb Chaim wants only the mechaber, not the Rama. So watch, this is what it is. He came and he said the Rama. That's what he said. So I don't know. You have to go ask, because it's a very basic shaila. Dam bashton is a big sugya, you know what I mean? I mean, it happens all the time. There's shailas that come to a rav all the time. According to the mechaber, there's nothing what to talk about. There's no sugya. It's dam makah, there's no sugya. We'll see the Chazon Ish makes it into a little sugya, the Chavas Daas makes it into a little sugya that the mechaber is not going in all cases. We'll get to that sugya. But pashtus... Okay, so the answer is we're not ... on that because they flush. Period. End of story. So they say that's what the poskim say, it's clean. So you come into bed, 99% of the time it's clean. One time. Yeah, it's clean, it's this. Okay, let's move on. Now, so the first thing I came and I told you that the mechaber tar. If you want to ... chumra, all right. So understand that in that context, that if you're going to pasken shailos for Sefardim, it's a chumra. I mean, if you want to use this Rama, I mean, you zicher don't hold like that. You hold it l'chumra, chaveisa. I want to tell you more: I hold the whole Rama as l'chumra. I don't even hold of this Rama, and I don't want to say it that way. Let me say it a different way, because you could think I don't hold the Rama. You know what I mean. By this time already, you know what I mean. I mean to say is, if you take this Rama as halacha pesuka, I don't think you understood the Rama. I believe that the pshat in the Rama is that it's also chumra, because he says the lashon, ein lehatir. Look the way he says it: haga, v'yesh omrim d'ein lehatir. What do you mean, ein lehatir? She's asur. What do you mean, ein lehatir? What did you mean by ein lehatir? I don't know, what kind of nusach is ein lehatir? What do you mean, ein lehatir? So I say, haga, she's a nida. What are you talking about? Teretz is, ein lehatir, it's a chumra. We're machmir. Now we have to discuss why taka we should be machmir, we shouldn't be machmir, but al kol panim, at least we...

Huh? Yeah, it's pashut like that. Now, the only thing is, now we've given the Mizakt, we've colored the right picture of what this whole sugya is about. And the answer is, it might not be too much. It might be that it's tahor, and even if it's not tahor according to Rama, it's just to be machmir not to be tahor, and even if you hold of the Rama, the Sefardim, it's only a chumra b'alma. So in that context, let's learn, okay? Now, if you notice, by learning it, you're not going to find it's not there. I looked all over. You have it? I know it's different. He talks about a kesem afterwards. I went, I looked all over. It's not there. There's no such thing. It doesn't exist. I went, I went, I searched the well list. I couldn't find it. I found one place in the Katzar he has, and then in the Hakdamah he has. If it's a de'oraisa after the sidrei taharah he brings down. The hargashah has a lot to do with what we spoke about, but I don't want to go get into the whole sidrei taharah. Okay, now. Okay, good. What do you have? What do you have over there? It's not this. It's not. You're not going to find. Huh? So what should I do? I'm asking. I'm asking you. What should I answer you? The mechaber holds it's mutar. Okay, now. Let's discuss the three shitos. L'maaseh, if you notice by learning it, you'll find three shitos. Chaver holds tahor. The first shita is, Ela b'yosheves v'shotinah, aval b'medes, d'nimtza sham dam tahor, which means chodel re'iyusah. Chodel re'iyusah, one out of two, right? So it's ein lah tirah, one out of two. V'yesh omrim, afilu b'yesheves, which is tarti. Tarti, right? It's tarti for good. There's two reasons to say that it's okay. Af al pi kein, ein lah hatirah. Okay. So the first shitah is tohorah. The second shitah is, ein lah hatirah ela b'yesheves v'shtinah, aval b'omedes im meklachas atochah, which means chad l'reiusa u'l'already asur, right? The opposite. Once chad l'reiusa, we don't aser; the opposite, right? Yesheves v'shtinah is tahor, and omedes u'meklachas. Meklachas, so chad l'reiusa is tahor, right? And the second shitah is by shtayim l'reiusa, afilu b'yesheves, meaning shtayim l'malyusa, we still asur, right? So even if it's yesheves, ein lah hatir ela b'meklachas, u'mimtzad dam toch hasafek, which means you need tarti l'taivasa. Okay. Right. V'afilu yesheves ein lah hatir ela b'meklachas. Toivah, aval al safek safek temeiah, b'medes b'cholin yitmeiah. Okay. So what's the machlokes here? One, two, three. What is that, a number game? Yesh shtei seifim l'hatir, yesh sifa chad l'hatir. I mean, is it based on a medical sugya, or it's based on if there's two reasons, one reason? What does it have to do? I don't understand. Are we discussing— The metzius, that if she's a medes, the probabilities are it'll be dam, it's mashma has nothing to do with that. It's mashma that we're saying that it has the two reasons, or one reason to aser, two reasons to aser. What does it have to do with two reasons to aser? It's not a number game. Unless the pshat is, the way we're explaining, that be'etzem it's mutar, tehorah, ein derech, but since lemaaseh, since lemaaseh, it's doimeh to nidah, and there can be a lot of mistakes, so you have to have the gedarim of this: two reasons, one reason. How far of a gezeirah, so to speak, is it? And what do I mean by gezeirah? Because bichlal you have to ask a shaylah. There's not one word here, re'iyah and kesem. So tehorah is no problem, because if you're tahor, you're tahor anyway; one has nothing to do with the other. But according to the Rama, that ein lah tirah, what, al tzriah d'Oraisa, or it's only a derabbanan, al kesem, pashut only derabbanan. Especially the way we're learning, ein lah tirah means only chumra ba'alma, so there's nothing what to talk about, right? How'd you learn? Is it ksamim or is it re'iyah? What are we going to say the story is?

You thought it was re'iyah. Wow. Wow. I, all the poskim, everyone says that it's a kesem, not a re'iyah. How did you learn? You thought it was a re'iyah? You thought ein latahor because maybe she's regular niddah mide'oraisa? Okay, forget about that. Let's say the Rama is those shitos. You thought it was a re'iyah. What did you learn? Mamash a re'iyah. Wow. Wow. That's interesting. There's no hargashah. Why should it be a re'iyah? What are you talking about? You know that part we established, that the hargashah is from the mei raglayim. That doesn't change. But that doesn't change. That doesn't change. That doesn't change. That doesn't change. Hargashas mei raglayim hu. So you're saying the Rama, that changed. The Rama held it wasn't hargashas mei raglayim. No, I didn't say that. I said the only reason the chaver said it's from hargashas mei raglayim, it's also because urine doesn't come from there. So of course it's hargashas mei raglayim, and it's not the same rule. Over here, though, you're saying maybe it went up, it came down. How do you know which hargashah it was? You see, he was learning she'ein mei raglayim menacheder is a reason already why the hargashah has to be mei raglayim. Once you don't know that. But if you learn that the hargashah is mei raglayim because lemaaseh, when a person has mei raglayim, it's more common the hargashah from that. It has nothing to do with your raya, because ein meiraglayim. I know if it's true, so say it. So say that. That's all. If it's true, but you have to argue with something that's true. See, you're learning that this is already a nesinas taam on both dinim. A, it's not dam, and B, it's not hargasha. You know why? Because you see that ein dam nidah b'shaas mei raglayim. But if you learn that it has to do with the fact that it's more mistavra that it's dam, dam mei raglayim—I'm sorry, it's more mistavra that there hargasha is mei raglayim because that's what happens—so then who says it's de'oraisa בכלל? Why should I think it's de'oraisa? So then it blibes a kasha. Okay, so what you'll do is you'll look at your homework, and you'll see that everybody says that it's kesem. Everybody, everybody says a kesem. Yes. Kesem. Why aren't you writing this down? This is an unbelievable chiddush. The whole inyan, the Rema says, tell me, be machmir because of kesem. I said the word chumra, but I'm not even discussing the chumra. I'm saying even the Ramo is ein l'hatir as a chumra, but because of kesem. In other words, and which chumra are we referring to? Even the Gemara that asks, asks mi'ta'am kesem. What does he say? He says kesem. How is it going to be? Okay. Okay, let's go weiter. Okay, now. What do you have over there? I know that. I saw that. I don't like that. I saw the Chutshani, I saw it. Everybody says kesem. Oh yeah, yeah. No, no, he doesn't bring the other side that it's a kesem. What are you talking about? Of course it's a kesem. I actually referring to... Okay, come. What you're gonna have to do is... Huh? That's a kesem, I know. Yeah, it's a shaylah pashta kesem. What do you have over there? Okay, so...

The first sheetah holds it's tahor. It says clearly it's a ketem, right? It's a ketem, of course a ketem. Pashut it's a ketem. I saw the Chut Shani. Well, right. No, in the Rama there's two shitos: the tahorah, and then there's yesh omrim, and the yesh omrim, the two shitos. You're making the sapel and they're not sapel, the shitos. Okay, come, let's go. Now, there's a reason why I don't want to get into the nitty-gritty of the Ramo yet, because I'm not learning the Ramo yet. I'm still learning the Mechaber. I want to know the sugya of tahorah, and I want to know the Ramo's argument. What is he arguing on? He's arguing on the tahorah to say that what, that it's aser min haTorah? Or is he arguing on the tahorah to come and say that it's what? Yesh l'hachmir. It's a derabbanan. And therefore we have to see if it's shtayim l're'usa, shtayim l'teivusa. You have two—what does it have, two shtayim l're'usa? What is it? It's like sfeik sfeika? You can learn the sugya about sfeik sfeika. You can learn that. You can learn that if it's two tzdadim it becomes like a sfeik sfeika. But you know it's not a mahapach, you know that. It's not a sfeik sfeika mahapach, you know that. It's not mahapach because it's the same side. It's the same thing over again. It's not—and even if, it's not even if, it's that. So either you learn this sugya by the shtei se'ifim has to do with sfeik sfeika, right? Shtei se'ifim l'hakel, but it's not a sfeik sfeika mahapach, and I don't like going into that. I don't know why, it's just not—I'm not into that sfeik sfeikas and zachin, I don't know, it's not for me all this. Well, the pshat is that since it's anyway derabbanan, so if there's two cheshbonos to be meikel, so we're meikel, that's all. S'fek sfeika, it's two steps away from what we're choshesh from. This looks like a re'iyah. People might make a mistake for re'iyah, but it's not a normal case. It's two steps away. Hagam, I don't know if anybody who sees it would understand that. That's where the problem might be. In the Tamak Zeiri, you can't come and say that they know the Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim, this mekaleches. It's a little bit more complicated. Unless s'fek sfeika. This is the two צדדים. Either it has to be s'fek sfeika, or it's the lashon was not s'fek sfeika. What's the lashon that's used? Shtayim l'tivusa, shtayim l'reiusa. Not exactly s'fek sfeika. You know that, right? When you read those words, it's not s'fek sfeika, it's something else, okay? Ametzad that you do mean s'fek sfeika, it's not a s'fek sfeika המסבך. It's a problem, okay. I want to show you something interesting. בין ששתינה והיא עומדת, בין שהיא שינה והיא יושבת. Comes along the Shach and he says, בין מקלחת בין שיושבת. Right? Whether she's dripping, whether she's flowing, whether she's dripping, okay? Makes no difference. Not l'choira. The Mechaber doesn't say that. It's very nice to say he means that, and that's the din, but he didn't say that, right? So there's got to be a reason why he doesn't say it. I mean, why would he not say that? I mean, there's cases. That's the Rama. The Rama makes a chiluk between yosheves and shoyeses, mekalachas. So say that. Say, bein omedes, bein mekalachas, bein yosheves, bein shoyeses. Talk like that, that's all. Give me the cases. So we could come and say that he didn't have to, because that's hainu hach. That whenever you're עומדת, it's mekalachas. And whenever you're יושבת, it's going to be the other way around. I'm sorry. Whenever you're עומדת, you're שוֹיֶסֶס. And whenever you're יושבת, you're מְקַלַּחַת. Go regulars, it's regular. You're standing up. So mainly you don't have to say it out, because it's hainu hach. You look at the poskim, that's one of the cheshbonos they have, that it happens to be that way. When you're standing, it doesn't come out regular. If you're sitting, it comes out regular. So he doesn't have to say it. Or maybe. Or maybe. Where is this? Oh.

Yeah. Tell me something. Does it make a difference if she held back? She held in for many hours. It's not a trip. She held in for many hours. We'll talk about it, right? We'll soon see. Is it here? Huh? It's not here. I don't understand. Ah, if it makes no nafkamina, so say it. Ah, so then don't say, Bein miklach bein sheises. Maybe there's no nafkamina. And hachanami, so don't say anything. So don't say, emedes bein shishtinah. Don't say anything. Just say, isha shemada, tehorah. According to the way you're learning up the pshat, because it really makes everything is tehorah, so then why pick this case? Don't pick any cases. And the teretz is, he was concerned about the Gemara. You see, you're not going to win me. It's a chess game. This shiur is a chess game. You think you're going to put your pawn out—I don't know how to play chess, I'm just making up words—and you think you're going to put your queen out, your chaveis, whatever, your king, your knight, I don't know. I'll checkmate you right away. You'll—here, ... so don't say anything. What was the shaila again? I don't see it. A very pashut thing. Is there a sugya about lachatz? Yeah, it's very shayach that when she has lachatz, she has dam. I mean, it makes, right? Very possible that if she held in and she lets out, there's dam, right? There is a sugya. It's not stam made up, right? Afal pi kein, he doesn't bring it. Talks about the Bais Yosef. There is a discussion about it. Why didn't you bring it? Teretz is because who cares? What's the difference? That's what he answers. So I asked you, so what's the difference between medes and yesheves? It's the same thing. Oh, I want to give the different criteria. Omedes, yosheves, right? Everything under those categories, obviously. Say bein lachatz bein eina lachatz. You have to say bein this, bein that. Honestly, if you're already making a chiluk between yosheves and omedes, the same. He's just quoting the Mishnah Ketubot. The Mishnah said omedes, yosheves. The rest of whatever the Gemara... All the pilpul, and that he's telling you. It doesn't matter. Can I say it a little bit better than you? The Shach is saying... he sticks it in, right? Yeah. And what about lachatz? But he's saying if there's lachatz, it's mekalachas, and it comes out right away. You know that? Where did you see that in the Shach? My Shach says... I was going to say the same thing. Who said? Maybe. Okay, so now you're saying a very big chiddush. Okay, so let me tell you what I think, and maybe you're all trying to say this, but you have to say it better. Rashi over there says that, yes, if there's atzira, if she held back, there's going to be dam, right? But Rashi says that causes the stisah. The dripping is because she held back. So it could be that it's all nichlal in omedes and yosheves, right? Omedes and yosheves, right? Because omedes and yosheves, huh? Omedes and yosheves, right? What do you want? What are you saying? Okay, don't discuss anything about bullshit, yeah? But ma'aseh sheyeshes comes from lachatz, yeah? A medes yesheves also causes sheyeshes. Maybe because of lachatz. You can have what? What? What could you have? No, maybe not. Maybe not. Maybe whenever you're b'kalachatz, maybe whenever you're omedes. What happens if you're omedes? Okay. Wait a second. What happens if you're omedes, and then you have sheyeshes, and then there's sheyeshes because of omedes? Maybe it's because of lachatz. So it's all one halacha. So omedes is the halacha. Omedes is the case of lachatz. Omedes is the case of sheyeshes. My kashya to you, the Shach comes along and adds it.

And then all of a sudden we find there's even another nekudah that Beis Shamai talks about, lachatz. So why isn't it in the Shulchan Aruch, and the Teretz is it is in the Shulchan Aruch, because a medes is going to cause shehiyah, and it's going to cause lachatz. It's all the same sugya. It's all the same sugya. You'll ask me a kasha, it's a different type of lachatz. One is the lachatz of the way it's coming out. What about the lachatz that she's holding back? Again, I'm saying a very pashut. Okay, listen to me. I'm saying a very pashut zach. Pay attention, pay attention, rabosai, listen to me carefully. It says here, bein omedes, bein yosheves. Okay, so he does make a nafka mina, right? He doesn't just say every time a aglayim it's mutar. He comes and explains to you, which means is, you would think, don't think. You would think bein yosheves, there's no chiluk. So he's already coming to chiluk. Comes along the Shach, and he says, hey, bein mekalachat, bein shehiyah. Yeah, but why didn't the Mechaber talk about it? I don't see why. He didn't know how to write his Shulchan Aruch? What happened? And then I ask you, what about the third nekudah, lachatz? It's also in the sugya. What happened to that? So he comes and tells me because it's anyway taharah, so why go into it? You have to tell me that, right? You yourself say omedes and yosheves. You see that there's makom to say maybe it's different. Lachatz, I could say, any baal seichel will come and say, well, what do you mean it's different? What do you mean you don't see it's different? Are you maskim that if you just wanted to tell me that every time you find mei raglayim, it cannot, you'd need to just write every time it's mei raglayim, bashanah it's mutar, and finished. And עומדת, an עומדת is obviously because you would say not that way. Kumashmalan, the Shulchan Aruch, you should know. So I'm asking you, why would he skip what he just said? Mikalachas is sheyeseses. Unless a woman wouldn't have a havamina that makes a difference. Maybe, I mean, you see there is a difference. You see the Rishonim talk about it. What about lachatz? That zicher makes sense. Zicher makes sense. You should come and say, you know what, I tremendous, couldn't control myself. It makes sense that it could be something's wrong. And the teretz is, according to the Rishonim that explain עומדת causes שיסעס, and that itself is לחץ, so then it's miyushev. It's all עומדת. It's all עומדת. Right? Good? Good? Yes or no? Are you here? Okay. Yeah? Okay. But I ask you, there's two types of לחץ. There's the לחץ of standing up, and then there's—what happened if she held back for hours? She was on a trip and she couldn't find the bathroom. So I found an interesting Ran, okay? The Ran in the teshuva, siman samach tes, says a marvelous thing. Why is she עומדת? Why is she going to the bathroom that way? Who goes to the bathroom that way? As he says. It's exactly what he says. She's עומדת because she couldn't control—she couldn't hold it. One more second. Ready chiddush, no? Rashi says this. I saw in the Ran. Rashi says that she's עומדת for this reason. Okay. So then you have the לחץ of—before also in the word עומדת, okay. According to this, if in a medes is the story of bein sheisas mei mekalachas and bein lachatz and bein not lachatz, and that's the story of oimedes. So when the Ramah comes and he's matir, so he's—I'm sorry—when the Ramah comes, is ein lehatir. Does he mean ein lehatir even if there was lachatz? Or does he mean ein lehatir just back on what he said before on oimedes and yosheves? So maybe nafka mina. If I stick back lachatz into the oimedes and yosheves of the Mechaber, so then the Ramah is a whole different Ramah.

But I'm asking you, but no, but not both. No, I'm saying, he says, Ein lehatir ela b'yosheves, okay? Aval b'medes, ima klachas. That's with lachatz or without lachatz? You don't know. I'm asking, I'm seeing the lachatz of her holding back. You don't know. The Gemara says that's not that lachatz. According to Tosafos, it's normal derech. Again, again, again. If omedes means that there was lachatz from before, so when the Rama says ein lehatir, he means what case? That case too? Again, the way the Rishonim explain—I'm asking, not the Rishonim, I'm asking, how do you read this mechaber? The Mechaber says, omedes tahor. So I said, do we stick in lachatz or we don't stick in lachatz? If you don't stick in lachatz, you don't know in the Rama when he says omedes u'mikaleches, lachatz, you don't know that. It could be that if it's not because of lachatz, for example, and I hold like this very strongly, if let's say, if let's say she's doing it because of nekiyus. Yes, the toilet is dirty. People, when they go away, they're not going to want to sit in the bathroom. They don't want to do it. Huh? You went to a gas station. Pashut, pashut case, right? So if you learn that the lachatz and af al pi kein— So you have that in the lachatz of the amidah, right? You have the lachatz in af al pi kein, so it's ein lohat, right? Ein lohat. The Rama says, the Mechaber says you have to be mat. The Rama says ein lohat with the lachatz, okay? Maybe the lachatz from before, he would be maskim to. That you don't know. That you don't have in the Rama. That's what I want to... Write this down. Write this down, and if you argue with me, you'll write a teshuvah that you're right. Write it. I don't mind. Go ahead. Sure. What? He brings a case here: aval boy medes im mikalachas l'toch hasafsal v'nimtza sham dam, tehorah. Aval im shoyeses, tameiah. Usually shoyeses, there's no lachatz there. Right, right. There is lachatz. What? It's the same case as... What? She held herself back, it would be asur. She would be holding herself back for two hours, that would be asur, because everybody explains she needs to only comes because she holds herself back. If she's streaming, it's a stream, that's normal. She just happens to be standing. It's normal. What are you saying? What are you doing? What did you just do now? Right, shotetet could come from the way she's sitting. Now, aha. Now, not everybody says that. It's machlokes rishonim, drop by drop. That's what the Rishonim—it's machlokes rishonim. Some Rishonim say that the actual amidah itself causes the sheyes. Okay, so you have to do your homework a little bit better. I thought you knew more than the— Again, he's saying like this: Hagah. He's saying like this: Hagah, d'ein la'tirah ela b'yosheves v'hishtin, okay, aval b'omedes—she says, 'omedes—im mekaleches, right, so it's not a problem. Wait a second. There's no lachatz, right? There's no lachatz, omedes and there's no lachatz. So I'm asking, what happens—so one sec, there's no lachatz, it's still tahor. Okay, now what about v'yesh omrim, the second one, afilu b'yosheves—wait a second, ein lehatir ela b'mekalachas, v'nimtza dam peirush, aval al sfas ha'omedes b'chol ענין טמאה, right? One second, so where's the lachatz? There is no lachatz. But what happens in case there is lachatz? I'm telling you, but what happens if the lachatz is not from the amidah, that she—

Had lach because she held in. You don't have that in the Rambam. That's what you say. That's what I'm trying to tell you. If you learn the Rishonim, you see it's not so pashut, the Rishonim. That's one side of the Rishonim. There's two ways to learn it. Either you learn that the fact that she held in, that's where the tznius comes from, or from the way she sits, that's where the tznius comes from. From the way she stands or the way she sits, the tznius comes from. Machlokes Rishonim, where the tznius comes from. If she's standing, there could be tznius. If she's sitting, it's mekalkeles. Yes, I'm saying a very pashut thing. I'm saying it's like this. You have to know in the Mechaber, when he talks about v'hi omedes, do we mean v'hi omedes and also sheyoseses? The Shach says yes, we mean that. Do we mean also lachatz? Yes, we mean that also, that omedes, lachatz, and tahor. So the Ramo argues, and he says omedes is no good. The second shita of omedes is no good. So it's omedes is no good even if it's sheyoseses. It's no good even if it's mekalachas. It's no good even if there's lachatz. If the Ramo learned, im haRama lo med... ...גם אני לא אוהב את זה עכשיו. גם לי יש לי בעיה... ...עוד פעם... ...אז מה? ...מה עושה second shita? ...אומדת... So you don't know what the emed is b'chol hainyan is aser. Does he mean emed b'chol hainyan, whether even if it's mekalachas, right? Whether it's even if she has stress from the fact that she's standing, which means even sheyeseses. Make a difference, right? So I'm asking you, what about a third thing? What happens in case there's lachatz from the fact she held in? Is that nichlal in emedes b'chol hainyan? How do you know? Because you decided that. Okay, okay. So I'm saying not like that, okay? Lachatz on sitting. I'm saying like this: what happens if she's— that's a different case. That's the second case I want to get to. What happens if she's sitting and she rather does have lachatz? It's another case I want to get. I want to get to two cases which, depending on how you learn the mechaber and the Rama, would be taluy. Is emedes mean even the lachatz from holding in? So when the Rama asers lachatz, he means even that also. And maybe that lachatz could cause דא. You know, the Gemara says whoever, right, holds back, עובר ניסן, right? עובר בטל שח. The Gemara also says that it's maybely dei צילון. You get a certain disease, I don't know. What? Whatever, but it causes physical— physical is very unhealthy. The what? I understand that, but how do you know she doesn't get sick from it? I don't know. Maybe he gets sick from it. How do you know that if a woman holds it, it doesn't cause any problem? Maybe it does. The next nekudah is, what happens if she's a yesheves and she has lachatz? What happens in such a case? Okay, so write down the shaylah. Write down, and today in the afternoon you'll fight about it, and now let me go further in the meantime, okay? Because this is just chelek aleph shel ha'shiur. We're going to go more, the Rama. Okay. The Mechaber comes along and says that it came out, im mei ragleha, im, with. Now, with could mean that you saw it come out with, and with is that it's there together, and we assume that it came together. Lo itasheseh. Yesh klal, omrim k'sheze yotzei, sheyotzei dam; achar kach omrim sheyesh dam b'toch hasefer. Is that included? Is that included in im mei ragleha? So the poskim say—

Yeah, of course, because that's the case. Safek, that's the next sugya. Okay. So I had a pashta kasha: who said? How do you know? Especially, you come and tell me a klal that's not normal for dam to come b'hishtanah, then you look inside, maybe it came after. Why should you say it came before? I don't know. It's a peledike. If you saw it come out together, okay, so it came out together. But if you didn't see it come out together, maybe first this came and then that came. Why should we say? Huh? Asur. What are you talking— I don't see the whole sugya. I חושב the whole sugya. What's the sugya? Yatza dam b'hishtanah, so if you saw it together, okay. But if you didn't see it together, and there's a klal that it can't come together, but there a klal doesn't come together, so that's a good enough reason to say it didn't come together. So how could you be toleh? In the Rash, let's say it's 98 percent, whatever. Since more שכיח to say that it came afterwards, why should you say it came together? Then you'll find in the sefas ha-sefer, you wouldn't find it only inside. I would say nafka mina. No, I'm talking about inside, inside. Come and say that it's from that. You know what I would say? Maybe it depends on when she got up, how quick was. I don't know, how quick was. I don't know. Maybe it matters. Maybe if it's mamash right away, so we can't say came after. But if it wasn't right away, maybe you can say came after. Why? And if you could say came, why don't we say it came after? A peledike chiddush to me. It's a peledike chiddush to me. Hmm. You come and tell me can come together, right? That makes sense. So if you saw it come together, so you have a problem, so you have to figure out how it came together. But if it didn't come, and you looked afterwards, you found it, so that's your explanation: it didn't come together. Why say it came together, which doesn't make sense? Say it didn't come together and it makes sense, and that's all, finished. Ah. So now you're being maskim to my ta'irah, because even if we're going to say there is dam, the dam is only a chash to be choshesh. There is never a tzad, really, that we're afraid of dam. If anything, it's a kesem. Since it's a kesem, so therefore we're not going to come and say bedavka that it is when we don't know that way either. Lu yetzur wasn't a kesem, so what's there to talk about? You know that dam can't come bashton. Can't come. Can't. So why would you say that it did if you didn't see it? If you don't see, it's not muchach that it's that way. Teretz is the other way around. באמת it's a kesem, not a re'iyah, it's a kesem. Since it's a kesem, so therefore, since it's possible, even miut, possible, could be. That's right. And therefore I'm saying in Rashi, ein derech ... ein derech beformat. Can't be, because then this wouldn't work out. Hey, derech kemi, and it can't be, because then I would say that if it can't be, so then it's ein derech. What's the ...? But why should you say that? For what reason? What's the mechayev of it? The whole mechayev of the—you're missing the whole—you're not starting to get angry. The whole mechayev to say that is because it's ein derech. But that's only while, not after. So say it was after. Why should you say it was during and then say ein derech and make it a makah? Where are you going? I just stopped. Where are you going? So it's ein derech during. So she's zochet meh, then what are you talking about? Can I—if she could sometimes see niddus during going to the bathroom, that makes her more tamei? No. The chances are, the chances are that it's not that. The chances are not that. Now, you didn't see it during. You saw that it could be after. So why say it was during and then say it's a makah because of ein derech? So say that it wasn't during. I don't know what you're talking about. You're saying maybe it's a—how do you know it's a makah? Only because of ein derech. That's the mechayev of the makah. So don't say it was during. Just say it was after. That's your tli in the makah. I don't—I'm telling you an answer. It's only a drop-on in any way. It's only a drop-on in any way. I'm trying to prove that even if it was after. So why do you have to come on to saying Rashi? So ein derech's just not shayach.

Okay, we'll get to that. You want me to—I'm asking to go further. Are the islands ready to go further? Okay. Okay, so I'll tell you what we're gonna do. Listen to what we're gonna do. Could we do this after Mincha? No, I'm not gonna stick around. Okay. We started the siman. Okay, hello? You promised me you're gonna work on this. This is—we're not moving. Two, three days. So Thursday we're gonna— All right, work on it. Go further in this nekudah. I'll tell you what my chiddush...