Siman 183 — Lamdan level: the foundation of the din of niddah
Hargashah, makor and seven clean days — study and pilpul on the single seif
סימן קפ״ג
נדה וזבה, חומרא דרבי זירא, הרגשה ועקירה, דם המקור
עיון, פלפול, שיטות הראשונים והאחרונים
⚡ For students and talmidei chakhamim ⚡
✦ ❖ ✦
Pilpul and in-depth study
Sugyos, sources, the chakirah of the foundation, machlokos of Rishonim and Acharonim,
nafka minos for practice and examination of the shitos
Subject:
שולחן ערוך יורה דעה סימן קפ״ג (a single seif)
with the nosei kelim: ש״ך (שפתי כהן), ט״ז (טורי זהב), פתחי תשובה, סדרי טהרה
Foundation of the sugya in Shas:
נדה ס״ו ע״א (the chumra of Rabbi Zeira, בנות ישראל) · ויקרא ט״ו (the parashah of niddah and zavah) · רמב״ם הלכות איסורי ביאה, chapters 5 and 11
Written and edited by:
הרב יוסף חיים סממה · DAAT
📑 Table of contents
Introduction to the sugya — a woman from whose source blood has come out, the foundation of all the laws of niddah (a single seif)
Niddah of the Torah and zavah — the two institutions of the Torah and the root of the distinction
The chumra of Rabbi Zeira and the daughters of Israel — always seven clean days, and the nature of that acceptance (נדה ס״ו ע״א)
Hargashah — the three kinds of sensation (פ״ת ס״ק א) and hargashah of the Torah
Uprooting and going out — at which instant the tumah is born (ט״ז, פ״ת ס״ק ב, ברית אברהם)
Hargashah against kesem — of the Torah and of the Rabbis (siman 190)
The blood of the makor — the derashah of מקור דמיה (ש״ך), blood of the makor and blood of a wound
Kechardal — the measure of the sighting (פ״ת ס״ק ג ; ש״ך ס״ק ג)
Unmarried, married and kareis — the universality of the prohibition (ריב״ש, רמ״א)
אשה שרואה טיפת דם צריכה לישב ז׳ נקיים. ובו סעיף אחד: אשה שיצא דם ממקורה בין באונס בין ברצון טמאה והוא שתרגיש ביציאתו ומיהו משתרגיש בו שנעקר ממקומו ויצא טמאה אע״פ שלא יצא לחוץ ואפי׳ לא ראתה אלא טיפת דם כחרדל יושבת עליו ז׳ נקיים: הגה כאשר יתבאר משפטן לקמן סי׳ קצ״ו ואין חילוק בין פנויה לנשואה לענין איסור נדה (ריב״ש סימן תכ״ב מביאו ב״י) כי כל הבא על הנדה חייב כרת:
The foundation — the three conditions of the din of niddah
The foundation of the siman, which is the gateway to all the laws of niddah: a woman becomes temei'ah through a sighting of blood under three conditions held together. (a) The makor — that the blood came out of her source, from the womb, and not from another place.
« שיצא דם ממקורה » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
(b) Hargashah — the sensation of its coming out; it is the condition of tumah of the Torah.
« והוא שתרגיש ביציאתו » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
(c) Any quantity whatsoever — a drop like a mustard seed is enough, and no minimum measure has to be reached.
« לא ראתה אלא טיפת דם כחרדל » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
And there is no difference between duress (a jump, an exertion) and the natural course: in either case she is temei'ah.
« בין באונס בין ברצון טמאה » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
And from the moment she is temei'ah, she counts seven clean days; the rule of that counting will be set out further on (siman 196).
« יושבת עליו ז׳ נקיים » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
"it was uprooted from its place and came out… even though it did not come out to the outside": the Acharonim weighed the Mechaber's words. The tumah does not depend on the blood leaving the body, but on the uprooting — that the blood detaches from its place in the makor and begins to move. Once she has felt that uprooting she is temei'ah at once, even though the blood has not come out to the outside.
« משתרגיש בו שנעקר ממקומו ויצא טמאה אע״פ שלא יצא לחוץ » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
This is the great foundation on which the whole sugya turns: what exactly fixes the instant of the tumah — the uprooting out of the makor, or the arrival in the בית החיצון?
The place of the siman in the whole: siman 183 is the foundation; the other simanim of niddah are its detail — hargashah and kesamim (siman 190), the times of the veses in the simanim that follow, the counting of the seven clean days, the bedikos and the tevilah (siman 196 onwards). The Shach says so in as many words at the end of his fourth ס״ק, citing the עטרת זהב.
« הוא מקור ויסוד שעליו נבנו כל דיני הנדה הנהוגים בזמן הזה » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ד׳)
That is why it is fitting to dwell here on the root of the concepts, from which everything else is derived.
2. Niddah of the Torah and zavah — the two institutions
To understand why seven clean days are always counted, one must first dwell on two distinct institutions of the Torah.
The chakirah — niddah and zavah, what separates them: the Torah (ויקרא ט״ו) divides the woman who sees blood into two dinim. Niddah — one who sees blood during her days of niddah (the seven days the Torah fixes at the beginning of the cycle) is temei'ah for seven days from the sighting and then immerses — even if she saw throughout the seven days. Zavah — one who sees blood during the days of zivah (the eleven days that follow the days of niddah), outside the time of her veses; the minor zavah (one day) keeps a day against a day, and the major zavah (three consecutive days) requires seven clean days and a korban. The Shach recalls that the days of zivah are only the eleven immediately following the seven in which she saw as a niddah.
« ואין ימי זיבה אלא בי״א הסמוכים לז׳ שראתה בהם נדות » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ד׳)
The two institutions — the basic table:
The institution
When
The counting toward taharah
Niddah of the Torah
A sighting during the days of niddah (start of the cycle)
Seven days from the sighting, then tevilah — even without clean days
Major zavah
Three consecutive sightings during the days of zivah
שבעה נקיים — seven days clean of blood, then tevilah
The root of the practical difficulty: the Torah's division between days of niddah and days of zivah presupposes an exact counting of days — when the cycle began, how many days have passed, whether she has entered the days of zivah. In our time we are not expert in that calculation, and one cannot know with certainty whether the sighting falls in days of niddah (in which case seven clean days would not be needed) or in days of zivah (in which case they would). Out of that doubt grew the chumra of Rabbi Zeira, set out in the next section. The Rambam describes exactly this process: because not all women had the strength to count the days of niddah and the days of zivah, the Sages decreed that all the woman's days should be like her days of zivah.
That is: the daughters of Israel took a stringency upon themselves — that every sighting of blood, however slight and even within the days of niddah, be treated as a doubt of zivah; and that they therefore always count seven clean days before the tevilah, not contenting themselves with the seven days of niddah.
The foundation — two institutions merged into a single din:
The chumra of Rabbi Zeira brings the two institutions of the Torah (niddah and zavah) together into a single practice. Since we do not know whether the sighting falls in days of niddah or in days of zivah, every sighting is treated as that of a zavah: any woman who sees blood, even a drop like a mustard seed and even in her days of niddah, counts seven clean days and then immerses. And it is through that gate that the din of our siman enters: the Mechaber's phrase, יושבת עליו ז׳ נקיים, is the language of the zavah, and it draws its force from the acceptance of the daughters of Israel.
Chakirah — what is the nature of that acceptance: the ways of study divide over the status of the chumra of Rabbi Zeira: is it a custom that the daughters of Israel took upon themselves — which is the letter of the gemara, "they were stringent upon themselves" —
or has it become a full takanah of the Sages, which it is in no one's power to abolish? The Rambam, by distinguishing two layers, gives material to both sides: on the one hand the gezeirah of the Sages (cited in the previous section), on the other an additional stringency that the daughters of Israel added on top of it.
The nafka mina is read in the regime of doubt, in the case of a place where such a custom would not have been taken on, and in the possibility of leniency under duress. The question is reported here; it is not decided.
The Rambam (הלכות איסורי ביאה פי״א): the Rambam writes that this conduct was adopted in every place where there are Jews, and that it applies to every daughter of Israel who sees blood, even a single drop like a mustard seed.
The Shach says the same from the standpoint of the din: by Torah law only the major zavah must sit seven clean days, and it was to prevent error that the Sages required seven clean days in every case.
« היינו מדרבנן אבל מדאורייתא א״צ לישב ז׳ נקיים אלא זבה גדולה » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ד׳)
« אלא שכדי שלא תבא לידי טעות החמירו חז״ל והצריכו לעולם ז׳ נקיים » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ד׳)
Thus the Mechaber's phrase, "she counts seven clean days", already encloses within it the acceptance of the daughters of Israel.
"והוא שתרגיש ביציאתו" (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א) — the condition of hargashah is the heart of the siman, and on it rests the distinction between what is of the Torah and what is of the Rabbis.
The foundation — hargashah as the condition of tumah of the Torah:
By Torah law the woman is temei'ah only through blood whose coming out she has felt. A sighting with no sensation at all is not tumah of the Torah, and its regime is judged separately (the kesamim, siman 190). Hargashah is therefore not a side detail but the very body of the obligation: it is what separates blood of niddah of the Torah from a mere trace of blood without sensation. The Shach writes it in as many words.
« היינו מדאורייתא אבל מדרבנן טמאה אע״פ שלא הרגישה כדלקמן סימן ק״צ וכמה דוכתי » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
The three kinds of hargashah (פתחי תשובה ס״ק א): the Pischei Teshuvah reports, in the name of the Acharonim, that hargashah is not one thing but three ways, each of which counts as hargashah for the woman to be temei'ah by Torah law.
« ודע דשלשה מיני הרגשות יש לענין שתהא טמאה מדאורייתא » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
(a) Her body shuddered — she felt a tremor, a shaking of her whole body; the Pischei Teshuvah reports it from the Rambam, in chapter 5 of Hilchos Issurei Biah, din 14.
(c) A moist thing flowed — she felt that a moist thing was flowing from her within; the Pischei Teshuvah finds it in the responsa of the Acharonim.
« והשלישית נמצא בשו״ת האחרונים ז״ל כשמרגשת שדבר לח זב ממנה בפנים » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
And the Pischei Teshuvah at once reports that the Chasam Sofer disputes this third case in several responsa, and holds at length that the flowing of a moist thing is not a hargashah.
« והאריך לבאר דזיבת דבר לח לאו הרגשה הוא » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
Chakirah — what is the "hargashah" the Torah made a condition: out of the three ways the question arises: is hargashah the sensation of the blood itself flowing (a moist thing flowing), or the sensation of the makor's action (the opening of the makor, the shaking of the body), which does not depend on the blood as such? The nafka mina appears where she felt a hargashah and found nothing on examination, or found only a kesem. The Pischei Teshuvah raises precisely this question and refers to the responsa that treated it.
« ואם מצאה דם בבדיקה בלא הרגשה או אחר תשמיש בלא הרגשה אי הוי ספק דאורייתא » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
He reports that in the judgment of the כרתי ופלתי, the סדרי טהרה and the חוות דעת it would be of the Torah, but that for a mere wiping, or where she did not insert the ed deeply, there is only a rabbinic matter when she did not feel.
« אבל בקינוח או שלא הכניסה העד בעומק אלא מהפרוזדור ולחוץ אינו אלא מדרבנן כשלא הרגישה » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
And for practice — ask your Rav.
5. Uprooting and going out — at which instant the tumah is born
The question — where exactly the tumah is fixed: the Mechaber's formulation calls for weighing.
« משתרגיש בו שנעקר ממקומו ויצא טמאה אע״פ שלא יצא לחוץ » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
What is "was uprooted" and what is "came out"? Is the uprooting out of the makor, inward, enough, or must the blood have reached the בית החיצון, the outer chamber? And if the blood then goes out to the outside, does that going out add anything? This is the knot of the study on this seif.
The two sides of the doubt, as the Pischei Teshuvah sets them out (ס״ק ב):
The side
What it holds
Where it is set out
Everything turns on the uprooting
The essence of the tumah is the uprooting of the blood from the inner chamber to the בית החיצון; the blood's going out to the outside neither adds nor takes away
A Rav's question, reported and answered in this sense by the ברית אברהם (פ״ת ס״ק ב׳)
The going out also counts
The going out from the בית החיצון to the outside would itself be a sighting of tumah, and that blood could not be counted within the seven clean days
The other side of the same doubt (פ״ת ס״ק ב׳ ; וכן נסתפק בתשובת מעיל צדקה סי׳ נ״ד)
The question of the ברית אברהם (פתחי תשובה ס״ק ב): the Pischei Teshuvah reports the responsum of the Bris Avraham (חלק יו״ד סימן מ״ב): a Rav found himself in doubt about the instant of the tumah.
« עי׳ בתשו׳ ברית אברהם חי״ד סי׳ מ״ב שרב אחד נסתפק » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
« אם נימא דעיקר הטומאה בעקירת הדם מבית הפנימי לבה״ח אבל יציאת הדם מבית החיצון לחוץ לא מעלה ולא מוריד » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
« או דיציאת הדם מבה״ח לחוץ יחשב ג״כ לראית טומאה ולא תוכל לצרפו למנין ז״נ » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
The Bris Avraham answered him and brought many proofs that no additional tumah arises from the blood's going out of the בית החיצון.
« והרבה להוכיח דאין שום טומאה נוספת ביציאת הדם מבה״ח לחוץ » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
The Mechaber's phrase, "even though it did not come out to the outside", points the same way: no exit from the body is required. The Taz, at this precise place, does not decide the question: he refers to the beginning of siman 188, where these dinim are set out.
« עיין ריש סימן קפ״ח מדינים אלו » (ט״ז יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
And for practice — ask your Rav.
Nafka mina, and the Pischei Teshuvah's reservation: even holding that the going out to the outside adds no tumah, the practical consequence the questioning Rav drew does not follow. Since she must perform the bedikah of the hefsek taharah, she has to know that no blood remains, even in the בית החיצון.
« דכיון שצריכה בדיקת הפסק טהרה צריכה שתדע שלא יהיה שום דם אפילו בבה״ח » (פתחי תשובה יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
The shitah of the Taz (ס״ק א) — duress and natural course: the Taz explains that "by duress" means by a jump, and "willingly" means according to the woman's nature, of itself. In either case, once she has felt the uprooting, she is temei'ah.
« באונס. פירוש על ידי קפיצה » (ט״ז יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
« ברצון פירוש כפי טבע האשה מחמת עצמה » (ט״ז יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
We learn from here that it is the uprooting-with-sensation that is decisive, and not the manner in which it was brought about.
6. Hargashah against kesem — of the Torah and of the Rabbis
Out of the condition of hargashah is born one of the great practical foundations of all the laws of niddah.
The foundation — two separate tracks:
• Hargashah (siman 183) — a sighting whose coming out she felt: tumah of niddah of the Torah, and it is of this that all the details of the siman speak (duress, natural course, kechardal).
• Kesem (siman 190) — she found blood on her garment or at her bedikah without hargashah: tumah of a kesem, whose substance is rabbinic, and which carries details of measure, place and colour that hargashah does not know. The Shach draws the line of division on the Mechaber's very words.
« היינו מדאורייתא אבל מדרבנן טמאה אע״פ שלא הרגישה כדלקמן סימן ק״צ » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
The root of the matter: since the Torah suspended the tumah upon hargashah, blood found without hargashah is not temei'ah by Torah law. Why then is she temei'ah through a kesem at all? Because the Sages decreed tumah upon the kesem, out of concern that she may have felt and not paid attention. From there come all the leniencies of the kesamim (siman 190): less than a גריס, a kesem found on something that does not receive tumah, attribution to a wound — all of them lighten because the substance of the tumah of a kesem is rabbinic, which is not so of the hargashah of the Torah of siman 183. The measure of the גריס is the one the Mechaber sets out at siman 190.
« לא גזרו על הכתם אלא אם כן יש בו כגריס ועוד » (שו״ע יו״ד ק״צ:ה)
Nafka mina — she felt, examined, and found nothing: since hargashah is decisive, the Acharonim examine the case of one who felt a full hargashah (the opening of the makor, the shaking of the body) and found nothing at all — is the sensation attributed to something else, or do we suspect a sighting? And conversely: a kesem found with no hargashah at all falls under the rabbinic regime and is treated more lightly. This is the very question the Pischei Teshuvah leaves open at his first ס״ק. And for the decision in each case — ask your Rav.
7. The blood of the makor — the derashah of "מקור דמיה"
The chakirah — which blood renders temei'ah: the Mechaber's phrasing is precise: it is not every blood coming from the woman that renders her temei'ah with the tumah of niddah, but specifically the blood that comes from the makor, the womb.
« שיצא דם ממקורה » (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
Hence the question: what is the regime of blood that comes from elsewhere — from a wound, an injury, or another organ?
The derashah of the Shach — "מקור דמיה": the Shach reports that the source of the din that only blood of the makor renders temei'ah is the verse, from which our Sages learned that she is temei'ah only through blood that comes from the makor.
« מדכתיב והיא גלתה את מקור דמיה למדו חז״ל שאינה טמאה אלא בדם הבא מן המקור » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק א׳)
The verse is the one of the kareis of the niddah (ויקרא כ׳:יח), from which the Rama also draws his gloss at the end of the seif. Therefore, if it is established with certainty that the blood comes from another place and not from the makor, there is no tumah of niddah there — without prejudice to what must still be examined under the heading of kesamim and the other concerns.
Blood of the makor against blood of a wound:
Origin of the blood
The din
Note
Blood of the makor (womb)
Renders temei'ah with the tumah of niddah (with hargashah)
The substance of the din of our siman
Blood of a wound or injury
Is not blood of niddah — it is attributed to the wound
Under conditions, and after establishment; see siman 190
Attribution to a wound — with caution: the din of attributing to a wound (if she has a wound in a place from which blood comes out, she attributes the blood to the wound and not to the makor) is treated at length in the laws of kesamim (siman 190), and it carries many conditions there: that the wound actually bleed, that it not be evident that this blood is blood of niddah, and so forth. In our time, establishing the origin of the blood — makor or wound — most often requires a medical examination joined to the decision of a moreh hora'ah. And for practice — ask your Rav.
"ואפי׳ לא ראתה אלא טיפת דם כחרדל יושבת עליו ז׳ נקיים" (שו״ע יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
The foundation — blood of niddah has no measure:
Unlike the laws of kesamim, where a גריס ועוד is needed to render temei'ah rabbinically, blood of niddah whose coming out she felt has no measure at all: even a drop like a mustard seed renders temei'ah. And the reason for the distinction is what has just been set out: blood of hargashah is tumah of the Torah, and there is no room to apply to it the measure of the kesamim, whose substance is rabbinic. The Shach goes further still: even less than that.
« וה״ה פחות כ״כ האגור בשם ש״ד והגש״ד וכ״כ האחרונים ופשוט הוא » (ש״ך יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ג׳)
What the Pischei Teshuvah sets out on this word (ס״ק ג): the Pischei Teshuvah decides nothing here: he refers to the responsa that treated the measure — שב יעקב סימן ל״ח ול״ט, כתר כהונה סימן מ״ח — and to a responsum that treats of already dried blood.
All of this teaches that the attention is not on the quantity but on the sighting-with-sensation itself. What those responsa conclude about dried blood is not reported here, and is not decided. And for practice — ask your Rav.
9. Unmarried, married and kareis — the universality of the prohibition
"הגה כאשר יתבאר משפטן לקמן סי׳ קצ״ו ואין חילוק בין פנויה לנשואה לענין איסור נדה (ריב״ש סימן תכ״ב מביאו ב״י) כי כל הבא על הנדה חייב כרת" (רמ״א יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
The foundation — the prohibition depends on the woman's state, not on the bond of marriage:
The tumah of niddah and the prohibition attached to it do not depend in any way on the woman's being married. Every woman who has seen blood with hargashah — unmarried or married — is a niddah, and whoever comes upon her is liable to kareis. This is the Rama's chiddush in the name of the Rivash: let it not enter the mind that the prohibition of niddah is a din governing the relation of a man to his wife — it is a din in the woman's own person, holding against every man.
« ואין חילוק בין פנויה לנשואה לענין איסור נדה » (רמ״א יו״ד קפ״ג:א)
The root of the Rivash's words: the Rama's source is a responsum of the Rivash (סימן תכ״ב), cited by the Beis Yosef — the Rama himself gives that reference in his gloss. And the reason of the matter: the kareis of the niddah is stated in the Torah of any man who lies with a woman in her state of niddah, without distinguishing between married and unmarried.
It follows that the din of siman 183 — the fixing of the tumah — is a general din holding for every daughter of Israel, and from there come the gravity of the siman and its founding character. The Taz, at his second ס״ק, recalls moreover that it was the fear of error in a prohibition of kareis that led to the stringency on every shade of red.
« משום שמא יבאו לטעות באיסור כרת החמירו לטמא כל מראה אדום » (ט״ז יו״ד קפ״ג ס״ק ב׳)
Note — the scope of the siman: siman 183 fixes only the tumah itself and its gravity (the kareis); but the details of the ways to permission — the counting of the seven clean days, the bedikos, the chafifah and the tevilah — are set out further on (siman 196 onwards), as the Rama himself says in opening his gloss.
And every practical ruling in this matter requires the judgment of a moreh hora'ah. And for practice — ask your Rav (or a dayan / a certified yoetzet halachah).
The overall chakirah of the siman: what are the conditions that constitute the tumah of niddah, and what is their root?
Makor — only blood coming from the womb renders temei'ah, by the derashah of the verse that the Shach reports (ש״ך ס״ק א׳).
Hargashah — a condition of the Torah; three kinds of sensation: the body shudders, the makor opens, a moist thing flows (פ״ת ס״ק א׳), the third being disputed by the Chasam Sofer.
Akirah — the tumah is born at the uprooting out of the makor, even though the blood has not come out to the outside (מחבר; and the doubt of the ברית אברהם, פ״ת ס״ק ב׳).
Kechardal — blood of hargashah has no measure (מחבר; ש״ך ס״ק ג׳), unlike the rabbinic kesem (siman 190).
Seven clean days — by force of the chumra of Rabbi Zeira and of the daughters of Israel, every sighting is treated as a doubt of zivah (נדה ס״ו ע״א; ש״ך ס״ק ד׳).
Kareis — no distinction between unmarried and married (ריב״ש, רמ״א).
Nafka mina for practice, as the Acharonim cited here set it out:
A sighting of blood from the makor with hargashah → tumah of niddah of the Torah → seven clean days and then tevilah (the ways of the counting: siman 196).
She found blood without hargashah (a kesem) → a rabbinic and lighter din (siman 190): measure, place and colour change the outcome (ש״ך ס״ק ב׳).
It was established that the blood comes from a wound and not from the makor → attribution to the wound, under its conditions and after establishment (siman 190; and most often a medical examination is needed).
No distinction between unmarried and married — the prohibition and the kareis hold for every daughter of Israel (ריב״ש, רמ״א).
And for practice — ask your Rav (or a dayan / a certified yoetzet halachah).
Only blood of the womb renders temei'ah; blood of a wound does not
מחבר ; ש״ך ס״ק א׳ (מקור דמיה)
Hargashah
A condition of the Torah; three kinds of sensation
מחבר ; ש״ך ס״ק ב׳ ; פ״ת ס״ק א׳
Akirah
Temei'ah from the instant of the uprooting, even though the blood has not come out to the outside
מחבר ; פ״ת ס״ק ב׳ (ברית אברהם)
Duress and natural course
No distinction — in either case she is temei'ah
מחבר ; ט״ז ס״ק א׳
Kechardal
Blood of hargashah has no measure — and even less than that
מחבר ; ש״ך ס״ק ג׳ ; פ״ת ס״ק ג׳
Seven clean days
Always, by force of the chumra of Rabbi Zeira
נדה ס״ו ע״א ; ש״ך ס״ק ד׳ ; הגה (סימן קצ״ו)
Unmarried and married
No distinction; whoever comes upon a niddah is liable to kareis
רמ״א בשם ריב״ש סימן תכ״ב
Table — central machlokos and foundations
Subject
First side
Second side
The instant of the tumah
Everything turns on the uprooting toward the בית החיצון; the going out to the outside adds nothing (ברית אברהם, פ״ת ס״ק ב׳)
The going out from the בית החיצון to the outside also counts as a sighting of tumah (the other side of the doubt, פ״ת ס״ק ב׳)
Hargashah — its nature
Sensation of the blood flowing — a moist thing flows (פ״ת ס״ק א׳)
Sensation of the makor's action — the makor opens, the body shudders; and the Chasam Sofer disputes the first (פ״ת ס״ק א׳)
Blood without hargashah (a kesem)
Hargashah — of the Torah (siman 183)
Kesem — rabbinic and lighter (siman 190; ש״ך ס״ק ב׳)
The nature of the chumra of Rabbi Zeira
A custom the daughters of Israel took upon themselves (נדה ס״ו ע״א; רמב״ם פי״א ה״ד)
A full gezeirah of the Sages (רמב״ם פי״א ה״ג; ש״ך ס״ק ד׳)
Table — the sources of the sugya
Torah and gemara: ויקרא ט״ו (the parashah of niddah and zavah) · ויקרא כ׳:יח (the verse of kareis; from it the ש״ך draws the derashah of מקור דמיה — the form « והיא גלתה את מקור דמיה » is the ש״ך’s, the verse itself reading וְהִוא) · נדה ס״ו ע״א (the chumra of Rabbi Zeira, בנות ישראל) · נדה ג׳ ע״א (אִשָּׁה מַרְגֶּשֶׁת בְּעַצְמָהּ)
Acharonim: בית יוסף · רמ״א · ש״ך · ט״ז · פתחי תשובה · סדרי טהרה · כרתי ופלתי · חוות דעת · ערוך השולחן (יורה דעה קפ״ג) · ברית אברהם · נודע ביהודה · חתם סופר
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ DAAT · הרב יוסף חיים סממה
תלמיד חכם · מעביר שיעורים בהלכה ובחסידות סימן קפ״ג · Level 2 — Lamdan · יסוד דין הנדה — הרגשה, מקור ושבעה נקיים daattorah.com
⚠️ This content is written for study and examination only. In matters of taharas hamishpachah, for any practical ruling (לְמַעֲשֶׂה) — ask your Rav (or a dayan / a certified yoetzet halachah).