ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous dafNidah 12
(a) No! It is forbidden for a woman to examine herself before Tashmish for
her husband only - because we are worried that her husband, knowing that
she is not working in Taharos, will suspect that she is perhaps Temei'ah,
and will separate from her.
(b) After Tashmish, a woman can either make a proper examination. But this
takes time, and, by the time she has performed it, should she find blood,
there is a likelihood that the blood came only afterwards. Consequently,
they will not be Chayav Chatas - at most, an Asham Taluy - if that.
Or she can just wipe the womb clean, which takes no time at all. Therefore,
if she finds blood, they will both be Chayav Chatas.
(c) No! she is not obligated to examine herself - even after Tashmish. This
is because we are afraid that, since her husband knows that intends to
examine herself, he will be afraid (even in advance) to be intimate with
her, in case she later discovers that she is Temei'ah. (This is how Rashi
learns the Gemara's Sha'aleh, though it appears strange that the Gemara
should ask this again, after having established that a woman is not
obligated to examine herself for her husband alone; in addition, the Lashon
'Mahu she'Tivdok' and not 'Mahu she'Chayeves Livdok' suggests a voluntary
examination, rather than an obligatory one. It seems more appropriate to
explain the Sha'aleh as to whether she is *permitted* to examine herself,
rather than *obligated*- in the way that Tosfos explains the Sha'aleh of
before Tashmish [where Rashi says nothing]).
(a) The Gemara uses the term 'Eden shel Tzeni'us, referring to the
examination of before Tashmish, and it means that it is 'Midas Chasidus'.
(b) The Gemara objects to this term, which suggests that the pre'Tashmish
examination is no more than a Chumra, when really it is a Halachah.
(c) The Gemara wants to say that someone who fulfills the words of the
Chachamim is bears the title 'Tzanua' However, Rava objects to this too,
because it infers that someone who does not fulfil the words of the
Chachamim, merely loses the title of 'Tzanu'a', whereas in reality, he
ought to be called a Rasha.
(d) Rava learns: 'Tzenu'os, Eid she'Badku Bo Atzman Lifnei Tashmish Zeh,
Ein Bodkos Bo Lifnei Tashmish Acher', ve'she'Ein Tzenu'os, Bodkos, ve'Lo
(a) A woman who is not dealing with Taharos does not need to examine
herself for her husband. That is categorically accepted. Consequently, the
suggestion that a woman who has no Veses should need a Bedikah for her
husband is unacceptable.
(b) The Gemara therefore establishes that the statement of Rebbi Aba speaks
when the woman does deal with Taharos, and what he means to say is, that if
she *has* a Veses, then she does not require a Bedikah when she is asleep
(since she is anyway not fit to work in Taharos); whereas if she does not,
then she *does*. When she is awake, she needs a Bedikah either way (since
she is fit to work with Taharos).
(See Tosfos, who explains that by asleep, we mean not fully awake - dozing
perhaps - because it is forbidden to be intimate with a woman who is fully
(a) The Beraisa permits a man who returns home to be with his wife asleep
or awake - without a Bedikah. But did Shmuel not say that a woman who has a
Veses, is only permitted to be with his wife without a Bedikah, when she is
asleep; and if she does not have a Veses, then she is even forbidden when
she is asleep? (See Tosfos, for how we know that the Beraisa is not
speaking about a woman who does not work in Taharos.)
(b) The Gemara replies that when Shmuel refers to Bedikah, her consent is
good enough, because, if she were not Tehorah, she would not consent to
intimacy. (See Tosfos, who explains that this Sevara is confined to the
case of a man who comes from a journey, and will not apply to a man who has
not been away.)
(c) We are afraid that, if he needs to wake her up especially to make a
Bedikah, it will lead to him to despise her.
(d) 'Sudni' menas either a Talmid-Chacham (because of the acronym "Sod
Hashem li'Yerei'av", hinted in the the word); or it means a beer-maker, as
this was Rav Papa's profession.
(a) The wives of Rav Papa and Rav Huna Brei d'Rav Yehoshua told him that
their husbands did not make a point of waking them up to make a Bedikah,
when they came home and found them asleep.
(b) They asked the wives and not the husbands, because they suspected that
Rav Papa and Rav Huna B'rei d'Rav Yehoshua might tell them that it was
halachically permitted, without adding that they themselves were Machmir
(and Rav Kahana really wanted to know how they behaved personally, so that
he could follow their stringencies).
(a) Rebbi Meir holds that a woman who has no Veses is forbidden to her
husband even if she uses two 'Eidim'.
When Aba Chanan said 'Oi Lo le'Ba'alah', either he was saying to Rebbi Meir
that a woman who has no Veses does receive her Kesubah - like Rebbi Chanina
ben Antignos; or to Rebbi Chanina ben Antignos, that her husband cannot
rely on her Bedikah before Tashmish, because perhaps even though she is
Tehorah then, she may see blood during Tashmish; therefore, she is
forbidden to him - like Rebbi Meir.
(b) We are worried that perhaps, if the woman later develops a Veses after
she has remarried and born children, her ex-husband will say that, had he
known, he would never have divorced her. This invalidates the Get
retroactively, with the result that her children are now Mamzeirim. So we
warn him at the outset that when he divorces her, his divorce will be
permanent, and any regrets that he may later have will be ineffective.
(c) 'Peyros' is the fruit of the property which the wife brings in to the
marriage, and of which the husband is entitled to eat the fruits (i.e. to
make full use of). It is known as 'Nechsei Milug'. In this case, we ought
to have said that, since she has no Kesubah from him, it transpires that
their marriage is not valid, so that he should really return the fruit that
'Mezonos' refers to a husband who goes overseas, where, under normal
circumstances, Beis-Din would fix for her, sustenance from his property.
And 'Bela'os' are the remains of the clothes which she brought into the
marriage and which the husband would normally have to return after he
(d) She loses her Kesubah because no Kesubah is due to a woman by a
marriage in which intimacy is impossible (See Ritva, in whose opinion this
is due to a Mekach Ta'us - a false sale.)
(a) Rav Yehudah, who quoted Shmuel as ruling like Rebbi Chanina ben
Antignos, did not issue the ruling that a woman who does not have a Veses
is forbidden to her husband without Bedikah, and vice-versa (the Gemara
appears to mean that each one is quoting the same Halachah in the name of
Shmuel from a different source, and neither agrees that he Shmuel made the
Hadran Alach 'Shamai'!
(b) If a woman does not deal with Taharos, Rebbi Meir agrees that she does
not need Bedikah and that she is permitted to her husband.