Attributing Blood to a Wound

From Halachipedia
Revision as of 02:35, 20 January 2017 by YitzchakSultan (talk | contribs) (Created page with "# According to Sephardim if a woman knows she has a wound in that area of the body and bleeds if it is the time of the veset or onah beynonit she can’t assume that the blood...")

(diff) ← Older revision | Approved revision (diff) | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
  1. According to Sephardim if a woman knows she has a wound in that area of the body and bleeds if it is the time of the veset or onah beynonit she can’t assume that the blood is from the wound. However, at other times she can assume that the blood came from the wound. [1]
  2. According to Ashkenazim, if a woman knows that she has a wound which she knows previously bled, when she sees next she can assume that the blood is from the wound unless it is her veset or onah beynonit.[2]

During a Veset Period

  1. If a woman has a wound and sees during a veset she is tameh[3] unless she is certain that when she saw blood the wound actively bleeding at that time.[4]

Sources

  1. All opinions in the Gemara Niddah 16a agree that if a woman sees blood and knows that she has a wound in that area she is pure. The gemara concludes that this is true even during the veset if veset is only derabbanan. The Mordechai (Niddah no. 735 s.v. neemenet) explains that she needs to know that blood previously came from the wound in order to use it as a factor to assume that the blood she is currently seeing came from that wound. Sefer Hatrumah (92 s.v. vedin) and Hagahot Maimoniyot (Isurei Biyah 11:8) agree. Tosfot 16a s.v. vemar seems to agree. However, the Rashba (Torat Habayit 23a) argues that it is sufficient for her to know that there is a wound even though she doesn’t know that it bled previously. The Bet Yosef YD 187:5, Darkei Moshe Haaruch 187:7, Bach 187:4, and Taz 187:10 understand the Rashba in this light. However, the Shach argues that even the Rashba agrees with the Mordechai and Tosfot. Taharat Habayit v. 1 p. 230 writes that Shulchan Aruch 187:5 follows the opinion of the Rashba and such is the halacha for Sephardim. The Peleti 187:5 also explains the Shulchan Aruch in this light.
  2. The Rama YD 187:5 holds like the Mordechai and Tosfot that a woman needs to know that the wound actually previously bled in order to assume that the blood came from there. However, even such a wound is insufficient during a veset since she has to become tameh at some point and the halacha suspects that she’ll see at her next veset or onah beynonit. Shach 187:25 clarifies that this halacha applies to purify a woman to her husband in general (and not just for a woman who sees blood during tashmish).
  3. Tosfot Niddah 16a s.v. umar, Mordechai Niddah no. 735 s.v. neemenet, Sefer Hatrumah 92 s.v. vedin, Hagahot Maimoniyot 11:8, Rama YD 187:5, Taharat Habayit v. 1 p. 249
  4. Shach YD 187:26