Nida Thoughts

Nida Notes

מס' נדה- a ולד is seen as being equivalent to דם נדה . One is just another form of the other. Consider:
1)כל אשה שדמיה מרובין, בניה מרובין (סוף פרק ט') - more blood, more children. less blood, less children
2) a יולדת is literally equated in the פסוק to be like a נדה . Even when sitting 14 days for a girl the פסוק still says כנדתה, whereas by the 7 days of a מצורע מוסגר that comparison is never made (even though the דיני טומאה are the same, as far as I know). So in a sense it comes out almost parallel: you sit 7 days of טומאה for a ולד, 7 days for דם
3) (this “proof” is a little bit complicated but follow me here.)-- both a ולד and נדה דם have value on an existential level ( בבחינת הויה) i.e. their very existing in this world makes them significant regardless of how little impact we see them having on their external environment (בחינת חיים).
First let’s show this by ולד and then by דם נדה.(See נדה 5:2? ) I ask you what difference is there between a fully formed baby one second before it sticks out its head [which is the halachic threshhold for defining a לידה] and the second after it sticks out its head. Yet the Torah sees one as killing an object and one as killing a בן קיימא .
Furthermore, the Torah says you should do ייבום for a man who has died and בן אין לו, yet if a man had a son born to him for even a second and then that son dies (where he dies as a result of something external killing him בר קיימא vs. לאו בר קיימא) there is no longer any mitzva to do yibum! This is called “בן יש לו”.
Life is meaningful because it exists .
מאי חזית דדמך דידך סומק טפי דילמא דמא דההוא גברא סומק טפי
Who says your existence is worth more than hers. Who says your blood [דם] is worth more than hers?
See Sotah by Amram and Miriam where it implies that the birth of a child by definition allows for an עוה"ב whereas he wouldn’t if he were never born So we see that a ולד’s value is existential in nature.

Now דם נדה.(עיין מס' נדה ריש פרק ז') With exception of דם נדה ( including דם זבה ויולדת see Rambam perek 3 Hl’ mishkav u’moshav ) and בשר מת all other טומאות are only מטמא as long as they are moist. Once they’ve dried up to “the point of no return” (see גמ' שם) they are no longerטמא . This includes שרץ, נבלה, ש"ז, וכו' . Yet דם נדה is מטמא even then. Why, says the גמ'? because it exists and the פסוק says דם יהיה זובה בבשרה , so long as it exists it is טמא even where it lacks any moistness allowing it to impact on things around it. (although I should be honest and point out, as mentioned above, that this halacha isn’t only by דם נדה but by dam zava and yoledet also. Maybe that ruins what I’m saying, maybe not, I’m not sure).

[Maybe that’s also the reason for בשר מת being מטמא when it’s dried up, although the source in the torah that the גמ' brings doesn’t harp on any הויה language. Keep in mind also that there are other connections of נדה to טומאת אדם including it’s purification process of הזאת מי נדה.]
4)(מס' סוטה) אדם - אפר דם מרה אדם-


--the relationship of לידה to death and burial, both being a transition of worlds or “states of existence” if you will. The “seeding” of the woman and her giving forth those seeds [תזריע] similar to the seeding of the body in the ground and its coming up for תחית המתים. Note the גמ' (Sanhedrin Perek Chelek I vaguely remember) learning that people will get up from תחית המתים clothed similar to grain, and the קל וחומר of תחית המתים because מה ולד שנכנס בחשאי יוצא בקולי קולות זה שנכנס בקולי קולות כל שכן שיצא בקולי קולות . [1]

The גמ' (ל:) also connects these two events in the pasuk (ישיעיהו מה') כי לי תכרע כל ברך תשבע כל לשון .כל ברך- זה יום המיתה זה יום הלידה- תשבע כל לשון

Don’t forget the famous משל (I don’t know where the source is though) of the twin babies in their mother’s stomach and the one baby “mourning” over his brother who just “died” by being born.

[1] I’m a little bothered though about a גמ' (ע:) towards the end of the מס'. The גמ' says that the אנשי אלכסנדריא asked R’ Yehoshua ben Chananya 3 foolish questions. One of them was “Would people who got up for תחית המתים require sprinkling to purify their tumah?” to which he answered them “we’ll find out when mashiach comes”. Yet the גמ' earlier in the מס' mentioned this concept by showing the amazing quality of hashem to bring something tahor ( a child) of something tameh (the דם נדה and sperm). We note there the paradox so why is it so foolish to ask whether the same paradox will occur in the future for תחית המתים?

Another Great Passage from Nietzsche

""As regards a woman, for instance, the control over her body and her sexual gratification serves as an amply sufficient sign of ownership and possession to the more modest man; another with a more suspicious and ambitious thirst for possession, sees the "questionableness", the mere apparentness of such ownership, and wishes to have finer tests in order to know especially whether the woman not only gives herself to him, but also gives up for his sake what she has or would like to have-- only then does he look upon her as "possessed". A third, however, has not even here got to the limit of his distrust and his desire f0r possession: he asks himself whether the woman, when she gives up everything for him, does not perhaps do so for a phantom of him; he wishes first to be thoroughly, indeed, profoundly well known; in order to be loved at all he ventures to let himself be found out. Only then does he feel the beloved one fully in his possession, when she no longer deceives herself about him, when she loves him just as much f0r the sake of his devilry and concealed insatiability, as for his goodness, patience, and spirituality. ""

If only Nietzche were around that I could kiss him :-)

שפתים ישק משיב דברים נכוחים

Nice Lines -- Nietzsche -- Beyond Good and Evil

Couldn't possibly quote all the lines that i liked from the book-- but just a few short ones:

--Where there is neither love nor hatred in the game, woman's play is mediocre

--A sign of strong character, when once the resolution has been taken, to shut the ear even to the best counter-arguments. Occasionally, therefore, a will to stupidity

-- He who despises himself, nevertheless esteems himself thereby, as a despiser.

..and finally, a longy but a goody:

-- "It is the business of the very few to be independent; it is a privilege of the strong. .... He enters into a labrynth, he multiplies a thousandfold the dangers which life in itself already brings with it; not the least of which is that no one can see how and where he loses his way, becomes isolated, and is torn piecemeal by some minotaur of conscience. Supposing such a one comes to grief, it is so far from the comprehension of men that they neither feel it, nor sympathize with it. And he cannot any longer go back! He cannot even go back again to the sympathy of men!"

you gotta love it! :-)

Shalom without Tochacha- Mishnat R' Eliezer

כל שלום שאין בו תוכחה אינה שלום שנאמר והוכיח אברהם את אבימלך וגו' )בראשית כא( כה

or something to that effect. essentially pointing out that krittat brit demands an openness of communication that allows for tochacha and expression.

Interesting then that Virgo should be one of the most "critical" of signs. The context of brit in Virgo אין אשה כורתת ברית אלא לזה שעשאה כלי allows for all the critique to be possible.

Nice Song- Louis Prima

What a delightfully tragic song!! :-)

Like staring into the face of an abyss and smiling. See the end of Pirates of the Carribean II "Hello Beastie" :-)

I'm just a gigolo,
everywhere I go
people know the part I'm playing
paid for every dance
starting each romance
oh what their saying

And there will come a day
And youth will pass away
What will they say about me
When the end comes I know
They'll say just a gigalo
Life goes on without me

Cause I aint got nobody
oh and theres nobody cares for me
theres nobody cares for me

I'm so sad and lonely
sad and lonely
sad and lonely

Won't some sweet mamma
come and take a chance with me
cause I aint so bad

And I'll sing out, sweet love songs
All of the time
She will only be, only be
Bip bozadee bodzee bop le bop

I aint got nobody
oh and theres nobody cares for me
theres nobody cares for me

Hummala bebhuhla zeebuhla boobuhla
hummala bebhuhla zeebuhla bop
I ain't got nobody, nobody,nobody cares for me
theres nobody cares for me
I'm so sad and lonely, oh lonely, oh lonely, lonely lonely

Won't some sweet mama
come and rescue me
cause I aint so bad

And I'll sing out
sweet love songs
all of the time
she will only be,
only,only, only only be
baby, sugar darling

I aint got nobody baby
And there's nobody, there's nobody
there's nobody theres nobody
there's no one, there's no one
nobody, nobody, nobody
nobody cares for me

I תקופת סוכות -- “season feel”

- סופית --< זמן אסיפה, “depressing”, sad, winter, an ending of sorts

רגל סופית

not very cheery either... --קהלת

- התחלת זמן גשם

חג האסיף תקופת השנה -ויאסף אל עמיו

ערכין לב: וסנהדרין סד. - למדים מסוגיית ערכין דעצם מלת "סוכה" פירושו סוף וביטול של רע ויצרא דעבירה
- “gonna have to face it you’re addicted to love”
- וְסֻכָּה תִּהְיֶה לְצֵל־יוֹמָם מֵחֹרֶב וּלְמַחְסֶה וּלְמִסְתּוֹר מִזֶּרֶם וּמִמָּטָר:


II ענין ישועה בסוכות
- לולב איקרי הושענא, הקפת המזבח ואמירת אני והו, ושאבתם מים בששון ממעיני הישועה, הושיעה את עמך
- יש להבין ממה אנחנו מבקשים ישועה? בפרט בזמן המקדש
- (שמות רבה א' לב') - ויקם משה ויושיען וכו' ר' יוחנן בשם ר' אליעזר בנו של ר' יוסי הגלילי אומר דבר של ג"ע באו לעשות עמהן ועמד משה והושיען שנאמר כאן ויושיען ונאמר להלן צעקה הנערה בעיר וגו' מה להלן וכו' אף כאן וכו' רבנן אמרי וכו' אין ויושיען אלא לשון הצלת מים שנא' הושיעני אלק' כי באו מים עד נפש (תהלים סט)

III מקור סוכות

- וַיָּשָׁב בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא עֵשָֹו לְדַרְכּוֹ שֵֹעִֽירָה: וְיַֽעֲקֹב נָסַע סֻכֹּתָה וַיִּבֶן לוֹ בָּיִת וּלְמִקְנֵהוּ עָשָֹה סֻכֹּת עַל־כֵּן קָרָא שֵׁם־הַמָּקוֹם סֻכּֽוֹת (לג, טז-יז')
- דמיון יעקב ועשו לשעירי יוה"כ
- הדמיון הוא עד כדי כך שבאים ליטול שכר באחרית ימים (ע"ג ב:)
- טענתם נסתרת דוקא ע"י מצות סוכה

דירת עראי ודירת קבע... אולי הוי כנגד אתנהלה לאטי וסוכה תהיה לצל יומם
[ועי' מדרש פליאה ד' ויהי ערב זה עשו ויהי בקר זה יעקב יום אחד זה יוה"כ]

ג' החלקים הצד השוה שביניהן הוא דעת IV
-הבדלה בין ישראל לעמים הוא ע"י כחה של דעת דאם אין דעת הבדלה מנין
da’at allows for differentiation through personalization--

-מקור מלת דעת הוא עץ הדעת טוב ורע דהיינו מקור מיתה ויצרא דעבירה
- מיתה הוא ענין סדר טהרות דהיינו סדר של דעת
-דוקא סכך שאינו מקבל טומאה דהיינו זמן ביטולו של רע ומיתה
- סוכות הוא חג של דעת [למען ידעו דורותיכם וגו'] ובא אחר יום של עינוי בלי יישוב הדעת (אשר על כן שיעורו בככתובת הגסה)

-גם אצל סוכה של יעקב קדמה לו ענין של דעת ויצרא דעבירה אצל שרו של עשו וגיד הנשה

Sukka Thoughts, Questions, and Insights

Thoughts/Themes from מס' סוכה

- The concept of ישועה recurring often-- the לולב is called הושענא , הושענא רבא, אני ו-הו הושיעא נא.

Particularly interesting to note is that we’re asking for ישועה not celebrating it. Why would people living during the times of the beit hamikdash have a need for ישועה? From what? The same question applies to many of the 15 שיר המעלות that were said on the steps of the ezrat nashim? Why in the world would the leviim be saying tehillim 121 and 130, for example, while standing on the steps of the ezrat nashim?

-Sukkos being a time of ending-- end of the regalim, end of annual life before entering into the winter, Sukka being representative of ביטול יצ"ר which is at the end of time.

- the seemingly integral relationship of מים and יין-- possibly k’neged שמחה and ששון.
יין ישמח לבב אנוש...... ושאבתם מים בששון ממעיני הישועה

- the torah’s referring to the לולב and הדס in terms of their level of constriction לולב-naturally loose but requires כפות and then הדס -naturally bonded and braided.

(Possibly ערבות also share in this similarity of characterization-- they must be like the נחל ,smooth and fluid without any constriction at all. (maybe))

- the polarization of ערבה and אתרוג--

1) the midrash of types of jews,
2)an אתרוג חסר כל שהוא is פסול whereas the ערבה of הושענא רבא is כשר even עלה אחד בבד אחד

3) אתרוג is b’ikar on the first day, ערבה on the last

(tangentially interesting that this seems to be regressing--going from the “Tzadik” of אתרוג to the “Rasha” of ערבה. Also strange the seven days of Sukkot seem to be כנגד the seven sefirot and yet אתרוג which is representative of מלכות should be on the first and not last day, usually מלכות comes last and is theכולל ).
--Yet they have a common thread of water between the two of them--ערבי נחל .... עץ הדר (the gm’ says הדר comes from the greek prefix “hydro”)


- the significance of the סכך needing to be not even ראוי לקבל טומאה and not just טהור and ראוי לקבל טומאה --> Sukkos represents a time of the bitul of the existence of רע not just התגברות over it, hence the need for not even the ability for טומאה/רע ( note: the connection of רע to טומאה and in addition the relationship of death to טומאה and דעת, Sukkos is the only רגל mentioned with דעת “למען ידעו דורותיכם” [pachad yitzchak] ) Sukkos then flows very nice from Yom Kippur (I have some proofs elsewhere that Yom Kippur is very related to דעת ex. the שיעור of כותבת הגסה is the שיעור of יישוב הדעת not אכילה .)

-interesting to note that in the torah, the mitzvot of 4 minim and Sukka seem to be “afterthoughts” to the chag of Sukkot. See Vayikra 23:33-44 Pesukim 37 and 38 should be at the end, not before 4 minim and sukka.