More Discussions for this daf
1. Tum'ah of Snow 2. Anatomical identities 3. Cutting nails
4. Meaning of expression 5. Bedikah Kodem Tashmish 6. Mezid Plus Witnesses and Hatra'ah Equals?
DAF DISCUSSIONS - NIDAH 17

Alexander asks:

To all the Kollel's team sholom!

Tell me, please, why has the snow a grain structure for tum'o and hasn't it for taharo (hashoko). (Niddo, daf 16 or 17, a, at the bottom). The both dinim are to relate to the case when one hoshev the snow le'mashke, so they must be the same!

Thank you.

Alexander

The Kollel replies:

Your question is asked by the Rash in Taharos 3:2 (at the end). He concludes that there is a difference between Kabalas Tum'ah And Hashakah to a Mikvah. As far as Kabalas Tum'ah is concerned, we know that touching is not considered connected. However, as far as the Mikvah is concerned, since one may be immerse in the snow itself, through touching the Mikvah it is as if the whole snow has become a Mikvah.

D. Zupnik

Alexander comments:

Thank you for your answer - I saw the mar'e mokoym but didn't found Taharos with Rash at our Kollel. But after we have such an answer I must ask the following question: if touching is not considered connected, how can you see it connected so strong to permit "immerse in the snow itself"? We haven't the 40 seo but a lagre amount of a very small kelym which don't form a mikve at all! How can we take this permission as the basis of the answer if it's problematic itself? (Our maggid shiur tried to answer me in that way but agreed with this second question).

Sincerely,

Alexander

The Kollel replies:

You will find the Rash printed in any standard Gemara Nidah of the Vilna Shas.

Touching is not considered a Chibur in Ochlim. With regard to Mashkim, in general a Chibur is made by being in one "Ashboren," which means that it is not on a slope or otherwise resting in a manner that it will flow apart. Otherwise, the water in the Mikvah itself would also not be considered to be connected. In true Mashkim, Ashboren is a Chibur even for Tum'ah. Snow is different, for we treat it like Ochlim. The question then arises, if it is Ochlin how can it be a Chibur? The Rash answers that since we allow it to attach to a Mikvah, we treat it as Mashkin as far as the Hashakah is concerned.

D. Zupnik

Alexander asked further:

Thank you for your answer - I saw the mar'e mokoym but didn't found Taharos with Rash at our Kollel. But after we have such an answer I must ask the following question: if touching is not considered connected, how can you see it connected so strong to permit "immerse in the snow itself"? We haven't the 40 seo but a lagre amount of a very small kelym which don't form a mikve at all! How can we take this permission as the basis of the answer if it's problematic itself? (Our maggid shiur tried to answer me in that way but agreed with this second question).

Sincerely,

Alexander

The Kollel replies:

When Tum'ah touches something, that thing alone becomes Tamei. (Although in some circumstances that thing can then proceed to be m'Tamei something else, that is a new Tum'ah and not a result of the original touching. Here we are dealing in a case where the snow that became Tamei cannot proceed to be m'Tamei something else (i.e. the snow that is next to it). This may be because we are talking here where the original cause for the Tum'ah was a Tevul Yom (Gra, Tosefta Taharos 2:3) or for other reasons.)

We need to determine whether all the pile of snow is considered one item or whether each of its constituent parts is an individual item. The Gemara brings a Beraisa that rules that only the part touched by the Tum'ah is Nitma which indicates to us that the Tana holds that each particle of snow is considered to be a separate item.

The Beraisa continues by saying that Hashakah on part of the pile of snow is Metaher the whole pile. This appears to be a contradiction because it seems to indicate that we consider the whole pile of snow as one item. However, this is not the case. Each particle is considered separate, and nonetheless Hashakah works for the whole pile without the whole pile needing to be immersed in the Mikvah. This is because Hashakah is Metaher by making the water or snow that touches the Mikvah Batel to the Mikvah and hence a part of the Mikvah. Once the snow that touches the Mikvah has become part of the Mikvah, it in turn can be Metaher the particles of snow that touch it by making those particles themselves a part of the Mikvah. This process will repeat itself as necessary until all the snow is considered to be part of the Mikvah and Tahor.

As for how one may Tovel in the snow, in fact the Beis Yosef (YD 201) brings a Machlokes Rishonim on the issue. A minority of Rishonim are of the opinion that Tevilah in snow is only valid after the snow has melted. One of the reasons given is that for Tevilah in snow to be valid, it would have to be in a way that the body of the Toveil touches forty Se'ah of snow at one instant, something that is considered impossible. However, the majority of Rishonim, as well as the Beis Yosef in Shulchan Aruch and the Rama (YD 201:30) permit Tevilah in frozen snow.

You ask how this is possible if the snow is not considered attached. We may answer that since it is all in one place, even if it is not considered one item, since his body is immersed in the snow it is considered a Tevilah. We can prove this from the fact that falling water is not considered one item (Gittin 16a) but one may still be Toveil in a wave that falls on oneself (Chulin 31a).

You can find the Rosh next to the Mishnayos at the back of a Nidah Gemara.

Dov Freedman