## Niddah Daf 25a

###### Niddah 25a:1
[Niddah 25a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:1)

פְּרַשְׁתְּבִינָא דְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא קָאֵי לֵיהּ לְאַדָּא דַּיָּילָא עַד פַּלְגֵיהּ, וְכוּלֵּי עָלְמָא קָאֵי לִפְרַשְׁתְּבִינָא דְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא עַד חַרְצֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
and when **the governor [*parashtevina*] of Pumbedita would stand** next **to Adda the attendant,** he would reach only **half of his** height. **And** when **everyone** else **in the world would stand** next **to the governor of Pumbedita,** they would reach only **his loins [*ḥartzeih*].**


###### Niddah 25a:2
[Niddah 25a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:2)

שָׁאֲלוּ לִפְנֵי רַבִּי: הַמַּפֶּלֶת שָׁפִיר מָלֵא בָּשָׂר מַהוּ? אָמַר לָהֶם: לֹא שָׁמַעְתִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The students **asked Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi: In the case of a woman **who discharges a gestational sac full of flesh, what is** the *halakha*? Does she have the impurity of a woman after childbirth? Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **said to them: I have not heard** from my teachers the *halakha* in this case.


###### Niddah 25a:3
[Niddah 25a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:3)

אָמַר לְפָנָיו רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי: כָּךְ אָמַר אַבָּא — מָלֵא דָּם טְמֵאָה נִדָּה, מָלֵא בָּשָׂר טְמֵאָה לֵידָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, said to him: This** is what **my father,** i.e., Rabbi Yosei ben Ḥalafta, one of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s teachers, **said:** If a woman discharged a gestational sac **full of blood, she is impure** with the impurity of **a menstruating woman.** If it is **full of flesh, she is impure** with the impurity of a woman after **childbirth.**


###### Niddah 25a:4
[Niddah 25a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:4)

אָמַר לֹיה: אִילְמָלֵי דְּבַר חָדָשׁ אָמַרְתָּ לָנוּ מִשּׁוּם אָבִיךָ — שְׁמַעְנוּךָ. עַכְשָׁיו,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi **said to him: If you had told us** an entirely **new statement in the name of your father,** no part of which was also stated by another Sage, **we would have listened to you,** i.e., we would have accepted the statement as *halakha*. But **now** that you stated two *halakhot*, one with regard to a woman who discharged a gestational sac full of blood, and the other with regard to a woman who discharged a gestational sac full of flesh, the entire statement cannot be accepted as *halakha*.


###### Niddah 25a:5
[Niddah 25a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:5)

מִדְּהָא קַמַּיְיתָא כִּיחִידָאָה קָאָמַר — כְּסוֹמְכוֹס שֶׁאָמַר מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר, הָא נָמֵי — שֶׁמָּא כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אֲמָרָהּ, וְאֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi explains: **From** the fact that Rabbi Yosei **said this first clause** of his statement, with regard to a gestational sac full of blood, **in accordance with an individual** opinion, i.e., **in accordance with** the opinion of **Sumakhos, who said in the name of Rabbi Meir** that the woman is impure, contrary to the opinion of the other Sages, it follows that with regard to **this** latter statement **as well,** with regard to a gestational sac full of flesh, one can say that **perhaps** Rabbi Yosei **said it in accordance with** the opinion of another individual Sage, **Rabbi Yehoshua. And** the ***halakha*** is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua.**


###### Niddah 25a:6
[Niddah 25a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:6)

דְּתַנְיָא: הַמַּפֶּלֶת שָׁפִיר שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְרוּקָּם, רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: וָלָד, וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: אֵינוֹ וָלָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita*: In the case of a woman **who discharges a gestational sac in which tissue did not develop, Rabbi Yehoshua says:** It has the status of **an offspring,** and the woman has the impurity of a woman after childbirth; **and the Rabbis say: It is not an offspring,** and the woman is pure. The opinion of Rabbi Yosei that a woman who discharged a gestational sac full of flesh is impure might be in accordance with the ruling of Rabbi Yehoshua, which is not accepted as *halakha*, since the majority of the other Sages disagree with him. Therefore, the *halakha* cannot be decided in accordance with either part of the statement of Rabbi Yosei.


###### Niddah 25a:7
[Niddah 25a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:7)

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא: מַחְלוֹקֶת בְּעָכוּר, אֲבָל בְּצָלוּל דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אֵינוֹ וָלָד. וְרַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר: בְּצָלוּל מַחְלוֹקֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says in the name of Rabbi Oshaya:** The **dispute** between Rabbi Yehoshua and the Rabbis applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **turbid,** as Rabbi Yehoshua holds that the turbidity indicates that there was likely an embryo in the sac that liquefied. **But in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **clear, everyone agrees** that the discharged sac **is not** considered **an offspring. And Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi says:** The **dispute** applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **clear.**


###### Niddah 25a:8
[Niddah 25a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:8)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: בְּצָלוּל מַחְלוֹקֶת, אֲבָל בְּעָכוּר דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל וָלָד, אוֹ דִּלְמָא בֵּין בָּזֶה וּבֵין בָּזֶה מַחְלוֹקֶת? תֵּיקוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages: What does Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi mean? Does he mean that the **dispute** applies only **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **clear, but in** a case where it is **turbid, everyone agrees** that it has the halakhic status of **an offspring? Or perhaps** Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi means that the **dispute** applies **in this** case **and in that** case, i.e., the Rabbis hold that the sac does not have the status of an offspring even if the amniotic fluid is turbid. The Gemara concludes that the dilemma **shall stand** unresolved.


###### Niddah 25a:9
[Niddah 25a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:9)

מֵיתִיבִי: אֶת זוֹ דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן חֲנַנְיָא — ״וַיַּעַשׂ ה׳ אֱלֹהִים לְאָדָם וּלְאִשְׁתּוֹ כׇּתְנוֹת עוֹר וַיַּלְבִּישֵׁם״, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁאֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא עוֹשֶׂה עוֹר לָאָדָם אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן נוֹצַר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** to the opinion that the dispute between Rabbi Yehoshua and the Rabbis applies only in a case where the amniotic fluid is turbid. It is taught in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya,** who is the same Rabbi Yehoshua who disagrees with the Rabbis with regard to the case of a woman who discharges a gestational sac in which tissue did not develop, **taught this** following proof for his opinion that the woman is impure: It is stated: **“And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins, and clothed them”** (Genesis 3:21). This **teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not make skin for a person unless he is** already **created,** as God first created Adam and Eve, and then gave them skin. Consequently, the existence of a gestational sac proves that there is an offspring.


###### Niddah 25a:10
[Niddah 25a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:10)

אַלְמָא: בְּעוֹר תַּלְיָא מִילְּתָא, לָא שְׁנָא עָכוּר וְלָא שְׁנָא צָלוּל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Evidently,** according to Rabbi Yehoshua **the matter** of whether or not an embryo is considered offspring **is dependent on** whether or not there is **skin,** and there **is no difference** whether the amniotic fluid is **turbid, and** there **is no difference** whether it is **clear.**


###### Niddah 25a:11
[Niddah 25a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:11)

אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא בְּצָלוּל מַחְלוֹקֶת — הַיְינוּ דְּאִיצְטְרִיךְ קְרָא, אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּעָכוּר מַחְלוֹקֶת — לְמָה לִי קְרָא? סְבָרָא בְּעָלְמָא הוּא! אֶלָּא שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: בְּצָלוּל מַחְלוֹקֶת, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, if you say** that the **dispute** applies **in** a case where it is **clear, that is** why it **was necessary** for Rabbi Yehoshua to derive from **a verse** that an embryo that has skin is considered an offspring. **But if you say** that the **dispute** applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **turbid,** but Rabbi Yehoshua concedes that the woman is pure if it is clear, **why do I** need **a verse** to teach that if the amniotic fluid is turbid the woman is impure? **It is logical** that where the amniotic fluid is turbid there was probably an embryo that liquefied. **Rather, conclude from it** that the **dispute** applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **clear.** The Gemara concludes: **Conclude from it** that this is correct.


###### Niddah 25a:12
[Niddah 25a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:12)

וְכֵן אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן, אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ: מַחְלוֹקֶת בְּעָכוּר, אֲבָל בְּצָלוּל — דִּבְרֵי הַכֹּל אֵינוֹ וָלָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And likewise,** just as Rabbi Oshaya interprets the dispute between Rabbi Yehoshua and the Rabbis as referring to a case where the amniotic fluid is turbid, **Rav Naḥman says** that **Rabba bar Avuh says:** The **dispute** between Rabbi Yehoshua and the Rabbis applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **turbid; but in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **clear, everyone agrees** that the discharged sac **is not** considered **an offspring.**


###### Niddah 25a:13
[Niddah 25a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:13)

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רָבָא לְרַב נַחְמָן: אֶלָּא אָמְרוּ, סִימָן וָלָד בִּבְהֵמָה דַּקָּה — טִינּוּף, בְּגַסָּה — שִׁלְיָא, בְּאִשָּׁה — שָׁפִיר וְשִׁלְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava raised an objection to** the opinion of **Rav Naḥman** from a mishna that specifies the obligations that apply to firstborn animals (*Bekhorot* 19b):**But** the Sages **said** that not only does a viable offspring exempt any subsequent offspring from being counted a firstborn, but the same applies to **an indication of the offspring** that is discharged from the womb. The indication **in a small animal** is a **murky discharge** from the womb, **in a large** animal it is the emergence of **an afterbirth,** and **in a woman** the indication is **a gestational sac or an afterbirth.**


###### Niddah 25a:14
[Niddah 25a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:14)

וְאִילּוּ שָׁפִיר בִּבְהֵמָה לָא פָּטַר, אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא בְּצָלוּל מַחְלוֹקֶת — מִשּׁוּם הָכִי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava infers: **And yet** the miscarriage of **a gestational sac in** the case of a large **animal does not exempt** the animal’s subsequent offspring from being counted a firstborn. **Granted, if you say** that the **dispute** between Rabbi Yehoshua and the Rabbis applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **clear,** it is **due to that** reason that the mishna differentiates between a large animal and a woman with regard to a gestational sac.


###### Niddah 25a:15
[Niddah 25a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:15)

אִשָּׁה דְּרַבִּי בַּהּ קְרָא, פְּטַר בַּהּ שָׁפִיר; בִּבְהֵמָה דְּלָא רַבִּי קְרָא, לָא פְּטַר בַּהּ שָׁפִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rava explains: **With regard to a woman, as the** aforementioned **verse:** “And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skins,” **includes** in the definition of offspring a gestational sac, i.e., skin, one can say that such **a gestational sac exempts** subsequent births from the obligations of primogeniture. By contrast, **in** the case of **an animal, as the verse does not include** a gestational sac in the definition of offspring, discharging **a gestational sac does not exempt** the animal’s subsequent offspring from being considered a firstborn.


###### Niddah 25a:16
[Niddah 25a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:16)

אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ בְּעָכוּר מַחְלוֹקֶת, מִכְּדֵי סְבָרָא הוּא, מַאי שְׁנָא אִשָּׁה, וּמַאי שְׁנָא בְּהֵמָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But if you say** that the **dispute** applies **in** a case where the amniotic fluid is **turbid,** and Rabbi Yehoshua deems the woman impure due to the likelihood that there was an embryo that liquefied, **since** this *halakha* **is** based on **logic, what is different** in the case of **a woman, and what is different** in the case of **an animal?** Rabbi Yehoshua’s reasoning applies equally to both. Evidently, the dispute applies in a case where the amniotic fluid is clear.


###### Niddah 25a:17
[Niddah 25a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:17)

מִי סָבְרַתְּ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ מִפְשָׁט פְּשִׁיט לֵיהּ? רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ סַפּוֹקֵי מְסַפְּקָא לֵיהּ, וְאָזֵיל הָכָא לְחוּמְרָא וְהָכָא לְחוּמְרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Do you hold** that **it is obvious to Rabbi Yehoshua** that a gestational sac in which the amniotic fluid is turbid has the halakhic status of an offspring? That is not so; rather, **Rabbi Yehoshua is uncertain** of its halakhic status, **and** therefore **here,** in this case, he rules **stringently, and there** he also rules **stringently.**


###### Niddah 25a:18
[Niddah 25a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:18)

גַּבֵּי אִשָּׁה, דְּמָמוֹנָא הוּא — סְפֵק מָמוֹנָא לְקוּלָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: First of all, **with regard to** a situation where **a woman** discharged a gestational sac in which the amniotic fluid was turbid, in **which** case the obligation of primogeniture **is a monetary matter,** i.e., the obligation to redeem the newborn child by paying money to a priest, the subsequent births are exempt, in accordance with the principle that **uncertainty** with regard to **monetary matters** is treated **leniently.**


###### Niddah 25a:19
[Niddah 25a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:19)

גַּבֵּי בְּהֵמָה, דְּאִיסּוּרָא הוּא דְּאִיכָּא לְגַבֵּי גִּיזָּה וַעֲבוֹדָה — סְפֵק אִיסּוּרָא לְחוּמְרָא; הָכִי נָמֵי גַּבֵּי אִשָּׁה — סְפֵק טוּמְאָה לְחוּמְרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
By contrast, **with regard to an animal,** in **which** case firstborn status **is a ritual matter, as there are** prohibitions **involving,** i.e., against, **shearing** the animal’s wool **and** using the animal for **labor** before it incurs a blemish, the discharged gestational sac is not considered an offspring and does not exempt subsequent births from the obligations of firstborn status, as **uncertainty** with regard to **ritual matters** is treated **stringently. So too, with regard to** the impurity of **a woman** who discharged a gestational sac, she is deemed impure, as **uncertainty** with regard to **impurity** is treated **stringently,** which means that for the purposes of this *halakha* a gestational sac is considered an offspring.


###### Niddah 25a:20
[Niddah 25a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:20)

וּמִי מְסַפְּקָא לֵיהּ? וְהָא קְרָא קָאָמַר! מִדְּרַבָּנַן, וּקְרָא אַסְמַכְתָּא בְּעָלְמָא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And is** Rabbi Yehoshua **uncertain** about the *halakha* of a woman who discharges a gestational sac? **But doesn’t he cite a verse** as proof that the woman has the impurity of one who gave birth? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehoshua maintains that the woman is impure **by rabbinic** law, **and the verse** he cites **is a mere support** for this *halakha*; it is not the actual source.


###### Niddah 25a:21
[Niddah 25a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:21)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב חֲנִינָא בַּר שֶׁלֶמְיָא לְרַב: הָא רַבִּי, הָא רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְהָא רַבִּי אוֹשַׁעְיָא, וְהָא רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי — מָר כְּמַאן סְבִירָא לֵיהּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Ḥanina bar Shelamya said to Rav: This** is the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, who told his students that he did not hear from his teachers the *halakha* in the case of a woman who discharged a gestational sac full of flesh; and **this** is the opinion of **Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei,** who cited his father’s opinion that in such a case the woman is impure. **And this** is the opinion of **Rabbi Oshaya,** that the dispute between Rabbi Yehoshua and the Rabbis applies only in a case where the amniotic fluid is turbid; **and** finally **this** is the opinion of **Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi,** who holds that the dispute applies if the amniotic fluid is clear. **In accordance with whose** opinion **does the Master hold?**


###### Niddah 25a:22
[Niddah 25a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:22)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנִי אוֹמֵר אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה, אֵינָהּ חוֹשֶׁשֶׁת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav **said to** Rav Ḥanina bar Shelamya: **I say** that **both** in **this** case, where the amniotic fluid is turbid, **and** in **that** case, where the fluid is clear, the woman does **not** need to be **concerned** that she has the status of a woman who gave birth to an offspring.


###### Niddah 25a:23
[Niddah 25a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:23)

וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אֶחָד זֶה וְאֶחָד זֶה חוֹשֶׁשֶׁת. וְאַזְדָּא שְׁמוּאֵל לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּכִי אֲתָא רַב דִּימִי אֲמַר: מֵעוֹלָם לָא דָּכוּ שָׁפִיר בִּנְהַרְדְּעָא, לְבַר מֵהָהוּא שְׁפִירָא דַּאֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּמַנַּח עֲלֵיהּ חוּט הַשַּׂעֲרָה מֵהַאי גִּיסָא וְחַזְיֵהּ מֵהַאי גִּיסָא. אֲמַר: אִם אִיתָא דְּוָלָד הוּאי — לָא הֲוָה זִיג כּוּלֵּי הַאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Shmuel says:** In **both this** case **and that** case, the woman must be **concerned** that the discharged gestational sac has the status of an offspring, and therefore she is considered impure like a woman who gave birth. **And Shmuel follows his** standard line of **reasoning** here, **as when Rav Dimi came** and transmitted many halakhic traditions, the latter **said: In Neharde’a** the Sages **never deemed** a woman who discharged **a gestational sac pure, except for** the case of **a certain gestational sac that came before Shmuel, who placed a hair on this side** of that sac, **and it was visible from that side.** Shmuel **said,** based on this test: **If it were so, that** there **was an offspring** in the sac, **it would not have been so transparent.** He therefore deemed the woman pure, but his ruling applied only in that extreme case.


###### Niddah 25a:24
[Niddah 25a:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:24)

וְאִם הָיָה מְרוּקָּם וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: אֵיזֶהוּ שָׁפִיר מְרוּקָּם? אַבָּא שָׁאוּל אוֹמֵר: תְּחִלַּת בְּרִיָּיתוֹ מֵרֹאשׁוֹ, וּשְׁתֵּי עֵינָיו כִּשְׁתֵּי טִיפִּין שֶׁל זְבוּב. תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: מְרוּחָקִין זֶה מִזֶּה. שְׁנֵי חֳוטָמִין כִּשְׁתֵּי טִיפִּים שֶׁל זְבוּב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **But if** the sac **was** one in which **tissue developed,** the halakhic status of the woman is that of a woman after childbirth. Since the sex of the embryo is unknown, she observes the strictures of a woman who gave birth both to a male and to a female; she is impure for fourteen days like a woman who gave birth to a female, but blood that she sees thereafter is pure only until forty days after birth, like a woman who gave birth to a male. **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: **What is** the definition of **a gestational sac** in which **tissue developed? Abba Shaul says: The beginning of the formation of** the embryo **is from its head, and its two eyes** look **like two drops,** similar to the eyes **of a fly. Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches:** These eyes must be **distant from each other.** Furthermore, **its two nostrils** look **like two drops,** similar to the nostrils **of a fly.**


###### Niddah 25a:25
[Niddah 25a:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:25)

תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: וּמְקוֹרָבִין זֶה לָזֶה, וּפִיו מָתוּחַ כְּ״חוּט הַשַּׂעֲרָה״, וּגְוִיָּתוֹ כַּ״עֲדָשָׁה״, וְאִם הָיְתָה נְקֵבָה — נִדּוֹנָה כִּ״שְׂעוֹרָה״ לְאׇרְכָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: And** these eyes must be **close to each other. And its mouth stretches** along the width of its face **like a strand of hair. And its body is like** the size of **a lentil. And if it was female,** its vagina can be **discerned** by the appearance **of** a line like a cracked grain of **barley** oriented **along the length of** its body.


###### Niddah 25a:26
[Niddah 25a:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:26)

וְחִתּוּךְ יָדַיִם וְרַגְלַיִם אֵין לוֹ, וְעָלָיו מְפוֹרָשׁ בַּקַּבָּלָה: ״הֲלֹא כֶחָלָב תַּתִּיכֵנִי וְכַגְּבִינָּה תַּקְפִּיאֵנִי עוֹר וּבָשָׂר תַּלְבִּישֵׁנִי וַעֲצָמוֹת וְגִידִים תְּסוֹכְכֵנִי חַיִּים וָחֶסֶד עָשִׂיתָ עִמָּדִי וּפְקֻדָּתְךָ שָׁמְרָה רוּחִי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And it does not have the shape of arms and legs** at this stage. **And it is said with regard to** an embryo at this stage, **in** the texts of **tradition,** the Prophets: **“Have You not poured me out as milk, and curdled me like cheese? You have clothed me with skin and flesh, and knit me together with bones and sinews. You have granted me life and favor, and Your providence has preserved my spirit”** (Job 10:10–12).


###### Niddah 25a:27
[Niddah 25a:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/25a:27)

וְאֵין בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ בְּמַיִם — שֶׁהַמַּיִם עַזִּין

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And one does not examine it with water** to discover its sex, **as water is** too **strong,**