## Niddah Daf 36b

###### Niddah 36b:1
[Niddah 36b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:1)

**מַתְנִי'** הַמְקַשָּׁה — נִדָּה. קִשְּׁתָה שְׁלֹשָׁה יָמִים בְּתוֹךְ אַחַד עָשָׂר יוֹם, וְשָׁפְתָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת, וְיָלְדָה — הֲרֵי זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** With regard to a pregnant woman **who experiences** labor **pains,** and they are accompanied by an emission of blood**,** her status is that of **a menstruating woman.** If **she experienced** these **pains** accompanied by emissions of blood for **three** consecutive **days within the eleven days** between periods of menstruation**,** during which time emissions of blood render a woman a *zava*, **and she rested** from labor **for** a twenty-four-hour **period, i.e.,** the pangs subsided**, and** she then **gave birth,** it indicates that the emissions were not due to her imminent labor**,** and **this** woman **is** considered **one who gives birth as a *zava*.** This is **the statement of Rabbi Eliezer.**


###### Niddah 36b:2
[Niddah 36b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:2)

רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: לַיְלָה וָיוֹם כְּלִילֵי שַׁבָּת וְיוֹמוֹ, שֶׁשָּׁפְתָה מִן הַצַּעַר וְלֹא מִן הַדָּם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehoshua says:** She is considered a *zava* only if the pangs subsided for a twenty-four-hour period of **a night and** the following **day, like Shabbat evening and its** accompanying **day.** Additionally, she is considered a *zava* in a case **where she rested from the pain** of labor **but not** necessarily **from the** flow of **blood.** In other words, the presence of labor pangs determines whether this blood is due to labor or the impure blood of *ziva*. Accordingly, if the pangs cease for twenty-four hours, she is considered a *zava* even if blood was discharging continuously from when she experienced her labor pains.


###### Niddah 36b:3
[Niddah 36b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:3)

כַּמָּה הִיא קִישּׁוּיָהּ? רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אֲפִילּוּ אַרְבָּעִים וַחֲמִשִּׁים יוֹם. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: דַּיָּהּ חׇדְשָׁהּ. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: אֵין קִישּׁוּי יוֹתֵר מִשְּׁתֵּי שַׁבָּתוֹת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**How long** before birth **is** pain attributable to **her** labor **pains,** which means that the blood is not considered blood of *ziva*? **Rabbi Meir says: Even forty or fifty days** before the birth, any blood she sees during the eleven days of *ziva* is not considered blood of *ziva*. **Rabbi Yehuda says:** It is **sufficient** that this *halakha* applies only from within one **month** of **her** due date. **Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon say:** Labor **pains** do **not** occur **more than two weeks** before birth. Accordingly, if she experiences bleeding for three consecutive days during eleven days of *ziva* that occur before this time, she is a *zava*.


###### Niddah 36b:4
[Niddah 36b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:4)

**גְּמָ'** אַטּוּ כׇּל הַמְקַשָּׁה נִדָּה הִיא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that a pregnant woman who experiences an emission of menstrual blood due to labor pains is considered a menstruating woman. This statement apparently applies to all blood due to labor. The Gemara therefore asks: **Is this to say that any** woman **who experiences** an emission due to labor **pains is a menstruating woman?** But if a woman experiences an emission due to labor pains in the eleven days of *ziva*, she is not rendered a *zava*, nor can this render her a menstruating woman.


###### Niddah 36b:5
[Niddah 36b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:5)

אָמַר רַב: נִדָּה לְיוֹמָא. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: חָיְישִׁינַן שֶׁמָּא תִּשְׁפֶּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav said:** It is correct that a woman who experiences an emission of blood due to labor during the eleven days of *ziva* is not rendered a *zava*, or even a lesser *zava*, who must observe one clean day for the day she experienced an emission. But she is **a menstruating woman for** one **day,** i.e., she is prohibited to her husband on the day of the emission, and in the evening she may immerse and become permitted to him. **And Shmuel said:** It is a rabbinic decree that she must observe a clean day, as **we are concerned lest she rest** from labor and thereby be rendered a lesser *zava*, as the cessation of pangs would indicate that her emission was not due to her imminent labor.


###### Niddah 36b:6
[Niddah 36b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:6)

וְרַבִּי יִצְחָק אָמַר: הַמְקַשָּׁה אֵינָהּ כְּלוּם. וְהָקָתָנֵי: הַמְקַשָּׁה נִדָּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yitzḥak said:** A woman **who experiences** labor **pains** during the eleven days of *ziva* **is nothing,** i.e., she is completely pure and is permitted to her husband. The Gemara asks: **But isn’t it taught** in the mishna that a woman **who experiences** labor **pains** is **a menstruating woman?** This apparently includes all women who experience an emission due to labor, even if it occurs during the eleven days of *ziva*.


###### Niddah 36b:7
[Niddah 36b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:7)

אָמַר רָבָא: בִּימֵי נִדָּה — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָה — טְהוֹרָה. וְהָתַנְיָא: הַמְקַשָּׁה בִּימֵי נִדָּה — נִדָּה, בִּימֵי זִיבָה — טְהוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** The mishna means that if she experienced an emission due to labor **during the days of menstruation,** she is considered **a menstruating woman;** if she experienced the emission **during the days of *ziva*,** she is **pure. And it is taught** likewise in a *baraita*: A woman **who experiences** labor **pains during the days of menstruation** is a menstruating woman; if she experiences them **during the days of *ziva*,** she is **pure.**


###### Niddah 36b:8
[Niddah 36b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:8)

כֵּיצַד? קִשְּׁתָה יוֹם אֶחָד, וְשָׁפְתָה שְׁנַיִם, אוֹ שֶׁקִּשְּׁתָה שְׁנַיִם וְשָׁפְתָה יוֹם אֶחָד, אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁפְתָה וְקִשְּׁתָה וְחָזְרָה וְשָׁפְתָה — הֲרֵי זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **How** so, i.e., when does an emission during the eleven days of *ziva* render a woman one who gives birth as a *zava*? If **she experienced** labor **pains** for **one day and** then **rested** from labor for **two** days, and she experienced an emission on all three days; **or** if **she experienced** labor **pains** for **two** days **and rested** from labor for **one day,** and she experienced bleeding on all three days; **or** if **she rested** from labor for one day **and she** then **experienced** labor **pains** for one day, **and again rested** from labor for one day, and she experienced bleeding on all three days; in each of these cases **this** woman **is** considered **one who gives birth as a *zava*,** as the cessation of labor pains indicates that the emission of blood is not due to her imminent labor.


###### Niddah 36b:9
[Niddah 36b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:9)

אֲבָל שָׁפְתָה יוֹם אֶחָד וְקִשְּׁתָה שְׁנַיִם, אוֹ שֶׁשָּׁפְתָה שְׁנַיִם וְקִשְּׁתָה יוֹם אֶחָד, אוֹ שֶׁקִּשְּׁתָה וְשָׁפְתָה וְחָזְרָה וְקִשְּׁתָה — אֵין זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב. כְּלָלוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר: קוֹשִׁי סָמוּךְ לַלֵּידָה — אֵין זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב, שׁוֹפִי סָמוּךְ לַלֵּידָה — הֲרֵי זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But** if she **rested** from labor for **one day and** then **experienced** labor **pains** for **two** days; **or** if **she rested** from labor for **two** days **and experienced** labor **pains** for **one day; or** if **she experienced** labor **pains** for one day **and** then **rested** from labor for one day, **and again experienced** labor **pains** for one day; **this** woman **is not** considered **one who gives birth as a *zava*,** since the labor pains indicate that the blood is due to her imminent labor. This is **the principle of the matter:** If she experienced labor **pains adjacent to** giving **birth, this** woman **is not** considered **one who gives birth as a *zava*;** if she was **resting** from labor **adjacent to** giving **birth, this** woman **is** considered **one who gives birth as a *zava*.**


###### Niddah 36b:10
[Niddah 36b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:10)

חֲנַנְיָא בֶּן אֲחִי רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: כֹּל שֶׁחָל קִישּׁוּיָהּ בַּשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁלָּהּ, אֲפִילּוּ כׇּל הַיּוֹם כּוּלּוֹ בְּשׁוֹפִי — אֵין זוֹ יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Ḥananya, son of Rabbi Yehoshua’s brother, says:** In **any** situation **where** she experiences an emission due to **her** labor **pains** that **occur on her third day,** she is not a *zava*. **Even** if she was in a state **of resting** from labor for **the entire** third **day,** with the exception of one hour of labor pains, **this** woman **is not** considered **one who gives birth as a *zava*,** since a woman is considered to be resting from labor on the third day only if she was resting for the entire day.


###### Niddah 36b:11
[Niddah 36b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:11)

״כְּלָלוֹ שֶׁל דָּבָר״ לְאֵתוֹיֵי מַאי? לְאֵתוֹיֵי דַּחֲנַנְיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: The statement that this is **the principle of the matter** serves **to add what?** The Gemara answers: It serves **to add** the ruling **of Ḥananya,** son of Rabbi Yehoshua’s brother, that for a woman to be considered one who gives birth as a *zava*, she must have rested from labor for the entire third day.


###### Niddah 36b:12
[Niddah 36b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:12)

מְנָא הָנֵי מִילֵּי? דְּתָנוּ רַבָּנַן: ״דָּמָהּ״ — דָּמָהּ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ, וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that if a woman experiences bleeding due to labor pains during the eleven days of *ziva* she is not considered a *zava*. The Gemara asks: **From where are these matters** derived? **As the Sages taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states with regard to a *zava*: “And if a woman has an issue of her blood many days” (Leviticus 15:25). The term **“her blood”** indicates that only **her blood** that comes **due to herself** is impure as blood of *ziva*, **but not** blood that comes **due to** her **child.**


###### Niddah 36b:13
[Niddah 36b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:13)

אַתָּה אוֹמֵר מֵחֲמַת וָלָד, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא מֵחֲמַת אוֹנֶס? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְאִשָּׁה כִּי יָזוּב זוֹב דָּמָהּ״, הֲרֵי אוֹנֶס אָמוּר. הָא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״דָּמָהּ״? דָּמָהּ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ, וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes the *baraita*: **Do you say** the verse excludes blood that comes **due to** her **child? Or** is it **only** excluding blood that comes **due to circumstances beyond** her **control? When** the verse **states: “And if a woman has an issue of her blood,”** the inclusion of *ziva* due to **circumstances beyond** her **control is** already **stated** in the inclusive phrase: Has an issue. If so, **how do I realize** the meaning of the term **“her blood”?** The verse is teaching that only **her blood** that comes **due to herself** is impure as blood of *ziva*, **but not** blood that comes **due to** her **child.**


###### Niddah 36b:14
[Niddah 36b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:14)

וּמָה רָאִיתָ לְטַהֵר אֶת הַוָּלָד וּלְטַמֵּא בְּאוֹנֶס? מְטַהֵר אֲנִי בַּוָּלָד — שֶׁיֵּשׁ טׇהֳרָה אַחֲרָיו, וּמְטַמֵּא אֲנִי בְּאוֹנֶס — שֶׁאֵין טׇהֳרָה אַחֲרָיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** given that the verse contains both an inclusion and an exclusion, **what did you see to deem pure** the blood emitted due to **the child, and to deem impure** the blood she sees **due to circumstances beyond** her **control?** Perhaps the opposite is the case, that blood emitted due to circumstances beyond her control is pure, whereas blood caused by labor is impure. The Gemara answers: **I deem pure** the blood emitted **due to the child, as there is** a period of **purity after it,** i.e., her days of purity following her days of impurity; **and I deem impure** the blood she sees **due to circumstances beyond** her **control, as there is no** period of **purity after it.**


###### Niddah 36b:15
[Niddah 36b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:15)

אַדְּרַבָּה, מְטַהֵר אֲנִי בְּאוֹנֶס, שֶׁכֵּן אוֹנֶס בְּזָב טָהוֹר! הַשְׁתָּא מִיהָא בְּאִשָּׁה קָיְימִינַן, וְאוֹנֶס בְּאִשָּׁה לָא אַשְׁכְּחַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **On the contrary, I** should **deem** the blood **pure in** a case where it was emitted due to **circumstances beyond** her **control, as** an emission of *ziva* due **to circumstances beyond** one’s **control** in the case **of** a male ***zav* is pure.** The Gemara explains: **Now, in any event, we are dealing with** the *halakha* of **a woman, and in** the case of **a woman we do not find** that an emission caused by **circumstances beyond** her **control** is pure. It is therefore preferable to deem impure an emission caused by circumstances beyond her control, and to deem pure an emission due to childbirth.


###### Niddah 36b:16
[Niddah 36b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:16)

וְאִיבָּעֵית אֵימָא: מַאי דַּעְתָּיךְ לְטַהוֹרֵי בְּאוֹנֶס, וּלְטַמּוֹיֵי בְּוָלָד? אֵין לָךְ אוֹנֶס גָּדוֹל מִזֶּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara adds: **And if you wish, say** instead: **What is your opinion, that** one should **deem** the blood **pure in** a case where it was emitted due to **circumstances beyond** her **control, and deem** the blood **impure** in a case where it was emitted **due to the child?** But **you have no greater** instance of **circumstances beyond** her **control than this,** the experience of labor pains.


###### Niddah 36b:17
[Niddah 36b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:17)

אִי הָכִי, נִדָּה נָמֵי נֵימָא: ״זָבָה״ — זוֹבָהּ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ, וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **If** it is **so** that the above verse is interpreted in such a manner, then in the case **a menstruating woman as well,** with regard to whom the verse states: “And a woman, if she has an issue, and her issue in her flesh is blood, she shall be in her menstruation seven days” (Leviticus 15:19), **let us say** that when the verse states **“her issue”** this indicates that only **her issue** that comes **due to herself** renders her a menstruating woman, **but not** an issue that comes **due to** her **child.**


###### Niddah 36b:18
[Niddah 36b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:18)

אַתָּה אוֹמֵר וָלָד, אוֹ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא אוֹנֶס? כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״וְאִשָּׁה כִּי תִהְיֶה זָבָה״ — הֲרֵי אוֹנֶס אָמוּר, הָא מָה אֲנִי מְקַיֵּים ״זָבָה״? זוֹבָהּ מֵחֲמַת עַצְמָהּ, וְלֹא מֵחֲמַת וָלָד!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **Do you say** that the verse excludes an issue that comes due to her **child? Or** is it excluding **only** an issue that comes due to **circumstances beyond** her **control? When** the verse **states: “And a woman if she has an issue,”** the inclusion of an issue due to **circumstances beyond** her **control is** already **stated.** If so, **how do I realize** the meaning of the term **“her issue”?** The verse is teaching that only **her issue** that comes **due to herself** renders her a menstruating woman, **but not** an issue that comes **due to** her **child.** If the verse can be interpreted in this manner, why does the *baraita* teach that a woman who experiences labor pains during the days of menstruation is considered a menstruating woman?


###### Niddah 36b:19
[Niddah 36b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:19)

אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: אֲמַר קְרָא ״תֵּשֵׁב״, יֵשׁ לְךָ יְשִׁיבָה אַחֶרֶת שֶׁהִיא כָּזוֹ, וְאֵיזוֹ זוֹ? קוֹשִׁי בִּימֵי זִיבָה. וְאֵימָא: זוֹ קוֹשִׁי בִּימֵי נִדָּה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Reish Lakish said:** The **verse states** with regard to the days of purity after childbirth: **“She shall observe** the blood of purity” (Leviticus 12:5). This indicates that **you have another** instance of an **observance that is like this one,** i.e., where the woman is not rendered impure by an emission of blood. **And which** is **this** other case? **This** is the case of blood that is emitted due to labor **pains during** the eleven **days of *ziva*.** An emission during the days of menstruation, by contrast, renders the woman a menstruating woman. The Gemara asks: **But** one can **say** that **this** other case is where a woman has an emission of blood due to labor **pains during the days of menstruation,** not where she experiences an emission during the days of *ziva*.


###### Niddah 36b:20
[Niddah 36b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:20)

אֶלָּא אָמַר אֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: אָמַר קְרָא ״וּטְמֵאָה שְׁבֻעַיִם כְּנִדָּתָהּ״ וְלֹא כְּזִיבָתָהּ, מִכְּלָל דְּזִיבָתָהּ טָהוֹר, וְאֵיזוֹ זוֹ — קוֹשִׁי בִּימֵי זִיבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Shmuel’s father said** the **verse states: “And she shall be impure two weeks, as in her menstruation”** (Leviticus 12:5), **and not: As in her *ziva*. By inference,** one may conclude **that** there is an instance in which an emission of blood that occurs during **her** days of ***ziva*** is **pure. And which** case is **this? This** is the case of blood that is emitted due to labor **pains during** the eleven **days of *ziva*.**


###### Niddah 36b:21
[Niddah 36b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:21)

וְהַשְׁתָּא דִּכְתִיב ״וְטָמְאָה שְׁבוּעַיִם כְּנִדָּתָהּ״, ״דָּמָהּ״ לְמָה לִי? אִי לָאו ״דָּמָהּ״, הֲוָה אָמֵינָא כְּנִדָּתָהּ וְלֹא כְּזִיבָתָהּ, וַאֲפִילּוּ בְּשׁוֹפִי. קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And now that it is written: “And she shall be impure two weeks as in her menstruation,” why do I** need the term **“her blood”** (Leviticus 15:25) from which it is likewise derived that blood emitted due to labor pains during the eleven days of *ziva* is pure? The Gemara answers: **If not** for the term **“her blood,” I would say** the verse is teaching that a woman who gives birth is impure **as in her menstruation, and not as in her *ziva*, and** therefore, **even** if she experienced bleeding during her days of *ziva* **in** a state of **resting** from labor pains, she remains pure. Consequently, the term “her blood” **teaches us** that this *halakha* applies only if she experiences bleeding due to labor pains.


###### Niddah 36b:22
[Niddah 36b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:22)

שֵׁילָא בַּר אֲבִינָא עֲבַד עוֹבָדָא כְּוָותֵיהּ דְּרַב. כִּי קָא נָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ דְּרַב אֲמַר לֵיהּ לְרַב אַסִּי: זִיל צַנְּעֵיהּ, וְאִי לָא צָיֵית — גָּרְיֵיהּ. הוּא סָבַר ״גַּדְּיֵיהּ״ אֲמַר לֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ According to Rav, a woman who emits blood during the eleven days of *ziva* due to labor pains is considered like a menstruating woman for that day, i.e., she is prohibited to her husband until she immerses in the evening. The Gemara relates that **Sheila bar Avina ruled** in an actual **case in accordance with** the opinion **of Rav.** The Gemara further relates that **when Rav was dying, he said to Rav Asi: Go** and **hide** this *halakha*, i.e., inform Sheila bar Avina that my ruling is incorrect. **And if he does not listen** to you, **drag him [*garyei*]** to your side with convincing claims. Rav Asi misheard and **thought** that Rav **said to him *gadyei*,** excommunicate him.


###### Niddah 36b:23
[Niddah 36b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:23)

בָּתַר דְּנָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ דְּרַב, אָמַר לֵיהּ: ״הֲדַר בָּךְ״, דַּהֲדַר בֵּיהּ רַב. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אִם אִיתָא דַּהֲדַר בֵּיהּ, לְדִידִי הֲוָה אָמַר לִי. לָא צָיֵית גַּדְּיֵיהּ. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וְלָא מִסְתְּפֵי מָר מִדְּלֵיקְתָּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**After Rav died,** Rav Asi went to Sheila bar Avina and **said to him: Retract your** ruling, **as Rav** himself **retracted his** opinion. Sheila bar Avina **said to** Rav Asi: **If it is so, that he retracted his** opinion, **he would have told me,** as I was his student; he would not have sent a messenger to inform me of such a retraction. Consequently, Sheila bar Avina **did not listen** to Rav Asi. Rav Asi **excommunicated him,** as he thought that this was Rav’s instruction. Sheila bar Avina **said to** Rav Asi: **But is the Master not afraid of the fire,** i.e., of a punishment for offending me?


###### Niddah 36b:24
[Niddah 36b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:24)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: אֲנָא אִיסִי בֶּן יְהוּדָה, דְּהוּא אִיסִי בֶּן גּוּר אַרְיֵה, דְּהוּא אִיסִי בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דְּהוּא אִיסִי בֶּן מַהֲלַלְאֵל — אֲסִיתָא דִּנְחָשָׁא דְּלָא שָׁלֵיט בֵּיהּ רִקְבָּא. אֲמַר לֵיהּ: וַאֲנָא שֵׁילָא בַּר אֲבִינָא — בּוּכְנָא דְּפַרְזְלָא דִּמְתַבַּר אֲסִיתָא דִּנְחָשָׁא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Asi **said to him,** linking in a fanciful manner his own name to the various names of an important *tanna*: **I am Isi ben Yehuda, who is Isi ben Gur Arye, who is Isi ben Gamliel, who is Isi ben Mahalalel,** and this name alludes to **a copper mortar [*asita*], over which rot has no power,** i.e., no harm will befall me. Sheila bar Avina **said to** Rav Asi: **And I am Sheila bar Avina,** and my father’s name alludes to **an iron pestle [*bukhna*], which smashes a copper mortar,** i.e., harm may befall you through the merit of my ancestors.


###### Niddah 36b:25
[Niddah 36b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/36b:25)

חֲלַשׁ רַב אַסִּי. עַיְּילוּהּ בְּחַמִּימֵי אַפְּקוּהּ מִקָּרִירֵי, עַיְּילוּהּ בְּקָרִירֵי אַפְּקוּהּ מֵחַמִּימֵי, נָח נַפְשֵׁיהּ דְּרַב אַסִּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara relates that **Rav Asi fell ill** and contracted one sickness after another, so that when **he entered the heat** of a fever, **he exited** a sickness where he felt **cold,** and when **he entered into** a sickness where he felt **cold, he exited the heat** of a fever. Eventually, **Rav Asi died.**