## Niddah Daf 44b

###### Niddah 44b:1
[Niddah 44b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:1)

בַּקֶּבֶר לְהַנְחִיל לְאֶחָיו מִן הָאָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
while **in the grave,** i.e., after death, **in order to bequeath to his paternal half-brother.**


###### Niddah 44b:2
[Niddah 44b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:2)

אִינִי? וְהָא הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא, וּפַרְכֵּס עַד תְּלָת פִּרְכּוּסֵי! אָמַר מָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב אָשֵׁי: מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַזְּנַב הַלְּטָאָה דִּמְפַרְכֶּסֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Is that so,** that it is presumed that the fetus died before its mother? **But wasn’t there an incident** in which the mother died **and** the fetus **made up to three spasmodic motions** afterward? **Mar, son of Rav Ashi, said:** That is **just as it is with the tail of the lizard, which twitches** after being severed from the lizard, but it is merely a spasmodic motion which does not indicate that it is still alive.


###### Niddah 44b:3
[Niddah 44b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:3)

מָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא אָמַר: לוֹמַר שֶׁמְּמַעֵט בְּחֵלֶק בְּכוֹרָה, וְאָמַר מָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא: בֵּן שֶׁנּוֹלַד אַחַר מִיתַת הָאָב אֵינוֹ מְמַעֵט בְּחֵלֶק בְּכוֹרָה, מַאי טַעְמָא? ״וְיָלְדוּ לוֹ״ בָּעֵינַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Mar, son of Rav Yosef, said** a different explanation of the mishna’s ruling **in the name of Rava:** The mishna teaches that a one-day-old baby inherits in order **to say that** such a child **reduces the portion of the firstborn.** A firstborn is entitled to a double portion of the inheritance, which is calculated by taking into account the portion due to his dead brother. **And Mar, son of Rav Yosef,** further **said in the name of Rava: A son who was born after his father’s death does not reduce the portion of the firstborn.** Therefore, the *halakha* in the mishna does not apply to a fetus. **What is the reason** for this? **We require** fulfillment of the verse: “If a man has two wives, the one beloved, and the other hated, **and they bore him children”** (Deuteronomy 21:15), and this does not apply to a fetus not yet born at the time of the father’s death.


###### Niddah 44b:4
[Niddah 44b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:4)

בְּסוּרָא מַתְנוּ הָכִי, בְּפוּמְבְּדִיתָא מַתְנוּ הָכִי: אָמַר מָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא — בְּכוֹר שֶׁנּוֹלַד לְאַחַר מִיתַת אָבִיו אֵינוֹ נוֹטֵל פִּי שְׁנַיִם. מַאי טַעְמָא? ״יַכִּיר״ בָּעֵינַן, וְהָא לֵיכָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **In Sura they taught** Mar’s statement **that** way, whereas **in Pumbedita they taught** it **this** way: **Mar, son of Rav Yosef, said in the name of Rava: A firstborn who was born after his father’s death does not receive a double** portion. **What is the reason** for this? **We require** fulfillment of the verse: “But **he shall acknowledge** the firstborn…by giving him a double portion” (Deuteronomy 21:17), **and** in this case the father **is not** there to acknowledge him.


###### Niddah 44b:5
[Niddah 44b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:5)

וְהִלְכְתָא: כְּכֹל הָנֵי לִישָּׁנֵי דְּמָר בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יוֹסֵף מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּרָבָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes: **And the *halakha*** is **in accordance with all these versions of** the statement of **Mar, son of Rav Yosef, in the name of Rava,** i.e., a one-day-old baby reduces the portion of the firstborn, a son born after his father’s death does not reduce the portion of the firstborn, and a firstborn born after his father’s death does not receive a double portion.


###### Niddah 44b:6
[Niddah 44b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:6)

וְהַהוֹרְגוֹ חַיָּיב. דִּכְתִיב ״וְאִישׁ כִּי יַכֶּה כׇּל נֶפֶשׁ״ — מִכׇּל מָקוֹם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And one who kills** a one-day-old baby is **liable** for his murder. The Gemara explains that the reason for this is **as it is written: “And he who smites any man mortally** shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:17), where the phrase “any man” indicates that this verse applies **in any case,** even in the case of a one-day-old baby.


###### Niddah 44b:7
[Niddah 44b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:7)

וַהֲרֵי הוּא לְאָבִיו וּלְאִמּוֹ וּלְכׇל קְרוֹבָיו כְּחָתָן שָׁלֵם. לְמַאי הִלְכְתָא? אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לְעִנְיַן אֲבֵלוּת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna further teaches: **And** if a one-day-old baby dies, **his** status in relation **to his father and to his mother and to all his relatives** is **like** that of **a full-fledged groom.** The Gemara asks: **With regard to what *halakha*** is this stated? **Rav Pappa said: With regard to mourning.**


###### Niddah 44b:8
[Niddah 44b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:8)

כְּמַאן? דְּלָא כְּרַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל, דְּאָמַר: כֹּל שֶׁשָּׁהָה שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם בָּאָדָם אֵינוֹ נֵפֶל. הָא לֹא שָׁהָה — סָפֵק הָוֵי! הָכָא בְמַאי עָסְקִינַן? דְּקִים לֵיהּ שֶׁכָּלוּ לוֹ חֳדָשָׁיו.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **In accordance with whose** opinion is this stated? It is **not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel, who said: With regard to humans, any** child **that remained** alive **thirty days** after birth **is not** considered **a non-viable newborn.** It can be inferred from this statement that if **he did not remain** alive for thirty days after birth, **he is** of **uncertain** status. The Gemara refutes this proof: **Here we are dealing with** a case **where one is certain that its months** of gestation **were completed,** and therefore it is certainly a viable newborn.


###### Niddah 44b:9
[Niddah 44b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:9)

**מַתְנִי'** בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד — מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה, וְאִם בָּא עָלֶיהָ יָבָם — קְנָאָהּ, וְחַיָּיבִין עָלֶיהָ מִשּׁוּם אֵשֶׁת אִישׁ,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **A girl** who is **three years and one day old,** whose father arranged her betrothal, **is betrothed through intercourse,** as the halakhic status of intercourse with her is that of intercourse in all halakhic senses. **And** in a case where the childless husband of a girl three years and one day old dies, **if** his brother the ***yavam* engages in intercourse with her, he acquires her** as his wife; **and** if she is married, a man other than her husband **is liable for** engaging in intercourse with **her due to** violation of the prohibition against intercourse with **a married woman.**


###### Niddah 44b:10
[Niddah 44b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:10)

וּמְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ לְטַמֵּא מִשְׁכָּב תַּחְתּוֹן כָּעֶלְיוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** if she is impure due to menstruation, **she imparts impurity to one who engages in intercourse with her** who then **renders impure** all the layers of **bedding beneath** him, rendering them impure **like the upper** bedding covering a *zav*, in the sense that it assumes first-degree ritual impurity and does not become a primary source of ritual impurity, and it renders impure food and drink, but it does not render impure people and vessels.


###### Niddah 44b:11
[Niddah 44b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:11)

נִשֵּׂאת לַכֹּהֵן — תֹּאכַל בִּתְרוּמָה; בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִן הַפְּסוּלִין — פְּסָלָהּ מִן הַכְּהוּנָּה; בָּא עָלֶיהָ אֶחָד מִכׇּל הָעֲרָיוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה — מוּמָתִין עָלֶיהָ, וְהִיא פְּטוּרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **she marries a priest, she may partake of *teruma*,** like any other wife of a priest; if she is unmarried and **one** of the men **who are unfit** for the priesthood, e.g., a *mamzer* or *ḥalal*, **engaged in intercourse with her, he disqualifies her from** marrying into **the priesthood,** and if she is the daughter of a priest, she is disqualified from partaking of *teruma*. Finally, if **one of all those with whom relations are forbidden,** as **stated in the Torah,** e.g., her father or her husband’s father, **engaged in intercourse with her, they are executed** by the court **for** engaging in intercourse with **her, and she is exempt,** because she is a minor.


###### Niddah 44b:12
[Niddah 44b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:12)

פָּחוֹת מִכֵּן — כְּנוֹתֵן אֶצְבַּע בָּעַיִן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If the girl is **less than that** age, younger than three years and one day, the status of intercourse with her is not that of intercourse in all halakhic senses; rather, it is **like placing a finger into the eye.** Just as in that case, the eye constricts, sheds tears, and then returns to its original state, so too, in a girl younger than three years and one day old, the hymen returns to its original state.


###### Niddah 44b:13
[Niddah 44b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:13)

**גְּמָ'** תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד. מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אָמְרִי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יַנַּאי: עֶרֶב רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **The Sages taught** in a *baraita*: **A girl** who is **three years** old **is betrothed through intercourse;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say:** She must be **three years and one day old.** The Gemara asks: **What** is the difference **between** their opinions, as both agree that she cannot be betrothed before the age of three? The Sages **of the school of Rabbi Yannai said:** There is a difference **between** their opinions in the case of a girl on **the eve of the first day of** the fourth **year** of her life. According to Rabbi Meir, she can be betrothed through intercourse, as on this day three years are complete, whereas the Rabbis maintain that she cannot be betrothed in this manner, as she has not yet entered the first day of her fourth year.


###### Niddah 44b:14
[Niddah 44b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:14)

וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם בַּשָּׁנָה חֲשׁוּבִין שָׁנָה אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** There is a difference **between** their opinions with regard to the issue of whether **thirty days in a year are considered** equivalent to **a year.** Rabbi Meir maintains that thirty days in a year are considered equivalent to a year, and therefore a girl aged two years and thirty days is already considered like a three-year-old and may be betrothed through intercourse. By contrast, the Rabbis contend that thirty days in a year are not considered equivalent to a year, and she may be betrothed through intercourse only upon reaching the age of three years and one day.


###### Niddah 44b:15
[Niddah 44b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/44b:15)

מֵיתִיבִי: בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים, וַאֲפִילּוּ בַּת שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד — מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת בְּבִיאָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים: בַּת שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים וְיוֹם אֶחָד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** against the explanation of Rabbi Yannai from a *baraita*: A girl who is **three years old, and even** one who is **two years and one day old, is betrothed through intercourse;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. And the Rabbis say:** She must be **three years and one day old.**