Study Niddah folio 41B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
and blood emerged through the womb, i.e., vaginally, during the 3 days preceding the birth. And R' Shimon conforms to his line of reasoning, that a caesarean birth is a full-fledged birth, and therefore the blood that emerged prior to the birth is ritually pure, and the Rabbis conform to their lin
Rav Yosef objects to this explanation: One difficulty is that according to this interpretation, the latter clause of the baraita is superfluous, as the dispute recorded there is identical to that of the first clause. And furthermore, the words: From there, in the phrase: The blood that emerges fro
Rather, Rav Yosef said that this is the explanation of the latter clause of the baraita: It is referring to a situation where both the offspring and blood emerged through the incision in the abdomen. It is in such a case that the first tanna deems the blood which emerged impure and R' Shimon deems
And the matter with regard to which they disagree is whether or not the location of a woman’s source, i.e., her uterus, is ritually impure. One Sage, the first tanna, holds that the location of a woman’s source is ritually impure, and therefore any blood that emerges from it, regardless of how i
§ Reish Lakish says: According to the statement of the one who deems the blood impure, the first tanna, he deems the woman impure as well, as though it were blood of menstruation. Likewise, according to the statement of the one who deems the blood pure, R' Shimon, he deems the woman pure as well.