We now find another baraita that allows us to posit that Rabbi Judah himself holds that a deaf person may ab initio recite a blessing. This is the mishnah about dedicating terumah. It was his rabbi, R. Elazar b. Azariah, who held that a deaf person should not read because he cannot hear, but if he does, it is still valid. This matches the baraita about birkat hamazon.
The baraita that we just taught contains a dispute between R. Judah (in the name of his teacher) and R. Meir. According to R. Judah he should make his blessing audible, but if he does not, it is still valid, whereas R. Meir says it need not be audible even ab initio.
Now that we know of this dispute, we can attribute the baraita about terumah which R. Judah son of R. Shimon b. Pazzi taught to R. Meir. It need not be R. Yose or R. Judah.
In the end there are three opinions concerning a deaf person who can speak. According to R. Judah ab initio he shouldn’t read because he cannot hear, but ex post facto, his reading is valid. According to R. Meir, even ab initio he can read. There is no need for him to hear. And according to R. Yose, even ex post facto, his reading is invalid.
This week’s daf opens by relating back to the Mishnah where R. Judah allowed a minor to read the Megillah.
Judah himself remembers reading the Megillah in front of the sages when he was a young boy. This is assumedly the basis for his ruling that a minor can read the Megillah. He himself did it!
Alas, his testimony is to no avail. The recollections of a minor are not valid testimony as to a halakhah.
Rabbi Judah Hanasi also remembers reading when he was a young boy, in front of R. Judah. But this evidence is doubly problematic. First of all, he can’t bring evidence that this is the halakhah from the very rabbi who allows it. We already knew that R. Judah allowed minors. Second, Rabbi Judah Hanasi was also a young boy, and as we learned above, a young boy’s testimony is not valid.
This section explains the mishnah which explained which mitzvoth must be performed during the day.
The verse demonstrates that the Megillah must be read at day.
Joshua ben Levi says that one must read it at night, and then read it again during the day. The mishnah which says that it must be read after the rise of the sun seems to contradict him.
The resolution is that the Mishnah refers only to the reading during the day. It does not mean that one does not have to read it at night. It just means that the day reading must be done after the rise of the sun....
The Talmud provides verses for how we know that circumcision, immersion in the mikveh, and sprinkling with purificatory waters must be done during the day.
This long section answers one relatively straightforward question—why did the mishnah have to specify that a woman who is counting one day for each day in which she saw abnormal genital discharge (zivah) has to immerse during the day. All people who immerse must do so, as the mishnah specifically said.
The answer is that there are some who do immerse during the day. Namely a man who had a seminal discharge. Similarly, a man who had an abnormal genital discharge immerses during the day. These people immerse during the day and at night are already pure. There is no counting. But a woman who has had a genital discharge must count one clean day for every impure day. She can’t immerse the same day that she had the discharge. So you might have thought that she could count the night as the day without discharge, therefore it comes to teach you that she must count a full day of cleanness, and only then immerse.