Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Niddah

Folio 14a

R. Joshua b. Levi cursed the man who sleeps on his back.⁹  But this, surely, is not correct,¹⁰  for did not R. Joseph rule that one lying on his back should not read the shema',¹¹  from which it follows, does it not, that it is only the shema' that he must' not read but that he may well sleep in this manner? — As regards sleeping on one's back this is quite proper if one slightly inclines sideways, but as regards the reading of the shema' even if one inclines sideways this is forbidden.¹²  But did not R. Johanan turn slightly on his side and read the shema'? — R. Johanan was different [from other people] because he was corpulent.¹³

MISHNAH. IT IS THE CUSTOM OF THE DAUGHTERS OF ISRAEL WHEN HAVING MARITAL INTERCOURSE TO USE TWO TESTING-RAGS, ONE FOR THE MAN AND THE OTHER FOR HERSELF,¹⁴  AND VIRTUOUS WOMEN PREPARE ALSO A THIRD RAG WHEREBY TO MAKE THEMSELVES FIT FOR MARITAL DUTY.¹⁵  IF A VESTIGE OF BLOOD IS FOUND ON HIS RAG¹⁶  THEY ARE BOTH UNCLEAN¹⁷  AND ARE ALSO UNDER THE OBLIGATION OF BRINGING A SACRIFICE.¹⁸  IF ANY BLOOD IS FOUND ON HER RAG IMMEDIATELY AFTER THEIR INTERCOURSE THEY ARE BOTH UNCLEAN AND ARE ALSO UNDER THE OBLIGATION OF BRINGING A SACRIFICE. IF, HOWEVER, ANY BLOOD IS FOUND ON HER RAG AFTER A TIME THEY ARE UNCLEAN¹⁹  BY REASON OF DOUBT²⁰  BUT EXEMPT FROM THE SACRIFICE. WHAT IS MEANT BY 'AFTER A TIME'? WITHIN AN INTERVAL IN WHICH SHE CAN DESCEND FROM THE BED AND WASH HER FACE.²¹  BUT [IF BLOOD WAS FOUND SOME TIME] AFTER SUCH AN INTERVAL SHE CAUSES UNCLEANNESS RETROSPECTIVELY²²  FOR A PERIOD OF TWENTY-FOUR HOURS²³  BUT SHE DOES NOT CAUSE THE MAN WHO HAD INTERCOURSE WITH HER TO BE UNCLEAN.²⁴  R. AKIBA RULED: SHE²⁵  ALSO CAUSES THE MAN WHO HAD INTERCOURSE WITH HER TO BE UNCLEAN.²⁶  THE SAGES, HOWEVER, AGREE WITH R. AKIBA THAT ONE WHO OBSERVED A BLOODSTAIN CONVEYS UNCLEANNESS TO THE MAN WHO HAD INTERCOURSE WITH HER.

GEMARA. But²⁷  why should not the possibility be considered that the blood might be that of a louse?²⁸  — R. Zera replied that place is presumed to be tested as far as a louse is concerned. There are others, however, who reply: It is too narrow for a louse. What is the practical difference between them?²⁹  — The practical difference between them is the case where a crushed louse was found.³⁰  According to the reply³¹  that the place is presumed to be tested, this must have come from somewhere else,³²  but according to the reply³¹  that the place is too narrow it might be presumed that the attendant³³  has crushed it.³⁴

It was stated: If a woman examined herself with a rag that she had previously examined,³⁵  and then she pressed it against her thigh on which she found blood on the following day, Rab ruled: She³⁶  is subject to the uncleanness of a menstruant.³⁷  Said R. Shimi b. Hiyya to him: But, surely, you told us, 'She has only to take the possibility³⁸  into consideration'. It was also stated: Samuel ruled: She is subject to the uncleanness of a menstruant.³⁷  And so they also ruled at the schoolhouse: She is subject to the uncleanness of a menstruant.

It was stated: If a woman examined herself with a rag which she had not previously examined and having put it into a box she found upon it, on the following day, some blood,³⁹  R. Joseph stated: Throughout all his lifetime R. Hiyya regarded [her] as unclean but in his old age he ruled that [she] was clean. The question was raised: What⁴⁰  does he⁴¹  mean: That throughout all his⁴²  lifetime he regarded [her] as menstrually unclean⁴³  and in his old age he ruled that [she] was clean as far as menstruation is concerned but unclean on account of the bloodstain,⁴⁴  or it is possible that throughout his lifetime he regarded [her] as unclean on account of the stain⁴⁴  and in his old age he ruled that [she] was absolutely⁴⁵  clean? — Come and hear what was taught: If a woman examined herself with a rag which she had not previously examined and having put it into a box she found upon it, on the following day, some blood, Rabbi ruled: She is regarded as menstrually unclean,⁴⁶  and R. Hiyya ruled: She is regarded as unclean on account of the bloodstain.⁴⁷

1. Though priests.
2. The friction is apt to engender heat resulting in an emission of semen which renders them unclean and therefore unfit to eat terumah.
3. Cf. prev. n.
4. Because, though most of their life is spent on the perilous seas, they nevertheless remain constant in their ancestral faith.
5. When riding. Hence no heat is engendered (v. foll. n.).
6. Cf. prev. n. Contact with the animal's bare back engenders heat, as in the case of the camel-riders who never use a saddle.
7. Which is a cause of friction.
8. Holding both legs on one side.
9. Since this causes erection.
10. Lit., 'I am not'.
11. Cf. P. B., p. 40ff.
12. One must either sit or lie fully on his side.
13. It would have been too great a strain for him to lie on his side.
14. Supra 5a q.v. notes.
15. By examining themselves before intercourse. On the difference between the practice of the virtuous and that of the ordinary women cf. supra 12a.
16. Even though he made use of it some considerable time after intercourse.
17. Since it is obvious that the blood was due to a menstrual discharge during intercourse. As the woman is unclean the man also is unclean (cf. Lev. XV, 24).
18. For the sin of intercourse during uncleanness.
19. For seven days.
20. Anything they touched is, therefore, in a suspended state of uncleanness.
21. Euphemism.
22. According to Rabbinic, but not Pentateuchal law.
23. Both to objects and human beings, their uncleanness lasting until the evening.
24. For seven days. He is unclean, however, on the same day until evening in accordance with Rabbinic law (cf. prev. two nn.).
25. On account of the doubt.
26. For seven days (cf. supra 6a).
27. With reference to the ruling that IF A VESTIGE OF BLOOD IS FOUND … THEY ARE BOTH UNCLEAN … AND ARE ALSO UNDER THE OBLIGATION OF BRINGING A SACRIFICE.
28. As this is not impossible the uncleanness should only be one of a doubtful nature, so that if any terumah is involved it should not be burned but only kept in suspense, and the sacrifice also should be one for doubtful (asham talui) and not one for certain trespass (asham waddai).
29. The two replies.
30. On the testing-rag at some distance from the blood mark.
31. Lit., 'that expression which says'.
32. The blood must, therefore, be assumed to be that of menstruation.
33. Euphemism.
34. During intercourse, and the blood may consequently be attributed to it.
35. And ascertained that it was clean.
36. Since the rag was examined by her before use and found to be clean, and the blood that was transferred from it to her thigh must consequently be that of menstruation.
37. Sc. her uncleanness is definitely established. It is not regarded as one of a doubtful nature despite the possibility that the blood on her thigh may have come from some object other than the rag.
38. That the blood was that of menstruation.
39. And it is uncertain whether the blood was that of menstruation or of some other source with which the rag may have come in contact before the woman had used it.
40. Lit., 'how'.
41. R. Joseph.
42. R. Hiyya's.
43. I.e., certain uncleanness.
44. I.e., uncleanness of a doubtful nature.
45. Lit., 'from nothing'.
46. I.e., certain uncleanness.
47. I.e., uncleanness of a doubtful nature.

Rabbi was commending R. Hama b. Bisa to R. Ishmael son of R. Jose as a great man, when the latter said to him, 'If you come across him⁸  bring him to me'. When he⁹  came he¹⁰  said to him, 'Ask me something'. 'What is the ruling', the other asked, 'if a woman examined herself with a rag which she had not previously examined and having put it into a box she found some blood upon it on the following day?' 'Shall I give you,' the first answered, 'the ruling according to the views of my father¹¹  or shall I rather give it to you according to the views of Rabbi?'¹²  'Tell me,' the other said, 'the ruling according to Rabbi'. 'Is this the person', R. Ishmael exclaimed, 'of whom it is said that he is a great man! How could one ignore¹³  the views of the Master¹⁴  and listen to those of the disciple?¹⁵  R. Hama b. Bisa, however, was of the opinion that since Rabbi was the head of the college and the Rabbis were frequently in his company his traditions were more reliable.¹⁶  What is the view of Rabbi [that has just been referred to] and what is that of R. Jose? — R. Adda b. Mattena replied: —

A Tanna taught, Rabbi declares her¹⁷  unclean and R. Jose declares her clean. In connection with this R. Zera stated: When Rabbi declared her unclean he did so in agreement with the ruling of R. Meir, but when R. Jose declared her clean he did so in accordance with his own view. For we learnt:¹⁸  If a woman when attending to her needs¹⁹  observed a discharge of blood, R. Meir ruled: If she was standing at the time she is unclean but if she was sitting she is clean. R. Jose ruled: In either case she is regarded as clean.²⁰  Said R. Aha son of Raba to R. Ashi: But did not R. Jose the son of R. Hanina state that when R. Meir ruled that the woman was unclean he did so only on account of the bloodstain,²¹  whereas Rabbi regarded her as unclean by reason of menstruation?²²  — The other replied, What we maintain is this: When that ruling²³  was stated it was that the uncleanness was due to menstruation.²⁴

IF ANY BLOOD IS FOUND ON HER RAG IMMEDIATELY AFTER HER INTERCOURSE THEY ARE BOTH UNCLEAN etc. Our Rabbis taught:²⁵  What is meant by 'immediately'? This may be illustrated by the parable of the attendant and the witness who stood at the side of the lintel where the witness enters immediately after the attendant goes out, this being the interval which the Rabbis allowed as regards wiping off,²⁶  but not as regards an examination.²⁷

IF, HOWEVER, ANY BLOOD IS FOUND ON HER RAG AFTER A TIME etc. A Tanna taught: They²⁸  do incur the obligation of bringing a suspensive guilt-offering. But what is the reason of our Tanna?²⁹  — It is essential³⁰  [that the doubt shall be of the same nature as in the case of the consumption of] one piece of two pieces.³¹

WHAT IS MEANT BY 'AFTER A TIME'? etc. Is not, however, this³²  incongruous with the following: What is meant by 'after a time'? R. Eleazar³³  son of R. Zadok explained: Within an interval in which³⁴  she can stretch out her hand, put it under the cushion or bolster, take out a testing-rag and make examination with it?³⁵  — R. Hisda replied: By AFTER is meant the interval following this interval.³⁶  But was it not stated in connection with this,³⁷  IF, HOWEVER, ANY BLOOD IS FOUND ON HER RAG AFTER A TIME THEY ARE UNCLEAN, BY REASON OF THE DOUBT BUT EXEMPT FROM THE SACRIFICE. WHAT IS MEANT BY 'AFTER A TIME'? WITHIN AN INTERVAL IN WHICH SHE CAN DESCEND FROM THE BED AND WASH HER FACE?³⁸  — It is this that was implied:³⁹  WHAT IS MEANT BY 'AFTER A TIME'? Within an interval in which she can stretch out her hand, put it under the cushion or bolster, take out a testing-rag and make examination with it; and WITHIN AN INTERVAL IN WHICH SHE CAN DESCEND FROM THE BED AND WASH HER FACE [the question of uncleanness is subject to] a divergence of view between R. Akiba and the Sages. But was it not stated,⁴⁰  AFTER SUCH AN INTERVAL?⁴¹  — It is this that was meant: And this is the interval concerning which R. Akiba and the Sages are at variance.

R. Ashi replied: The former and the latter⁴²  represent the same length of time; when she has the testing-rag in her hand the time IS WITHIN AN INTERVAL IN WHICH SHE CAN DESCEND FROM THE BED AND WASH HER FACE, but if she has not the rag in her hand the time is limited to 'within an interval in which she can stretch out her hand, put it under the cushion or bolster, take out a testing-rag and make examination with it'.

An objection was raised: What is meant by 'after a time'? This question was submitted by R. Eleazar son of R. Zadok to the Sages at Usha when he asked them,

1. The bloodmark on the rag.
2. Lit., 'like a bean and more'. If it is smaller it may be presumed to be that of a louse (cf. infra 58b).
3. That the stain must be no less than a certain minimum.
4. Cf. supra n. 2. Had it been regarded as menstrual blood the smallest speck of it would have sufficed to cause certain uncleanness (cf. infra 40a)
5. Lit., 'he stood'.
6. In agreement with Rabbi.
7. Obviously he did, since in his youth he would not have ventured to differ from Rabbi who was his master (Rashi). Aliter: In his youth he would not have addressed Rabbi in the second person (cf. B.B. 158b) but as 'the Master' (Tosaf.).
8. Lit., 'when he comes to your hand'.
9. R. Hama.
10. R. Ishmael.
11. R. Jose.
12. These views are stated infra.
13. Lit., 'put down'.
14. R. Jose.
15. Rabbi.
16. Lit., 'sharpened'.
17. The woman referred to in R. Bisa's question.
18. So MS.M. and marg. gl. Cur. edd., 'it was taught'.
19. Making water.
20. Mishnah infra 59b q.v. notes.
21. I.e., doubtful uncleanness.
22. Certain uncleanness. How then could R. Zera maintain that Rabbi followed the view of R. Meir?
23. Of R. Jose b. Hanina.
24. Cf. prev. n. but one mut. mut.
25. Supra 12a, q.v. notes.
26. Externally, which takes place instantly after intercourse.
27. Internally, which must inevitably take place after a longer interval than the one allowed had elapsed. In the former case the uncleanness is certain and the sacrifice incurred is a sin-offering, while in the latter case the uncleanness is of a doubtful nature and the sacrifice incurred is a suspensive guilt-offering.
28. Husband and wife, contrary to the ruling of the Tanna of our Mishnah that they are EXEMPT FROM THE SACRIFICE.
29. Cf. prev. n.
30. If a suspensive guilt-offering is to be incurred.
31. One of which was e.g., permitted fat and the the other was forbidden fat, and it is not known which of the two pieces the person in question had consumed. Only in such a case of doubt is a suspensive guilt-offering incurred (cf. Ker. 17b). Where, however, the doubt involves only one object or person (as is the case under discussion where only one woman is concerned) no suspensive guilt-offering can be incurred.
32. The definition of 'AFTER A TIME'
33. So BaH. Cur. edd. 'Eliezer'.
34. While still in bed.
35. This interval (cf. prev. n.) being shorter than the one IN WHICH SHE CAN DESCEND FROM THE BED etc., it follows that, according to this Baraitha, during the longer interval the woman does not convey uncleanness to her husband and is only subject to the lesser restrictions of the twenty-four hours' period of retrospective uncleanness. How then are the two rulings to be reconciled?
36. Defined in our Baraitha. Lit., 'after the after'. During the interval as defined in the Baraitha both husband and wife are subject to doubtful uncleanness but after that interval, and during the one defined in our Mishnah, the woman, according to the Rabbis, as stated in the next clause of the Mishnah, does not convey any uncleanness to her husband.
37. The interval defined in our Mishnah.
38. Which clearly shows, does it not, that during the interval spoken of in our Mishnah the woman does carry uncleanness to her husband?
39. Sc. some words are missing from our Mishnah and are to be regarded as inserted.
40. In connection with the dispute between R. Akiba and the Sages.
41. Sc. after the one defined in our Mishnah; from which it follows that during this interval both agree that the woman does carry uncleanness to her husband.
42. The interval defined in our Mishnah and the one defined in the Baraitha.