Niddah 113
(דברים יט, יד) לא תסיג גבול רעך אשר גבלו ראשונים בנחלתך כל שיש לו נחלה יש לו גבול כל שאין לו נחלה אין לו גבול
— Thou shalt not remove they neighbour's landmark,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. his ancestral grave-yard (Sifri). ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ודילמא תרומה טמאה היא
surely, they do not uphold, do they, the exposition of the injunction, Nor put a stumbling-block before the blind?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XIX, 14, which is homiletically applied to the supply of misleading information which leads the unwary into sin. As the Samaritans do not mind misleading in such matters, how could their evidence on the cleanness or uncleanness of a place be acted upon? ');"><sup>7</sup></span>
והא לית להו ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול
— It is a case where he was eating of it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A certain proof that the terumah was clean. Unclean terumah is forbidden to a clean, and much more so to an unclean priest. ');"><sup>12</sup></span>
אי הכי מאי למימרא
— It might have been presumed that they are not acquainted with the stages of formation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. of the embryo; so that a mature one might be mistaken by them for an abortion and, in consequence, they would declare a place to be free from graves when in fact it is not clean. ');"><sup>15</sup></span>
לא בקיאי בטינוף קמ"ל
THEY ARE BELIEVED WHEN THEY DECLARE CONCERNING A BEAST etc. But, surely, they do not uphold, the exposition of the injunction, Nor put a stumbling-block before the blind, do they?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. supra p. 397, nn. 15f mut. mut. ');"><sup>17</sup></span>
נאמנין על ציון וכו'
— R. Hiyya b. Abba citing R. Johanan replied: It is the case of a beast that is shorn and engaged in work.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the case of a firstling both these are forbidden and the Samaritan would not have ventured to shear it or to work with it. ');"><sup>18</sup></span>
(יחזקאל לט, טו) וראה עצם אדם ובנה אצלו ציון
— It might have been presumed that they are not acquainted with the nature of a discharge [from the womb],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which in the case of small cattle is an indication of a birth that exempts the next from the restrictions of a firstling (cf. Bek. 21b); sc. they might mistake an ordinary discharge for one of abortion and thus erroneously regard the next birth as free from the restrictions of a firstling. ');"><sup>19</sup></span>
אבנים פרעות היוצאות מן הגדר
BUT THEY ARE NOT BELIEVED EITHER IN REGARD TO OVERHANGING BRANCHES etc. 'OVERHANGING BRANCHES', as we have learnt: The following are regarded as overhanging branches. The foliage of a tree that affords a covering over the ground.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Oh. VIII, 2. If one of the branches overshadowed a grave, uncleanness is conveyed only to a person under it but not to one under any of the other branches; but when the exact spot of the grave is unknown all the area overshadowed by the foliage is on account of the doubt subject to the same restriction. A Samaritan who is lax in the observance of uncleanness in a doubtful case, is not to be relied upon when he states that the grave was overshadowed by a particular branch or branches and that the others did not overshadow it. ');"><sup>23</sup></span>
רב יהודה בר אמי משמיה דרב יהודה אמר
may<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since no flesh of the corpse need be expected, while the bones which the plough crushed (v. infra) to fractions convey uncleanness (if they are no smaller than a barley-grain) only by means of touch or carriage. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
החורש בית הקברות הרי זה עושה בית הפרס
continue on his way. R. Judah b. Ammi citing Rab Judah ruled: A beth peras that had been trodden out is clean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the bones are crushed and scattered by the constant treading and no bone of the prescribed minimum bulk (cf. prev. n. but one) remains. ');"><sup>29</sup></span>
ועד כמה הוא עושה
One further taught: If one ploughs a graveyard he forms thereby a beth ha-peras.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Peras is derived from a root meaning 'to crush' the bones being crushed by the plough. Aliter: 'Peras' means a 'half', the extent of the unclean area being half a furrow in each direction from the grave. Aliter: 'Peras' is derived from a root meaning 'to extend', the uncleanness being extended to an area larger than that of the grave. ');"><sup>30</sup></span>
מלא מענה מאה אמה בית ארבעת סאין
And to what extent does he form it? To that of a full length of a furrow of a hundred cubit [squared, which covers an area of] four beth <i>se'ah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which means a hundred times a hundred cubits. ');"><sup>31</sup></span>
ולא מהימני
Was it not in fact taught, 'Concerning a field in which a grave was lost<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And which also, like a field in which a grave was ploughed, is subject to the uncleanness of a beth ha-peras (cf. M.K. 5b). ');"><sup>34</sup></span>
שדה שאבד בה קבר נאמן כותי לומר אין שם קבר לפי שאינו מעיד אלא על גופו של קבר
since he gives his evidence only about the grave itself;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is subject to Pentateuchal uncleanness which Samaritans observe. As his evidence amounts to an assertion that no Pentateuchal uncleanness is involved in that particular place he may well be relied upon. How then is this to be reconciled with our Mishnah? ');"><sup>36</sup></span>
במהלך ובא על פני כולה
since he renders evidence only about the grave itself'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is subject to Pentateuchal uncleanness which Samaritans observe. As his evidence amounts to an assertion that no Pentateuchal uncleanness is involved in that particular place he may well be relied upon. How then is this to be reconciled with our Mishnah? ');"><sup>36</sup></span>
מהו דתימא
is a case where he walks backward and forward throughout all its area.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which may well be taken as reliable evidence that there was no grave there. Our Mishnah, however, refers to a case where the Samaritan walks only across a part of the field. As he omits the other part there is reason to suspect that he knows it to contain a grave and that his evidence on the doubtful part of the field is intended to mislead Israelites so that they become subject to an uncleanness in which he himself does not believe. Hence the ruling of our Mishnah. ');"><sup>40</sup></span>
זה הכלל כו'
what was the need of stating it?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A rule that is self evident. As a grave was known to have been in the field and the Samaritan nevertheless walked through all its area, it must be obvious that he knew that the corpse had been removed. ');"><sup>42</sup></span>
זה הכלל לאתויי מאי
— It might have been presumed that a narrow strip jutted out,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' From the field; and that he assumed the grave to be located within that strip. As the rest of the field is still a suspected area the doubtful uncleanness of which Samaritans disregard his evidence aught not to be relied upon. ');"><sup>43</sup></span>
<br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך דם הנדה</strong></big><br><br>
he is believed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The possibility of a narrow strip jutting out not being taken into consideration. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> THIS IS THE GENERAL RULE etc. What is the expression THIS IS THE GENERAL RULE intended to include? — To include Sabbath boundaries<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which are a Rabbinical institution. Samaritans who reject it are not trusted when they state where the limit is. ');"><sup>46</sup></span> and wine of libation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Yen nesek, wine touched by an idolater and suspected of having been dedicated by him to idolatry. Samaritans do not regard such wine as forbidden and their evidence in such a case cannot, therefore, be trusted. ');"><sup>47</sup></span>