Niddah 113

Chapter 113

א מאי דרוש (דברים יט, יד) לא תסיג גבול רעך אשר גבלו ראשונים בנחלתך

1 GEMARA. What exposition did they rely upon?1 — Thou shalt not remove they neighbour's landmark,2

ב כל שיש לו נחלה יש לו גבול כל שאין לו נחלה אין לו גבול

ג נאמנים לומר קברנו והא לית להו (ויקרא יט, יד) ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול א"ר אבהו בכהן עומד שם

3 which they of old time have set, in thine inheritance,3 whosoever has an 'inheritance'4 has also a 'landmark',2 but whosoever has no inheritance5

ד ודילמא כהן טמא הוא דנקיט תרומה בידיה ודילמא תרומה טמאה היא דקאכיל מינה

4 has no landmark.2 THEY ARE BELIEVED WHEN THEY SAY, 'WE BURIED …' But,6 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? ');">7 — R. Abbahu replied: This8

ה אי הכי מאי למימרא מהו דתימא לא בקיאי ביצירה קמ"ל

5 is a case where a [Samaritan] priest stood there.9 But is it not possible that the priest was unclean?10 — It is a case where he holds terumah in his hand.11

ו נאמנין על הבהמה וכו' והא לית להו ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול א"ר חייא בר אבא א"ר יוחנן בגוזז ועובד

6 But is it not possible that the terumah was unclean?10 — It is a case where he was eating of it.12 If so,13 what was the need of stating it?14

ז אי הכי מאי למימרא מהו דתימא לא בקיאי בטינוף קמ"ל

7 — 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. ');">15 hence we were informed [that we do rely upon them].16 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?17

ח נאמנין על ציון וכו' ואע"ג דמדרבנן הוא כיון דכתיבא מזהר זהירי ביה דכתיב (יחזקאל לט, טו) וראה עצם אדם ובנה אצלו ציון

8 — R. Hiyya b. Abba citing R. Johanan replied: It is the case of a beast that is shorn and engaged in work.18 If so, what was the need of stating such a law?14 — 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. ');">19

ט אבל אין נאמנין לא על הסככות וכו' סככות דתנן אלו הן סככות אילן המיסך על הארץ פרעות דתנן אבנים פרעות היוצאות מן הגדר

9 hence we were informed [that they are to be believed]. THEY ARE BELIEVED WHEN GIVING INFORMATION ON THE MARKING OF etc. Although this20 is only a Rabbinical institution21 they are careful to observe it, since it is mentioned in Scripture. For it is written, And any seeth a man's bone, then shall he set up a sign by it.22 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. ');">23

י בית הפרס א"ר יהודה א"ר שמואל מנפח אדם בית הפרס והולך

10 PROTRUDING STONES, as we have learnt: protruding stones that project from a wall.24 BETH HA-PERAS. Rab Judah citing Samuel ruled: A man25

יא רב יהודה בר אמי משמיה דרב יהודה אמר בית הפרס שנידש טהור ותנא החורש בית הקברות הרי זה עושה בית הפרס ועד כמה הוא עושה מלא מענה מאה אמה בית ארבעת סאין רבי יוסי אומר חמש

11 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. ');">26 blow away the earth in a beth ha-peras27 and28 continue on his way. R. Judah b. Ammi citing Rab Judah ruled: A beth peras that had been trodden out is clean.29 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. ');">30 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 se'ah.31 R. Jose ruled: Five beth se'ah. But are they32 not believed?33

יב ולא מהימני והתניא שדה שאבד בה קבר נאמן כותי לומר אין שם קבר

12 Was it not in fact taught, 'Concerning a field in which a grave was lost34 a Samaritan is believed when he stated, "There is no grave there",35 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? ');">36

יג לפי שאינו מעיד אלא על גופו של קבר אילן שהוא מיסך על הארץ נאמן לומר אין תחתיו קבר לפי שאינו מעיד אלא על גופו של קבר

13 concerning a tree whose foliage affords a covering over the ground37

יד א"ר יוחנן במהלך ובא על פני כולה

14 he is believed when he stated, "There is no grave under it",38 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? ');">36

טו אי הכי מאי למימרא מהו דתימא רצועה נפקא קמ"ל

15 — R. Johanan replied: This39 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. ');">40 If so,41

טז זה הכלל כו' זה הכלל לאתויי מאי לאתויי תחומין ויין נסך

16 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. ');">42 — 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. ');">43 hence we were informed that44

יז <big>הדרן עלך דם הנדה</big>

17 he is believed.45 THIS IS THE GENERAL RULE etc. What is the expression THIS IS THE GENERAL RULE intended to include? — To include Sabbath boundaries46 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. ');">47

Previous Chapter Next Chapter