Niddah 134

Chapter 134

א שלש אינן חוצצות שתים איני יודע ור' יוחנן אמר אנו אין לנו אלא אחת
1 three hairs<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which cannot be tied very closely. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> constitute no interposition;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though they were knotted. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> but I do not know the ruling in the case of two'. R. Johanan, however, stated, 'We have only this one principle: R. Isaac said, According to traditional law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Debar Torah, lit., 'the word of the (oral) law'. ');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב אמר ר' יצחק דבר תורה רובו המקפיד עליו חוצץ רובו ואינו מקפיד עליו אינו חוצץ וגזרו על רובו שאינו מקפיד משום רובו המקפיד וגזרו על מיעוטו המקפיד משום רובו המקפיד
2 an interposition on its<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One's hair. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> major part<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When each single hair is knotted. ');"><sup>5</sup></span> to which a man objects constitutes an interposition but one which he does not mind constitutes no interposition; but the Rabbis ruled that an interposition on its<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' One's hair. ');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ג ולגזור נמי על מיעוטו שאינו מקפיד משום מיעוטו המקפיד היא גופה גזרה ואנן ניקום ונגזור גזרה לגזרה
3 greater part shall constitute an interposition, even when the man does not mind it, as a preventive measure against the possibility of allowing an interposition on its major part to which the man does object; and they also ruled that an interposition on its minor part to which a man objects shall constitute an interposition as a preventive measure against the possibility of allowing an interposition on its major part to which a man objects.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. while traditional law restricts a disqualifying interposition to (a) its extension over the major part of one's hair and (b) the man's objection to it, the Rabbis regard (a) without (b) or (b) without (a) also as a disqualifying interposition. ');"><sup>6</sup></span> But why should no prohibition be enacted also against an interposition on its lesser part, to which one does not object, as a preventive measure against the possibility of allowing an interposition over the lesser part to which one does object?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both cases involving a lesser part. ');"><sup>7</sup></span>
ד אמר רב נדה בזמנה אינה טובלת אלא בלילה ושלא בזמנה טובלת בין ביום בין בלילה רבי יוחנן אמר בין בזמנה בין שלא בזמנה אינה טובלת אלא בלילה משום סרך בתה
4 — This ruling itself<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The one forbidding an interposition over the lesser part to which one objects. ');"><sup>8</sup></span> is but a preventive measure, shall we go so far<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'we shall arise ');"><sup>9</sup></span> as to institute a preventive measure against the possibility of infringing a preventive measure?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Certainly not. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> Rab ruled: If a menstruant performs immersion at 'the proper time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the seventh day. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ה ואף רב הדר ביה דאמר רבי חייא בר אשי אמר רב נדה בין בזמנה בין שלא בזמנה אינה טובלת אלא בלילה משום סרך בתה
5 she may do it only at night<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before nightfall the seven prescribed unclean days have not been completed. ');"><sup>12</sup></span>
ו אתקין רב אידי בנרש למטבל ביומא דתמניא משום אריותא רב אחא בר יעקב בפפוניא משום גנבי
6 
ז רב יהודה בפומבדיתא משום צנה רבא במחוזא משום אבולאי
7 
ח אמר ליה רב פפא לרבא ולאביי מכדי האידנא כולהו ספק זבות שוינהו רבנן ליטבלינהו ביממא דשביעאה
8 but if she performs it after the proper time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the eighth day. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> she may do it either in the day time or at night.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n. but one mut. mut. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ט משום דרבי שמעון דתניא (ויקרא טו, כח) אחר תטהר אחר אחר לכולן שלא תהא טומאה מפסקת ביניהן ר' שמעון אומר אחר תטהר אחר מעשה תטהר
9 R. Johanan ruled: Whether at the proper time or after the proper time a menstruant may perform immersion only at night, on account of the possibility of her daughter's following her lead.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not knowing the difference between an immersion on the seventh and one on the eighth she, following the example of her mother on an eighth day, would perform immersion in the day time on a seventh also. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> Rab, moreover, also withdrew his ruling; for R. Hiyya b. Ashi citing Rab laid down: Whether at the proper time or after the proper time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the eighth day. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> a menstruant may perform immersion only at night on account of the possibility of her daughter's following her lead.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Not knowing the difference between an immersion on the seventh and one on the eighth she, following the example of her mother on an eighth day, would perform immersion in the day time on a seventh also. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> R. Idi ordained at Narash that immersion shall be performed on the eighth day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Instead of the night following the seventh day. ');"><sup>16</sup></span>
י אבל אמרו חכמים אסור לעשות כן שמא תבא לידי ספק
10 on account of lions.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the woman might encounter at night. ');"><sup>17</sup></span> R. Aha b. Jacob issued a similar ordinance at Papunia on account of thieves.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the woman might encounter at night. ');"><sup>17</sup></span>
יא אמר רב הונא אשה חופפת באחד בשבת וטובלת בשלישי בשבת שכן אשה חופפת בערב שבת וטובלת במוצאי שבת
11 Rab Judah did the same at Pumbeditha on account of the cold. Rabbah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So with old edd. and Maharsha. Cur. edd., Raba. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> acted similarly at Mahoza on account of the guards of the city gates.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who were men of doubtful morality. Aliter: Dangerous caverns on the road to the ritual bath. ');"><sup>19</sup></span>
יב אשה חופפת באחד בשבת וטובלת ברביעי בשבת שכן אשה חופפת בערב שבת וטובלת במוצאי יו"ט שחל להיות אחר השבת
12 Said R. Papa<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' MS.M., Papi. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>
יג אשה חופפת באחד בשבת וטובלת בחמישי בשבת שכן אשה חופפת בערב שבת וטובלת במוצאי שני ימים טובים של ראש השנה שחל להיות אחר השבת
13 to Raba,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So with Alfasi and Bomb, ed. Cur. edd. insert 'and to Abaye'. ');"><sup>21</sup></span>
יד ורב חסדא אמר כולהו אמרינן שכן לא אמרינן היכא דאפשר אפשר היכא דלא אפשר לא אפשר
14 Consider: At the present time the Rabbis have put all menstruants on the same level as zabahs,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who must allow seven clean days to pass before they can attain cleanness, ');"><sup>22</sup></span> why then should they not allow them<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the case of a zabah ');"><sup>23</sup></span>
טו ורב יימר אמר אפילו שכן נמי אמרינן לבר מאשה חופפת באחד בשבת וטובלת בחמישי בשבת דלמוצאי שני ימים טובים של ראש השנה שלאחר השבת ליתא דאפשר דחופפת בלילה וטובלת בלילה
15 to perform immersion in the daytime of the seventh day?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And should one happen to be no zabah but a menstruant her uncleanness had in fact terminated seven days earlier. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> — This cannot be allowed on account of the following ruling of R. Simeon. For it was taught: After that she shall be clean,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 28. ');"><sup>25</sup></span>
טז דרש מרימר הלכתא כרב חסדא וכדמתרץ רב יימר
16 'after' means after all of them, implying that no uncleanness may intervene between them; but R. Simeon stated: After that she shall be clean<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And should one happen to be no zabah but a menstruant her uncleanness had in fact terminated seven days earlier. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> implies that after the act<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of counting the seventh day, even before the day had ended. ');"><sup>26</sup></span>
יז איבעיא להו אשה מהו שתחוף בלילה ותטבול בלילה מר זוטרא אוסר ורב חיננא מסורא שרי
17 she shall<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On performing immersion. ');"><sup>27</sup></span> be clean, but the Sages have ruled that it was forbidden to do so in case she might thereby land in a doubtful situation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of cleanness. She might have intercourse on that day and experience a discharge subsequently before its termination, in which case her counting as well as her immersion must be deemed invalid, and her intercourse has thus taken place during a period of doubtful cleanness. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> R. Huna ruled: A woman<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' About to undergo immersion. ');"><sup>29</sup></span>
יח א"ל רב אדא [לרב חיננא מסורא] לאו הכי הוה עובדא בדביתהו דאבא מרי ריש גלותא דאיקוט אזל ר"נ בר יצחק לפיוסה ואמרה ליה מאי איתיה השתא
18 may wash her head on a Sunday<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'on the first day of the week'. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> and perform immersion on the following Tuesday,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. an interval of a day may be allowed between the washing of her head and her immersion. ');"><sup>31</sup></span> since similarly she<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose immersion is due on a Saturday night. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> is allowed to wash her head<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An act forbidden on a Saturday which is the Sabbath day. This question is asked on the view that the washing of the head may not be performed on the same night as the immersion, v. infra. ');"><sup>33</sup></span> on a Friday<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'Sabbath eve'. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> and undergo immersion on the following Saturday night.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., at the goings out of the Sabbath'. As an interval of one day must inevitably be allowed in this case (cf. prev. nn.) it is also allowed where the interval is merely a matter of the woman's convenience. ');"><sup>35</sup></span> A woman may wash her head on a Sunday and undergo immersion on the following Wednesday, since similarly she<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whose immersion is due on the termination of a festival day that fell on a Sunday. ');"><sup>36</sup></span> is allowed to wash her head<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' An act forbidden on a festival day. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> on a Friday<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'Sabbath eve'. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> and undergo immersion in the night following a festival that occurred on a Sunday. A woman may wash her head on a Sunday and undergo immersion on the following Thursday, since similarly she may wash her head on a Friday and undergo immersion in the night following the two festival days of the New Year that happened to fall immediately after a Saturday. R. Hisda, however, stated: In all these cases<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where immersion is due on a night that followed a Sabbath or a festival day on which the washing of one's head is forbidden. ');"><sup>38</sup></span> we rule as mentioned<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That an interval of a day or more is permitted between the time of the washing of the head and immersion. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> but we do not draw the inference of 'since similarly'; for where [the avoidance of an interval] is possible an interval must be avoided,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'possible'. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> and only where this is impossible<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As in the cases where the days preceding the nights of immersion are ones on which the washing of the head is forbidden. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> may an interval be allowed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'it is not possible'. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> R. Yemar, however, stated: We may even draw the inferences of 'since similarly'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. an interval may be allowed even on account of a woman's personal convenience, since she is allowed a similar interval when the day preceding the night of her immersion is one on which it is forbidden to wash one's head. ');"><sup>43</sup></span> except in the case where a woman is permitted to wash her head on a Sunday and undergo immersion on the following Thursday, for the parallel of the night following the two festival days of the New Year that happened to fall immediately after a Saturday does not hold, since it is possible for the woman to wash her head and undergo immersion in the same night.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The one following the second festival day of the New Year. Had she been allowed to wash her head on the preceding Friday the interval between the washing and the immersion would have been too long; hence it is preferable that the washing be done in the same night as the immersion. As a long interval of three day is not allowed even in such a case, where the washing of the head on the day preceding the night of the immersion is impossible, it cannot be allowed, with much more reason, where the interval is no necessity but a matter of convenience. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> Meremar in his discourse laid down: The law is in agreement with R. Hisda<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That 'we do not draw the inference of since similarly' and that, consequently, no interval for the sake of a woman's personal convenience may be allowed between the washing of her head and her immersion. ');"><sup>45</sup></span> but<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though R. Hisda allows an interval where the day preceding the immersion is one on which labour is forbidden. ');"><sup>46</sup></span> in accordance with the interpretation of R. Yemar.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who allows the interval only in the first two cases but not in the third case where the immersion is due on the termination of the New Year festival that happened to fall on a Sunday and a Monday. ');"><sup>47</sup></span> The question was raised: May a woman wash her head at night<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The night in which her immersion is due. ');"><sup>48</sup></span> and perform immersion the same night?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is she, it is asked, likely to pay scant attention to the former on account of her hurry to get through with her immersion? ');"><sup>49</sup></span> — Mar Zutra forbids this, but R. Hinena of Sura permits it. Said R. Adda to R. Hinena of Sura:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Var. lec., R. Adda of Sura to Mar Zutra (BaH.). ');"><sup>50</sup></span> Did not the following incident<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which proves that washing the head and immersion may take place the same night. ');"><sup>51</sup></span> actually occur<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'was not thus the incident'. ');"><sup>52</sup></span> to the wife of the exilarch Abba Mari? She having had some quarrel<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' With her husband, as a result of which she refused to perform immersion. ');"><sup>53</sup></span> R. Nahman b. Isaac proceeded to pacify her, and when she said to him, 'What is the hurry now?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' At night. ');"><sup>54</sup></span>
Previous ChapterNext Chapter