Niddah 135

Chapter 135

א תסגי אייתי למחר וידע מאי קאמרה ליה אמר דודי חסרת טשטקי חסרת עבדי חסרת

1 There will be time enough to-morrow', he understood what she meant1 and retorted, 'Are you short of kettles? Are you short of buckets?2 Are you short of servants?'3 Raba delivered the following discourse: A woman may wash her head on the Sabbath eve4

ב דרש רבא אשה חופפת בערב שבת וטובלת במוצאי שבת אמר ליה רב פפא לרבא והא שלח רבין באגרתיה אשה לא תחוף בערב שבת ותטבול במוצאי שבת

2 and perform immersion at the termination of the Sabbath.5 Said R. Papa to Raba: But did not Rabin send in his letter the message that 'a woman must not wash her head on the Sabbath eve and perform immersion at the termination of the Sabbath'? And, furthermore, is it not surprising to yourself that a woman should be allowed to6 wash her head in the day time and perform immersion at night seeing that it is required that immersion should follow immediately after the washing of the head, which is not the case here? Raba subsequently appointed an amora7 in connection with this matter and delivered the following discourse: The statement I made to you is an erroneous one,8

ג ותמה על עצמך היאך חופפת ביום וטובלת בלילה הא בעינן תכף לחפיפה טבילה וליכא

3 but in fact it was this that was reported in the name of R. Johanan, 'A woman may not wash her head on the Sabbath eve and perform immersion at the termination of the Sabbath'; and, furthermore, it would be surprising that a woman should be allowed to6

ד הדר אוקי רבא אמורא עליה ודרש דברים שאמרתי לפניכם טעות הן בידי ברם כך אמרו משמיה דרבי יוחנן אשה לא תחוף בערב שבת ותטבול במוצאי שבת ותמה על עצמך היאך חופפת ביום וטובלת בלילה הא בעינן סמוך לחפיפה טבילה וליכא

4 wash her head in the day time and perform immersion at night seeing that it is required that immersion should closely follow the washing of the head, which would not be the case here. But the law is that a woman may wash her head in the day time and perform immersion at night. And the law is that a woman may wash her head at night only.9 But does not a contradiction arise between the one law and the other? — There is no contradiction: The former refers to a case where washing in the day time is possible while the latter refers to one where this is impossible.10

ה והלכתא אשה חופפת ביום וטובלת בלילה והלכתא אשה לא תחוף אלא בלילה (אלא) קשיא הלכתא אהלכתא

5 MISHNAH. IF A MENSTRUANT EXAMINED HERSELF ON THE SEVENTH DAY11 IN THE MORNING AND FOUND HERSELF TO BE CLEAN, AND AT TWILIGHT12 SHE DID NOT ASCERTAIN HER SEPARATION,13 AND AFTER SOME DAYS SHE EXAMINED HERSELF AND FOUND THAT SHE WAS UNCLEAN, BEHOLD SHE IS14 IN A PRESUMPTIVE STATE OF CLEANNESS.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It being assumed that the discharge did not occur before the moment she had discovered it. All clean things which she handled between the time of her immersion (on the night following the seventh day) and the time of her last examination are consequently regarded as clean. ');">15

ו לא קשיא הא דאפשר הא דלא אפשר

6 IF SHE EXAMINED HERSELF ON THE SEVENTH DAY16

ז <big>מתני׳</big> נדה שבדקה עצמה יום שביעי שחרית ומצאה טהורה ובין השמשות לא הפרישה ולאחר ימים בדקה ומצאה טמאה הרי היא בחזקת טהורה

7 IN THE MORNING AND FOUND THAT SHE WAS UNCLEAN, AND AT TWILIGHT17

ח בדקה עצמה ביום שביעי שחרית ומצאה טמאה ובין השמשות לא הפרישה ולאחר זמן בדקה ומצאה טהורה הרי זו בחזקת טמאה

8 SHE DID NOT ASCERTAIN HER SEPARATION,13

ט ומטמאה מעת לעת ומפקידה לפקידה ואם יש לה וסת דיה שעתה

9 AND AFTER A TIME SHE EXAMINED HERSELF AND FOUND THAT SHE WAS CLEAN, BEHOLD SHE IS14

י ור' יהודה אומר כל שלא הפרישה בטהרה מן המנחה ולמעלה הרי זו בחזקת טמאה וחכמים אומרים אפילו בשנים לנדתה בדקה ומצאה טהורה ובין השמשות לא הפרישה ולאחר זמן בדקה ומצאה טמאה הרי זו בחזקת טהורה

10 IN A PRESUMPTIVE STATE OF UNCLEANNESS.18 SHE19 CONVEYS, HOWEVER, UNCLEANNESS FOR TWENTY-FOUR HOURS RETROSPECTIVELY OR DURING THE TIME BETWEEN THE LAST AND THE PREVIOUS EXAMINATION, BUT IF SHE HAD A SETTLED PERIOD, IT SUFFICES FOR HER TO BE DEEMED UNCLEAN FROM THE TIME OF HER DISCHARGE. R.20 JUDAH RULED: ANY WOMAN WHO DID NOT,21

יא <big>גמ׳</big> איתמר רב אמר זבה ודאי ולוי אמר זבה ספק

11 FOLLOWING THE AFTERNOON, ASCERTAIN HER SEPARATION TO A STATE OF CLEANNESS IS REGARDED AS BEING IN A PRESUMPTIVE STATE OF UNCLEANNESS.22 BUT THE SAGES RULED: EVEN IF SHE EXAMINED HERSELF ON THE SECOND DAY OF HER MENSTRUATION AND FOUND THAT SHE WAS CLEAN, AND AT TWILIGHT SHE DID NOT ASCERTAIN HER SEPARATION, AND AFTER A TIME SHE EXAMINED HERSELF AND FOUND THAT SHE WAS UNCLEAN, SHE IS REGARDED AS BEING IN A PRESUMPTIVE STATE OF CLEANNESS.23 GEMARA. It was stated: Rab ruled: She24

יב אהייא אילימא ארישא הרי זו בחזקת טהורה קתני

12 is a certain zabah, but Levi ruled: She is a doubtful zabah. What do they refer to? If it be suggested: To the first clause [it could be objected]: Was it not stated, BEHOLD SHE IS IN A PRESUMPTIVE STATE OF CLEANNESS? If, on the other hand, they refer25 to the final clause,26

יג אלא אסיפא בשלמא ספק זבה אמרינן אלא זבה ודאי נמי הרי בדקה ומצאה טהורה

13 one can well see the logic of regarding the woman27 as a doubtful zabah,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since on the seventh day in the morning she was still unclean and since at twilight of that day it was not ascertained that she was clean, it may well be suspected that there was a discharge on the eighth, ninth and tenth in consequence of which she would become a zabah. ');">28 but why also29

יד אלא כי איתמר דרב ולוי שמעתא באפי נפשה איתמר נדה שבדקה עצמה ביום השביעי שחרית ומצאה טמאה ובין השמשות לא הפרישה ולאחר ימים בדקה ומצאה טמאה רב אמר זבה ודאי ולוי אמר זבה ספק

14 a certain zabah seeing that she has examined herself and found that she was clean?30 The fact is that when the statements of Rab and Levi were made they were given as independent rulings:31

טו רב אמר זבה ודאי כיון דמעיקרא נמצאת טמאה ועכשיו נמצאת טמאה טמאה ודאי ולוי אמר ספק זבה אימר פסקה ביני וביני

15 If a menstruant examined herself on the seventh day in the morning and found that she was unclean, and at twilight she did not ascertain her separation, and after some days she examined herself and found that she was unclean, Rab ruled: She is a certain zabah, but Levi ruled: She is a doubtful zabah. 'Rab ruled: she is a certain zabah', since she was previously found to be unclean and now also she was found to be unclean, she must be definitely unclean. 'But Levi ruled: She is a doubtful zabah', because it might be assumed that the discharge may have been discontinued in the intervening time.

Previous Chapter Next Chapter