Niddah 18

Chapter 18

א כל שקורין לה אמא אמא ואינה בושה ר' זירא ור' שמואל בר רב יצחק חד אמר כל שאינה מקפדת וחד אמר כל שאינה בושה מאי בינייהו איכא בינייהו בושה ואינה מקפדת
1 when people call her mother in her presence<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So MS.M. Cur. edd. 'mother, mother'. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> and she does not blush. R. Zera and R. Samuel b. Isaac differ:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On what was meant by 'near old age'. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> One says, '[When she is called mother] and<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'all that'. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> she does not mind,' and the other says, 'And<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'all that'. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> she does not blush' — What is the practical difference between them? — The practical difference between them is the case of one who blushes but does not mind. What is the length of an 'onah? — Resh Lakish citing R. Judah Nesi'ah<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Prince, Judah II. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> replied: A normal 'onah is thirty days; but Raba, citing R. Hisda, replied: Twenty days. In fact, however, there is no difference of opinion between them. One Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Resh Lakish. ');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ב וכמה עונה אמר ריש לקיש משום רבי יהודה נשיאה עונה בינונית שלשים יום ורבא אמר רב חסדא עשרים יום ולא פליגי מר קחשיב ימי טומאה וימי טהרה ומר לא חשיב ימי טומאה
2 reckons both the clean and the unclean days<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., the interval between one period and another which is thirty days. ');"><sup>6</sup></span> while the other Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Raba. ');"><sup>7</sup></span> does not reckon the unclean days.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which number ten (seven as menstruant and three as zabah) leaving (thirty minus ten are) twenty clean days (Rashi. Cf., however, Tosaf.). ');"><sup>8</sup></span> Our Rabbis taught: If over an old woman have passed three 'onahs<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any flow during all this time. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> and then she observed a flow, it suffices for her to reckon her period of uncleanness from the time she observed the flow; if another three 'onahs have passed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any flow during all this time. ');"><sup>9</sup></span> and then she observed a flow, it again suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it. If, however, another three 'onahs have passed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any flow during all this time. ');"><sup>9</sup></span>
ג ת"ר זקנה שעברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה דיה שעתה ועוד עברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה דיה שעתה ועוד עברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה הרי היא ככל הנשים ומטמאה מעת לעת ומפקידה לפקידה
3 and then she observed a flow she is regarded<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'behold she'; since the appearance of the flow for the third time establishes the fact that her menstrual flow had not yet ceased and that only the length of the intervals between its periodic appearances has changed. ');"><sup>10</sup></span> as all other women and causes uncleanness retrospectively for twenty-four hours or from the previous examination to the last examination. This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That after a third appearance the woman's uncleanness begins twenty-four hours retrospectively. ');"><sup>11</sup></span>
ד ולא (מיבעיא) שכוונה אלא אפי' פיחתה (ואפילו) והותירה
4 is the case not only<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. MS.M and marg. n. Cur. edd. 'and it is not necessary (to state)', the word 'necessary' appearing in parenthesis. ');"><sup>12</sup></span>
ה אפי' פיחתה ולא מבעיא כוונה אדרבה כי כוונה קבעה לה וסתה ודיה שעתה
5 where she observed the flow at perfectly regular intervals<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if each interval was, for instance, exactly ninety days. ');"><sup>13</sup></span> but even where she observed it at successively decreasing intervals or<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cur. edd. in parenthesis. 'and even'. ');"><sup>14</sup></span>
ו וכי תימא רבנן היא דפליגי עליה דרבי דוסא דאמרי אשה שיש לה וסת מטמאה מעת לעת איפכא מבעי ליה ולימא ולא שפיחתה והותירה אלא אפי' כוונה
6 increasing intervals.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. irrespective of whether (a) the first interval extended over ninety-three days, the second over ninety-two and the third only over ninety or (b) the first extended over ninety-one days, the second over ninety-two and the third over ninety-three days. ');"><sup>15</sup></span> [You say,] 'Even<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Emphasis on this word. ');"><sup>16</sup></span> where she observed it at successively decreasing intervals'. It thus follows<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the expression 'even' is used (cf. prev. n.). ');"><sup>17</sup></span>
ז תני לא שפיחתה והותירה אלא אפי' כוונה ואיבעית אימא ה"ק ולא שכוונה אלא שפיחתה והותירה אבל כוונה קבעה לה וסת ודיה שעתה ומני רבי דוסא היא
7 that there is no need to mention that this law<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That after a third appearance the woman's uncleanness begins twenty-four hours retrospectively. ');"><sup>11</sup></span> applies where she observed the flow at perfectly regular ones. But should not the law be reversed, seeing that where she observes a flow at perfectly regular intervals she thereby establishes for herself a fixed period and it should, therefore, suffice for her to reckon her period of uncleanness from the time she observed the flow? And should you reply that this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the woman is unclean retrospectively even when she has a fixed period. ');"><sup>18</sup></span> represents the view of the Rabbis who differ from R. Dosa in maintaining that even a woman who has a fixed period causes retrospective uncleanness for twenty-four hours,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 4b. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> [it could be objected:] Should not the order<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the Baraitha under discussion. ');"><sup>20</sup></span>
ח ר"א אומר כל אשה שעברו עליה וכו' תניא אמר להם רבי אליעזר לחכמים מעשה בריבה אחת בהיתלו שהפסיקה שלש עונות ובא מעשה לפני חכמים ואמרו דיה שעתה
8 have been reversed to read as follows: Not only where she observed the flow at successively decreasing intervals or increasing intervals<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is her uncleanness retrospective for twenty-four hours. ');"><sup>21</sup></span> but even where she observed it at perfectly regular ones?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Where it might have been presumed that she has thereby established for herself a fixed period. ');"><sup>22</sup></span> — Read: Not only where she observed the flow at successively decreasing intervals or increasing intervals<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Is her uncleanness retrospective for twenty-four hours. ');"><sup>21</sup></span>
ט אמרו לו אין שעת הדחק ראיה מאי שעת הדחק איכא דאמרי שני בצורת הוו איכא דאמרי טהרות אפיש לעבידא וחשו רבנן להפסד דטהרות
9 but even where she observed it at perfectly regular ones.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n. but one; the ruling representing the view of the Rabbis (supra 4b). ');"><sup>23</sup></span> And if you prefer I might reply, It is this that was meant: This<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That after a third appearance the woman's uncleanness begins twenty-four hours retrospectively. ');"><sup>24</sup></span> does not apply where a woman observed the flow at perfectly regular intervals but only where she observed it at successively decreasing or increasing ones. Where, however, she observed it at perfectly regular intervals she thereby establishes for herself a fixed period and it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she has observed the flow. And whose view does this represent? That of R. Dosa.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra 4b. ');"><sup>19</sup></span> R. ELIEZER RULED: FOR ANY WOMAN OVER WHOM HAVE PASSED etc. It was taught: R. Eliezer said to the Sages. It once happened to a young woman at Haitalu<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Babylonian form for Aitalu, modern Aiterun, N.W. of Kadish. V. S. Klein, Beitrage, p. 47.] ');"><sup>25</sup></span> that her menstrual flow was interrupted for three 'onahs, and when the matter was submitted to the Sages they ruled that it sufficed for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed the flow. They replied: A time of emergency is no proof. What was the emergency? — Some say, It was a time of dearth,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When a decision to regard all the foodstuffs the woman had touched during the preceding twenty-four hours as unclean would have involved a serious loss and undue hardship. ');"><sup>26</sup></span> while others say, The quantity of foodstuffs the woman had prepared<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' During the preceding twenty-four hours. ');"><sup>27</sup></span>
י ת"ר מעשה ועשה רבי כר' אליעזר לאחר שנזכר אמר כדי הוא ר' אליעזר לסמוך עליו בשעת הדחק מאי לאחר שנזכר אילימא לאחר שנזכר דאין הלכה כר' אליעזר אלא כרבנן בשעת הדחק היכי עביד כוותיה
10 was rather large and the Rabbis took into consideration the desirability of avoiding the loss of the levitically clean things. Our Rabbis taught: It once happened that Rabbi acted in agreement with the ruling of R. Eliezer, and after he reminded himself observed, 'R. Eliezer deserves to be relied upon in an emergency'. What could be the meaning of 'after he reminded himself'? If it be explained: After he reminded himself that the <i>halachah</i> was not in agreement with R. Eliezer but in agreement with the Rabbis [the difficulty would arise:] How could he act according to the former's ruling even in an emergency? — The fact is that it was not stated whether the law was in agreement with the one Master or with the other Master. Then what is meant by 'after he reminded himself'? — After he reminded himself that it was not an individual that differed from him but that many differed from him, he observed 'R. Eliezer deserves to be relied upon in an emergency'. Our Rabbis taught: If a young girl who had not yet attained the age of menstruation<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'whose time to see (the menses) has not arrived'. ');"><sup>28</sup></span> observed a discharge, after the first time it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it; after the second time also<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since presumptive menstruation like any other condition of presumption cannot be established by one occurrence. ');"><sup>29</sup></span>
יא אלא דלא איתמר הילכתא לא כמר ולא כמר ומאי לאחר שנזכר לאחר שנזכר דלאו יחיד פליג עליה אלא רבים פליגי עליה אמר כדי הוא ר' אליעזר לסמוך עליו בשעת הדחק
11 it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it, but after the third time<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since according to Rabbi (with whose view, as shown infra, this Baraitha agrees) two occurrences suffice to establish a condition of presumption. ');"><sup>30</sup></span> she is in the same position as all other women<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who are in a condition of presumptive menstruation. ');"><sup>31</sup></span>
יב ת"ר תנוקת שלא הגיע זמנה לראות וראתה פעם ראשונה דיה שעתה שניה דיה שעתה שלישית הרי היא ככל הנשים ומטמאה מעת לעת ומפקידה לפקידה
12 and<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In accordance with Rabbinic law. ');"><sup>32</sup></span> causes uncleanness retrospectively<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a preventive measure enacted in the case of all such women (cf. prev. n. but one). ');"><sup>33</sup></span>
יג עברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה דיה שעתה ועוד עברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה דיה שעתה ועוד עברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה הרי היא ככל הנשים ומטמאה מעת לעת ומפקידה לפקידה
13 for twenty-four hours or from her previous examination to her last examination. If subsequently three 'onahs have passed over her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any discharge. ');"><sup>34</sup></span>
יד וכשהגיע זמנה לראות פעם ראשונה דיה שעתה שניה מטמאה מעת לעת ומפקידה לפקידה עברו עליה שלש עונות וראתה דיה שעתה
14 
טו אמר מר עברו עליה שלש עונות דיה שעתה
15 and then she again observed a discharge it suffices for her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the complete absence of the flow for three 'onahs is regarded as the cessation of the flow. ');"><sup>35</sup></span> to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In agreement with R. Eliezer (cf. our Mishnah). ');"><sup>36</sup></span> If another three 'onahs have passed over her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any discharge. ');"><sup>34</sup></span> and then again she observed a discharge it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it. But if another three 'onahs have passed over her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any discharge. ');"><sup>37</sup></span> and she again observed a discharge she is in the same position as all other women<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who are in a condition of presumptive menstruation. ');"><sup>38</sup></span> and causes uncleanness retrospectively for twenty-four hours or from her previous examination to her last one.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the appearance of the discharge for the third time proved that her flow had not ceased and that only the intervals between the discharges had been lengthened. ');"><sup>39</sup></span> When, however, a girl had attained the age of menstruation,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This being the case spoken of in our Mishnah: AND OF WHAT DID THEY SPEAK&nbsp;… OF A FIRST OBSERVATION. ');"><sup>40</sup></span> after the first observation it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed the discharge, while after the second time she causes uncleanness retrospectively for twenty-four hours or from her previous examination to her last examination.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. our Mishnah: BUT AT A SUBSEQUENT OBSERVATION&nbsp;… HOURS. ');"><sup>41</sup></span> If subsequently three 'onahs have passed over her<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her observing any discharge. ');"><sup>42</sup></span> and then she again observed a discharge, it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In agreement with R. Eliezer (cf. our Mishnah). ');"><sup>43</sup></span> The Master said,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Supra; in regard to a young girl who had not yet attained the age of menstruation and who observed a discharge at the end of each of three consecutive 'onahs. ');"><sup>44</sup></span> 'If subsequently three 'onahs have passed over her and then she again observed a discharge, it suffices for her to reckon her uncleanness from the time she observed it'.
Previous ChapterNext Chapter