Niddah 22

Chapter 22

א בית שמאי היא דאמרי מעין אחד הוא וסתם לן תנא כב"ש סתם ואחר כך מחלוקת הוא וכל סתם ואח"כ מחלוקת אין הלכה כסתם

1 Beth Shammai who hold that 'it1 all emanates from the same source'.2 But would the Tanna teach an anonymous Mishnah3

ב ואבע"א מי קתני מבקשת לישב יושבת קתני אי יושבת מאי למימרא מהו דתימא תיבדוק דדילמא קבעה לה וסת קמ"ל דמעין טהור למעין טמא לא קבעה

2 in agreement with the view of Beth Shammai?4 — This is an anonymous ruling that is followed by a divergence of opinion, and wherever an anonymous ruling is followed by a dispute the halachah does not agree with the anonymous ruling. And if you prefer I might reply: Was it stated,5 'desirous of CONTINUING'?6 It was only stated, 'CONTINUING'.7 But if the woman was already 'continuing'7 what was the purpose of stating the ruling?8

ג הניחא ללוי דאמר שני מעינות הם אלא לרב דאמר מעין אחד הוא תבדוק דילמא קבעה לה וסת אפילו הכי מימי טהרה לימי טומאה לא קבעה

3 — It might have been assumed that she should examine herself in case she establishes for herself9 a settled period, hence we were informed [that no examination is necessary] because no settled period can be established [by the regularity of a discharge from] a clean source for that of an unclean one. This is satisfactory according to Levi who stated that there are two sources,10

ד ומשמשת בעדים וכו' תנן התם תינוקת שלא הגיע זמנה לראות ונשאת ב"ש אומרים נותנין לה ארבע לילות וב"ה אומרים עד שתחיה המכה

4 but according to Rab who stated that there was only one source10 why should she not examine herself seeing that she might have established for herself9 a settled period? — Even in that case she cannot establish a settled period in the clean days for the unclean ones. SHE MUST ALSO USE TESTING-RAGS WHEN SHE HAS MARITAL INTERCOURSE etc. We have learnt elsewhere: If a young girl, whose age of menstruation11 had not yet arrived, married, Beth Shammai ruled: She is allowed12 four nights,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In which intercourse with her husband is permitted despite the flow of blood, it being assumed that the flow is not due to menstruation (as is the case with one who married after attaining the age of menstruation) but to the wound that had been caused by the first intercourse. ');">13

ה אמר רב גידל אמר שמואל לא שנו אלא שלא פסקה מחמת תשמיש וראתה שלא מחמת תשמיש אבל פסקה מחמת תשמיש וראתה טמאה

5 and Beth Hillel ruled: Until the wound is healed.14 R. Giddal citing Samuel stated: They15 learnt this16

ו עבר לילה אחת בלא תשמיש וראתה טמאה נשתנו מראה דמים שלה טמאה מתיב ר' יונה ובתולה שדמיה טהורים אמאי תשמש בעדים דדילמא נשתנו מראה דמים שלה

6 only in the case where bleeding through intercourse had not ceased, though she subsequently observed a discharge that may not have been due to intercourse;17 but if bleeding through intercourse had ceased18 and then she observed a discharge19 she20 is unclean.21

ז אמר רבא אימא רישא חוץ מן הנדה והיושבת על דם טוהר הוא דלא בעיא בדיקה אבל בתולה שדמיה טהורין בעיא בדיקה אלא קשיין אהדדי

7 If one night has passed without intercourse and then she observed a discharge she is unclean. If the colour of her blood changed22 she is unclean. R. Jonah raised an objection:23

ח כאן ששמשה דאימא שמש עכרן כאן שלא שמשה

8 OR WHEN SHE IS A VIRGIN WHOSE BLOOD IS CLEAN [she need not use testing-rags]. But why should she not rather use testing-rags24

ט תניא נמי הכי בד"א שלא פסקה מחמת תשמיש וראתה שלא מחמת תשמיש

9 seeing that it is possible that the colour of her blood had changed? — Raba replied, Read the first clause: EXCEPT WHERE SHE IS A MENSTRUANT OR IS CONTINUING IN THE BLOOD OF PURIFICATION, from which it follows that only in those cases no examination is required but that a virgin whose blood is clean does require one.25 But, then, are not the two rulings26

י אבל פסקה מחמת תשמיש וראתה טמאה עבר לילה אחת בלא תשמיש וראתה טמאה נשתנו מראה דמים שלה טמאה

יא פעמים היא צריכה וכו' א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל לא שנו אלא לטהרות אבל לבעלה מותרת פשיטא שחרית תנן

11 mutually contradictory? — The former27 refers to one who had marital intercourse, where it might well be assumed that the membrum was the cause of the change;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'the attendant (euphemism) disturbed them', so that the test after the intercourse would prove nothing: and since no test is to be made after intercourse none is required before it (v. Rashi). ');">28 while the latter29 refers to one who had no marital intercourse.30

יב אלא אי אתמר אסיפא אתמר ובשעה שהיא עוברת לשמש את ביתה א"ר יהודה אמר שמואל לא שנו אלא באשה עסוקה בטהרות דמגו דבעיא בדיקה לטהרות בעיא נמי בדיקה לבעלה אבל אינה עסוקה בטהרות לא בעיא בדיקה

12 So it was also taught: This31 applies only in the case where 'bleeding through intercourse had not ceased, though she subsequently observed a discharge that may not have been due to intercourse, but if bleeding through intercourse had ceased and then she observed a discharge she is unclean. If one night has passed without intercourse and then she observed a discharge she is unclean. If the colour of her blood has changed she is unclean.32 TWICE [DAILY] MUST SHE etc. Rab Judah citing Samuel stated: They learnt this33 only in respect of clean things, but to her husband she is permitted.34 Is not this35

יג מאי קמ"ל תנינא כל הנשים בחזקת טהרה לבעליהן אי ממתני' הוה אמינא הני מילי באשה שיש לה וסת אבל אשה שאין לה וסת בעיא בדיקה

13 obvious, seeing that we learnt, IN THE MORNING?36 — Rather, if the statement37 was at all made it was in connection with the final clause: AND38 ALSO WHEN SHE IS ABOUT TO PERFORM HER MARITAL DUTY; Rab Judah citing Samuel stated, They learnt this only as regards a woman who was handling clean things, who, since it is necessary that she examine herself39 for the sake of the clean things,40

יד והא מתני' באשה שיש לה וסת עסקינן מתני' בין שיש לה וסת בין אין לה וסת והא קמ"ל דאע"ג דיש לה וסת מגו דבעיא בדיקה לטהרות בעיא נמי בדיקה לבעלה

14 must also examine herself41 for the sake of her husband, but if a woman was not handling clean things she requires no examination. But what new point does he42 teach us, seeing that we have learnt: All women are in a condition of presumptive cleanness for their husbands?43

טו והא אמרה שמואל חדא זימנא דאמר רבי זירא אמר רבי אבא בר ירמיה אמר שמואל אשה שאין לה וסת אסורה לשמש עד שתבדוק ואוקימנא בעסוקה בטהרות חדא מכלל חברתה אתמר

15 — If the ruling were to be derived from the Mishnah43 it might have been presumed that the ruling applied only to a woman who had a settled period but that a woman who had no settled period does require examination.44 But does not our Mishnah45 deal with one who has a settled period?46 — Our Mishnah deals with both one who had a settled period, and one who had no settled period,47 and it is this that was meant,48

טז תניא נמי הכי בד"א לטהרות אבל לבעלה מותרת בד"א שהניחה בחזקת טהורה אבל הניחה בחזקת טמאה לעולם היא בטומאתה עד שתאמר לו טהורה אני

16 that although she had a settled period, since she must be examined for the sake of the clean things she handled she must also be examined for the sake of her husband. But did not Samuel state this49 once, for R. Zera citing R. Abba b. Jeremiah who had it from Samuel stated, 'A woman who had no settled period may not perform marital intercourse before she has examined herself'50 and it has been explained50 to refer to one who was engaged in the handling of clean things?51 — The one statement52 was inferred from the other.53 So it was also taught: This54 applies only to clean things55 but to her husband she is permitted.56 This,57 however, applies only where he left her in a state of presumptive cleanness, but if he left her in one of presumptive uncleanness she remains for ever in her uncleanness until she tells him, 'I am clean'.

Previous Chapter Next Chapter