א ואינה יודעת מה הפילה רבי יהודה סבר זיל בתר רוב חתיכות ורוב חתיכות של ארבע מיני דמים הויין ורבנן סברי זיל בתר רוב חתיכות לא אמרינן
1 and she does not know what she has aborted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The object having been lost. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> [In such a case,] R. Judah holds, one must be guided by the nature of most of such shapeless objects, and most such objects have the colour of one of the four kinds of blood, while the Rabbis hold that we do not say that one must be guided by the nature of most such objects.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because they do not agree that most such objects have one or other of the colours of the unclean kinds of blood. R. Johanan, by his limitation to three (supra 18a) of the cases in which the majority rule is given the force of a certainty, has implicitly indicated that, in the case dealt with by R. Judah, the uncleanness of the woman, which is entirely dependent on the majority rule, is not one of certainty but one of a doubtful nature. Consequently terumah that had been touched by the woman may not be burnt. ');"><sup>2</sup></span> <b><i>MISHNAH</i></b>. FIVE KINDS OF BLOOD IN A WOMAN ARE UNCLEAN: RED, BLACK, A COLOUR LIKE BRIGHT CROCUS, OR LIKE EARTHY WATER OR LIKE DILUTED WINE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Mazug, wine mixed with water. ');"><sup>3</sup></span> BETH SHAMMAI RULED: ALSO A COLOUR LIKE THAT OF FENUGREEK WATER OR THE JUICE OF ROASTED MEAT; BUT BETH HILLEL DECLARE THESE CLEAN. ONE THAT IS YELLOW, AKABIA B. MAHALALEL DECLARES UNCLEAN AND THE SAGES DECLARE CLEAN. R. MEIR SAID: EVEN IF IT DOES NOT CONVEY UNCLEANNESS AS A BLOODSTAIN IT CONVEYS UNCLEANNESS AS A LIQUID.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is explained in the Gemara infra. ');"><sup>4</sup></span> R. JOSE RULED: IT DOES NEITHER THE ONE NOR THE OTHER.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'neither so nor so'. ');"><sup>5</sup></span>