Niddah 43

כי פליגי בחתיכה

and they only differ in the case of a shapeless object.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That was chapped. ');">¹</span>

מר סבר דרכה של אשה לראות דם בחתיכה ומר סבר אין דרכה של אשה לראות דם בחתיכה

One Master<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The first Tanna. ');">²</span>

רבא אמר

holds that it is usual for a woman to observe blood in a shapeless object<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The woman is, therefore, unclean. Only when the abortion is smooth, and the blood contained within it does not come in contact with the woman's body, the text, 'In her flesh' cannot, be applied to it. ');">³</span>

דכולי עלמא אין דרכה של אשה לראות דם בחתיכה והכא באשה טהורה ומקור מקומו טמא קמיפלגי

and the Masters<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis. ');">⁴</span>

דר' אליעזר סבר

hold that it is not usual for a woman to observe blood in such an object.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And if she does observe any it is no menstrual blood and she consequently remains clean. ');">⁵</span>

אשה טהורה ודם טמא דהא אתי דרך מקור

Raba replied that all<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even the first Tanna. ');">⁶</span>

ורבנן סברי

agreed that it is not usual for a woman to observe blood in a shapeless object, but it is on the question whether the woman is clean<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the blood was not menstrual. ');">⁷</span>

אשה טהורה ומקור מקומו טהור

and the interior of the uterus is unclean<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And so conveys uncleanness to any blood that passes through it. ');">⁸</span>

בעא מיניה רבה מרב הונא

that they differ, R. Eliezer being of the opinion that though the woman is clean<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Because the blood was not menstrual. ');">⁹</span>

הרואה קרי בקיסם מהו

the blood is unclean since it comes through the uterus,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n. The blood consequently conveys uncleanness to any object with which it comes in contact and also to the woman herself to the extent that her uncleanness lasts until sunset. ');">¹⁰</span>

{ויקרא טו } ממנו אמר רחמנא עד דנפיק מבשרו ולא בקיסם

while the Rabbis hold the opinion that the woman is clean and the interior of the uterus is also clean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that the blood remains clean even after it had passed through the uterus. ');">¹¹</span>

או דלמא האי ממנו עד שתצא טומאתו לחוץ ואפי' בקיסם נמי

Rabba required of R. Huna: What is the ruling where one observed semen on a splinter?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After it had been inserted into the membrum. ');">¹²</span>

אמר ליה

Did the Divine Law say, From him<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And if any man's seed of copulation go out from him (A.V. Lev. XV, 16). ');">¹³</span>

תיפוק ליה דהוא עצמו אינו מטמא אלא בחתימת פי האמה למימרא דנוגע הוי

to indicate that the man is unclean only when it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The semen. ');">¹⁴</span>

אלא מעתה אל יסתור בזיבה

issued naturally from his body but not when it was brought out by means of a splinter, or is it possible that the expression 'from him' implies [that the man is unclean] only when his uncleanness<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After it had been inserted into the membrum. ');">¹²</span>

אלמה תניא

has come out of his body, in which case [he is unclean] even though that was effected by means of a splinter? — The other replied: You can infer the ruling [from the fact] that the man himself<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Even where there was a natural discharge of semen. ');">¹⁵</span>

(ויקרא טו, לב) זאת תורת הזב ואשר תצא ממנו שכבת זרע מה זיבה סותרת אף שכבת זרע נמי סותר

becomes unclean only when the quantity of semen emitted suffices to close up the orifice of the membrum.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the splinter used is inevitably smaller than the orifice, the quantity of semen extracted by it must obviously be less than the prescribed minimum. ');">¹⁶</span>

אמר ליה

This then<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since (as in the case of nebelah for instance) a minimum has been prescribed, below which semen conveys no uncleanness. ');">¹⁷</span>

סתירה היינו טעמא דסותר לפי שאי אפשר לה בלא צחצוחי זיבה

implies that the man<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who is deemed unclean on account of the semen. ');">¹⁸</span>

אלא מעתה תסתור כל שבעה

is regarded as having touched the semen.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Had the uncleanness been conveyed to him on account of his observation of it, no minimum would have been prescribed, as none was prescribed for menstrual blood (a case of uncleanness through observation) and where the smallest drop of blood suffices to cause uncleanness. ');">¹⁹</span>

אלמה תניא

But, then, this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The man's contact (cf. prev. nn.) with the semen, as his contact with a dead creeping thing, for instance, whose uncleanness also is conveyed through contact. ');">²⁰</span>

זאת תורת הזב וגו' מה זיבה סותרת אף שכבת זרע סותר אי מה זיבה סותרת כל ז' אף שכבת זרע נמי סותר כל ז'

should not cause [the counting of the clean days] after a <i>zibah</i> to be void.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As is the case where there was such contact with a dead creeping thing. ');">²¹</span>

ת"ל (ויקרא טו, לב) לטמאה בה אין לך בה אלא מה שאמור בה סותרת יום אחד

Why then was it taught: This is the law of him that hath an issue,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. zibah. ');">²²</span>

אמר ליה

and of him from whom the flow of seed<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Semen. ');">²³</span>

גזירת הכתוב היא זיבה גמורה דלא ערבה בה שכבת זרע סותרת כל שבעה צחצוחי זיבה דערבה בה שכבת זרע לא סותרת אלא יום אחד

goeth out,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 32. ');">²⁴</span>

בעא מיניה ר' יוסי ברבי חנינא מרבי אלעזר

as <i>zibah</i><span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That occurs during the counting of the seven clean days after the termination of a previous zibah. ');">²⁵</span>

דם יבש מהו

causes [the counting of the clean days] to be void<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And, before ritual cleanness is attained seven clean days must be counted again. ');">²⁶</span>

(ויקרא טו, כה) כי יזוב זוב דמה אמר רחמנא עד דמידב דייב ליה לח אין יבש לא או דלמא

so does semen? — The other replied: As regards counting again, this is the reason why the previous counting is void: because it is impossible for semen to be emitted<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' During the days following a period of zibah. ');">²⁷</span>

האי כי יזוב זוב דמה אורחא דמילתא היא ולעולם אפילו יבש נמי

without an admixture of some particles of <i>zibah</i>.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is the zibah, and not the semen, that causes the necessity for a new counting of the seven clean days. ');">²⁸</span>

א"ל

Now then,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since (cf. prev. n.) the zibah is the cause. ');">²⁹</span>

תניתוה דם הנדה ובשר המת מטמאין לחים ויבשים

this should cause the counting of all the seven days<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the discharge was discovered on the seventh day. ');">³⁰</span>

אמר ליה

to be void,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As is the case with a discharge of zibah. ');">³¹</span>

לח ונעשה יבש לא קא מיבעיא לי כי מיבעיא לי יבש מעיקרא

why then was it taught: 'This is the law of him that hath an issue etc.', as <i>zibah</i> causes the clean days to be counted again so does semen? But in case you should assume that as <i>zibah</i> causes the counting of all the seven days<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the discharge was discovered on the seventh day. ');">³⁰</span>

הא נמי תניתוה

to be void so does semen also, it was expressly stated, So that he is unclean thereby;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 32. ');">²⁴</span>

המפלת כמין קליפה כמין שערה כמין עפר כמין יבחושין אדומין תטיל למים

you can apply to it<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Semen, which causes uncleanness for one day only. ');">³²</span> only that which had been said about it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. (cf. prev. n.) it cannot be expected to cause a recount of seven days when it never causes uncleanness for more than one day. ');">³³</span> hence it causes the counting of one day only to be void?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How then could R. Huna maintain that zibah is the cause of the recount? ');">³⁴</span> — The other<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Huna. ');">³⁵</span> replied: It is a decree of Scripture that an absolute <i>zibah</i> in which no semen is mixed causes the counting of all seven days to be void, but particles of <i>zibah</i> in which semen is mixed cause only the counting of one day<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The last, on which it was discovered. ');">³⁶</span> to be void. R. Jose son of R. Hanina enquired of R. Eleazar: What is the ruling in the case of dry blood?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. does it, or does it not convey uncleanness? ');">³⁷</span> Did the Divine Law say, Have an issue<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'will flow a flowing' (v. infra). ');">³⁸</span> of her blood<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">³⁹</span> to indicate that it must be actually flowing,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. prev. n. but one. ');">⁴⁰</span> hence it refers only to fluid blood but not to dry, or is it possible that the expression, 'have all issue of her blood'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XV, 25. ');">⁴¹</span> was used merely because blood usually flows, but the same law in fact applies to dry blood also? — The other replied: You have learnt it: The blood of a menstruant and the flesh of a corpse convey uncleanness when fresh or when dry.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Infra 54b. ');">⁴²</span> Said he [R. Jose] to him, 'Where the blood was first fresh and then it dried up, I have no question to ask; my question arises only where it was originally dry'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Sc. the abortion was a piece of dry blood. ');">⁴³</span> 'This also', the other replied, 'you have learnt: IF A WOMAN ABORTED AN OBJECT THAT WAS LIKE A RIND, LIKE A HAIR, LIKE EARTH, LIKE RED FLIES, LET HER PUT IT IN WATER