משנה: שַׁמַּי אוֹמֵר כָּל־הַנָּשִׁים דַּייָן שַׁעְתָּן. הִלֵּל אוֹמֵר מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה אֲפִילוּ לְיָמִים הַרְבֶּה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים לֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה וְלֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה אֶלָּא מֵעֵת לְעֵת מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה. וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת. כָּל־אִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ װֶסֶת דַּייָהּ שָׁעָתָהּ. וְהַמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בָּעִדִּים הְרֵי זוֹ כַפְּקִידָה וּמְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת וְעַל יַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה. MISHNAH: Shammai says, every woman’s timing is exact1A menstruating woman is impure and imparts original impurity to anything she sits on (Leviticus.15.19-23">Lev. 15:19–23). While impurity of food is not mentioned in these verses, it is taken for granted that if she imparts impurity to implements that do not easily become impure, certainly she imparts impurity to food which easily becomes impure. The impurity is defined (Leviticus.15.19">v. 19) by “blood is flowing from her flesh”. Shammai holds that a woman notices exactly when her period starts; therefore any food she touches after the onset of her period is impure but anything she had touched before is pure.; Hillel says, from checking to checking2Hillel holds that blood dropscan separate from the uterine wall without necessarily flowing out of the vagina. For him, all food a woman touched between the last time she checked herself thoroughly and the noticed onset of her period are retroactively declared possibly impure., even if that is a long time. But the Sages say following neither of them but for checking to checking to be reduced by 24 hours, and from 24 hours to be reduced by checking3For them, a woman with a regular period does not have to worry about retroactive impurity (Niddah 1:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Niddah.1.1.1">Mishnah 2). If she has no regular period, she is expected to check herself from time to time but the retroactive impurity cannot extend to more than 24 hours; the interval of impurity is the smaller of 24 hours and the time from the last thorough check..
Every woman with a regular period4Latin svetum, corresponding to Hebrew אורח “regularity”; cf. E. and H. Guggenheimer, Notes on the Talmudic Vocabulary 8–11, Lešonenu 37 (1973), 105–112. follows her exact timing; and if one has intercourse with cloths5After intercourse (according to Rashi: before and after intercourse) she wipes herself with a clean cloth which can be inspected the next morning. The connection of the word עדים to the biblical hapax in Isaiah.64.5">Is. 64:5 is due to Qimhi; according to Isaiah.64.5">Rashi (Is. 64:5), the biblical word is an Aramaism and means “to be discarded”. In Niddah, Rashi seems to to read עֵד “a witness”., this counts as checking and is reduced by 24 hours and by checking.
הלכה: שַׁמַּי אוֹמֵר. כָּל־הַנָּשִׁים דַּייָן שַׁעְתָּן כול׳. מָהוּ דַּייָן שָׁעָתָן. שֶׁאֵינָן מְטַמּוֹת טַהֳרוֹת לְמַפְרֵעַ. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים לֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה וְלֹא כְדִבְרֵי זֶה. לֹא כְשַׁמַּאי שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן סְייָג לִדְבָרָיו וְלֹא כְהִלֵּל שֶׁהִפְלִיג עַל מִדּוֹתָיו. אֶלָּא מֵעֵת לְעֵת מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת. כֵּיצַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה. בָּֽדְקָה עַצְמָהּ בְּשֵׁינִי בַשַּׁבָּת וְרָאָת בַּחֲמִישִּׁי בַשַׁבָּת אֵין טָמֵא אֶלָּא עַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת דְּאַרְבָּעָתָא. כֵּיצַד מִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה מְמַעֶטֶת עַל יַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת. בָּֽדְקָה בְשַׁחֲרִית וְרָאָת בְּמִנְחָה אֵין טָמֵא אֶלָּא עַד שַׁחֲרִית. HALAKHAH: “Shammai says, every woman’s timing is exact,” etc. What means, “their timing is exact”? They do not retroactively impart impurity to food prepared in purity. “But the Sages say following neither of them,” not following Shammai who imposed no restriction, and not like Hillel who went overboard. “But for checking to checking it is reduced by 24 hours, and from 24 hours is reduced by checking.” How is checking to checking reduced by 24 hours? If she checked herself on Tuesday and saw blood on Thursday, [her food] is impure only from the same time on Wednesday. How is 24 hours reduced by checking? If she checked herself out in the morning and saw in the afternoon, it is impure only starting from the morning6A slightly longer version is in Niddah.4b">Babli, 4b, and Niddah 1:1" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.1.1">Tosefta 1:1–2..
תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. הַשֶּׁרֶץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בְּמָבוֹי מְטַמֵּא לְמַפְרֵעַ. רִבִּי אִמִּי בָּעֵי. מַתְנִיתָא דְּלֹא כְשַׁמַּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אִין לֵית הוּא כְשַׁמַּי אֲפִילוּ כְהִלֵּל לֵית הִיא. וְלֹא מוֹדֶה הִלֵּל בְּמָבוֹי שֶׁהוּא מִתְכַּבֵּד וְשֶׁטֶף שֶׁלִּגְשָׁמִים עוֹבֵר בוֹ שֶׁהוּא טָהוֹר. שַׁמַּי אוֹמֵר. הָדָא אִשָּׁה עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהִיא רְגִילָה בְמֵי רַגְלַיִם עָשׂוּ אוֹתָהּ כְּמָבוֹי שֶׁהוּא מִתְכַּבֵּד וְשֶׁטֶף שֶׁלִּגְשָׁמִים עוֹבֵר בוֹ וְהוּא טָהוֹר. There7Mishnah Niddah 7:2., we have stated: “A [dead] crawling animal8Eight animals, reptiles, rats, and moles are enumerated in Leviticus.11.29-38">Lev. 11:29–38. In death, they are original sources of severe impurity. found in a dead-end alley9A dead-end alley bordered on both sides by walls, either the back walls of houses or the walls of courtyards. One enters the houses of the alley through the courtyards. While the dead-end alley is public domain, it is not subject to all the rules of public domains since it is used only by its inhabitants and their visitors. It can be turned into a private domain as far as the rules of the Sabbath are concerned (this is the topic of Tractate Erubin). It is a private domain for the rules of impurity, meaning that a doubt of impurity has to treated as presumptive impurity; cf. Sotah 1:2:5" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.1.2.5">Soṭah 1:2, Note 88. causes impurity retroactively10The Mishnah continues: “up to the time it was swept (with a broom).” If any food was transported through the alley, one assumes that the bearer touched the dead crawling thing, became impure, and transferred that impurity to the food he was carrying. One assumes that sweeping the alley with a broom cleans it, but one fears that the animal died very soon after the alley was swept. Therefore, it seems that impurity in a dead-end alley follows Hillel’s rules.. Rebbi Immi asked, does this Mishnah not disagree with Shammai? Rebbi Yose11It would seem that one has to read: R. Yasa, R. Immi’s companion. said, this is true, it does not follow Shammai, but even Hillel it does not follow. Does Hillel not agree that a dead-end alley which was swept or inundated by a rainstorm12In this case, nobody checked but one assumes that the rain swept everything away. This case appears neither in the Mishnah nor in the Niddah 6:8" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.6.8">Tosephta (6:12). is pure? Shammai says, since this woman regularly urinates13She would notice any blood at that time., she is like a dead-end alley which was swept or inundated by a rainstorm and is pure14Shammai’s position is the most rational one. It presumes that the Mishnah speaks of an alley which is swept regularly (Niddah.56">Babli 56a/b). In the Niddah.3a">Babli, 3a, Hillel denies that a woman will check herself for blood when urinating..
עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁבָּֽדְקָה וּמָֽצְתָה נָגוּב. בָּֽדְקָה וּמָֽצְתָה טָהוֹר. רִבִּי אִמִּי בְשֵׁם רַב רִבִּי בָּא בְשֵׁם רַב יְהוּדָה. בָּֽדְקָה וּמָֽצְתָה טָהוֹר אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ עַד שֶׁיִּתְנַגֵּב מַעְייָנָהּ. חַד רִבִּי טוֹבִי אָמַר בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ עַד מֵעֵת לְעֵת. אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא. כַּד סְלִיקִית לְהָכָא שְׁמָעִית מִן כָּל־רַבָּנִן. מוּתֶּרֶת לְבֵיתָהּ מִיַּד. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָאן דָּמַר. מוּתֶּרֶת לְבֵיתָהּ. מִפְּקִידָה הוּא לְמָעֵט מֵעֵת לְעֵת. וּמָאן דָּמַר. אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ. אֵינָהּ כִּפְקִידָה לְמָעֵט מֵעֵת לְעֵת. וְאֲפִילוּ כְמָאן דָּמַר. אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ. כִּפְקִידָה הִיא לְמָעֵט מֵעֵת לְעֵת. וְלָמָּה הִיא אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ. שֶׁמִּתּוֹךְ שֶׁהִיא מִתְרַגֶּלֶת בְּדָמִים טְהוֹרִין הִיא מִתְרַגֶּלֶת בְּדָמִים טְמֵאִין. So far if she checked and found herself dry15No discharge whatsoever.. If she checked and found herself pure16She found a discharge from her body but it was of a kind declared pure in Niddah 2:7:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Niddah.2.7.1">Mishnah 2:6. The existence of pure genital discharges is Pharisaic doctrine, absolutely denied by all Sadducee sources known to us; cf. the Damascus Document CD 5:7, Mishnah 4:2.? Rebbi Immi in the name of Rav, Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah: If she checked and found herself pure she is forbidden to her husband until her [blood’s] source dries up17This is the standard Babylonian doctrine, culminating in the Niddah.66a">Babli (66a) in R. Ze‘ira’s doctrine, which accepts the Sadducee doctrine that all discharges are impure and, in order to avoid the consequences of this doctrine which are unacceptable in Pharisaic practice, treats every menstrual discharge as a continuing non-menstrual discharge (Leviticus.15.25-30">Lev. 15:25–30), which requires an additional seven days before purity may be achieved. Babylonian practice accepts the distinction between pure and impure discharges only for the rules of impurity, which were irrelevant in Babylonia, but not for those of marital relations.. One Rebbi Tobi said in the name of Rebbi Abbahu, she is forbidden to her house for 24 hours. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said, when I18A Babylonian immigrating into Palestine. immigrated here, I heard from all rabbis that she is immediately permitted to her husband19Since the determination of the character of blood as pure or impure is in the domain of competence of a rabbi, it follows that the woman who claims her blood to be pure has to show her blood to a rabbi. It is not to be assumed that any woman did that unless her household was run on the rules of ritual purity, i. e., a family of Cohanim or of “fellows” (cf. Introduction to Tractate Demay).. They wanted to say that for him who says, she is permitted to her husband, this is a check which diminishes from 24 hours20All the food she prepares remains pure., but for him who says, she is forbidden to her husband, it is not counted as a check which diminishes from 24 hours21If she later has an impure discharge, the food becomes retroactively impure.. But even for him who says, she is forbidden to her husband, it is counted as a check which diminishes from 24 hours22There is no reason to make the status of the check depend on its outcome.. Why is she forbidden to her husband? Because she is used to pure blood, she might get used to impure blood23Once she is used to the looks of the pure discharge, she might decide herself about the quality of her discharge and wrongly qualify impure for pure. The prohibition of marital relations in this case is purely rabbinical; it has no biblical source..
בָּֽדְקָה וּמָֽצְתָה סָפֵק. פְּשִׁיטָא אֵינָהּ כִּפְקִידָה לְמָעֵט מֵעֵת לְעֵת. הוּא עַצְמוֹ מָהוּ שֶׁיִּטָּמֵא בְּסָפֵק. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. טוּמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגֵינָס שֶׁרָאוּ דַּייָן שָׁעָתָן. מָה אַתְּ שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. טוּמְטוּם וְאנְדְּרוֹגֵינָס סָפֵק וּמֵעֵת לְעֵת סָפֵק וְאֵין סָפֵק לְסָפֵק. וָכָא. רְאִייָתָהּ סָפֵק וּמֵעֵת לְעֵת סָפֵק וְאֵין סָפֵק לְסָפֵק. If she checked herself and found it a doubtful case24If it cannot be decided whether the discharge is pure or impure. (This is the explanation of R. Moses Margalit. It is somewhat difficult to accept since (a) in matters of biblical prohibitions a doubt has to be resolved in a restrictive way and (b) this is a matter of impurity in a private domain and has to be declared impure; cf. Niddah 1:1:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Niddah.1.1.3">Note 9, Sotah 1:2:5" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.1.2.5">Soṭah 1:2 Note 88. Therefore, it seems more likely that it cannot be determined whether there was any discharge.). It is obvious that it is not counted as a check to diminish from 24 hours25If later this was followed by a genuine discharge, the previous doubt was resolved and food retroactively became impure for 24 hours.. Itself26The blood according to R. Moses Margalit, or alternatively the cloth used for the check., would it be impure because of doubt? Let us hear from the following: “A sexless27Niddah 1:2" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.1.2">Tosephta 1:3. The sexless has neither penis nor vagina, cf. Yevamot 8:6:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Yevamot.8.6.1">Yebamot8:6, Note 226. He could be a male with an ingrown penis. It is difficult to see how he could have a female genital discharge. or a hermaphrodite28He has penis, testicles, breasts and vagina; if he has a discharge, its status is in doubt since if he is a male, the vaginal discharge is irrelevant. Cf. Yebamot 8:6, Notes 224,225,236,237,242. who had a discharge follow their exact timing.” What do you infer from this? Rebbi Yose said, a sexless or a hermaphrodite represent a doubt, 24 hours represent a doubt, and a doubt is not superimposed on a doubt29In the Babli, this is called סְפֵק סְפֵיקָא “a doubt superimposed on a doubt” (Kiddushin.75a">Qiddušin 75a); a prohibition in such a case would be disregarded. Cf. Ketubot 1:1:4" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Ketubot.1.1.4">Ketubot 1:1 Note 23, Yebamot 16:1, last line.. So here, whether she had a discharge30R. Moses Margalit would translate: “The nature of her discharge is in doubt”. represents a doubt, 24 hours represent a doubt, and a doubt is not superimposed on a doubt.
הוּנָא בַּר חִייָה אָמַר. מֵעֵת לְעֵת שֶׁאָֽמְרוּ לַקֳּדָשִׁים אֲבָל לֹא לְטַהֳרוֹת. הָתִיב רַב חִסְדָּא. וְהָתַנֵּי. מַעֲשֶׂה בְרִיבָה אַחַת בְּעייתלו שֶׁהִפְסִיקָה לָהּ שָׁלֹשׁ עוֹנוֹת וְלֹא רָאָת וְאַחַר כָּךְ רָאָת. וּבָא מַעֲשֶׂה לִפְנֵי חֲכָמִים וְאָֽמְרוּ. דַּייָה שָׁעָתָהּ. וְכִי יֵשׁ קֳדָשִׁים בְּעייתלו. אֶלָּא בִּשֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ לְטָהֳרַת הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. וְלֹא כְחוּלִין הֵן. תִּיפְתָּר שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ לְטָהֳרַת מֵי חַטָּאת. שֶׁמֵּי חַטָּאת חֲמוּרִין מִן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. 31From here on, a Geniza fragment is available; its readings are denoted by ג. For the quotations from a Tosephta, the Babli is denoted by ב, the Tosephta edited by Zuckermandel by תו. Huna bar Ḥiyya32In the Niddah.4a">Babli, 4a, he is identified as Rav Huna. This is the only place in which his patronymic is given. said, the 24 hours which were quoted refer to sacrifices but not to pure food33He denies the applicability of the Mishnah after the destruction of the Temple. Since the only sanctified food available after the destruction of the Temple was heave, the entire discussion becomes academic.. Rav Ḥisda objected, was it not stated34Niddah 1:5" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.1.5">Tosephta 1:9, Niddah.9b">Babli 9b.: “It happened with a girl in Aitlo35The vocalization is not known; the Babylonian tradition is different; the place has not been identified. But in any case it is impossible to prepare sacrifices outside of Jerusalem since living animals cannot become impure and the material for flour, wine, and oil sacrifices was controlled by the Temple.
In Babli and Tosephta it is stated that the impurity in effect should have been retroactive, that the ruling as given fits only extraordinary circumstances. One may assume that the Yerushalmi refers to a similar text and that Rav Ḥisda the Babylonian’s question really refers to this, that under normal circumstances the impurity of a menstruating woman without regular period should act retroactively on food prepared in purity outside of Jerusalem. that she missed for three periods and then had a period. When the case came before the Sages, they said that her timing is exact.” Are there sacrifices in Aitlo? But it must be food prepared in the purity of sacrifices36Profane food, eaten by people who insist that they adhere to strict standards of purity. While most of these, called “fellows”, observed the standards of heave (which recognizes three degrees of derivative impurity, cf. Introduction to Tractate Demay, p. 349; Demay 2:2, Note 137), some people adhered to standards of sacrifices which recognized four degrees (Mishnah Tahorot 2:5).! Is that not really profane food37Mishnah Tahorot 2:8 decrees that profane food prepared according to the standards of sacrifices is still profane, admitting only two degrees of derivative impurity. A minority opinion admits three degrees, but certainly not four. This may be a polemic against followers of sects similar to that of Qumran, whose MMT text seems to prescribe the purity of sacrifices for all members of the group of the select few.? Explain it if it was prepared in the purity of purifying water38The water to which ashes from the red cow were added and which purified from the impurity of the dead. This water had to be guarded even from touching sacrificial food, Parah 10:6" href="/Mishnah_Parah.10.6">Mishnah Parah 10:6. The ashes were available in Palestine a long time after the destruction of the Temple, cf. Berakhot 1:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Berakhot.1.1.1">Berakhot1:1, Note 3; it was not impossible for a priestly family to preserve the rules of this purifying process., since purifying water has more restrictive rules than sacrifices.
תַּנֵּי. מֵעֵת לְעֵת שֶׁאָֽמְרוּ תּוֹלִין אֲבָל לֹא שׂוֹרְפִין. וַהֲוָה רִבִּי זְעִירָא חֲדִי בָהּ. אַשְׁכָּח תַּנֵּי. הָרוֹאָה כֶתֶם מְטַמֵּא לְמַפְרֵעַ. וּמָה הִיא מְטַמְּאָה. הָאוֹכְלִין וְהַמַּשְׁקִין וְהַמִּשְׁכָּבוֹת וְהַמּוֹשָׁבוֹת. וּמְקוּלְקֶלֶת לְמִינְייָנָהּ וּמְטַמֵּא אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ לְמַפְרֵעַ. הָרוֹאָה דָם מְטַמֵּא לְמַפְרֵעַ. וּמָה הִיא מְטַמֵּא. הָאוֹכְלִין וְהַמַּשְׁקִין וְהַמִּשְׁכָּבוֹת וְהַמּוֹשָׁבוֹת. וְאֵינָהּ מְקוּלְקֶלֶת לְמִינְייָנָהּ וְאֵינָהּ מְטַמֵּא אֶת בַּעֲלָהּ לְמַפְרֵעַ. רִבִּי עְקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. מְטַמֵּא אֶת בַּעֲלָהּ לְמַפְרֵעַ. וְזֶה וְזֶה תּוֹלִין אֲבָל לֹא שׂוֹרְפִין. תַּמָּן אָֽמְרִין. מֵעֵת לְעֵת שֶׁאָֽמְרוּ מִשְׁכָּבָהּ כְּמַגָּעָהּ. מָה. כְּבוֹעֵל נִדָּה וְאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בְהֵיסֶט וְאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בִּכְלֵי חֶרֶשׂ. אַשְׁכָּח תַּנֵּי. מְטַמֵּא כְּלֵי חֶרֶס בְּהֵיסֶט. מֵעֵת לְעֵת שֶׁאָֽמְרוּ. מַגָּעָהּ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים מָהוּ. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. מְעוּבֶּרֶת וּמֵינִיקָה טְהוֹרוֹת לְבַעֲלֵיהֶן. וְכֵן אִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ װֶסֶת. וּשְׁאָר כָּל־הַנָּשִׁים טְהוֹרוֹת בְּבִיאָה וּמְטַמְּאוֹת בְּמַגָּע. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה. וַדַּאי מַגָּעָהּ בִּרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים טְמֵא. It was stated: For the 24 hours which were stated, one suspends but one does not burn40If heave was declared “impure” because a woman had handled it within 24 hours of her menstrual impurity, it cannot be burned as impure heave since the declaration was purely precautionary; the woman might have been impure when touching the heave. Since it is forbidden to destroy pure sanctified food, that heave neither can be destroyed, for perhaps it is pure, nor be used, for perhaps it is impure. It has to be left unused until it spoils, is no longer food, and automatically loses its sanctified status.. Rebbi Ze‘ira enjoyed this [because] he found stated41Niddah 9:5" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.9.5">Tosephta 9:6,Niddah 9:4" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.9.4">5; Niddah.6a">Babli 6a, both in slightly different formulation.: “A woman who detects a stain42She detects a blood stain on her garment. This is proof that she bled sometime but she does not know when. makes impure retroactively43The retroactivity extends all the time back until either the time when the woman had checked herself or the garment had been washed.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds44By Leviticus.15.20-23">Lev. 15:20–23, any seat or couch used by a menstruating woman becomes a source of original impurity. The impurity of food is not mentioned in the verses; it is only secondary (cf. Niddah 1:1:6" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Niddah.1.1.6">Note 36). The original impurity of beds and seats induced retroactively is also asserted in the Niddah.5b">Babli, 5b.; her count is in disorder45By tradition, denied by Sadducees, there are 11 days after the end of seven days of a menstrual period in which no new menses are possible, in which any bloody discharge cannot be menstrual but must follow the rules of zava. But if the start of the period is unknown, the count is impossible and any discharge triggers a seven day menstrual period., and she makes her sex partner impure retroactively46Since her impurity was unknown to her.. A woman who detects blood makes impure retroactively47In Tosephta and Babli: For 24 hours. The Yerushalmi probably assumes the validity of the Sages’ statement in Niddah 1:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Niddah.1.1.1">Mishnah 1.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds; her count is not in disorder48She counts from the moment she notices the discharge., and she does not make her sex partner impure retroactively. Rebbi Aqiba says, she makes her sex partner impure retroactively. In both cases49Stain or blood., one suspends but one does not burn.” There50In Babylonia. This statement is missing in the Geniza text., they say: For the 24 hours which were stated, her bed is like her touch51Since her touch creates only derivative impurity, her seat and bed also do not become sources of original impurity.. How? Like one who sleeps with a menstruating woman52Leviticus.15.24">Lev. 15:24 declares the man and his seat or bedding as impure but refrains from declaring seat and bedding as sources of original impurity. who does not make impure by moving53Leviticus.15.6">Lev. 15:6 is interpreted that the male sufferer of gonorrhea imparts impurity to anything he moves, even if he never touches it. By biblical standards, a clay vessel cannot become impure by being touched from the outside; it becomes impure only by an original impurity inside its cavity. If a clay vessel has a cover fastened to it, it also cannot become impure by the impurity of the dead. But if either a (male or female) sufferer from gonorrhea or a menstruating woman indirectly moves a clay vessel, for example moving a wooden plank (in itself impervious to impurity) on which there is a closed clay vessel, that vessel and its contents become impure. and does not make clay vessels impure. It was found stated: He makes clay vessels impure by moving54In the Tosephta (Note 41) this is asserted for both cases of menstrual impurity. The baraita quoted here disproves the earlier statement which denied the possibility of impurity by moving.. For the 24 hours which were stated, what is the status of what she touches in the public domain55A general rule states that a doubt about matters of impurity in a public domain can be disregarded (cf. Niddah 1:1:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Niddah.1.1.3">Note 9). The question is, if a woman had certainly touched something in the public domain within 24 hours of her menstruation, is this counted as a doubt or not?? Let us hear from the following56A related text in Niddah 3:3" href="/Tosefta_Niddah.3.3">Tosephta 3:8.: Pregnant and nursing women are pure for their husbands57They are not supposed to menstruate., as is a woman with a regular period58Except close to her time.. And all other women59Excluding pre-puberty girls and post-menopausal women. There are not many women left in this category of “others”. are pure for sexual relations but impure in their touch60Since at any time they could induce retroactive impurity.. That means, what she certainly touched in the public domain is impure.
רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. בָּֽדְקָה חֲלוּקָהּ בְּשַׁחֲרִית וּמְצָתָה טָהוֹר. וּבְמִנְחָה וּמָצָאת עָלָיו כֶּתֶם. פְּשִׁיטָא חֲלוּקָהּ אֵינָוֹ טָמֵא אֶלָּא עַד שְׁעַת בְּדִיקָה. גּוּפָהּ מָהוּ שֶׁיְּהֵא טָמֵא מֵעֵת לְעֵת. כְּלוּם אַתְּ מְטַמֵּא גוּפָהּ אֶלָּא מַחֲמַת חֲלוּקָהּ. חֲלוּקָהּ אֵינָוֹ טָמֵא אֶלָּא עַד שְׁעַת בְּדִיקָה וְגוּפָהּ טָמֵא מֵעֵת לְעֵת. Rebbi Yudan asked: She checked her garment in the morning and found it pure, in the afternoon and found a stain on it. It is obvious that her garment is retroactively impure only after the time of her checking. Is her body impure for retroactive 24 hours? Does one not declare her body to be impure only because of her garment? Her garment is retroactively impure only after the time of her checking; her body should retroactively be impure for 24 hours61The 24 hour rule is never mentioned in connection with stains.?
וְהַמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בָּעִדִּים הְרֵי זֶה כִּפְקִידָה. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. בָּֽדְקָה עַצְמָהּ בְּשַׁחֲרִית וְשִׁימְּשָׁה בְּעִד בְּחַצּוֹת וְרָאָת בְּמִנְחָה אֵין טָמֵא אֶלָּא עַד שְׁעַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ. לֵוִי אָמַר. בְּעִד שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַתַּשְׁמִישׁ הִיא מַתְנִיתָא. אֲבַל בְּעִד שֶׁלִּפְנֵי הַתַּשְׁמִישׁ הֲמוּמָה הִיא לְבֵיתָהּ וְאֵינָהּ בּוֹדֶקֶת יָפֶה. רִבִּי אָבוּן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי זְעִירָא. בְּעִד שֶׁלִּפְנֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ הִיא מַתְנִיתָא. אֲבַל בְּעִד שֶׁלְּאַחַר הַתַּשְׁמִישׁ דִּיהָא הִיא מַחְמַת שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע. “And if one has intercourse with cloths, this counts as checking.” How is that? If she checked herself in the morning, had intercourse with a cloth at noontime, and saw [blood] in the afternoon, she is impure only from after the time of intercourse. Levi said, the Mishnah speaks of a cloth used after intercourse, but for a cloth used before intercourse she would be impatient for her mate and not check thorougly. Rebbi Abun in the name of Rebbi Ze‘ira, the Mishnah speaks of a cloth used before intercourse, but a cloth used after intercourse is faded because of semen62The Niddah.5a">Babli, 5a, requires both checks..