Are there two different categories within the four women who are considered that they don’t bleed, such that there is a difference in the law regarding the second time one sees after not seeing? What is the law regarding one who gets here period based on some outside factors (i.e. jumping)? Can one create a cycle based on that? If it happens based on an act and a particular day, how do we treat it? When do women need to check? Are there women who don’t need to check? Is the pure blood after childbirth inherently different from the impure blood after childbirth? Does one need to check that one type began before counting the days of pure blood? A young girl who got married and hasn’t yet started menstruating – until what point can we assume blood she sees is from the tear in her hymen? When does she need to begin checking before and after relations? The examinations are only required for women dealing with pure items. But the rabbis instituted that women dealing with pure items who are checking anyway, should also check before having relations with their husbands.
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Judith Rosenfeld Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin BenZion on her second yahrzeit. “Her curiosity, humor, intellect and devout nature continues to inspire and hold us accountable. We miss her and think of her in all our pursuits, especially in our Hadran learning, where she would be glad to know that she didn’t have to boil more than 1 egg at a time!!”
Niddah 11
שׁוֹפְעוֹת דָּם וּבָאוֹת — דַּיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי עִיבּוּרָן וְדַיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי מְנִיקוּתָן, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: לֹא אָמְרוּ דַּיָּין שְׁעָתָן אֶלָּא בִּרְאִיָּיה רִאשׁוֹנָה, אֲבָל בַּשְּׁנִיָּה מְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה.
continuously discharging menstrual blood, their time is sufficient for all their days of pregnancy and their time is sufficient for all their days of nursing. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon all say: They said that her time is sufficient only with regard to the first sighting of blood, but with regard to the second sighting, her status is like that of any other woman, and she transmits impurity for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination.
וְאִם רָאֲתָה רִאשׁוֹנָה וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה — קָבְעָה לָהּ וֶסֶת. לְמַאי? אִילֵימָא לְיָמִים, הָא כֹּל יוֹמָא דְּלָא קְפִיץ לָא חֲזַאי!
§ The mishna teaches: And if she saw the first sighting as a result of unnatural circumstances, then even with regard to the second sighting her time is sufficient. Rav Huna says: If she jumped and saw menstrual blood, and again she jumped and saw menstrual blood, and a third time she jumped and saw menstrual blood, she has established a fixed menstrual cycle. The Gemara asks: For what occurrence has she established a fixed cycle? If we say that it is a cycle of days alone, this cannot be correct, as every day that she did not jump, she also did not see menstrual blood. Therefore, her cycle cannot be a mere pattern of days.
אֶלָּא לִקְפִיצוֹת, וְהָתַנְיָא: כֹּל שֶׁתִּקְבָּעֶנָּה מֵחֲמַת אוֹנֶס, אֲפִילּוּ כַּמָּה פְּעָמִים — לֹא קָבְעָה וֶסֶת! מַאי לַָאו — לֹא קָבְעָה וֶסֶת כְּלָל?
The Gemara explains: Rather, the established menstrual cycle is caused by jumps, i.e., by observing a pattern of jumping and seeing blood three times, she has established that jumping causes the onset of her menstrual period. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Any woman who establishes a pattern of seeing menstrual blood due to a recurring accident, even if the pattern repeats, still has not established a fixed menstrual cycle? An accidental menstrual pattern brought about by external causes does not create a menstrual cycle. The Gemara explains the difficulty: What, is it not correct to say that the baraita means that she has not established a fixed menstrual cycle at all?
לָא, לֹא קָבְעָה וֶסֶת לְיָמִים לְחוֹדַיְיהוּ וְלִקְפִיצוֹת לְחוֹדַיְיהוּ, אֲבָל קָבְעָה לָהּ וֶסֶת לְיָמִים וְלִקְפִיצוֹת. לְיָמִים לְחוֹדַיְיהוּ פְּשִׁיטָא! אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כְּגוֹן דִּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּבְשַׁבָּת קְפַצָה וְלָא חֲזַאי, וּלְחַד בְּשַׁבָּת חֲזַאי בְּלָא קְפִיצָה.
The Gemara answers: No, the baraita means that she has not established a fixed menstrual cycle of days alone, nor of jumps alone, but she has established a fixed menstrual cycle for a combination of days and of jumps. In other words, she has established a fixed menstrual cycle when she jumps on specific days. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it obvious that she does not establish a cycle for days alone? Why is it necessary to state this? Rav Ashi says: It is necessary to teach this in a case where she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and again she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and then on the following Shabbat she jumped and did not see blood, but on Sunday, the next day, she saw menstrual blood without jumping.
מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא לְמַפְרֵעַ, דְּיוֹמָא הוּא דְּקָגָרֵים וְלָא קְפִיצָה, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דִּקְפִיצָה נָמֵי דְּאֶתְמוֹל גְּרַמָא, וְהַאי דְּלָא חֲזַאי — מִשּׁוּם דְּאַכַּתִּי לָא מְטָא זְמַן קְפִיצָה.
Rav Ashi explains: Lest you say that the matter is revealed retroactively that it was the day that caused her to experience menstruation and not the jumping, and therefore she has established a menstrual cycle of menstruating on Sundays, regardless of jumping, the baraita teaches us that it was also the jumping of yesterday, on Shabbat, that caused the menstruation today, on Sunday. And as for the fact that she did not see menstrual blood then, that was because the time when jumping causes menstruation had not yet arrived.
לִישָּׁנָא אַחֲרִינָא, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה — קָבְעָה לָהּ וֶסֶת לְיָמִים וְלֹא לִקְפִיצוֹת. הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: דִּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּבְשַׁבָּת קְפַצָה וְלָא חֲזַאי, וּלְחַד בְּשַׁבָּת (אַחֲרִינָא) חֲזַאי בְּלָא קְפִיצָה, דְּהָתָם אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא דְּיוֹמָא הוּא דְּקָא גָרֵים.
The Gemara presents another version of Rav Huna’s statement. Rav Huna says: If a woman jumped and saw menstrual blood, and again she jumped and saw menstrual blood, and a third time she jumped and saw menstrual blood, she has established a fixed menstrual cycle for a pattern of days and not for a pattern of jumps. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? Rav Ashi says: This is referring to a case where she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and then again she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and then on the following Shabbat she jumped and did not see blood, but on Sunday, the next day, she saw menstrual blood without jumping. In that case there, the matter is revealed retroactively that it is the day that causes her to menstruate, not the jumping.
מַתְנִי’ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ, צְרִיכָה לִהְיוֹת בּוֹדֶקֶת, חוּץ מִן הַנִּדָּה וְהַיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר.
MISHNA: Although the Rabbis said that for a woman with a fixed menstrual cycle her time is sufficient and she does not transmit impurity retroactively, she is required to examine herself each day to ensure that she is ritually pure and will not impurify pure items that she is handling. All women must examine themselves each day except for a menstruating woman, whose impure status is known, and a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity, whose ritually pure status is known even if she experiences bleeding.
וּמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בְּעֵדִים, חוּץ מִיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר, וּבְתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִים.
And even a woman with a fixed menstrual cycle engages in intercourse while using examination cloths to ascertain whether her menstrual flow began, except for a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity, and a virgin whose blood is ritually pure for four days after engaging in intercourse for the first time.
וּפְעָמִים צְרִיכָה לִהְיוֹת בּוֹדֶקֶת: שַׁחֲרִית, וּבֵין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא עוֹבֶרֶת לְשַׁמֵּשׁ אֶת בֵּיתָהּ. יְתֵירוֹת עֲלֵיהֶן כֹּהֲנוֹת, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהֵן אוֹכְלוֹת בִּתְרוּמָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף בִּשְׁעַת עֲבָרָתָן מִלֶּאֱכוֹל בִּתְרוּמָה.
And she is required to examine herself twice each day: In the morning, to ascertain if she menstruated during the night, and at twilight, to ascertain if she menstruated during the day. And she is also required to examine herself at a time that she is about to engage in intercourse with her husband. The obligation of women of priestly families is greater than that of other women, as they are also required to examine themselves when they seek to partake of teruma. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even when they conclude partaking of teruma they are required to examine themselves, in order to ascertain whether they experienced bleeding while partaking of teruma.
גְּמָ’ חוּץ מִן הַנִּדָּה. דִּבְתוֹךְ יְמֵי נִדָּתָהּ לָא בָּעֵי בְּדִיקָה.
GEMARA: The mishna teaches: All women must examine themselves each day, except for a menstruating woman. The Gemara explains: Such a woman does not need to examine herself, as during the days of her menstruation she does not need examination.
הָנִיחָא לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ, דְּאָמַר: אִשָּׁה קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי זִיבָתָהּ, וְאֵין אִשָּׁה קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי נִדָּתָהּ — שַׁפִּיר. אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר: אִשָּׁה קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי נִדָּתָהּ — תִּבְדּוֹק, דִּילְמָא קָבְעָה לַהּ וֶסֶת!
The Gemara raises a difficulty: This works out well according to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who said that a woman can establish a fixed menstrual cycle even during the days that she has zava status, but a woman does not establish a fixed menstrual cycle during the days of her impurity due to menstruation, as any bleeding during these seven days is merely a continuation of her original menstruation. According to this opinion, it is well, and one can understand the mishna. But according to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said that a woman can establish a fixed menstrual cycle during the days of her menstruation, let her examine herself, as perhaps she will establish a fixed menstrual cycle.
אָמַר לָךְ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כִּי אָמֵינָא אֲנָא — הֵיכָא דַּחֲזֵיתֵיהּ מִמַּעְיָן סָתוּם, אֲבָל חֲזֵיתֵיהּ מִמַּעְיָן פָּתוּחַ — לָא אֲמַרִי.
The Gemara explains that Rabbi Yoḥanan could say to you: When I say that a woman can establish a fixed menstrual cycle during the days of her menstruation, that applies only in a case where the first two instances of her fixed cycle were established when she first saw blood from a stopped source, i.e., she saw blood on those particulars days at the outset of her period. But when she first saw blood from an open source, i.e., when the first two instances that she experienced bleeding on those particular days was in the middle of her menstrual period, I did not say that she establishes a fixed menstrual cycle, and therefore there is no need for her to examine herself.
וְהַיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר, קָא סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ — מְבַקֶּשֶׁת לֵישֵׁב עַל דַּם טוֹהַר.
§ The mishna teaches: All women must examine themselves each day, except for a menstruating woman, whose impure status is known, and a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity. The Gemara explains: It may enter your mind that when the mishna mentions a woman who is observing the period of the blood of purity, it is referring to one who is finishing the period of impurity following a birth and is anticipating observing the period of the blood of purity. In other words, her days of impurity are ending and she is about to start her days `of purity, and the mishna is stating that there is no need for an examination to conclude her days of impurity before starting her days of purity.
הָנִיחָא לְרַב, דְּאָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא, הַתּוֹרָה טִמְּאַתּוּ וְהַתּוֹרָה טִהֲרַתּוּ — שַׁפִּיר.
The Gemara analyzes the mishna in accordance with this interpretation. This works out well according to the opinion of Rav, who said that blood after birth and blood of purity both come from one source, and the Torah deemed blood after birth impure, and the Torah deemed blood of purity pure. According to this opinion, it is well, and one can understand the mishna, since even if she emits blood continuously through the end of her days of impurity into her days of purity, the blood during her days of purity is pure.
אֶלָּא לְלֵוִי דְּאָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵם, תִּבְדּוֹק, דִּילְמָא אַכַּתִּי לָא פְּסַק הָהוּא מַעְיָן טָמֵא! אָמַר לָךְ לֵוִי: הָא מַנִּי?
But according to the opinion of Levi, who said that there are two distinct sources, one for blood after birth and one for blood of purity, she should be required to examine herself at the end of the period following birth, as perhaps that impure source of blood after birth had not yet stopped flowing. The Gemara explains that Levi could say to you: In accordance with whose opinion is this ruling?
בֵּית שַׁמַּאי הִיא, דְּאָמְרִי: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא. וּסְתַם לַן תַּנָּא כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי?! סְתָם וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת הוּא, וְכׇל סְתָם וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת אֵין הֲלָכָה כִּסְתָם.
It is the opinion of Beit Shammai, who say that there is only one source for the two types of blood (see 35b). The Gemara asks: But can it be that the tanna taught us an unattributed mishna, which is generally accepted as the halakha, in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, whose opinion is usually not accepted as halakha? The Gemara answers: It is a case where the mishna first records an unattributed opinion and afterward it records a dispute with regard to the same matter. And there is a principle that any time the mishna first records an unattributed opinion and afterward it records that the ruling is subject to a dispute, then the halakha is not necessarily in accordance with the unattributed opinion.
וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: מִי קָתָנֵי ״מְבַקֶּשֶׁת לֵישֵׁב״? ״יוֹשֶׁבֶת״ קָתָנֵי! אִי יוֹשֶׁבֶת, מַאי לְמֵימְרָא? מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא תִּיבְדּוֹק, דְּדִילְמָא קָבְעָה לַהּ וֶסֶת — קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּמַעְיָן טָהוֹר לְמַעְיָן טָמֵא לָא קָבְעָה.
And if you wish, say instead: Does the mishna teach: A woman is anticipating observing the period of the blood of purity? Rather, it teaches: Who is observing the period of the blood of purity. The Gemara asks: If the mishna is referring to a woman who is already observing the period of the blood of purity, what is the purpose of stating that she is exempt from performing examinations? Isn’t this obvious? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that she should examine herself, as perhaps she will find that she established a fixed menstrual cycle through blood found on her examination cloths, the mishna teaches us that a woman does not establish a cycle from sightings of blood that came from a pure source that transfers to the period when she sees blood from an impure source.
הָנִיחָא לְלֵוִי, דְּאָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵם, אֶלָּא לְרַב דְּאָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא — תִּבְדּוֹק, דִּילְמָא קָבְעָה לַהּ וֶסֶת! אֲפִילּוּ הָכִי, מִימֵי טׇהֳרָה לִימֵי טוּמְאָה לָא קָבְעָה.
The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to this answer: This answer works out well according to Levi, who said that there are two distinct sources, one for blood after birth and one for blood of purity; one can understand that she does not establish a cycle with regard to blood from one source, from a sighting of blood from a different source. But according to Rav, who said that blood after birth and blood of purity both come from one source, she should be required to examine herself during the period of the blood of purity, as perhaps she established a fixed menstrual cycle. The Gemara answers: Even so, i.e., that both types of blood come from the same source, nevertheless a woman does not establish a cycle from her days of purity that transfers to her days of impurity.
וּמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בְּעֵדִים וְכוּ׳. תְּנַן הָתָם: תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת וְנִשֵּׂאת, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹתְנִין לָהּ אַרְבַּע לֵילוֹת, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: עַד שֶׁתִּחְיֶה הַמַּכָּה.
§ The mishna teaches: And even a woman with a fixed menstrual cycle engages in intercourse while using examination cloths to ascertain whether her menstrual flow began, except for a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity, and a virgin whose blood is ritually pure for four days after engaging in intercourse for the first time. In this connection, the Gemara notes that we learned in a mishna there (64b): With regard to a young girl whose time to see the flow of menstrual blood has not arrived, as she has not yet reached puberty, and she married, Beit Shammai say: The Sages give her four nights after intercourse during which the blood is attributed to her torn hymen and she is ritually pure. Thereafter, any blood is menstrual blood and she is impure. And Beit Hillel say: The blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals.
אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה שֶׁלֹּא מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ, אֲבָל פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה.
With regard to Beit Hillel’s statement, Rav Giddel says that Shmuel says: They taught this only in a case where she does not stop seeing blood due to intercourse. In other words, every time she engages in intercourse she experiences bleeding. In that case, even if she saw blood not due to intercourse, Beit Hillel still attribute the blood to the torn hymen. But if she stops seeing blood due to intercourse, and then she subsequently saw blood on another occasion, that blood renders her impure.
עָבַר לַיְלָה אַחַת בְּלֹא תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה. נִשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֵה דָמִים שֶׁלָּהּ — טְמֵאָה. מֵתִיב רַבִּי יוֹנָה: ״וּבְתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִים״, אַמַּאי? תְּשַׁמֵּשׁ בְּעֵדִים, דְּדִילְמָא נִשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֵה דָמִים שֶׁלָּהּ!
He continues: Similarly, if one night passed without them engaging in intercourse and she subsequently saw blood without connection to intercourse, this indicates that the blood is no longer from her torn hymen and therefore she is deemed impure. Likewise, if the appearance of her blood had changed since her initial blood from her torn hymen, she is impure. Rabbi Yona raises an objection to this last halakha from the mishna: And a virgin whose blood is ritually pure is not required to examine herself when she engages in intercourse. Why not? She should engage in intercourse while using examination cloths, as perhaps she will find that the appearance of her blood has changed, which would mean that her blood is no longer ritually pure blood from her torn hymen.
אָמַר רָבָא: אֵימָא רֵישָׁא ״חוּץ מִן הַנִּדָּה וְהַיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר״, הוּא דְּלָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה, אֲבָל בְּתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִין בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה. אֶלָּא קַשְׁיָין אַהֲדָדֵי!
Rava says: Say the first clause: All women must engage in intercourse while using examination cloths, except for a menstruating woman whose impure status is certain and a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity. It can be inferred from here that these two exceptions are not required for women to examine themselves, but a virgin whose blood is pure is required to perform an examination. This ruling apparently supports Shmuel’s opinion that examination is required to determine if there is a change in the appearance of her blood. But if so, then the two clauses of the mishna are difficult, as they contradict each other.
כָּאן — שֶׁשִּׁמְּשָׁה, דְּאֵימָא שַׁמָּשׁ עֲכָרָן; כָּאן — שֶׁלֹּא שִׁמְּשָׁה.
The Gemara explains: Here, in the latter clause that indicates that a virgin requires no examination, it is referring to a case where she had engaged in intercourse. In such a situation an examination would be inconclusive, as even if the appearance of her blood had changed, one can say that it was because the man’s organ soiled it, i.e., perhaps the intercourse caused the change of appearance in her blood. By contrast, there, in the first clause, it is referring to a case where she had not engaged in intercourse, and therefore she is required to perform an examination to determine if there was a change in appearance in her blood, as any difference in appearance would indicate a change from pure blood to impure blood.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? שֶׁלֹּא פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ, וְרָאֲתָה שֶׁלֹּא מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ.
The Gemara notes that this halakha is also taught in a baraita. With regard to the opinion of Beit Hillel that blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals, the baraita asks: In what case is this statement said? In a case where she does not stop seeing blood due to intercourse, i.e., every time she engages in intercourse she experiences bleeding. If so, even when she sees blood not due to intercourse, it is deemed pure.
אֲבָל פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה, עָבַר לַיְלָה אַחַת בְּלֹא תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה, נִשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֵה דָמִים שֶׁלָּהּ — טְמֵאָה.
But if she stopped seeing blood due to intercourse, and she subsequently sees blood at a different time, that sighting renders her impure. Similarly, if one night passed without her engaging in intercourse and then she saw blood without connection to intercourse, she is deemed impure. Furthermore, if she sees blood and the appearance of her blood had changed from her initial blood from her torn hymen, she is impure.
פַּעֲמַיִם הִיא צְרִיכָה וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לִטְהָרוֹת, אֲבָל לְבַעְלָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת. פְּשִׁיטָא, ״שַׁחֲרִית״ תְּנַן!
§ The mishna teaches: And she is required to examine herself twice each day, in the morning and at twilight. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The mishna taught this halakha only with regard to touching ritually pure items. But with regard to her husband, she is permitted to him without any requirement to perform examinations. The Gemara asks: Isn’t this obvious, as we learn in the mishna that she must examine herself twice a day, and the first time is in the morning? This indicates that the mishna is concerned about the status of ritually pure items that she will handle during the day, but not about intercourse with her husband, as a couple usually engages in relations at night rather than during the day.
אֶלָּא אִי אִתְּמַר אַסֵּיפָא אִתְּמַר: וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא עוֹבֶרֶת לְשַׁמֵּשׁ אֶת בֵּיתָהּ. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּאִשָּׁה עֲסוּקָה בִּטְהָרוֹת, דְּמִגּוֹ דְּבָעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה לִטְהָרוֹת — בָּעֲיָא נָמֵי בְּדִיקָה לְבַעְלָהּ, אֲבָל אֵינָהּ עֲסוּקָה בִּטְהָרוֹת — לָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה.
The Gemara answers: Rather, if the statement of Rav Yehuda citing Shmuel was stated, it was stated with regard to the latter clause of the mishna: And she is also required to examine herself at a time that she is about to engage in intercourse with her husband. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The mishna taught this halakha only with regard to a woman who is engaged in handling pure items. She alone is required to examine herself before intercourse. The reason is that since she is required to perform an examination in preparation for handling pure items, she also requires an examination in preparation for intercourse with her husband. But with regard to a woman who is not engaged in handling pure items, she is not required to perform an examination in preparation for intercourse with her husband.
מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן? תְּנֵינָא: כׇּל הַנָּשִׁים בְּחֶזְקַת טׇהֳרָה לְבַעֲלֵיהֶן! אִי מִמַּתְנִיתִין הֲוָה אָמֵינָא, הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, אֲבָל אִשָּׁה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ וֶסֶת — בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה.
The Gemara asks: What is Rav Yehuda teaching us? We already learn this from the mishna (15a): All women have the presumptive status of purity to their husbands, and therefore the husband does not need to ascertain whether she is ritually pure before engaging in intercourse. The Gemara answers: If this halakha is learned from the mishna alone, I would say that this statement applies only to a woman who has a fixed menstrual cycle. But in the case of a woman who does not have a fixed menstrual cycle, she is required to perform an examination before intercourse. Consequently, Rav Yehuda teaches us that even a woman who does not have a fixed menstrual cycle is not required to perform an examination before intercourse, unless she handles pure items.
וְהָא מַתְנִיתִין בְּאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת עָסְקִינַן! מַתְנִיתִין בֵּין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, בֵּין אֵין לָהּ וֶסֶת, וְהָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּיֵשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, מִגּוֹ דְּבָעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה לִטְהָרוֹת, בָּעֲיָא נָמֵי בְּדִיקָה לְבַעְלָהּ.
The Gemara asks: But aren’t we are dealing in the mishna with a case of a woman who has a fixed menstrual cycle? The Gemara answers: The mishna is dealing both with a case where she has a fixed menstrual cycle and with a case where she does not have a fixed menstrual cycle. And this is what the mishna teaches us: That even though she has a fixed menstrual cycle, and therefore one might think that she is exempt from examination, nevertheless if she handles pure items, since she is required to perform an examination in preparation for handling those pure items, she is also required to perform an examination in preparation for intercourse with her husband.
וְהָא אַמְרַהּ שְׁמוּאֵל חֲדָא זִימְנָא! דְּאָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יִרְמְיָה, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אִשָּׁה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ וֶסֶת אֲסוּרָה לְשַׁמֵּשׁ עַד שֶׁתִּבְדּוֹק. וְאוֹקִימְנָא בַּעֲסוּקָה בִּטְהָרוֹת! חֲדָא מִכְּלַל חֲבֶרְתַּהּ אִתְּמַר.
The Gemara asks: But didn’t Shmuel already state this halakha on another occasion? As Rabbi Zeira said that Rabbi Abba bar Yirmeya says that Shmuel says: With regard to a woman who does not have a fixed menstrual cycle, it is forbidden for her to engage in intercourse with her husband until she examines herself and determines that she is pure. And we interpreted this halakha as referring to a case where she is engaged in handling pure items. The Gemara answers: Shmuel did not in fact issue two statements; rather, one was stated by inference from the other. In other words, Shmuel said one of these statements explicitly; the other was reported by his students in his name based on an inference from what he had said.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — לִטְהָרוֹת, אֲבָל לְבַעְלָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — שֶׁהִנִּיחָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת טְהוֹרָה, אֲבָל הִנִּיחָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת טְמֵאָה — לְעוֹלָם הִיא בְּטוּמְאָתָהּ עַד שֶׁתֹּאמַר לוֹ ״טְהוֹרָה אֲנִי״.
The Gemara adds: This is also taught in a baraita: In what case is this statement, that a woman requires an examination, said? It is said with regard to a woman who is preparing for handling pure items. But with regard to engaging in intercourse with her husband, she is permitted to do so without performing an examination. The baraita qualifies this ruling: And in what case is this statement, that she is not required to perform an examination, said? It is said when her husband traveled and left her with the presumptive status of ritual purity. If so, upon his return she does not need to perform an examination before they engage in intercourse. But if he left her with the presumptive status of ritual impurity, she remains forever in her status of impurity, until she says to him: I am ritually pure.
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
Rabbinic Authority and Personal Autonomy in Early Rabbinic Law, Part 2 of 3: The Law of Niddah
Extempore Effusions on the Completion of Masechet Niddah, Prakim Bet and Gimel
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I started learning Jan 2020 when I heard the new cycle was starting. I had tried during the last cycle and didn’t make it past a few weeks. Learning online from old men didn’t speak to my soul and I knew Talmud had to be a soul journey for me. Enter Hadran! Talmud from Rabbanit Michelle Farber from a woman’s perspective, a mother’s perspective and a modern perspective. Motivated to continue!
Brentwood, California, United States
I have joined the community of daf yomi learners at the start of this cycle. I have studied in different ways – by reading the page, translating the page, attending a local shiur and listening to Rabbanit Farber’s podcasts, depending on circumstances and where I was at the time. The reactions have been positive throughout – with no exception!
Guildford, United Kingdom
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
Mamaroneck, NY, United States
I started learning when my brother sent me the news clip of the celebration of the last Daf Yomi cycle. I was so floored to see so many women celebrating that I wanted to be a part of it. It has been an enriching experience studying a text in a language I don’t speak, using background knowledge that I don’t have. It is stretching my learning in unexpected ways, bringing me joy and satisfaction.
Warwick, Rhode Island, United States
I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!
California, United States
I started learning Talmud with R’ Haramati in Yeshivah of Flatbush. But after a respite of 60 years, Rabbanit Michelle lit my fire – after attending the last three world siyumim in Miami Beach, Meadowlands and Boca Raton, and now that I’m retired, I decided – “I can do this!” It has been an incredible journey so far, and I look forward to learning Daf everyday – Mazal Tov to everyone!
Florida, United States
I’ve been wanting to do Daf Yomi for years, but always wanted to start at the beginning and not in the middle of things. When the opportunity came in 2020, I decided: “this is now the time!” I’ve been posting my journey daily on social media, tracking my progress (#DafYomi); now it’s fully integrated into my daily routines. I’ve also inspired my partner to join, too!
Teaneck, United States
I had dreamed of doing daf yomi since I had my first serious Talmud class 18 years ago at Pardes with Rahel Berkovitz, and then a couple of summers with Leah Rosenthal. There is no way I would be able to do it without another wonderful teacher, Michelle, and the Hadran organization. I wake up and am excited to start each day with the next daf.
Irvine, United States
I started learning Gemara at the Yeshivah of Flatbush. And I resumed ‘ברוך ה decades later with Rabbanit Michele at Hadran. I started from Brachot and have had an exciting, rewarding experience throughout seder Moed!
Maale Adumim, Israel
When the new cycle began, I thought, If not now, when? I’d just turned 72. I feel like a tourist on a tour bus passing astonishing scenery each day. Rabbanit Michelle is my beloved tour guide. When the cycle ends, I’ll be 80. I pray that I’ll have strength and mind to continue the journey to glimpse a little more. My grandchildren think having a daf-learning savta is cool!
Jerusalem, Israel
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Pittsburgh, United States
What a great experience to learn with Rabbanit Michelle Farber. I began with this cycle in January 2020 and have been comforted by the consistency and energy of this process throughout the isolation period of Covid. Week by week, I feel like I am exploring a treasure chest with sparkling gems and puzzling antiquities. The hunt is exhilarating.
Pennsylvania, United States
I started learning after the siyum hashas for women and my daily learning has been a constant over the last two years. It grounded me during the chaos of Corona while providing me with a community of fellow learners. The Daf can be challenging but it’s filled with life’s lessons, struggles and hope for a better world. It’s not about the destination but rather about the journey. Thank you Hadran!
אפרת, Israel
I started the daf at the beginning of this cycle in January 2020. My husband, my children, grandchildren and siblings have been very supportive. As someone who learned and taught Tanach and mefarshim for many years, it has been an amazing adventure to complete the six sedarim of Mishnah, and now to study Talmud on a daily basis along with Rabbanit Michelle and the wonderful women of Hadran.
Jerusalem, Israel
When we heard that R. Michelle was starting daf yomi, my 11-year-old suggested that I go. Little did she know that she would lose me every morning from then on. I remember standing at the Farbers’ door, almost too shy to enter. After that first class, I said that I would come the next day but couldn’t commit to more. A decade later, I still look forward to learning from R. Michelle every morning.
Ra’anana, Israel
Minneapolis, MN, United States
See video
Raanana, Israel
After reading the book, “ If All The Seas Were Ink “ by Ileana Kurshan I started studying Talmud. I searched and studied with several teachers until I found Michelle Farber. I have been studying with her for two years. I look forward every day to learn from her.
Virginia, United States
Los Angeles, United States
Niddah 11
שׁוֹפְעוֹת דָּם וּבָאוֹת — דַּיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי עִיבּוּרָן וְדַיָּין כׇּל יְמֵי מְנִיקוּתָן, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: לֹא אָמְרוּ דַּיָּין שְׁעָתָן אֶלָּא בִּרְאִיָּיה רִאשׁוֹנָה, אֲבָל בַּשְּׁנִיָּה מְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה.
continuously discharging menstrual blood, their time is sufficient for all their days of pregnancy and their time is sufficient for all their days of nursing. This is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon all say: They said that her time is sufficient only with regard to the first sighting of blood, but with regard to the second sighting, her status is like that of any other woman, and she transmits impurity for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination.
וְאִם רָאֲתָה רִאשׁוֹנָה וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה — קָבְעָה לָהּ וֶסֶת. לְמַאי? אִילֵימָא לְיָמִים, הָא כֹּל יוֹמָא דְּלָא קְפִיץ לָא חֲזַאי!
§ The mishna teaches: And if she saw the first sighting as a result of unnatural circumstances, then even with regard to the second sighting her time is sufficient. Rav Huna says: If she jumped and saw menstrual blood, and again she jumped and saw menstrual blood, and a third time she jumped and saw menstrual blood, she has established a fixed menstrual cycle. The Gemara asks: For what occurrence has she established a fixed cycle? If we say that it is a cycle of days alone, this cannot be correct, as every day that she did not jump, she also did not see menstrual blood. Therefore, her cycle cannot be a mere pattern of days.
אֶלָּא לִקְפִיצוֹת, וְהָתַנְיָא: כֹּל שֶׁתִּקְבָּעֶנָּה מֵחֲמַת אוֹנֶס, אֲפִילּוּ כַּמָּה פְּעָמִים — לֹא קָבְעָה וֶסֶת! מַאי לַָאו — לֹא קָבְעָה וֶסֶת כְּלָל?
The Gemara explains: Rather, the established menstrual cycle is caused by jumps, i.e., by observing a pattern of jumping and seeing blood three times, she has established that jumping causes the onset of her menstrual period. The Gemara raises a difficulty: But isn’t it taught in a baraita: Any woman who establishes a pattern of seeing menstrual blood due to a recurring accident, even if the pattern repeats, still has not established a fixed menstrual cycle? An accidental menstrual pattern brought about by external causes does not create a menstrual cycle. The Gemara explains the difficulty: What, is it not correct to say that the baraita means that she has not established a fixed menstrual cycle at all?
לָא, לֹא קָבְעָה וֶסֶת לְיָמִים לְחוֹדַיְיהוּ וְלִקְפִיצוֹת לְחוֹדַיְיהוּ, אֲבָל קָבְעָה לָהּ וֶסֶת לְיָמִים וְלִקְפִיצוֹת. לְיָמִים לְחוֹדַיְיהוּ פְּשִׁיטָא! אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כְּגוֹן דִּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּבְשַׁבָּת קְפַצָה וְלָא חֲזַאי, וּלְחַד בְּשַׁבָּת חֲזַאי בְּלָא קְפִיצָה.
The Gemara answers: No, the baraita means that she has not established a fixed menstrual cycle of days alone, nor of jumps alone, but she has established a fixed menstrual cycle for a combination of days and of jumps. In other words, she has established a fixed menstrual cycle when she jumps on specific days. The Gemara asks: Isn’t it obvious that she does not establish a cycle for days alone? Why is it necessary to state this? Rav Ashi says: It is necessary to teach this in a case where she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and again she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and then on the following Shabbat she jumped and did not see blood, but on Sunday, the next day, she saw menstrual blood without jumping.
מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא: אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא לְמַפְרֵעַ, דְּיוֹמָא הוּא דְּקָגָרֵים וְלָא קְפִיצָה, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דִּקְפִיצָה נָמֵי דְּאֶתְמוֹל גְּרַמָא, וְהַאי דְּלָא חֲזַאי — מִשּׁוּם דְּאַכַּתִּי לָא מְטָא זְמַן קְפִיצָה.
Rav Ashi explains: Lest you say that the matter is revealed retroactively that it was the day that caused her to experience menstruation and not the jumping, and therefore she has established a menstrual cycle of menstruating on Sundays, regardless of jumping, the baraita teaches us that it was also the jumping of yesterday, on Shabbat, that caused the menstruation today, on Sunday. And as for the fact that she did not see menstrual blood then, that was because the time when jumping causes menstruation had not yet arrived.
לִישָּׁנָא אַחֲרִינָא, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה, קָפְצָה וְרָאֲתָה — קָבְעָה לָהּ וֶסֶת לְיָמִים וְלֹא לִקְפִיצוֹת. הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: דִּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּקְפִיץ בְּחַד בְּשַׁבָּת וַחֲזַאי, וּבְשַׁבָּת קְפַצָה וְלָא חֲזַאי, וּלְחַד בְּשַׁבָּת (אַחֲרִינָא) חֲזַאי בְּלָא קְפִיצָה, דְּהָתָם אִיגַּלַּאי מִילְּתָא דְּיוֹמָא הוּא דְּקָא גָרֵים.
The Gemara presents another version of Rav Huna’s statement. Rav Huna says: If a woman jumped and saw menstrual blood, and again she jumped and saw menstrual blood, and a third time she jumped and saw menstrual blood, she has established a fixed menstrual cycle for a pattern of days and not for a pattern of jumps. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances? Rav Ashi says: This is referring to a case where she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and then again she jumped on Sunday and saw menstrual blood, and then on the following Shabbat she jumped and did not see blood, but on Sunday, the next day, she saw menstrual blood without jumping. In that case there, the matter is revealed retroactively that it is the day that causes her to menstruate, not the jumping.
מַתְנִי’ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָמְרוּ דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ, צְרִיכָה לִהְיוֹת בּוֹדֶקֶת, חוּץ מִן הַנִּדָּה וְהַיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר.
MISHNA: Although the Rabbis said that for a woman with a fixed menstrual cycle her time is sufficient and she does not transmit impurity retroactively, she is required to examine herself each day to ensure that she is ritually pure and will not impurify pure items that she is handling. All women must examine themselves each day except for a menstruating woman, whose impure status is known, and a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity, whose ritually pure status is known even if she experiences bleeding.
וּמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בְּעֵדִים, חוּץ מִיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר, וּבְתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִים.
And even a woman with a fixed menstrual cycle engages in intercourse while using examination cloths to ascertain whether her menstrual flow began, except for a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity, and a virgin whose blood is ritually pure for four days after engaging in intercourse for the first time.
וּפְעָמִים צְרִיכָה לִהְיוֹת בּוֹדֶקֶת: שַׁחֲרִית, וּבֵין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת, וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא עוֹבֶרֶת לְשַׁמֵּשׁ אֶת בֵּיתָהּ. יְתֵירוֹת עֲלֵיהֶן כֹּהֲנוֹת, בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהֵן אוֹכְלוֹת בִּתְרוּמָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף בִּשְׁעַת עֲבָרָתָן מִלֶּאֱכוֹל בִּתְרוּמָה.
And she is required to examine herself twice each day: In the morning, to ascertain if she menstruated during the night, and at twilight, to ascertain if she menstruated during the day. And she is also required to examine herself at a time that she is about to engage in intercourse with her husband. The obligation of women of priestly families is greater than that of other women, as they are also required to examine themselves when they seek to partake of teruma. Rabbi Yehuda says: Even when they conclude partaking of teruma they are required to examine themselves, in order to ascertain whether they experienced bleeding while partaking of teruma.
גְּמָ’ חוּץ מִן הַנִּדָּה. דִּבְתוֹךְ יְמֵי נִדָּתָהּ לָא בָּעֵי בְּדִיקָה.
GEMARA: The mishna teaches: All women must examine themselves each day, except for a menstruating woman. The Gemara explains: Such a woman does not need to examine herself, as during the days of her menstruation she does not need examination.
הָנִיחָא לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ, דְּאָמַר: אִשָּׁה קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי זִיבָתָהּ, וְאֵין אִשָּׁה קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי נִדָּתָהּ — שַׁפִּיר. אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר: אִשָּׁה קוֹבַעַת לָהּ וֶסֶת בְּתוֹךְ יְמֵי נִדָּתָהּ — תִּבְדּוֹק, דִּילְמָא קָבְעָה לַהּ וֶסֶת!
The Gemara raises a difficulty: This works out well according to the opinion of Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, who said that a woman can establish a fixed menstrual cycle even during the days that she has zava status, but a woman does not establish a fixed menstrual cycle during the days of her impurity due to menstruation, as any bleeding during these seven days is merely a continuation of her original menstruation. According to this opinion, it is well, and one can understand the mishna. But according to the opinion of Rabbi Yoḥanan, who said that a woman can establish a fixed menstrual cycle during the days of her menstruation, let her examine herself, as perhaps she will establish a fixed menstrual cycle.
אָמַר לָךְ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: כִּי אָמֵינָא אֲנָא — הֵיכָא דַּחֲזֵיתֵיהּ מִמַּעְיָן סָתוּם, אֲבָל חֲזֵיתֵיהּ מִמַּעְיָן פָּתוּחַ — לָא אֲמַרִי.
The Gemara explains that Rabbi Yoḥanan could say to you: When I say that a woman can establish a fixed menstrual cycle during the days of her menstruation, that applies only in a case where the first two instances of her fixed cycle were established when she first saw blood from a stopped source, i.e., she saw blood on those particulars days at the outset of her period. But when she first saw blood from an open source, i.e., when the first two instances that she experienced bleeding on those particular days was in the middle of her menstrual period, I did not say that she establishes a fixed menstrual cycle, and therefore there is no need for her to examine herself.
וְהַיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר, קָא סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ — מְבַקֶּשֶׁת לֵישֵׁב עַל דַּם טוֹהַר.
§ The mishna teaches: All women must examine themselves each day, except for a menstruating woman, whose impure status is known, and a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity. The Gemara explains: It may enter your mind that when the mishna mentions a woman who is observing the period of the blood of purity, it is referring to one who is finishing the period of impurity following a birth and is anticipating observing the period of the blood of purity. In other words, her days of impurity are ending and she is about to start her days `of purity, and the mishna is stating that there is no need for an examination to conclude her days of impurity before starting her days of purity.
הָנִיחָא לְרַב, דְּאָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא, הַתּוֹרָה טִמְּאַתּוּ וְהַתּוֹרָה טִהֲרַתּוּ — שַׁפִּיר.
The Gemara analyzes the mishna in accordance with this interpretation. This works out well according to the opinion of Rav, who said that blood after birth and blood of purity both come from one source, and the Torah deemed blood after birth impure, and the Torah deemed blood of purity pure. According to this opinion, it is well, and one can understand the mishna, since even if she emits blood continuously through the end of her days of impurity into her days of purity, the blood during her days of purity is pure.
אֶלָּא לְלֵוִי דְּאָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵם, תִּבְדּוֹק, דִּילְמָא אַכַּתִּי לָא פְּסַק הָהוּא מַעְיָן טָמֵא! אָמַר לָךְ לֵוִי: הָא מַנִּי?
But according to the opinion of Levi, who said that there are two distinct sources, one for blood after birth and one for blood of purity, she should be required to examine herself at the end of the period following birth, as perhaps that impure source of blood after birth had not yet stopped flowing. The Gemara explains that Levi could say to you: In accordance with whose opinion is this ruling?
בֵּית שַׁמַּאי הִיא, דְּאָמְרִי: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא. וּסְתַם לַן תַּנָּא כְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי?! סְתָם וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת הוּא, וְכׇל סְתָם וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַחְלוֹקֶת אֵין הֲלָכָה כִּסְתָם.
It is the opinion of Beit Shammai, who say that there is only one source for the two types of blood (see 35b). The Gemara asks: But can it be that the tanna taught us an unattributed mishna, which is generally accepted as the halakha, in accordance with the opinion of Beit Shammai, whose opinion is usually not accepted as halakha? The Gemara answers: It is a case where the mishna first records an unattributed opinion and afterward it records a dispute with regard to the same matter. And there is a principle that any time the mishna first records an unattributed opinion and afterward it records that the ruling is subject to a dispute, then the halakha is not necessarily in accordance with the unattributed opinion.
וְאִי בָּעֵית אֵימָא: מִי קָתָנֵי ״מְבַקֶּשֶׁת לֵישֵׁב״? ״יוֹשֶׁבֶת״ קָתָנֵי! אִי יוֹשֶׁבֶת, מַאי לְמֵימְרָא? מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא תִּיבְדּוֹק, דְּדִילְמָא קָבְעָה לַהּ וֶסֶת — קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּמַעְיָן טָהוֹר לְמַעְיָן טָמֵא לָא קָבְעָה.
And if you wish, say instead: Does the mishna teach: A woman is anticipating observing the period of the blood of purity? Rather, it teaches: Who is observing the period of the blood of purity. The Gemara asks: If the mishna is referring to a woman who is already observing the period of the blood of purity, what is the purpose of stating that she is exempt from performing examinations? Isn’t this obvious? The Gemara answers: Lest you say that she should examine herself, as perhaps she will find that she established a fixed menstrual cycle through blood found on her examination cloths, the mishna teaches us that a woman does not establish a cycle from sightings of blood that came from a pure source that transfers to the period when she sees blood from an impure source.
הָנִיחָא לְלֵוִי, דְּאָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵם, אֶלָּא לְרַב דְּאָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא — תִּבְדּוֹק, דִּילְמָא קָבְעָה לַהּ וֶסֶת! אֲפִילּוּ הָכִי, מִימֵי טׇהֳרָה לִימֵי טוּמְאָה לָא קָבְעָה.
The Gemara raises a difficulty with regard to this answer: This answer works out well according to Levi, who said that there are two distinct sources, one for blood after birth and one for blood of purity; one can understand that she does not establish a cycle with regard to blood from one source, from a sighting of blood from a different source. But according to Rav, who said that blood after birth and blood of purity both come from one source, she should be required to examine herself during the period of the blood of purity, as perhaps she established a fixed menstrual cycle. The Gemara answers: Even so, i.e., that both types of blood come from the same source, nevertheless a woman does not establish a cycle from her days of purity that transfers to her days of impurity.
וּמְשַׁמֶּשֶׁת בְּעֵדִים וְכוּ׳. תְּנַן הָתָם: תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת וְנִשֵּׂאת, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹתְנִין לָהּ אַרְבַּע לֵילוֹת, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: עַד שֶׁתִּחְיֶה הַמַּכָּה.
§ The mishna teaches: And even a woman with a fixed menstrual cycle engages in intercourse while using examination cloths to ascertain whether her menstrual flow began, except for a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity, and a virgin whose blood is ritually pure for four days after engaging in intercourse for the first time. In this connection, the Gemara notes that we learned in a mishna there (64b): With regard to a young girl whose time to see the flow of menstrual blood has not arrived, as she has not yet reached puberty, and she married, Beit Shammai say: The Sages give her four nights after intercourse during which the blood is attributed to her torn hymen and she is ritually pure. Thereafter, any blood is menstrual blood and she is impure. And Beit Hillel say: The blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals.
אָמַר רַב גִּידֵּל, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה שֶׁלֹּא מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ, אֲבָל פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה.
With regard to Beit Hillel’s statement, Rav Giddel says that Shmuel says: They taught this only in a case where she does not stop seeing blood due to intercourse. In other words, every time she engages in intercourse she experiences bleeding. In that case, even if she saw blood not due to intercourse, Beit Hillel still attribute the blood to the torn hymen. But if she stops seeing blood due to intercourse, and then she subsequently saw blood on another occasion, that blood renders her impure.
עָבַר לַיְלָה אַחַת בְּלֹא תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה. נִשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֵה דָמִים שֶׁלָּהּ — טְמֵאָה. מֵתִיב רַבִּי יוֹנָה: ״וּבְתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִים״, אַמַּאי? תְּשַׁמֵּשׁ בְּעֵדִים, דְּדִילְמָא נִשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֵה דָמִים שֶׁלָּהּ!
He continues: Similarly, if one night passed without them engaging in intercourse and she subsequently saw blood without connection to intercourse, this indicates that the blood is no longer from her torn hymen and therefore she is deemed impure. Likewise, if the appearance of her blood had changed since her initial blood from her torn hymen, she is impure. Rabbi Yona raises an objection to this last halakha from the mishna: And a virgin whose blood is ritually pure is not required to examine herself when she engages in intercourse. Why not? She should engage in intercourse while using examination cloths, as perhaps she will find that the appearance of her blood has changed, which would mean that her blood is no longer ritually pure blood from her torn hymen.
אָמַר רָבָא: אֵימָא רֵישָׁא ״חוּץ מִן הַנִּדָּה וְהַיּוֹשֶׁבֶת עַל דַּם טוֹהַר״, הוּא דְּלָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה, אֲבָל בְּתוּלָה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ טְהוֹרִין בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה. אֶלָּא קַשְׁיָין אַהֲדָדֵי!
Rava says: Say the first clause: All women must engage in intercourse while using examination cloths, except for a menstruating woman whose impure status is certain and a woman after childbirth who is observing the period of the blood of purity. It can be inferred from here that these two exceptions are not required for women to examine themselves, but a virgin whose blood is pure is required to perform an examination. This ruling apparently supports Shmuel’s opinion that examination is required to determine if there is a change in the appearance of her blood. But if so, then the two clauses of the mishna are difficult, as they contradict each other.
כָּאן — שֶׁשִּׁמְּשָׁה, דְּאֵימָא שַׁמָּשׁ עֲכָרָן; כָּאן — שֶׁלֹּא שִׁמְּשָׁה.
The Gemara explains: Here, in the latter clause that indicates that a virgin requires no examination, it is referring to a case where she had engaged in intercourse. In such a situation an examination would be inconclusive, as even if the appearance of her blood had changed, one can say that it was because the man’s organ soiled it, i.e., perhaps the intercourse caused the change of appearance in her blood. By contrast, there, in the first clause, it is referring to a case where she had not engaged in intercourse, and therefore she is required to perform an examination to determine if there was a change in appearance in her blood, as any difference in appearance would indicate a change from pure blood to impure blood.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? שֶׁלֹּא פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ, וְרָאֲתָה שֶׁלֹּא מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ.
The Gemara notes that this halakha is also taught in a baraita. With regard to the opinion of Beit Hillel that blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals, the baraita asks: In what case is this statement said? In a case where she does not stop seeing blood due to intercourse, i.e., every time she engages in intercourse she experiences bleeding. If so, even when she sees blood not due to intercourse, it is deemed pure.
אֲבָל פָּסְקָה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה, עָבַר לַיְלָה אַחַת בְּלֹא תַּשְׁמִישׁ וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה, נִשְׁתַּנּוּ מַרְאֵה דָמִים שֶׁלָּהּ — טְמֵאָה.
But if she stopped seeing blood due to intercourse, and she subsequently sees blood at a different time, that sighting renders her impure. Similarly, if one night passed without her engaging in intercourse and then she saw blood without connection to intercourse, she is deemed impure. Furthermore, if she sees blood and the appearance of her blood had changed from her initial blood from her torn hymen, she is impure.
פַּעֲמַיִם הִיא צְרִיכָה וְכוּ׳. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא לִטְהָרוֹת, אֲבָל לְבַעְלָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת. פְּשִׁיטָא, ״שַׁחֲרִית״ תְּנַן!
§ The mishna teaches: And she is required to examine herself twice each day, in the morning and at twilight. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The mishna taught this halakha only with regard to touching ritually pure items. But with regard to her husband, she is permitted to him without any requirement to perform examinations. The Gemara asks: Isn’t this obvious, as we learn in the mishna that she must examine herself twice a day, and the first time is in the morning? This indicates that the mishna is concerned about the status of ritually pure items that she will handle during the day, but not about intercourse with her husband, as a couple usually engages in relations at night rather than during the day.
אֶלָּא אִי אִתְּמַר אַסֵּיפָא אִתְּמַר: וּבְשָׁעָה שֶׁהִיא עוֹבֶרֶת לְשַׁמֵּשׁ אֶת בֵּיתָהּ. אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא בְּאִשָּׁה עֲסוּקָה בִּטְהָרוֹת, דְּמִגּוֹ דְּבָעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה לִטְהָרוֹת — בָּעֲיָא נָמֵי בְּדִיקָה לְבַעְלָהּ, אֲבָל אֵינָהּ עֲסוּקָה בִּטְהָרוֹת — לָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה.
The Gemara answers: Rather, if the statement of Rav Yehuda citing Shmuel was stated, it was stated with regard to the latter clause of the mishna: And she is also required to examine herself at a time that she is about to engage in intercourse with her husband. Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The mishna taught this halakha only with regard to a woman who is engaged in handling pure items. She alone is required to examine herself before intercourse. The reason is that since she is required to perform an examination in preparation for handling pure items, she also requires an examination in preparation for intercourse with her husband. But with regard to a woman who is not engaged in handling pure items, she is not required to perform an examination in preparation for intercourse with her husband.
מַאי קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן? תְּנֵינָא: כׇּל הַנָּשִׁים בְּחֶזְקַת טׇהֳרָה לְבַעֲלֵיהֶן! אִי מִמַּתְנִיתִין הֲוָה אָמֵינָא, הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, אֲבָל אִשָּׁה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ וֶסֶת — בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה.
The Gemara asks: What is Rav Yehuda teaching us? We already learn this from the mishna (15a): All women have the presumptive status of purity to their husbands, and therefore the husband does not need to ascertain whether she is ritually pure before engaging in intercourse. The Gemara answers: If this halakha is learned from the mishna alone, I would say that this statement applies only to a woman who has a fixed menstrual cycle. But in the case of a woman who does not have a fixed menstrual cycle, she is required to perform an examination before intercourse. Consequently, Rav Yehuda teaches us that even a woman who does not have a fixed menstrual cycle is not required to perform an examination before intercourse, unless she handles pure items.
וְהָא מַתְנִיתִין בְּאִשָּׁה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת עָסְקִינַן! מַתְנִיתִין בֵּין שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, בֵּין אֵין לָהּ וֶסֶת, וְהָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן: דְּאַף עַל גַּב דְּיֵשׁ לָהּ וֶסֶת, מִגּוֹ דְּבָעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה לִטְהָרוֹת, בָּעֲיָא נָמֵי בְּדִיקָה לְבַעְלָהּ.
The Gemara asks: But aren’t we are dealing in the mishna with a case of a woman who has a fixed menstrual cycle? The Gemara answers: The mishna is dealing both with a case where she has a fixed menstrual cycle and with a case where she does not have a fixed menstrual cycle. And this is what the mishna teaches us: That even though she has a fixed menstrual cycle, and therefore one might think that she is exempt from examination, nevertheless if she handles pure items, since she is required to perform an examination in preparation for handling those pure items, she is also required to perform an examination in preparation for intercourse with her husband.
וְהָא אַמְרַהּ שְׁמוּאֵל חֲדָא זִימְנָא! דְּאָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא, אָמַר רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר יִרְמְיָה, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: אִשָּׁה שֶׁאֵין לָהּ וֶסֶת אֲסוּרָה לְשַׁמֵּשׁ עַד שֶׁתִּבְדּוֹק. וְאוֹקִימְנָא בַּעֲסוּקָה בִּטְהָרוֹת! חֲדָא מִכְּלַל חֲבֶרְתַּהּ אִתְּמַר.
The Gemara asks: But didn’t Shmuel already state this halakha on another occasion? As Rabbi Zeira said that Rabbi Abba bar Yirmeya says that Shmuel says: With regard to a woman who does not have a fixed menstrual cycle, it is forbidden for her to engage in intercourse with her husband until she examines herself and determines that she is pure. And we interpreted this halakha as referring to a case where she is engaged in handling pure items. The Gemara answers: Shmuel did not in fact issue two statements; rather, one was stated by inference from the other. In other words, Shmuel said one of these statements explicitly; the other was reported by his students in his name based on an inference from what he had said.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — לִטְהָרוֹת, אֲבָל לְבַעְלָהּ מוּתֶּרֶת. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים — שֶׁהִנִּיחָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת טְהוֹרָה, אֲבָל הִנִּיחָהּ בְּחֶזְקַת טְמֵאָה — לְעוֹלָם הִיא בְּטוּמְאָתָהּ עַד שֶׁתֹּאמַר לוֹ ״טְהוֹרָה אֲנִי״.
The Gemara adds: This is also taught in a baraita: In what case is this statement, that a woman requires an examination, said? It is said with regard to a woman who is preparing for handling pure items. But with regard to engaging in intercourse with her husband, she is permitted to do so without performing an examination. The baraita qualifies this ruling: And in what case is this statement, that she is not required to perform an examination, said? It is said when her husband traveled and left her with the presumptive status of ritual purity. If so, upon his return she does not need to perform an examination before they engage in intercourse. But if he left her with the presumptive status of ritual impurity, she remains forever in her status of impurity, until she says to him: I am ritually pure.
