Niddah 20

בקילור ורבי תלה בשרף שקמה מאי לאו אאדום

it to an eye salve [bekilor], which the woman had previously handled. And likewise, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi attributed a stain to the sap of a sycamore tree the woman had touched. The Gemara explains the objection: What, is it not the case that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi attributed red bloodstains to these causes because they are red, albeit not as red as blood? Evidently, the color of impure blood can be similar to such shades of red as well, which means that all these distinctions mentioned by the amora’im above are irrelevant.

לא אשאר דמים

The Gemara answers: No; Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi attributed stains to an eye salve and the sap of a sycamore tree because those stains were like the other types of blood mentioned in the mishna.

אמימר ומר זוטרא ורב אשי הוו יתבי קמיה אומנא שקלי ליה קרנא קמייתא לאמימר חזייה אמר להו אדום דתנן כי האי שקלי ליה אחריתי אמר להו אשתני אמר רב אשי כגון אנא דלא ידענא בין האי להאי לא מבעי לי למחזי דמא

The Gemara relates that Ameimar and Mar Zutra and Rav Ashi were sitting before a bloodletter, to receive treatment. The bloodletter removed blood in a bloodletter’s horn from Ameimar for his first treatment. Ameimar saw the blood and said to his colleagues: The red color that we learned about in the mishna is like this blood in the horn. The bloodletter again removed blood from Ameimar, this time using another horn. Upon seeing the blood in this horn, Ameimar said to them: The color of this blood has changed compared to the blood in the first horn. Rav Ashi, who saw both types of blood, said: Any Sage such as myself, as I do not know how to distinguish between this blood and that blood, should not see, i.e., examine, different types of blood to issue a ruling as to whether they are pure or impure.

שחור כחרת אמר רבה בר רב הונא חרת שאמרו דיו תניא נמי הכי שחור כחרת ושחור שאמרו דיו ולימא דיו אי אמר דיו הוה אמינא כי פכחותא דדיותא קא משמע לן כי חרותא דדיותא

§ The mishna teaches: What is the black color that is impure? It is blood as black as ḥeret. Rabba bar Rav Huna says: This ḥeret of which the Sages spoke is ink. The Gemara notes that this opinion is also taught in a baraita: This black color is like ḥeret, and the black of which the Sages spoke is ink. The Gemara asks: But if so, why does the tanna of this baraita mention both terms? Let him say simply: Ink. The Gemara explains: If the tanna had said only: Ink, I would say that he means that it is like the clear part of the ink, i.e., the upper portion of ink in an inkwell, which is very bright. Therefore, the tanna of the baraita teaches us that it is like the blackness [ḥaruta] of the ink, the lower part of the inkwell, which is darker.

איבעיא להו בלחה או ביבשתא תא שמע דרבי אמי פלי קורטא דדיותא ובדיק בה

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: To which type of ḥeret were the Sages referring? Were they referring to moist or dry ḥeret? Come and hear a resolution from a practical ruling, as when black blood was brought before Rabbi Ami he would break up pieces of dried ink and examine blood with it.

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל כקיר כדיו וכענב טמאה וזוהי ששנינו עמוק מכן טמאה אמר רבי אלעזר כזית כזפת וכעורב טהור וזוהי ששנינו דיהה מכן טהור

§ The mishna states that if the blackness of the blood is deeper than ink, it is impure, whereas if it is lighter it is pure. In this regard, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: If a woman saw blood whose color was like black wax [kekir] or like black ink or like a black grape, she is ritually impure. And this is the meaning of that which we learned in the mishna: If the black is deeper than that, it is ritually impure. Rabbi Elazar says: If a woman saw blood whose color was like a black olive, or like black tar, or like a black raven, this blood is pure. And this is the meaning of that which we learned in the mishna: If the black is lighter than that, it is ritually pure.

עולא אמר כלבושא סיואה עולא אקלע לפומבדיתא חזייה לההוא טייעא דלבוש לבושא אוכמא אמר להו שחור דתנן כי האי מרטו מיניה פורתא פורתא יהבו ביה ארבע מאה זוזי

Ulla says: When the mishna states that black blood is impure, it means like the garments of the inhabitants of Siva’a, which were extremely black. The Gemara relates that when Ulla happened to go to Pumbedita, he saw a certain Arab [tayya’a] who was dressed in a black garment. Ulla said to the Sages of Pumbedita: The black color that we learned about in the mishna is like this color. Since people wanted a sample of the shade of blood mentioned in the mishna, they tore the Arab’s garment from him bit by bit, and in recompense they gave him four hundred dinars.

רבי יוחנן אמר אלו כלים האוליירין הבאים ממדינת הים למימרא דאוכמי נינהו והאמר להו רבי ינאי לבניו בני אל תקברוני לא בכלים שחורים ולא בכלים לבנים שחורים שמא אזכה ואהיה כאבל בין החתנים לבנים שמא לא אזכה ואהיה כחתן בין האבלים אלא בכלים האוליירין הבאים ממדינת הים

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The black blood that the mishna says is impure is like these cloths of the bath attendants [haolyarin] who come from overseas. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that these are black cloths? But didn’t Rabbi Yannai say to his sons: My sons, do not bury me in black cloths nor in white cloths. Not in black, lest I be acquitted in judgment and I will be among the righteous like a mourner among the grooms. And not in white, lest I not be acquitted in judgment and I will be among the wicked like a groom among the mourners. Rather, bury me in the cloths of the bath attendants who come from overseas, which are neither black nor white. Apparently, these cloths of the bath attendants are not black.

אלמא לאו אוכמי נינהו לא קשיא הא בגלימא הא בפתורא

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as a distinction can be made. When Rabbi Yannai indicates that they are not black, that is referring to a regular garment, whereas with regard to the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan that indicates that they are black, that is referring to a cloth placed on an item such as a table or a bed.

אמר רב יהודה אמר שמואל וכולם אין בודקין אלא על גבי מטלית לבנה אמר רב יצחק בר אבודימי ושחור על גבי אדום

§ With regard to the examination of the five types of blood mentioned in the mishna, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: And with regard to all of them, in their various shades, one examines them only when they are placed on a white linen cloth, as only in this fashion can one properly discern the precise color of the blood. Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi says: And in the case of black blood, one must place it on a red linen cloth.

אמר רב ירמיה מדפתי ולא פליגי הא בשחור הא בשאר דמים מתקיף לה רב אשי אי הכי לימא שמואל חוץ משחור אלא אמר רב אשי בשחור גופיה קמיפלגי

Rav Yirmeya of Difti says: And Shmuel and Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi do not disagree, as this statement of Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi is referring specifically to black blood, whereas that ruling of Shmuel that one must use a white cloth is referring to the other four types of blood listed in the mishna. Rav Ashi objects to this interpretation: If so, let Shmuel say: With regard to all of them except for black, one examines them only when they are placed on a white linen cloth. Rather, Rav Ashi says: Shmuel and Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi disagree with regard to black blood itself, whether it should be examined against the background of a white or a red cloth.

אמר עולא כולן עמוק מכן טמא דיהה מכן טהור כשחור

Ulla says: With regard to all of these five types of blood enumerated in the mishna, if the color is deeper than that which is described in the mishna the blood is ritually impure; if it is lighter than it, the blood is ritually pure, as explicitly stated in the mishna with regard to black.

ואלא מאי שנא שחור דנקט סלקא דעתך אמינא הואיל ואמר רבי חנינא שחור אדום הוא אלא שלקה הילכך אפילו דיהה מכן נמי ליטמא קמשמע לן

The Gemara asks: But if so, what is different about black, that the mishna mentions this halakha only with regard to that color? The Gemara answers: The reason is that it might enter your mind to say that since Rabbi Ḥanina says: The black blood mentioned in the mishna is actually red but its color has faded, therefore, even if it is lighter than that which is described in the mishna, it should also be impure. Consequently, the mishna teaches us that even with regard to black blood, if the color is lighter than the shade mentioned in the mishna, it is pure.

רבי אמי בר אבא אמר וכולן עמוק מכן טמא דיהה מכן נמי טמא חוץ משחור אלא מאי אהני שיעוריה דרבנן לאפוקי דיהה דדיהה

Rabbi Ami bar Abba says: And with regard to all of these five types of blood, if the color is deeper than that which is described in the mishna, the blood is ritually impure; if it is lighter than that which is described in the mishna, it is also ritually impure, except for black, which is pure if it is lighter. The Gemara asks: But if these types of blood, except for black, are impure whether they are deeper or lighter than the specific shade described in the mishna, what purpose do the measures specified by the Sages in the mishna serve? The Gemara answers that these descriptions are to the exclusion of a color that is lighter than lighter, i.e., the color is so faint that it does not qualify as impure blood.

ואיכא דאמרי רמי בר אבא אמר וכולן עמוק מכן טהור דיהה מכן טהור חוץ משחור ולהכי מהני שיעוריה דרבנן

And there are those who say a different version of the above statement. Rami bar Abba says: And with regard to all of these five types of blood, if the color is deeper than that which is described in the mishna, it is ritually pure; if it is lighter than that, it is also ritually pure, except for black, which is impure if it is deeper. And for this reason the measures, i.e., descriptions, of the Sages are effective, as any discrepancy from these descriptions means that the blood is pure.

בר קפרא אמר וכולן עמוק מכן טמא דיהה מכן טהור חוץ ממזג שעמוק מכן טהור דיהה מכן טהור בר קפרא אדיהו ליה ודכי אעמיקו ליה ודכי אמר רבי חנינא כמה נפיש גברא דלביה כמשמעתיה

Bar Kappara says: And with regard to all of them, if the color is deeper than that, the blood is impure; if it is lighter than that, it is pure, except for blood the color of diluted wine, with regard to which if the color is deeper than that, the blood is pure, and if it is lighter than that, it is also pure. The Gemara relates that in an effort to test bar Kappara, the Sages brought before him blood that had the appearance of diluted wine and they lightened it, and bar Kappara deemed it pure. On another occasion they deepened the color of blood that looked like diluted wine, and again bar Kappara deemed it pure. Rabbi Ḥanina says in astonishment: How great is this man whose heart, which is so sensitive it can distinguish between such similar shades of blood, is in accordance with his ruling of halakha.

וכקרן כרכום תנא לח ולא יבש

§ The mishna teaches, with regard to the colors of impure blood: And what is the color that is like the bright color of the crocus flower that is impure? It is like the brightest part of the flower, which is used to produce the orange-colored spice saffron. The Sages taught: This is referring to the appearance of moist saffron that is still fresh and not to its dry counterpart.

תני חדא כתחתון לא כעליון ותניא אידך כעליון ולא כתחתון ותניא אידך כעליון וכל שכן כתחתון ותניא אידך כתחתון וכל שכן כעליון

With regard to this color, it is taught in one baraita that it is like the lower part of the crocus flower, not like its upper part; and it is taught in another baraita that it is like the upper part of the flower and not like its lower part; and it is taught in another baraita that it is like its upper part, and all the more so blood whose color is like its lower part is impure; and it is taught in yet another baraita that it is like its lower part, and all the more so blood whose color is like its upper part is impure.

אמר אביי תלתא דרי ותלתא טרפן הויין

Abaye says that these baraitot do not contradict one another, as the crocus has three layers of the brightly colored parts of the crocus flower harvested for saffron, one above the other, and in each layer there are three leaves, i.e., styles or stigmata.

נקוט דרא מציעאה וטרפא מציעתא בידך

In order to examine blood whose color is similar to saffron, you should grasp the middle leaf of the middle layer in your hand and compare it to the blood. If they are similar, the blood is impure. Consequently, the four baraitot do not contradict one another: The first two baraitot are referring to the layer of leaves that must be examined. The first baraita says that it is the lower one, as the middle layer is lower than the upper one, while the second baraita states the reverse because the middle layer is higher than the lower one. Meanwhile, the last two baraitot are dealing with the leaves within the middle layer. The baraita that states: Like its lower part, and all the more so like its upper part, means: Like the lowest of the three leaves and all the more so like the middle leaf, which is above that leaf, while the other baraita states a similar idea with regard to the upper and middle leaves. In any event, all four baraitot are referring to the part of the crocus flower that is called by the mishna its brightest part.

כי אתו לקמיה דרבי אבהו אמר להו בגושייהו שנינו

The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rabbi Abbahu for him to examine blood whose color was similar to saffron, he would say to them: We learned that the mishna is referring specifically to crocus flowers that are still in their clumps of earth in which they grew, as once they are detached from that earth their color changes.

וכמימי אדמה תנו רבנן כמימי אדמה מביא אדמה שמנה מבקעת בית כרם ומציף עליה מים דברי רבי מאיר רבי עקיבא אומר מבקעת יודפת רבי יוסי אומר מבקעת סכני רבי שמעון אומר אף מבקעת גנוסר וכיוצא בהן

§ The mishna states: And what is the color that is like water that inundates red earth that is impure? In this regard the Sages taught in a baraita: In order to examine blood that is like water that inundates red earth, one brings fertile earth from the Beit Kerem Valley and one inundates the earth with enough water until it pools on the surface; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Akiva says: One brings earth from the Yodfat Valley. Rabbi Yosei says: From the Sikhnei Valley. Rabbi Shimon says: One can even bring earth from the Genosar Valley or from similar places.

תניא אידך וכמימי אדמה מביא אדמה שמנה מבקעת בית כרם ומציף עליה מים כקליפת השום ואין שיעור למים משום דאין שיעור לעפר ואין בודקין אותן צלולין אלא עכורין צללו חוזר ועוכרן וכשהוא עוכרן אין עוכרן ביד אלא בכלי

It is taught in another baraita: And to test whether blood is like water that inundates red earth, one brings fertile earth from the Beit Kerem Valley and one inundates the earth with an amount of water that rises above the earth by the thickness of the husk of garlic. And there is no required measure for the water, because there is no required measure for the earth with which the examination must be performed; it is sufficient to use a small amount of earth with a small amount of water. And one does not examine it when the water is clear, as it does not have the color of the earth, but rather when it is muddy from the earth. And if the water became clear because the earth settled, one must muddy it again. And when one muddies it he does not muddy it by hand but rather with a vessel.

איבעיא להו אין עוכרין אותן ביד אלא בכלי דלא לרמיה בידיה ולעכרינהו אבל במנא כי עכר ליה בידיה שפיר דמי או דלמא דלא לעכרינהו בידיה אלא במנא

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Does the statement that one does not muddy it by hand but rather with a vessel mean that one should not put the dirt into his hand and muddy the water with dirt in his hand, but in a case where the earth is in a vessel, when one muddies it by mixing the earth and water with his hand one may well do so? Or perhaps the baraita means that even when the earth is in a vessel one should not muddy the water by mixing it with earth with his hand, but rather with a vessel?

תא שמע כשהוא בודקן אין בודקן אלא בכוס ועדיין תבעי לך בדיקה בכוס עכירה במאי תיקו

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a baraita: When one examines this water, he examines it only with a cup. Evidently, it is necessary to use a vessel. The Gemara rejects this proof: But you still have a dilemma. This baraita merely states that the examination must be performed while the water is in a cup, but with what is the muddying performed? Must this be done by means of a vessel alone, or may one use his hand as well? The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.

כי אתו לקמיה דרבה בר אבוה אמר להו במקומה שנינו רבי חנינא פלי קורטא דגרגשתא ובדיק ביה לייט עליה רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסי באסכרה

§ The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rabba bar Avuh to examine blood that is similar to water that inundates red earth, he would say to them: We learned that the examination must be conducted in its place, i.e., the location the earth was taken from. But if the earth was transported elsewhere, the examination is no longer effective. The Gemara further relates that Rabbi Ḥanina would break up a clump of earth and examine with it, without mixing it in water. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, would curse anyone who used this method that they should be punished with diphtheria.

רבי חנינא הוא דחכים כולי עלמא לאו חכימי הכי

Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, explained: It is only Rabbi Ḥanina who is permitted to examine the blood in this fashion, as he is wise, but everyone else is not so wise that they can successfully perform the examination without water.

אמר רבי יוחנן חכמתא דרבי חנינא גרמא לי דלא אחזי דמא מטמינא מטהר מטהרנא מטמא אמר רבי אלעזר ענוותנותא דרבי חנינא גרמא לי דחזאי דמא ומה רבי חנינא דענותן הוא מחית נפשיה לספק וחזי אנא לא אחזי

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Ḥanina’s wisdom causes me not to see blood for a halakhic examination. When I would examine blood and deem it impure, he would deem it pure, and when I would deem it pure, he would deem it impure. Conversely, Rabbi Elazar says: Rabbi Ḥanina’s humility causes me to see blood, as I reason to myself: If Rabbi Ḥanina, who is humble, places himself into a situation of uncertainty and sees various types of blood to determine their status, should I, who am not nearly as humble, not see blood for an examination?

אמר רבי זירא טבעא דבבל גרמא לי דלא חזאי דמא דאמינא בטבעא לא ידענא בדמא ידענא

Rabbi Zeira says: The complex nature of the residents of Babylonia causes me not to see blood for a halakhic examination, as I say to myself: Even matters involving the complex nature of people I do not know; can I then claim that I know about matters of blood?

למימרא דבטבעא תליא מלתא והא רבה הוא דידע בטבעא ולא ידע בדמא כל שכן קאמר ומה רבה דידע בטבעא לא חזא דמא ואנא אחזי

The Gemara asks: Is this to say that the matter of the appearance of blood is dependent on the nature of people, i.e., that it changes in accordance with their nature? But Rabba is an example of someone who knew about the complex nature of the people of Babylonia, and yet he did not know how to distinguish between different types of blood. The Gemara answers: Rabbi Zeira took this factor into account and said to himself: All the more so; if Rabba, who knew about the complex nature of these people, nevertheless would not see blood, should I, who am unknowledgeable about the nature of these people, see blood for examination?

עולא אקלע לפומבדיתא אייתו לקמיה דמא ולא חזא אמר ומה רבי אלעזר דמרא דארעא דישראל הוה כי מקלע לאתרא דרבי יהודה לא חזי דמא אנא אחזי

The Gemara relates that Ulla happened to come to Pumbedita, where they brought blood before him for an examination, but he would not see it, as he said: If Rabbi Elazar, who was the master of Eretz Yisrael in wisdom, when he would happen to come to the locale of Rabbi Yehuda, he would not see blood, shall I see blood here?

ואמאי קרו ליה מרא דארעא דישראל דההיא אתתא דאייתא דמא לקמיה דרבי אלעזר הוה יתיב רבי אמי קמיה ארחיה אמר לה האי דם חימוד הוא בתר דנפקה אטפל לה רבי אמי אמרה ליה בעלי היה בדרך וחמדתיו קרי עליה סוד ה׳ ליראיו

The Gemara asks: And why would they call Rabbi Elazar the master of Eretz Yisrael in wisdom? The Gemara explains that there was an incident involving a certain woman who brought blood before Rabbi Elazar for examination, and Rabbi Ami was sitting before him. Rabbi Ami observed that Rabbi Elazar smelled the blood and said to the woman: This is blood of desire, i.e., your desire for your husband caused you to emit this blood, and it is not the blood of menstruation. After the woman left Rabbi Elazar’s presence, Rabbi Ami caught up with her and inquired into the circumstances of her case. She said to him: My husband was absent on a journey, and I desired him. Rabbi Ami read the following verse about Rabbi Elazar: “The counsel of the Lord is with those who fear Him; and His covenant, to make them know it” (Psalms 25:14), i.e., God reveals secret matters to those who fear Him.

אפרא הורמיז אמיה דשבור מלכא שדרה דמא לקמיה דרבא הוה יתיב רב עובדיה קמיה ארחיה אמר לה האי דם חימוד הוא אמרה ליה לבריה תא חזי כמה חכימי יהודאי אמר לה דלמא כסומא בארובה

The Gemara further relates that Ifera Hurmiz, the mother of King Shapur, sent blood before Rava for examination, as she sought to convert and was practicing the halakhot of menstruation. At that time Rav Ovadya was sitting before Rava. Rav Ovadya observed that Rava smelled the blood and later said to the woman: This is blood of desire. She said to her son: Come and see how wise the Jews are, as Rava is correct. Her son said to her: Perhaps Rava was like a blind man who escapes from a chimney, i.e., it was a lucky guess.

הדר שדרה ליה שתין מיני דמא וכולהו אמרינהו ההוא בתרא דם כנים הוה ולא ידע אסתייע מילתא ושדר לה סריקותא דמקטלא כלמי אמרה יהודאי בתווני דלבא יתביתו

Ifera Hurmiz then sent Rava sixty different types of blood, some impure and others pure, and with regard to all of them Rava accurately told her their origin. The Gemara adds: That last sample of blood sent by Ifera Hurmiz was blood of lice, and Rava did not know what it was. He received support in this matter in the form of heavenly guidance, as he unwittingly sent her as a gift a comb for killing lice. She said in exclamation: Jews, you must dwell in the chamber of people’s hearts.

אמר רב יהודה מרישא הוה חזינא דמא כיון דאמרה לי אמיה דיצחק ברי האי טיפתא קמייתא לא מייתינן לה קמייהו דרבנן משום דזהימא לא חזינא

§ The Gemara cites more statements of the Sages with regard to the examination of blood. Rav Yehuda says: At first I would see blood, i.e., perform examinations of blood, but I changed my conduct when the mother of my son Yitzḥak, i.e., my wife, said to me that she acts as follows: With regard to this first drop of blood that I see, I do not bring it before the Sages, because it is not pristine blood, i.e., other substances are mixed with it. After hearing this, I decided I would no longer see blood, as it is possible that the first drop, which I do not get to see, was impure.

בין טמאה לטהורה ודאי חזינא

Rav Yehuda continues: But with regard to the examination of blood that a woman who gave birth emitted after the completion of her days of purity, i.e., at least forty days after giving birth to a male, or eighty after giving birth to a female (see Leviticus, chapter 12), in order to determine whether she is ritually impure or pure, I certainly see this blood and determine her status based on its color. This blood is clean, as the woman has been bleeding for a long period of time.

ילתא אייתא דמא לקמיה דרבה בר בר חנה וטמי לה הדר אייתא לקמיה דרב יצחק בריה דרב יהודה ודכי לה

§ The Gemara relates that Yalta, Rav Naḥman’s wife, brought blood before Rabba bar bar Ḥana, and he deemed her ritually impure. She then brought it before Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, and he deemed her pure.

והיכי עביד הכי והתניא חכם שטימא אין חברו רשאי לטהר אסר אין חבירו רשאי להתיר

The Gemara asks: But how could Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, act in this manner? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: In the case of a halakhic authority who deemed an item impure, another halakhic authority is not allowed to deem it pure; if one halakhic authority deemed a matter prohibited, another halakhic authority is not allowed to deem it permitted?

מעיקרא טמויי הוה מטמי לה כיון דאמרה ליה דכל יומא הוה מדכי לי כי האי גונא והאידנא הוא דחש בעיניה דכי לה

The Gemara explains that initially Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, deemed her impure, but he changed his mind when Yalta said to him: Every day that I bring blood of this kind of color to Rabba bar bar Ḥana he deems me pure, and specifically now he issued a different ruling, as he feels pain in his eye. Upon hearing this, Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, deemed her pure.

ומי מהימני אין והתניא נאמנת אשה לומר כזה ראיתי ואבדתיו

The Gemara asks: But are people deemed credible to present claims such as the one presented by Yalta? The Gemara answers: Yes; and likewise it is taught in a baraita: A woman is deemed credible if she says: I saw blood like this color, but I lost it before it could be examined.

איבעיא להו כזה טיהר איש פלוני חכם מהו

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If a woman states to her friend who showed her blood: My blood, which has an appearance like this, so-and-so, the halakhic authority, deemed it pure, what is the halakha? Is she deemed credible concerning its status?

תא שמע נאמנת אשה לומר כזה ראיתי ואבדתיו שאני התם דליתיה לקמה

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a resolution to this dilemma from the baraita cited above: A woman is deemed credible if she says: I saw blood like this color, but I lost it. This demonstrates that a woman may issue claims of this kind. The Gemara rejects this proof: There it is different, as in that case the blood is not before her, and therefore the Sages were lenient. But here, the woman’s friend can take her blood to a halakhic authority for examination.

תא שמע דילתא אייתא דמא לקמיה דרבה בר בר חנה וטמי לה לקמיה דרב יצחק בריה דרב יהודה ודכי לה והיכי עביד הכי והתניא חכם שטימא אין חבירו רשאי לטהר וכו׳

The Gemara further suggests: Come and hear the incident cited above, as Yalta brought blood before Rabba bar bar Ḥana, and he deemed her ritually impure; she then brought it before Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, and he deemed her pure. And the Gemara asked: How could Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, act in this manner? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: In the case of a halakhic authority who deemed an item impure, another halakhic authority is not allowed to deem it pure?

ואמרינן טמויי הוה מטמי לה כיון דאמרה ליה דכל יומא מדכי לה כי האי גונא והאידנא הוא דחש בעיניה הדר דכי לה אלמא מהימנא לה

And we say in response that initially Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, deemed her impure, but he changed his mind when she said to him that every day that she brings blood of this kind of color to Rabba bar bar Ḥana he deems her pure, and specifically now he issued a different ruling, as he feels pain in his eye. The Gemara summarizes: The conclusion of the story was that upon hearing this, Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, then deemed her pure. Evidently, when a woman issues claims with regard to blood that is presented, we deem her claims credible.

רב יצחק בר יהודה אגמריה סמך

The Gemara answers: That incident does not provide proof, as Rav Yitzḥak, son of Rav Yehuda, relied on his studies in his lenient ruling. At first, he was reluctant to issue his ruling, in deference to Rabba bar bar Ḥana, who had said the blood was impure. But when he heard Yalta’s explanation he deemed the blood pure, as he had originally thought. Therefore, there is no proof from there that a woman’s statements of this kind are accepted.

רבי ראה דם בלילה וטימא ראה ביום וטיהר המתין שעה אחת חזר וטימא אמר אוי לי שמא טעיתי

§ The Gemara further relates: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi once saw a woman’s blood at night and deemed it impure. He again saw that blood in the day, after it had dried, and deemed it pure. He waited one hour and then deemed it impure again. It is assumed that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi did not conduct another examination at this point; rather, he reasoned that the previous night’s examination had been correct, and the blood’s color should be deemed impure because of how it had looked when it was moist. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi then said: Woe is me! Perhaps I erred by declaring the blood impure, as based on its color it should be pure.

שמא טעיתי ודאי טעה דתניא לא יאמר חכם אילו היה לח היה ודאי טמא

The Gemara questions this statement: Perhaps I erred? He certainly erred, as it is taught in a baraita that a halakhic authority may not say: If the blood were moist it would certainly have been impure, and yet here, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi deemed the blood impure based on that type of reasoning.

אלא אמר אין לו לדיין אלא מה שעיניו רואות מעיקרא אחזקיה בטמא כיון דחזא לצפרא דאשתני אמר (ליה) ודאי טהור הוה ובלילה הוא דלא אתחזי שפיר כיון דחזא דהדר אשתני אמר האי טמא הוא ומפכח הוא דקא מפכח ואזיל

The Gemara explains that the incident did not unfold as initially assumed. Rather, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi examined the blood three times, as he said: A judge has only what his eyes see as the basis for his ruling. Initially, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi established the presumptive status of the blood as ritually impure, but when he saw in the morning that its color had changed, he said: It was definitely pure last night as well, and only because it was at night I thought that it was impure, because it could not be seen well. Subsequently, when he saw after a short while that its color again changed, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: This blood is impure, and it is gradually becoming lighter as its color fades.

רבי בדיק לאור הנר רבי ישמעאל ברבי יוסף בדיק ביום המעונן ביני עמודי אמר רב אמי בר שמואל וכולן אין בודקין אותן אלא בין חמה לצל רב נחמן אמר רבה בר אבוה בחמה ובצל ידו

With regard to the manner in which the Sages would examine blood, the Gemara relates that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi would examine blood by candlelight. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosef, would examine blood between the pillars of the study hall even on a cloudy day, despite the fact that it was not very light there. Rav Ami bar Shmuel says: And in all these cases, one examines blood only between sunlight and shade. Rav Naḥman says that Rabba bar Avuh says: One stands in a place lit by the sun, and he conducts the examination under the shadow of his hand, i.e., he places his hand over the blood. In this manner the color of the blood can be best discerned.

וכמזוג שני חלקים כו׳ תנא

§ The mishna states: And what is the color that is like diluted wine that is impure? It is specifically when the dilution consists of two parts water and one part wine, and specifically when it is from the wine of the Sharon region in Eretz Yisrael. The Sages taught in a baraita: