Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Niddah

Folio 8a

R. Eleazar⁴⁷  also⁴⁸  stated, 'The halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer in four things'. But are there no more of such rulings?⁴⁹  Have we not in fact learnt, 'R. Eliezer ruled, The minor is to be instructed to exercise her right of mi'un against him'⁵⁰  and R. Eleazar stated, 'The halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer'?⁵¹  And were you to reply that when R. Eleazar stated, 'The halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer in four things' he referred to the rulings in the Order of Toharoth, but that in the other Orders there are many more such rulings⁴⁹  [it could be retorted:] But are there any such? Have we not in fact learnt, 'The rose, henna,⁵²  lotus⁵³  and balsam as well as their proceeds are subject to the laws of the Sabbatical year⁵⁴  and they and their proceeds are also subject to the law of removal,'⁵⁵  in connection with which R. Pedath⁵⁶  is observed, 'Who taught⁵⁷  that balsam is a fruit?⁵⁸  R. Eliezer'; and R. Zera replied, 'I see that between⁵⁹  you and your father you will cause balsam to be permitted to the world,⁶⁰  since you said, "Who taught that balsam is a fruit? R. Eliezer" and your father said, "The halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer in four things".'⁶¹  Now, if it were so,⁶²  why did he⁶³  not reply to him,⁶⁴  'When my father said, "The halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer in four things" he referred only to rulings in the Order of Toharoth but in other Orders there are many more'?⁶⁵  — But then,⁶⁶  does not the previous difficulty⁶⁷  arise? — [In the case of mi'un⁶⁸  the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer] because R. Eleazar [b. Shammua'] takes up the same standpoint as he; for we have learnt: R. Eleazar ruled, The minor is to be instructed to exercise her right of mi'un against him.⁶⁹  But does he⁷⁰  take up the same standpoint? Have we not in fact shown that both⁷¹  were required because they are not like one another?⁷²  — Rather say: Because R. Judah b. Baba takes up the same standpoint as he.⁷⁰  But are there no more such rulings?⁷³

Have we not in fact learnt: 'R. Akiba ruled, One says it⁷⁴  as an independent benediction;⁷⁵  R. Eliezer ruled, One includes it in the benediction of thanksgiving';⁷⁶  and in connection with this R. Eleazar⁷⁷  stated,⁷⁸  'The halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer'? — R. Abba replied: [The halachah agrees with him] in that case because he [may have] said it in the name of R. Hanina b. Gamaliel, for it was taught: R. Akiba ruled, One says it⁷⁹  as an independent benediction;⁷⁵  R. Hanina b. Gamaliel ruled, One includes it in the benediction of thanksgiving.

1. Who was fatherless and was given in marriage by her mother or brothers (so that her marriage is only Rabbinically valid) and who had a sister that was of age and was married to the minor's husband's brother who died without issue. In accordance with the laws of the levirate marriage the surviving brother must marry the widow, but such marriage cannot take place in this case on account of the prohibition to marry a wife's sister. The minor, furthermore, is now forbidden to live with her husband (whose marriage with her is only Rabbinically valid) on account of the levirate bond between him and her sister (which is Pentateuchal). Rashi speaks here of two 'orphan' sisters, but the Mishnah in Yeb, speaks of 'deaf' sisters.
2. In order to avoid (cf. prev. n.) the difficulties mentioned.
3. Her husband. In virtue of mi'un (v. Glos.) she annuls her marriage and sets her husband free to perform the Pentateuchal law of the levirate marriage. Yeb. 109a.
4. Yeb. 110a.
5. The sixth, and last order of the Talmud in which the tractate of Niddah is included.
6. That Samuel referred to the Order of Toharoth alone.
7. That were made of quantities of dough each of which was never greater than five kab. Only when dough is no less than five kab in bulk is it subject to the dough-offering.
8. And in their total they amounted to no less than five kab.
9. Hal. II, 4.
10. Which shows that outside the Order of Toharoth there are other rulings concerning which the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer.
11. Hal. II, 4.
12. In support of the explanation given (cf. n. 10).
13. The ruling cited from Yeb. Lit., 'and what is the strength of that from that?'
14. R. Eliezer.
15. In certain cases enumerated in Yeb. 111a.
16. Yeb. 111a, a ruling that is analogous to that of R. Eliezer in Yeb. 109a, and it might have been assumed that only in this case, since R. Eliezer is supported by the authority of R. Eleazar, is the halachah in agreement with the former but not in other cases where he has no such support; hence the citation from Hal, where the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer even though his ruling has his own authority alone.
17. R. Eleazar.
18. As R. Eliezer.
19. Yeb. 111b.
20. Statements of Samuel, that the halachah is in agreement with (a) R. Eliezer and (b) R. Eleazar.
21. How then could it be suggested here that R. Eleazar's ruling provides support for that of R. Eliezer?
22. R. Eliezer.
23. So MS.M. Cur. edd. 'it was taught'.
24. Cf. notes on the similar ruling of R. Eliezer (cited from Yeb. 109a supra).
25. Whose husband left for a country overseas.
26. Who testifies that her husband was dead.
27. In accordance with Ex. XXI, 28 (as expounded in B.K. 54b), though the text speaks only of an ox.
28. It pecked out the brain of a child.
29. Lit., 'and about'.
30. One that is less than forty days old is invalid as 'wine from the vat', which is too new (cf. B.B. 97a, Sonc. ed. p. 405).
31. On one occasion, during the Syrian Greek siege of Jerusalem, when no sacrifice could be secured.
32. 'Ed. VI, 1.
33. Sc. the use of the plural form.
34. Lit., 'what minors? Not?' etc.
35. The answer being presumably in the affirmative it follows that R. Eliezer's ruling is supported by the authority of R. Judah b. Baba.
36. Lit., 'what'.
37. Of the class spoken of by R. Eleazar.
38. Excluding the one spoken of by R. Eliezer who, consequently, stands unsupported.
39. That the plural form in this context is used to indicate the class.
40. 'That a woman is allowed etc.'
41. Lit., 'and let us say'.
42. Obviously it should.
43. Lit., 'since here' (cf. supra p. 47, n. 25).
44. In the sing., though the whole class is included.
45. In the plural.
46. Lit., 'he learns exactly', sc. that 'minors' in the plural refers to the two classes of minor, the one dealt with by R. Eleazar and the one spoken of by R. Eliezer.
47. I.e., R. Eleazar b. Pedath who was an Amora. R. Eleazar who laid down the rule of mi'un is a Tanna and was b. Shammua'.
48. Like Rab Judah who cited Samuel supra 7b.
49. In regard to which the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer.
50. Supra q.v. notes.
51. Yeb. 110a.
52. Or 'cyprus flower'.
53. Or 'gum-mastich'.
54. Shebi. VII, 6: sc. during that year they must be treated as hefker (v. Glos.) and no trade may be carried on with them.
55. Sc., as soon as none of these products respectively remained in the field the owner must remove from his house all that he had previously gathered in. The last quoted part, 'and they … removal' is wanting in the Mishnah.
56. The son of R. Eleazar b. Pedath.
57. In the Mishnah cited from Sheb.
58. Were it no fruit it would not have been subject to the laws of the Sabbatical Year.
59. Lit., 'from'.
60. During the Sabbatical Year, i.e., to be exempt from its restrictions.
61. But no more. R. Eliezer's restrictive law concerning balsam, since it is not included in the four, must consequently be against the halachah and must, therefore, be disregarded.
62. That outside the Order of Toharoth there are other rulings of R. Eliezer in agreement with the halachah.
63. R. Pedath.
64. R. Zera.
65. And R. Zera's objection would thus have been met. Since R. Pedath, however, gave no such reply it follows that R. Eleazar's statement that 'the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer in four things' applies to all the Orders of the Talmud.
66. Cf. prev. n.
67. How is it that in the case of mi'un (which is not included in the four) the halachah is also in agreement with R. Eliezer?
68. Though it is not one of the four (cf. prev. n.).
69. Supra q.v. notes.
70. R. Eleazar [b. Shammua'].
71. The rulings of R. Eliezer and R. Eleazar respectively.
72. Supra q.v. notes.
73. Concerning which the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer.
74. The benediction of habdalah in the evening service at the conclusion of the Sabbath (cf. P.B., p. 46).
75. Sc. it is not to be included in any of the statutory benedictions.
76. Ber. 29a, 33a. Cf. P.B., p. 51.
77. b. Pedath (cf. supra).
78. M. J. Ber. (Tosaf).
79. The benediction of habdalah in the evening service at the conclusion of the Sabbath (cf. P.B., p. 46).

Said R. Jeremiah to R. Zera:¹⁶  But do you not yourself hold that he who taught that balsam was a fruit is R. Eliezer, seeing that we have learnt: R. Eliezer ruled, Milk curdled with the sap of 'orlah is forbidden?¹⁷  — This¹⁸  might be said to agree even with the view of the Rabbis, since they differed from R. Eliezer only in respect of the sap of the tree but in the case of the sap of the fruit they agree with him, for we have learnt: R. Joshua stated, I have explicitly heard that milk curdled with the sap of the leaves or with the sap of the roots is permitted, but if it was curdled with the sap of unripe figs it is forbidden because the latter is regarded as a proper fruit.¹⁹  And if you prefer I might reply: The Rabbis differ from R. Eliezer only in respect of a fruit producing tree but in the case of a tree that does not produce fruit they agree that its sap is regarded as its fruit, for we have learnt: R. Simeon ruled, Balsam is not subject to the laws of the Sabbatical Year²⁰  and the Sages ruled, Balsam is subject to the laws of the Sabbatical Year because the sap of the tree is regarded as its fruit.²¹  Now who are the Sages? Are they not in fact the Rabbis who differ²²  from R. Eliezer?²³  — Thus, a certain elder replied to him, said R. Johanan, 'Who are the "Sages"? R. Eliezer who ruled that its balsam is its fruit'. But if by the 'Sages' R. Eliezer was meant what was the point in speaking of a tree that does not produce fruit seeing that even where a tree produces fruit its sap is regarded as its fruit? — He²⁴  spoke to them²⁵  according to the view of the Rabbis. 'According to my view' [he said in effect,] 'even in the case of a fruit producing tree its sap is regarded as its fruit, but according to your view²⁶  agree with me at least in this case of a tree that produces no fruit that its sap is its fruit. But the Rabbis told him: No difference is made.²⁷

WHO IS REGARDED AS A 'VIRGIN'? ANY WOMAN WHO HAS NOT YET OBSERVED etc. Our Rabbis taught: [If a virgin] married and observed a discharge of blood that was due to the marriage, or if when she bore a child she observed a discharge of blood that was due to the birth, she is still called a 'virgin', because the virgin of whom the Rabbis spoke is one that is a virgin as regards menstrual blood but not one who is so in regard to the blood of virginity.²⁸  Can this, however, be correct?²⁹  Has not R. Kahana in fact stated, 'A Tanna taught: There are three kinds of virgin, the human virgin, the soil virgin and the sycamore virgin. The "human virgin" is one that never³⁰  had any sexual intercourse, the practical issue³¹  being her eligibility to marry a High Priest³²  or else her claim to a kethubah of two hundred zuz;³³  the "virgin soil" is one that had never³⁰  been cultivated, the practical issue³¹  being its designation as "a rough valley"34 or else its legal status as regards purchase and sale;³⁵  the "virgin sycamore" is one that has never³⁶  been cut,³⁷  the practical issue³⁸  being its legal status as regards purchase and sale³⁹  or else the permissibility to cut it³⁷  in the Sabbatical Year, as we have learnt: A virgin sycamore may not be cut in the Sabbatical Year because such cutting is regarded as cultivation'.⁴⁰  Now if this⁴¹  were correct why did he⁴²  not mention this one also? — R. Nahman b. Isaac replied: He only mentioned such as has no special⁴³  name⁴⁴  but one which bears a special⁴³  name⁴⁵  he does not mention. R. Shesheth son of R. Idi replied: He⁴⁶  only mentioned those, the loss of whose virginity⁴⁷  is dependent on an act⁴⁸  but one the loss of whose virginity⁴⁷  is not dependent on an act⁴⁹  he does not mention. R. Hanina son of R. Ika replied: He⁴⁶  only mentioned those⁴⁷  which do not change⁵⁰  into their original condition⁵¹  but one which does change to its original condition⁵²  he does not mention. Rabina replied: He⁵³  only mentioned that to which a purchaser is likely to object⁵⁴  but that to which a purchaser is not likely to object⁵⁵  he does not mention. But do not people object?⁵⁶  Was it not in fact taught, 'R. Hiyya stated: As leaven is wholesome for the dough so is menstrual blood wholesome for a woman'⁵⁷  and it was also taught in the name of R. Meir, 'Every woman who has an abundance of menstrual blood has many children'?⁵⁷  — Rather say: He⁵³  only mentioned that which a purchaser is anxious to acquire⁵⁸  but that⁵⁹  which a purchaser is not anxious to acquire⁶⁰  he does not mention.

Our Rabbis taught: What is meant by a virgin soil? One which⁶¹  turns up clods⁶²  and whose earth is not loose. If⁶¹  a potsherd is found in it, it may be known that it had once been cultivated;⁶³  if flint, it is undoubtedly⁶⁴  virgin soil.

'A WOMAN IN PREGNANCY'? ONE WHOSE EMBRYO 'CAN BE DISCERNED. At what stage⁶⁵  is the embryo discernible? — Symmachus citing R. Meir replied: Three months after conception. And though there is no actual proof for this statement there is an allusion⁶⁶  to it, for it is said in Scripture, And it came to pass about three months after⁶⁷  etc. 'An allusion to it' [you say], is not this a text of Scripture and a most reliable⁶⁸  proof? — [It can only be regarded as an allusion] because some women⁶⁹  give birth after nine months and others after seven months.⁷⁰

Our Rabbis taught: If a woman was⁷¹  in a condition of presumptive pregnancy and after observing a discharge of blood she miscarried an inflated object⁷²  or any other object which had no vitality⁷³  she⁷⁴  is still deemed to be⁷⁵  in the condition of her presumptive pregnancy and it suffices for her to reckon her period of menstrual uncleanness from the time of her observation of the discharge.⁷⁶  And though there is no actual proof for this ruling⁷⁷  there is an allusion⁷⁸  to it, for it is said in Scripture, We have been with child, we have been in pain, we have as it were brought forth wind.⁷⁹  But why only 'an allusion to it' seeing that the text provides actual⁸⁰  proof? — That text was in fact written about males.⁸¹

I would, however, point out an incongruity: If a woman was in hard labour⁸²  for two days⁸³  and on the third day⁸⁴  she miscarried an inflated object or any thing that had no vitality, she⁸⁵  is regarded as bearing in the condition of a zabah.⁸⁶  Now if you maintain that such miscarriage is a proper birth

1. R. Eliezer, a contemporary and brother-in-law of R. Gamaliel the son of Simeon who was one of the 'Ten Royal Martyrs' (Rashi).
2. Hanina, who was a son of R. Gamaliel of Jamnia (v. Tosaf.). Now is it likely that an older scholar would quote a tradition on the authority of a younger one?
3. In explanation why the halachah is in agreement with R. Eliezer in this particular case.
4. At a later date. Lit., 'stands'.
5. R. Hanina.
6. The 'Day' extending over a night and the following day.
7. Musaf, which on Sabbaths and festivals is recited after the morning service.
8. Ne'ilah, the last prayer before sunset on the Day of Atonement.
9. That follows the solemn day.
10. I.e., instead of all the 'eighteen (now nineteen) benedictions' that are to be recited at ordinary weekday services (cf. P.B., p. 44ff) one recites on this occasion only the first three and the last three benedictions, and inserts between a shortened prayer embracing the salient features of the intermediate ones (cf. P.B., p. 55).
11. Even on the evening mentioned.
12. The prayer added to the service at the conclusion of Sabbaths and festival days (cf. P.B., p. 46).
13. Yoma 87b, Pes. 3a. Cf. P.B., l.e. In the shortened prayer, where this benediction is reduced to a few words, this cannot be done. Now, since R. Hanina here states that habdalah is to be included in the benediction 'who favourest etc.' how could it be said supra that he adopts the same line as R. Eliezer who requires it to be included in the benediction of thanksgiving?
14. The last quoted ruling.
15. Who is in agreement with R. Eliezer.
16. Who objected (supra 8a) to R. Pedath's assertion as to the authorship of the ruling on balsam.
17. 'Orlah I, 7; because the sap is considered a fruit to which the prohibitions of 'orlah apply. Balsam also being a sap, must not the ruling that balsam is a fruit obviously be that of R. Eliezer?
18. The ruling just cited.
19. 'Orlah I, 7.
20. 'Because it is not regarded as a fruit', Sheb. VII, 6.
21. This quotation does not actually occur in the Mishnah cited (cf. prev. n.) but is implied from the ruling of the first Tanna ibid.
22. In the case of other trees.
23. Presumably they are. Thus it follows, as R. Zera submitted, that in the case of balsam the Rabbis are of the same opinion as R. Eliezer and that there is no need, therefore, to attribute to him the ruling which is in agreement with the halachah.
24. R. Eliezer.
25. Those who differed from him.
26. Which does not regard the sap of a fruit bearing tree as fruit.
27. Between the two kinds of tree. In neither case can sap be regarded as fruit.
28. Or birth.
29. Lit., 'I am not'.
30. Lit., 'all the time that she (had) not'.
31. Between being regarded as a virgin or not.
32. Cf. Lev. XXI, 13.
33. Only a virgin is entitled to that sum. One who is no virgin is entitled to one hundred zuz only.
34. Deut. XXI, 4, in the case where a murdered man was found in a field and his murderers cannot be discovered when a heifer is brought into a rough valley and a prescribed ceremonial is performed (v. ibid. 1ff).
35. If a plot of land has been sold or bought as 'virgin soil' it must be one that has never before been cultivated.
36. Lit., 'all the time that she (had) not'.
37. Since the cutting causes new growth.
38. Between being regarded as a virgin or not.
39. Cf. supra n. 10 mut. mut.
40. Which is forbidden (cf. Lev. XXV, 4); Sheb. IV, 5.
41. That there is also a virginity as regards menstrual blood.
42. R. Kahana who only spoke of three kinds of virgin.
43. Lit., 'attached', 'accompanying'.
44. 'Virgin' alone being sufficient.
45. Such as the 'virgin in respect of menstrual blood' whom 'virgin' alone would not sufficiently describe.
46. R. Kahana who only spoke of three kinds.
47. Lit., 'a thing that'.
48. Such as intercourse, cultivation or cutting.
49. As is the case with a discharge of menstrual blood which is a natural and involuntary process.
50. After intercourse, cultivation and cutting respectively.
51. Lit., 'to its creation', neither the woman nor the soil nor the sycamore can (cf. prev. n.) change into her or its original condition.
52. A woman in old age loses her flow and changes, in this respect, into a condition similar to her original virginity.
53. R. Kahana who only spoke of three kinds.
54. No one who could help it would be likely to marry a non-virgin or to buy land that was already exploited or a sycamore that was cut.
55. One who marries a virgin does not care whether or not she ever had her menstrual flow.
56. Cf. prev. n.
57. Keth. 10b.
58. Lit., 'that … jumps on it', people are anxious to marry a virgin, to buy a plot of land that was never before exploited and a sycamore that was never before cut.
59. A virgin who has no menstrual flow.
60. For the reasons indicated by R. Hiyya and R. Meir supra.
61. On being broken up.
62. That need crushing.
63. How else could the potsherd have found its way into it?
64. Lit., 'behold this'.
65. Lit., 'and how much'.
66. Lit., 'remembrance'.
67. That it was told … she is with child, Gen, XXXVIII, 24.
68. Lit., 'great'.
69. Lit., 'there is'.
70. And it might have been assumed that the three months of the text (representing a third of nine) applied to the former only while in the case of the latter the stage of recognition begins after 7/3 = 2 1/3, months.
71. Lit., 'behold she was'.
72. Lit., 'wind'.
73. Lit., 'existence'.
74. Despite the fact that her pregnancy, as is now evident, was not natural.
75. As regards retrospective uncleanness.
76. Not twenty-four hours retrospectively as is the case with one who is not pregnant.
77. That an inflated object (cf. supra n. 12) is regarded as a viable embryo in respect of pregnancy.
78. Lit., 'remembrance',
79. Emphasis on the last word. Isa. XXVI, 18. Tosef. Nid. I.
80. Lit., 'great'.
81. In whose case conception and birth are mere metaphorical expressions.
82. Accompanied by a flow of blood.
83. During the eleven days in which she is susceptible to the uncleanness of a zabah (v. foll. nn.).
84. After a further discharge of blood, so that (cf. prev. n. but one) her bleeding and pain extended over three consecutive days.
85. Since there was no proper birth though she had no relief from her pain between the time of the discharge and the miscarriage.
86. V. Glos. Sc. she must count seven days and bring the sacrifice prescribed for a zabah before she can attain cleanness.