Niddah 20a (כ.) — the Talmud in English

The Gemara raises an objection: An incident occurred, and Rabbi Meir suspended judgment regarding a stain

of a woman who had been occupied with kohl

And Rabbi suspended judgment regarding one who had been occupied with sycamore sap!

Since the woman had been occupied with these substances, it is evident that the reddish appearance of the kohl resembles the appearance of menstrual blood; otherwise, it would not have been possible to suspend judgment on its account. This is so even though the appearance of kohl is not intensely red. This objection is difficult according to Rav Naḥman, who required a strong red like blood drawn by bloodletting; according to Rabbi Abbahu, who distinguishes between the appearance of the blood of a bachelor and that of a married man; and according to Zeiri, who distinguishes between blood from a louse on the head and blood from a louse on the body. The appearance of kohl is weaker than all of these, and nevertheless it resembles menstrual blood?

The Gemara explains its question

: Does it not mean that the case involved a red appearance,

that she found a red stain, and Rabbi Meir deemed it permitted because she had been occupied with kohl, proving that an intense redness is not required

?

No,

the incident involved a different appearance, rather than a red one. It involved

the other bloods

listed in the Mishna, which resemble kohl, but not a red appearance. Only when its redness is intense is it menstrual blood.

Ameimar, Mar Zutra, and Rav Ashi were sitting before a bloodletter

who performed bloodletting with a horn.

They drew the first hornful from Ameimar,

the bloodletter took some of Ameimar's blood in the first horn.

They drew blood from Ameimar with the first horn,

the bloodletter taking some of Ameimar’s blood with the first horn.

He saw it,

Ameimar seeing the blood inside the horn, and

said to them,

Ameimar saying to Mar Zutra and Rav Ashi: The “red” that we learned

in the Mishna among the five impure bloods—is it like this?

They drew it

the blood in the horn

with another horn.

He said to them,

Ameimar said this when he saw the blood in the second horn:

“It has changed!”

This is not the same appearance, and a similar appearance in a woman would not render her impure.

Rav Ashi said,

when he heard Ameimar’s statement:

“In a case such as mine, when I do not know

how to distinguish

between this and that,”

between the color of the blood in the first horn and that of the blood in the second horn,

I certainly should not examine blood;

I am not fit to issue rulings regarding the appearances of blood!

We learned in the Mishna: Black—

like ink!

The Gemara brings three examples of the black appearance mentioned in the Mishna. [a]

Rabba bar Rav Huna said: The “ink” that they mentioned

is a black pigment mixed into

ink,

whose appearance is dark, rather than black pigment mixed with water, whose appearance is light.

It was taught likewise in a beraita: Black

—like ink. And the “black” that they mentioned

—ink!

That is, the blackness of the pigment dissolved in ink.

The Gemara raises a difficulty:

Let the tanna say

briefly: Black—like

ink!?

It answers:

If he had said, “

Black

—ink,”

I would have thought that

even an appearance resembling the

surface of ink,

like the appearance of the liquid ink at the top after the pigment has sunk into it, which is not entirely black, is impure.

Therefore, he teaches us

that the black blood of a woman that renders her impure is specifically when its appearance is

like the bottom of the ink,

the blackness of the pigment sunk at the bottom of the vessel, which is exceedingly black.

They raised a dilemma:

With regard to which appearance of the pigment in ink did they speak—

in

wet

ink or in dry ink?

Come and hear: Rabbi Ami

when he came to examine blood whose appearance was black,

would

break apart

a

piece of ink,

and examine with it,

by comparing the appearance of the blood with that of the dry ink.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel:

A woman who saw blood whose appearance was black

like wax,

black wax,

like ink,

and like a black grape

—

is impure! And this is what we learned:

in our Mishna, that if the black appearance was

darker than this,

more intense than ink,

she is impure.

Rabbi Elazar said: A black appearance

like an olive, like pitch,

and like a raven—

is pure! And this is what we learned: “Lighter than this

[than ink]—

is pure!” [b]

is ritually pure.” [b]

Ulla said

that the black mentioned in our Mishna means

like the clothing of Siwa,

as people in the place called Siwa customarily wear black garments.

Ulla happened to come to Pumbedita and saw an Arab wearing a garment

—

black

—

He said to them,

Ulla said to the people of Pumbedita: The appearance of blood called

“black” in the Mishna—

is like this!

The people of Pumbedita were delighted that they now had something with which to examine the appearance of black blood.

They plucked from him,

from his black garment,

a little at a time, and gave him four hundred dinars! [c]

Rabbi Yoḥanan said:

The black appearance in our Mishna is

the garments of the bath attendants,

the garments of the bath attendants

[the garments of bathhouse workers]

that come from overseas,

which are black.

The Gemara asks:

Does this indicate that the black garments

[the black ones]

are

those garments?

But Rabbi Yannai said to his sons: My sons, do not bury me in either black garments or white garments.

With

black garments,

do not bury me—

perhaps I will merit

the judgment

and be like a mourner among bridegrooms,

for the righteous in the Garden of Eden wear white garments. And in

white garments

do not bury me,

lest I not merit it and be like a bridegroom among mourners

in Gehenna. Rather, bury me

in the garments of the bath attendants that come from overseas!

Apparently,

the garments of the bath attendants

are not black!

The Gemara answers:

This is not difficult: This refers to the robes,

for the bath attendants’ robes are red rather than black, and Rabbi Yannai wished to be buried in them.

This refers to the cloths,

for the bath attendants’ towels and sheets are black. Rabbi Yoḥanan was referring to these black garments.

Rav Yehuda said in the name of Shmuel: And all of them,

all five bloods,

may be examined only on

a white cloth,

on which the appearance can be clearly discerned.

Rav Yitzḥak bar Avdumi said: The examination of

blood whose appearance is

black,

if it resembles ink, must be carried out

on

a

red garment.

Rav Yirmeya of Difti said: They do not disagree—

This

statement, that the examination must be performed on a red garment, concerns examination of an appearance that is

black. This

statement, that the examination is performed on a white cloth, concerns

the other

bloods!

Rav Ashi raised an objection to Rav Yirmeya of Difti: If so,

given that Shmuel agrees that a black appearance is examined on a red garment,

let Shmuel say, “Except for black”!

Rather, Rav Ashi said: They disagree regarding black itself,

Shmuel and Rav Yitzḥak bar Avdumi.

We learned in the Mishna that with regard to a black appearance, “Darker than this is impure; lighter than this is pure.” The Gemara presents four approaches concerning the status of the other appearances when they are darker or lighter than the appearances specified in the Mishna. [a]

Ulla said: All of them,

with regard to all the bloods, if the red appearance was

darker than this,

its redness being more intense than that stated in the Mishna,

it is impure!

And if it was

lighter than this,

if the red appearance is lighter than that stated in the Mishna, it is

pure!

The law of all four bloods is

like that of black, whose law is explained in the Mishna: if it is darker than the specified appearance, it is impure, and if it is lighter, it is pure. The Gemara explains: But then, why did the tanna mention “black” in the Mishna alone? It might have entered your mind to say: Since Rabbi Ḥanina said, “Black —it is red that has been stricken,” therefore, even if it is lighter than this, it should also render her impure.

ritually pure!

The law of all four blood colors is

like that of black,

whose law is explained in the Mishna: if it is deeper than the specified color, it is impure, and if it is paler, it is pure.

Since it is red and its blackness results only from a change, one might have thought that even when the black appearance is lighter it is impure, and that the law of a black appearance differs from that of the other red bloods.

He therefore teaches us

that the tanna explicitly stated in the Mishna that a lighter black appearance is pure, to teach us that black too is included in this rule. The reason that light black is pure is that red blood that becomes black through being stricken does not ordinarily become pale. If, nevertheless, the black appearance is pale, this indicates that the redness in it is deficient. [b]

Rabbi Ami bar Abba said: With regard to all of them, if darker than this,

it is impure; if lighter than this,

it is also impure, except for black,

which, if lighter than this, is pure.

The Gemara asks:

If so, what purpose is served by the measures established by the Sages,

who specified in the Mishna which red appearances are impure? In every case, whether the appearances are lighter or darker, they are also impure.

It answers:

To exclude “lighter than lighter,”

a color that is exceptionally pale. [c]

And some say: Rami bar Abba said: With regard to all of them, if darker than this

—

it is pure; if lighter than this

—

it is pure, except for black,

whose law is explained in the Mishna: if darker than it, it is impure, and if lighter, it is pure.

And for this reason the measures established by the Sages are useful,

for the bloods are impure specifically when they match the degree of redness specified in the Mishna, but not when they are lighter or even darker than it.

And some say: Rami bar Abba said: All of them, if deeper than this—

are pure; if paler than this—

are pure, except for black,

whose law is explained in the Mishna: if it is deeper than the specified color, it is impure, while if it is paler, it is pure.

And this is the purpose served by the measurements established by the Sages:

only blood matching the degree of redness specified in the Mishna is impure, but not blood paler than this, and not even blood deeper than this.

4.

Bar Kappara said: And with all of them, the darker than this—

is impure; the paler than this is pure, except for diluted wine, for which the darker than this is pure, and the paler than this is pure.

The Gemara brings an incident:

They presented it to Bar Kappara as pale,

they brought before him a bloodlike appearance resembling diluted wine that was pale—

and he declared it pure [and purified it]; and likewise,

[they declared it pure], and likewise

they presented it to him as darker,

a bloodlike appearance resembling diluted wine that was darker than the shade mentioned in the Mishna was brought before him,

and he declared it pure [he purified that one as well].

[he declared that one pure as well].

Rabbi Hanina said: How extraordinary is the man, whose heart

can distinguish between the appearances of blood—

in accordance with his teaching!

[according to the laws he teaches].

We learned in the Mishna:

And like the horn of saffron crocus.

The tanna taught:

like the appearance of a saffron-crocus horn,

moist and not dry.

The Gemara brings four beraitot concerning the color of saffron crocus and then explains that they do not disagree with one another:

A.

One beraita taught—

like the lower one but not like the upper one.

B.

And another beraita taught—

like the upper one but not like the lower one.

C.

And another beraita taught—

like the upper one, and all the more so like the lower one!

D.

And another beraita taught—

like the lower one, and all the more so like the upper one!

Abaye said: There are three tiers

of leaves, one above the other, in a saffron-crocus horn,

and there are three leaves in each tier

[with three leaves in each row, one above the other].

And if you come to examine a blood appearance corresponding to a saffron-crocus horn,

take the middle tier,

examine it according to the leaves in the middle row alone,

and the middle leaf is in your hand!

Among the three leaves in the middle tier, the finest is the middle leaf. However, examining this particular leaf is not indispensable; rather, all three middle leaves are valid for examination.

Accordingly, this is how the beraitot are to be explained:

A. Like the lower one but not like the upper one—like the middle tier, but not like the upper tier above it.

B. Like the upper one but not like the lower one—like the middle tier, but not like the lower tier beneath it.

C. Like the upper one and all the more so like the lower one — like the upper leaf in the middle tier, and all the more so like the middle leaf beneath it.

D. Like the lower one and all the more so like the upper one—like the lower leaf in the middle tier, and all the more so like the middle leaf above it.

When they came before Rabbi Abbahu

to examine it against a saffron-crocus horn,

he said—

They taught it with their clump!

When they are attached to the earth beneath them, and not when they have been detached from it , for then their color changes.

We learned in the Mishna:

And like water of earth.

The Sages taught: “Like water of earth”—

he brings rich soil from the Beit Kerem valley and floods it with water; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

Rabbi Akiva says:

he brings soil

from the Yodfat valley.

Rabbi Yosei says: From the Sakhnin valley.

Rabbi Shimon says: Even from the Ginnosar valley, and the like

of them.

Another beraita taught: “And like water of earth”—

he brings rich soil from the Beit Kerem valley and floods it with water to the depth of a garlic peel.

There is no measure for the water, because there is no measure for the soil,

that is, he brings enough water to cover the amount of soil before him to the depth of a garlic peel.

One does not examine it

when the water is

clear, but

when it is

cloudy,

so that the soil is mixed with the water and its appearance is discernible.

If it becomes clear,

the water [has become clear],

he clouds it again; and when he clouds it, he does not cloud it by hand, but with a vessel!

They raised a dilemma before them:

What is the meaning of the final ruling in the beraita,

“One does not cloud it by hand, but with a vessel”?

Is the meaning—

that he should not cast

soil

by hand and cloud it,

that is, he should not fill his hands with soil and mix the soil with the water while it is still in his hands, and then place it in a vessel,

but in a vessel,

if the soil is already in the vessel with the water,

if he clouds it by hand, it is acceptable,

since when his hand merely mixes the soil lying in the vessel, it does not cause a change in the appearance?

Or perhaps

the meaning is—

that he should not cloud it by hand

at all,

but in a vessel ,

the mixing must also be done there, by taking another vessel and mixing it in that vessel.

Come and hear: When he examines them

for the water of earth,

he examines them only in a cup,

and not by holding soil mixed with water in his hand and examining it. It follows that he should place the soil in a vessel with the water and mix it there, rather than hold it in his hand.

Still, you may ask,

for indeed the

examination

itself must be performed when the soil is

in a cup,

and not when it is in his hand, but

with regard to the clouding itself, you still have to ask what

the requirement is: Must it specifically be done in a vessel, or may it also be done by hand?

And we conclude:

Teyku!

When they came before Rabba bar Avuha

to examine it with the water of earth,

he said to them,

to those who brought the soil: “The water of earth—

we learned it in its place!”

The examination is effective only if it is performed in the place from which the soil was taken; but if the soil is transported elsewhere, its appearance changes, and it cannot be used as the basis for examination.

Rabbi Hanina split

off

a clod of earth and examined with it. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, cursed him,

that whoever performs such an examination should receive the punishment of

askara.