Niddah 53a (נג.) — the Talmud in English

Rabbi said: The words of Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra appear

to be correct in that she must be concerned about seeing during twilight,

when she did not examine herself.

And

the words appear

of the Sages

who were not concerned about seeing during twilight,

when she did examine herself.

And this means: The Sages and Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra in the name of Rabbi Yosei disagreed whether she had examined herself or had not examined herself, and Rabbi ruled in accordance with the Sages when she had examined herself, and in accordance with Rabbi Yosei when she had not examined herself.

The Gemara wonders: What is the nature of this examination?

What is meant by

What

“she examined herself,”

and what is meant by

“she did not examine herself”?

For if she examined her garment during twilight and found no stain, it is clear that she did not see blood at that time; so why, according to Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra in the name of Rabbi Yosei, must she be concerned that she might become a zava? [Meiri]

Rava said: I found the Sages of the house of Rav sitting and saying

in explanation of the examination:

Here, with what case are we dealing? For example, she examined

herself

herself

during twilight,

but she did not examine her garment!

And even

her

herself she did not examine

throughout the entire duration of “twilight,” which according to all opinions is included in that period,

but

only during

Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight

[which is the amount of time required to walk half a mil before the stars emerge]. However,

during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight,

which is an extremely brief period immediately before the stars emerge, like the blink of an eye,

she did not examine herself!

And the disagreement between the Sages and Rabbi Yosei follows their respective positions:

The Sages hold

that it does not matter that she did not examine herself

during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight,

which is ממש adjacent to night, because that period of time, in their view,

is night!

The entire concern applies only when one sees during twilight, lest her seeing be reckoned as occurring on two days; but here she need not be concerned, since

she examined herself during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight

and found no blood there.

But Rabbi Yosei

follows

his own reasoning, for he said that twilight

which is adjacent to night

is a matter of uncertainty, and since she did not examine herself during that period, she must be concerned that perhaps she saw then, and her seeing is therefore reckoned as having occurred on two days.

And her seeing is therefore reckoned as having occurred on two days.

And I said to them

[Rava said this to the Sages of the house of Rav, who had explained the reasoning of the Sages: She need not be concerned because she examined herself during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight].

If only

there had been

her hands before her eyes,

to pay attention to that place to see whether blood appeared, throughout

the entire twilight, you would be speaking well!

But

now

that she does not examine herself throughout the entire period, let us be concerned

that perhaps she saw blood when she withdrew her hands!?

And they said to me: When we say

that according to the Sages she need not be concerned, it is

when she placed her hands before her eyes

throughout

the entire twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda.

After explaining the disagreement between the Sages and Rabbi Yosei, the Gemara explains Rabbi’s statement:

“

Rabbi said: The words of Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra in the name of Rabbi Yosei appear to be correct, that she must be concerned about seeing during twilight,

when she did not examine herself.”

What is meant by

“she did not examine herself”?

If you say that she examined herself

only

during

twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda, but she did not examine herself during

twilight

of Rabbi Yosei,

and therefore Rabbi ruled in accordance with his words, since she did not examine herself throughout the entire twilight, including the period that according to Rabbi Yosei is twilight, and she must therefore be concerned about seeing during twilight.

This cannot be said. For

by implication, Rabbi Yehuda

ben Agra himself, who does not distinguish between examining herself and not examining herself, and who is concerned in every case,

holds

that

even though she examined herself during both

twilights [both Rabbi Yehuda’s and Rabbi Yosei’s],

she must be concerned

that perhaps she saw during twilight. And why?

She examined herself

throughout the entire twilight and found no blood there!?

Rather, it is obvious

that Rabbi did not issue his ruling in accordance with Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra in such a case, but in another case:

that she did not examine herself either during

twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda or during

twilight

of Rabbi Yosei,

and therefore Rabbi ruled here in accordance with Rabbi Yosei, that she must be concerned lest she saw during twilight.

And accordingly, since Rabbi expressed concern only where she did not examine herself at all during twilight, it follows:

But if she examined herself during

twilight

of Rabbi

Yehuda

and

did not examine herself during

twilight of Rabbi Yosei, she need not be concerned!

during

twilight of Rabbi Yosei, she need not be concerned!

Apparently, “

Rabbi Yosei’s twilight”

is, according to Rabbi, night!

Therefore Rabbi was not concerned lest she see during that period. Even if she sees then, it is only one day, unlike seeing during twilight, which is considered seeing on two days; if she sees once more, there is then a sequence of three days and she becomes a zava.

Come and hear the latter clause

of Rabbi’s statement:

“

And the words appear

of the Sages

who were not concerned about seeing during twilight,

when she examined herself!”

What is meant by

“she examined herself”?

If you say that she examined herself during

twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda, but did not examine herself during

twilight

of Rabbi Yosei,

and Rabbi ruled in accordance with the Sages because she examined herself during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight, and that is sufficient for us not to be concerned.

By implication, the Sages

themselves, who do not distinguish between examining herself and not examining herself,

hold

that

even though she did not examine herself during either period, we are not concerned!

But why?

She did not examine herself

at all during twilight, and perhaps she saw during those periods?!

Rather, it is obvious

that Rabbi’s ruling in accordance with the Sages refers to another case:

That she examined herself both during

twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda and during

twilight

of Rabbi Yosei,

and only in this case did Rabbi rule in accordance with the Sages, that we are not concerned.

But if she examined herself during

twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda but did not examine herself during

twilight

of Rabbi Yosei, we are concerned

according to Rabbi [for the Sages themselves are not concerned]!

Apparently, Rabbi Yosei’s twilight is, according to Rabbi, a matter of uncertainty! This is a difficulty from one statement of Rabbi to another!

For from the first clause we inferred that he holds that this period is certainly night and is not twilight.

Because of this difficulty, the Gemara establishes Rabbi’s words differently: he did not come to disagree, but to explain:

Rather,

this is what Rabbi said

Rabbi:

The words of Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra

in the name of Rabbi Yosei

appear to be correct according to the Sages,

that she must be concerned about seeing during twilight where

she did not examine herself at all, either during

twilight

of Rabbi Yehuda or during

twilight

of Rabbi Yosei.

For even the Sages disagreed with him only where she examined herself during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight but did not examine herself during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight.

For according to the Sages, this examination is sufficient for her not to be concerned, because in their view Rabbi Yosei’s twilight is night.

Whereas according to Rabbi Yosei, she must be concerned, as he follows his position that his twilight is still a matter of uncertainty.

But where she did not examine herself at all, the Sages agree with him

that she must be concerned!

[According to this formulation of Rabbi’s words, one cannot prove, as we had previously thought, that the Sages and Rabbi Yosei disagree in every case, whether she examined herself or did not examine herself. For now Rabbi is not ruling that when she examined herself the halakha is in accordance with the Sages and that when she did not examine herself it is in accordance with Rabbi Yosei; rather, he is explaining their words.]

And we raise a contradiction

to this, apparently, from what we learned: A woman

who sees a stain,

For a substantial sight,

of three gris or more,

must be concerned

that she may become a zava.

For a slight sight,

of less than three gris and more,

she need not be concerned!

This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra, who said it in the name of Rabbi Yosei.

Rabbi said: I heard from him,

from Rabbi Yosei,

that in both this case and that case she must be concerned.

And for this reason he said to me

Rabbi Yosei:

And if in the case of a menstruating woman who did not perform an examination to establish ritual purity

[who did not examine herself at the end of the seventh day]

from the afternoon offering onward

on the seventh day, despite the fact that she examined herself in the morning of the seventh day of her menstruation and found herself pure, will she not be presumed impure?

Will she not be presumed impure?

For she had an established presumption of seeing throughout the time of her menstruation, and she is required to separate in a state of purity only at the end of the seventh day, from the time of the afternoon offering onward. If she did not establish herself in purity at that time and did not examine herself, we are concerned that perhaps she saw at the end of the day, and that her seeing continued into the eighth day, in which case immersion on that day would not be effective for her.

The same law applies to one who sees a stain: Since we know with certainty that she saw blood, she must examine herself throughout the entire twilight. If she did not examine herself during the entire twilight period, we are concerned that perhaps she saw blood when she withdrew her hands at the end of the day, and her seeing would then be reckoned as occurring on two days.

Rabbi adds:

And

it appears

to me that his words,

of Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra, that she need not be concerned about a slight sight,

when she examined herself!

What is meant by

“she examined herself”?

If you say that she examined herself during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight but did not examine herself during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight,

and Rabbi agrees with Rabbi Yehuda in this case, that examination during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight is sufficient to remove her from concern about seeing during twilight, although he disagrees with him where she did not examine herself at all,

by implication, Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra holds

that

even though she did not examine herself either during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight or during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight, she need not be concerned! But she did not examine herself!?

Rather, it is obvious

that Rabbi’s agreement with Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra refers to a case where

she examined herself both during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight and during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight,

for according to Rabbi, it is only in this case, when she examined herself throughout the entire twilight including Rabbi Yosei’s twilight, that she need not be concerned.

By implication, Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra holds

that if she

examined herself during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight

only

and did not examine herself during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight, she need not be concerned.

Apparently, according to Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra, Rabbi Yosei’s twilight is night!

This is a difficulty from Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra to Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra!

For above we said, according to Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra, that Rabbi Yosei follows his position that his twilight is also considered a matter of uncertainty.

Granted, without

the words of

Rabbi,

who distinguishes between examining herself and not examining herself,

there is no difficulty!

For it is possible to resolve the contradiction by saying that Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra held, as we initially thought, that Rabbi Yosei’s twilight is considered a matter of uncertainty, and to establish his statements as follows:

That

there,

above, where Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra said in the name of Rabbi Yosei that she must be concerned about seeing during twilight, the case is one where

she examined herself

only

during Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight but did not examine herself during Rabbi Yosei’s twilight,

whereas

here,

where he said in the name of Rabbi Yosei that she need not be concerned about a slight sight, the case is one where

she also examined herself during both Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight and Rabbi Yosei’s twilight.

Rather, with regard to Rabbi there is a difficulty,

for it follows from his words above that, according to Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra in the name of Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Yosei’s twilight is considered a matter of uncertainty, whereas from his words here it is evident that it is considered night!

The Gemara answers:

There are two tannaim, and they differ with regard to the position of Rabbi Yehuda ben Agra!

According to both of them, Rabbi Yosei’s twilight is considered a matter of uncertainty and not night. Rather,

this tanna,

above, who expressed concern,

holds that Rabbi Yehuda’s twilight has ended,

that Rabbi Yehuda’s period of twilight does not overlap with Rabbi Yosei’s period, but ends before Rabbi Yehuda’s time ends,