Niddah 61a (סא.) — the Talmud in English

“Were not fit to see -

they are seen

as though they were fit to see,”

and since blood emerged from between them, it is certain that one of them saw blood contrary to the natural course of the cessation of bleeding; therefore, both are impure due to uncertainty.

Mishna:

If three women were sleeping in one bed, and blood was found beneath

the

middle

woman, all of them are impure,

as we are concerned that they may have moved in their sleep , and the other women consequently came to occupy the place where the middle woman had been lying.

Beneath

the

inner

woman, who was sleeping close to the wall -

the two inner women are impure, and the outer woman is pure,

as we are not concerned that they moved so far that the outer woman reached the place of the inner woman .

Beneath the outer woman -

the two outer women are impure, and the inner woman is pure.

When

did they say that if blood was found beneath the outer woman, the inner woman is pure? -

When they entered

the bed

through the foot of the bed.

But if they passed over it,

meaning that they all passed along the outer side of the bed -

all of them are impure,

because perhaps blood fell from one of them as they passed there while entering.

If one of them examined herself and was found pure -

she is pure, and the other two are impure 44 .

If two of them examined themselves and were found pure -

they are pure, and the third is impure.

If all three examined themselves and were found pure -

all of them are impure,

since one of them necessarily erred in her examination, but it is not known which one.

To what can this be compared? -

To an impure heap

containing an olive-bulk of a corpse

that became mixed with two pure heaps, and one of them was examined and found pure -

it is pure, and the other two are impure.

If two were examined and found pure -

they are pure, and the third is impure.

If all three were examined and found pure -

all of them are impure; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir.

For Rabbi Meir says: Anything presumed impure -

remains in its state of impurity forever, until it becomes known to you where the impurity is.

But the Sages say: One examines until he reaches bedrock or

the

virgin

ground, which has never been plowed; and if he does not find it, we declare them all pure, even though it is certain to us that the impurity was in one of the heaps.

Gemara:

The Gemara asks:

What is different

above, in the

first clause

[of the previous Mishna] -

that it does not distinguish

where the blood was found, whether beneath the inner or the outer woman,

and what is different in the latter clause, that it does distinguish?

It answers:

Rabbi Ami said:

The previous Mishna speaks of a case in which they were

in

a position in which they were

interlocked

with one another. Since they were extremely close to one another, we are concerned even that the outer woman may have moved to the place of the inner woman .

We learned in the Mishna:

“If one of them examined herself

etc.”,

“To what can this be compared? To an impure heap that became mixed with two pure heaps.”

The Gemara asks:

Why does it need to teach “

To what can this be compared,”

when the ruling of the Mishna is obvious and there is no need to explain it by means of an analogy?

The Gemara answers:

This is what Rabbi Meir said to the Rabbis: What is different with regard to blood, that you do not distinguish,

since you agree with me that if blood was found and all three examined themselves and were found pure, one must say that one of them necessarily erred in her examination, and all three are rendered impure due to uncertainty,

and what is different with regard to a heap, that you do distinguish

from me and declare all the heaps pure even when all three were examined and found pure?

And the Rabbis

answered:

Granted, there

with regard to the three heaps -

perhaps a raven took it,

and therefore it was not found in any of the heaps; there is no necessity to say that there was an error in the examinations.

But here -

this blood,

which was found in the bed,

from where did it come?

It certainly came from one of these women, and since one of them necessarily erred in her examination, all three are rendered impure.

Rabbi Meir brings proof for his position, that one must be concerned about an error in an examination:

It was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Meir said: There was an incident involving a sycamore tree in Kefar Sava, which was presumed to contain impurity, and they examined it but did not find

the impurity.

After some time, the wind blew against it, uprooted it, and a corpse’s skull was found stuck at its base

of the tree.

They said to him,

the Rabbis:

Is this proof?

Perhaps they did not examine it adequately,

but where we know that they examined it properly, it is not reasonable to say that they erred in the examination.

The Gemara brings an additional proof that errors occur in examinations:

It was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Yosei said: There was an incident involving a cave in Sikhin, which was presumed to contain impurity, and they examined it until they reached ground that was smooth as a fingernail,

which had never been sown,

but they did not find anything.

After some time, workers entered it because of the rain. They struck the ground with their axes and found a mortar full of bones 46 .

They said to him: Is this proof?

Perhaps they did not examine it adequately.

It was taught in a beraita: Abba Shaul says: There was an incident involving the rock of Beit Ḥoron, which was presumed to contain impurity, and the Sages were unable to examine it because it was extensive.

And there was an elder there, whose name was Rabbi Yehoshua ben Ḥananya. He said to them: Bring me sheets!

They brought him sheets, and soaked them in water, and spread them over it.

A pure place,

whose ground was solid, remained

dry,

whereas

an impure place,

whose soil was soft because it had been dug up, became

damp ,

because the damp soil absorbed the water from the sheets.

They examined

beneath the damp place,

and found a large pit full of bones. It was taught: This was the pit into which Ishmael ben Netaniah filled the slain. As it is written: “And the pit into which Ishmael cast all the corpses of the men whom he struck by the hand of Gedaliah.”

The Gemara asks:

But did Gedaliah kill them? Ishmael killed them! 48 .

It answers:

Rather, since he was supposed

to Gedaliah

to heed the counsel of Johanan son of Kareah,

who informed him that he had heard that Ishmael son of Netaniah had come to kill him ,

but he did not heed it -

Scripture considers it as though he had killed them.

Rava said: With regard to this evil report, although it is not necessary to accept it -

one must be concerned about it

50 . There were certain Galileans about whom a rumor circulated that they had committed murder.

They came before Rabbi Tarfon.

They said to him: Let our master hide us,

for we did not kill anyone; this is merely a false accusation.

He said to them: What shall we do?

If I do not hide you -

the authorities will see you

and kill you.

If I hide you -

the Rabbis have said: With regard to this evil report, although it is not necessary to accept it -

one must be concerned about it 51 .

Rather,

“Go and hide yourselves.” “Og, king of Bashan, went out toward them, he and all his people, to battle at Edrei,

and

the Lord said to Moses: ‘Do not fear him.’” 52 .

The Gemara discusses this verse: Now, Sihon and Og were brothers,

as the Master said: Sihon and Og -

were the sons of Ahiyah bar Shemḥazai

[one of the angels who descended in the generation of Enosh]

.

And if so ,

what is different with regard to Og -

that Moses was afraid,

of whom Moses was concerned,

and what is different with regard to Sihon, that Moses was not afraid?

The Gemara explains how we know that Moses feared Og:

Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: From the response

of the Holy One, blessed be He, to

that righteous man’s

[Moses’]

concern, you know what was in his heart,

for from the fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, had to answer him, “Do not fear him,” we learn that Moses was afraid.

The reason he feared Og and not Sihon was that

he said: Perhaps the merit of Abraham our forefather will stand him in good stead, as it is stated: “And the fugitive came and told Abram the Hebrew.”

And Rabbi Yoḥanan said: This is Og,

who was called “the fugitive” because

he escaped from the generation of the Flood 54 .

The Sages taught: In the case of a garment in which a stain

of menstrual blood, which imparts impurity through contact,

has been lost, one applies seven substances to it

[which are listed in the following Mishna],

and nullifies it,

the stain; from then on it no longer returns to impart impurity, and one may immerse the garment in a mikveh and purify it .