Niddah 64a (סד.) — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

It was stated: If she saw on the fifteenth day of this month, and on the sixteenth day of this month,

the one following it

, and on the seventeenth day of this month

the one after that

. Rav said: She established a veset—

for progression

by one day in the month, and she is forbidden in the fourth month on the eighteenth day, and in the fifth month on the nineteenth day, and so on

. And Shmuel said:

She did not establish a veset

until she progresses three times,

that is, until she progresses once more in the fourth month, to the eighteenth day. The reason is that the first sighting in the first month was not part of a progression, and consequently, in the first three months only the last two sightings were part of a progression, whereas establishing a veset of progression requires three sightings in a progression.

The Gemara discusses:

Shall we say that Rav and Shmuel

disagree as to whether a veset of progression is established after two progressions or after three

—they disagree over the dispute between Rabbi and Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

As it is taught in a beraita,

a woman who

married a

husband

first—

and he died, and she married a

husband

second—

and he died.

She may not marry a third

because she has acquired the status of a “killer”

—the words of Rabbi.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: To a third—

she may marry; to a fourth she may not marry.

This is because a presumption is created only after three occurrences.

Rav, who prohibited her after two progressions, holds in accordance with Rabbi, who says that a presumption is established after two occurrences; and Shmuel, who required three progressions, holds in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel.

The Gemara rejects this:

No; everyone

holds

in accordance with Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel,

that there is no presumption until after three occurrences.

Here, they disagree about this: Rav maintains

that the sighting on

the fifteenth—

is included

in the count of the veset.

And Shmuel maintains—

since

the sighting on the fifteenth

was not seen as part of a progression—

it is not included

in the count of the veset of progression

at all. 137 .

He raised an objection to him: If she was accustomed to seeing on the fifteenth day

and changed to the sixteenth day—

the next time

both this day and that day are forbidden.

The fifteenth is forbidden by virtue of an established veset, and the sixteenth by virtue of a veset that is not established.

And if the next time

she changed to the seventeenth day—

the sixteenth is permitted

the time after that

and

the reason is that a veset that is not established is uprooted after a single occurrence

, while the fifteenth is forbidden

as the law of an established veset, which is uprooted only after three occurrences

; and

the seventeenth is likewise forbidden

as the law of a veset that is not established.

because of a menstrual pattern that has not been established.

If she changed to the eighteenth day—

all of them are permitted,

since now, on the third occasion on which she changed, the established veset of the fifteenth has been uprooted, and she established a veset of progression by one day; she also need not be concerned for the eighteenth day

; nothing is forbidden except from the eighteenth onward,

namely, the nineteenth day of the following month and the twentieth day of the month after that.

From the fact that she established a veset only with the third progression, and not already the second time, it is proven that the halakha follows Shmuel, that a veset of progression is established only after three progressions,

and this is difficult for Rav!

The Gemara answers:

Rav can say to you:

She was

accustomed

to seeing on the fifteenth

; that is different.

Since this day was the fixed day of the previous veset, it certainly does not combine with the new veset of progression, and three sightings excluding it are required.

The Gemara asks:

But the one who raised it—

what led him to raise it?

That is, what was the basis for the initial question against Rav from that Mishna, which explicitly stated that the case involved one who was “accustomed”? Surely the tannai mentioned this because the law of one who is accustomed differs from that of a woman who has no established veset!

The Gemara answers: The questioner thought that when the tannai stated

“accustomed”, it was because

he

needed it

to teach an additional novel point:

Lest you say: Since she was accustomed, and you uprooted it—

after two times you uprooted it,

and the fifteenth day would therefore be permitted already after the second occurrence

; it teaches us

that an established veset is uprooted only after three occurrences.

He raised an objection: If she saw on the twenty-first day of this month, on the twenty-second day of this month, and on the twenty-third day of this month—

she established

after the two progressions

a veset

of progression. And if she

deviated

on the third sighting

to the twenty-fourth day—

she did not establish a veset,

since the progressions are not equal.

From the fact that, with equal progressions, the beraita sufficed with two progressions,

this is a refutation of Shmuel!

The Gemara answers:

Shmuel can say to you: With what are we dealing here?

For example, she was accustomed to seeing on the twentieth day, and she changed to the twenty-first day,

and the twenty-first day mentioned in the beraita is not the day of the first sighting but the day of the first progression. Consequently, on the twenty-fourth day she progressed for the third time, and therefore she established a veset.

The Gemara proves its answer:

This too is precise: We omitted the twentieth day and stated the twenty-first day,

and it is the tannai’s practice to begin with a round number such as twenty and then proceed to twenty-one

—learn from this

that the case is one in which she was accustomed to seeing on the twentieth, and now began to progress by one day and saw on the twenty-first as part of the progression.

We learned in the Mishna:

A woman does not establish a veset until she establishes it

three times.

Rav Pappa said: We said this—

only with regard to establishing it,

so that three occurrences are required to uproot it

; but with regard to being concerned for it

the next time alone

—she is concerned after a single occurrence.

The Gemara asks concerning Rav Pappa:

What does this teach us?

But

we already learned

it

:

If she was accustomed to seeing on the fifteenth day and changed to the twentieth day—both this day and that day are forbidden!

The Gemara answers:

If it were only from there,

I would have said: This applies

when she is concerned once for a veset that is not established

when

her sighting occurs

within the days of her menstruation,

which are a period during which she is liable to see, and her sighting follows the normal pattern of women; therefore, we are concerned that she may see again

. But where it does not occur within the days of her menstruation,

but during her days of zavah, which are “not the time of her menstruation,” and she has an established status of not seeing blood during them, and it is reasonable that this sighting was merely incidental,

say no

—we should not be concerned for a veset that is not established

; it teaches us

that we are concerned

. We learned in the Mishna:

And she is not purified from the veset

until she uproots it three times.

Rav Pappa said: We said this only when she established it three times—

for three occurrences are required to uproot it.

But

if she saw only

twice—

it is uprooted after a single occurrence.

The Gemara asks:

What does this teach us,

Rav Pappa? We already

learned

it

: A woman does not establish a veset until she establishes it three times!

The Gemara answers:

Lest you say: One

uprooting is required

for one

sighting;

two

uprootings

for two

sightings;

and three—

for three; it teaches us

that even two sightings are uprooted by one occurrence in which she did not see

. A beraita was taught in accordance with Rav Pappa’s opinion: If she was accustomed to seeing on the twentieth day and changed to the thirtieth day

—both this day and that day are forbidden.

When the twentieth day arrived and she did not see—

she is permitted to engage in marital relations until the thirtieth day, and she must be concerned for the thirtieth day.

When the thirtieth day arrived and she saw,

and it follows that she saw twice on the thirtieth day

; when the twentieth day arrived and she did not see 144 , and when the thirtieth day arrived and

144, and the thirtieth day arrived and

now, on the third occasion

—she did not see

on it, the veset that was not established for the thirtieth day is thereby uprooted.

And

therefore, if

the twentieth day arrived and she saw—