Niddah 65b — the Talmud in English

The akalim

poles for the needs of the olive press, made of materials

of reeds and batzbatz

hemp

are wiped

14 . And the akalim made of material of flax and rushes

are left unused

they are set aside without use for a long time.

And how long are they left unused? Twelve months.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: He sets them aside from winepress to winepress and from olive press to olive press.

And the Gemara asks: Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel

that is the first tanna

for surely the time between winepress and winepress and olive press and olive press is twelve months?!

The Gemara answers:

There is a difference between them

early and late

for sometimes the times of the winepresses and olive presses are advanced or delayed, and then there is not an interval of twelve months.

Rabbi Yose says: One who wishes to purify them immediately

without waiting twelve months

scalds them with boiling water, or pours boiling olive water over them

he pours hot olive water over them.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says in the name of Rabbi Yose: He places them beneath a pipe whose water flows in a stream, or in a spring whose waters run swiftly,

they wash them with a rapid flow.

And how much

time does he leave them there

A period.

In the manner that they said

to render fit the winepress that had been scalded

with regard to teharot, so they said concerning forbidden wine

with regard to the purification of the winepress.

And the Gemara explains:

To which direction is this turned?

Is it right to say this? But surely

we are dealing with teharot!

The beraita is dealing with this subject?

Rather:

This is how it must be read in the beraita:

In the manner that they said with regard to teharot, so they said concerning forbidden wine.

And the amoraim explained:

And what is a period

as mentioned in this beraita?

Rabbi Hiyya bar Abba said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: Either a day or a night.

Rabbi Hana Shauna—and some say Rabbi Hana bar Shauna—said that Rabba bar bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Yohanan: Half a day and half a night.

And Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzhak said: And they do not disagree

and they did not disagree concerning the measure of the period:

This

the words of the one who says either a day or a night are stated

in the seasons of Nisan and Tishrei

when the day and night are equal.

This

the words of the one who says half a day and half a night are stated

in the seasons of Tammuz and Tevet

when the day and night are not equal, and in half a day and half a night there are twelve equal hours. And the Gemara concludes its question: Why did Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel say in our subject that the period is a night and half a day?

The Gemara answers:

Here too,

also in our subject

say

it is necessary to say with regard to

nida: half a day and half a night!

And the Gemara asks:

But he said a night and half a day!

Rather

this is the explanation of his words:

If

either

a night

of Nisan and Tishrei

when the day and night are equal,

or half a day and half a night

of Tevet and Tammuz

when the day and night are not equal, and the period is twelve hours.

And if you wish, say: It is different,

the law of the biat mitzva is different because of the

ketuba.

For it is common

that they prolong

that they extend

it

because they are occupied with writing it that night

more

a great deal

until they sign.

And the biat mitzva is delayed, and therefore the Sages gave her another half-day, so that she would have twelve hours.

Rav and Shmuel both say: The halakha is:

even a young girl who has not reached the age at which she is expected to see —

he has intercourse once as a mitzva and withdraws.

Rav Hisda raised an objection: It happened that Rabbi gave her four nights out of twelve months!

Rava said to him: To go searching for a refutation

to seek questions from the beraita

why do I need to? Raise

a difficulty

from the Mishna

from our own Mishna itself!?

He

Rav Hisda

thought—

an act of a great person

Rabbi’s ruling in practice

is preferable

to raise a difficulty from it.

In any event, for Rav and Shmuel it is difficult.

The Gemara answers:

They acted—

in accordance with our Sages.

For it was taught: Our Sages reconsidered the matter and reached a decision

and agreed:

He has intercourse once as a mitzva and withdraws. 17 .

Ulla said: When they were engaged in it,

when

Rabbi Yohanan and Reish Lakish

were examining this Mishna, which is

in

the chapter

of the young girl,

they did not derive

from it

any practical ruling immediately,

but only as one derives

as the extraction of

a fox

the fox

from a plowed field

from a plowed field [this is a parable: like a fox that enters a plowed place, from which it extracts nothing and emerges only with dust on its feet. So too, they did not establish any ruling on the basis of our Mishna in this chapter]. Rather,

and they concluded it as follows: He has intercourse once as a mitzva and withdraws.

Rabbi Abba said to Rav Ashi: If so

that one must be so concerned with the law of virgin’s blood,

a conscientious man

who has intercourse with a virgin

should not complete his intercourse!

He said to him: If so

that he should not complete it

his heart will trouble him and he will withdraw

from intercourse altogether.

The Sages taught: And all of them

the virgins with whom intercourse took place

who were

continuing

to discharge blood

after their intercourse without interruption,

and came from within four nights

[in the case of one who had not seen blood in her father’s house] and continued to discharge blood

after four nights.

Or in the case of one who saw in her father’s house—she had been discharging

from within the night

the first

after the night—

all of them must examine themselves

whether the appearance of the blood changed, for then one does not say: Since she is discharging without interruption throughout the four nights, it is established that it is virgin’s blood.

And in all of them Rabbi Meir is stringent in accordance with the words of Beit Shammai

that after four nights in the case of a minor, and after one night in the case of one who has reached the age at which she is expected to see but has not seen, she is obligated to examine herself, even though she is discharging.

And the other sightings,

in a case where she does not continue to discharge, in which there are also distinctions

between Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel—

in these Rabbi Meir holds that

one follows the appearance of the blood, in accordance with the words of Beit Hillel. For according to Beit Shammai they are impure even when the bloods did not change, whereas Beit Hillel purifies them when the appearance of the blood did not subsequently change.

in accordance with the words of Beit Hillel. According to Beit Shammai, they are impure even when the appearances of the blood have not changed, whereas Beit Hillel deem them pure when the appearance of the blood does not subsequently change.

For Rabbi Meir used to say: The appearances of the bloods are different from one another.

How so: Menstrual blood—

red; virgin’s blood—

is not red.

Menstrual blood—

filth,

a filthy appearance;

virgin’s blood—

is not filth,

its appearance is clean.

Menstrual blood—

comes from the source; virgin’s blood—

comes from the sides.

Rabbi Yitzhak bar Rabbi Yose said that Rabbi Yohanan said: This is the statement of Rabbi Meir, but the Sages say: All appearances of blood—

are one

and therefore, even if the blood changed, she is pure as long as she continues to discharge.

The Sages taught: One who sees

blood because of intercourse has intercourse the first time.

That is, if she had intercourse and saw blood once, she is permitted to have intercourse a

second

time, and a

third. From this point onward—

she may not have intercourse

anymore

until she is divorced

from her husband. And after she is divorced,