Niddah 71b — the Talmud in English

And the Sages deem it pure, because ![](pamud.bmp "

page location")

the first one is severed first.

And this means that, since the blood does not emerge in a stream but emerges drop by drop into a hollow, the blood that emerges after death becomes mixed little by little with the blood that emerged during life and is nullified within it.

Therefore, even if in the end the blood that emerges after death is greater than the blood that emerged during life, it is pure.

And they decreed concerning dam tevuza only when the bloods do not become mixed.

And we raised an objection to this:

The Sages have properly said to Rabbi Judah!

And we answer:

Rabbi Judah follows his own reasoning

108, for he says: Blood does not nullify blood.

Rabbi Shimon says:

A person who was

crucified on a tree, whose blood drips onto the ground

in great quantity all at once, and does not drip drop by drop,

and a quarter-log of blood is found beneath him—

he is impure.

Rabbi Judah deems him pure; I say that a drop of death is standing for him on top of the tree,

and there is not a quarter-log of blood on the ground after death.

And we raised an objection to this:

And should Rabbi Judah not say for himself

here:

I say that a drop of death is standing on top of the bed!

And we answer:

The case of the bed is different—

because it is perforated.

Mishna:

At first they would say: The woman sitting over pure blood,

who, after her immersion, is one who “immersed for a long day,” who imparts impurity according to the law of second-degree impurity only to foods and liquids, but not to vessels —

would pour water

into a vessel

for

washing the flesh of the

Paschal offering,

but would not touch the water itself.

They went back and said: Behold, she is like contact with one impure through a corpse with regard to consecrated property,

but not with regard to non-sacred food, and the water with which they wash the flesh of the offering is non-sacred food. And second-degree impurity does not make third-degree impurity among non-sacred food. Therefore, even if she touches the water itself, she will not render the offering impure —

according to the words of Beit Hillel

113. Beit Shammai say:

They decreed concerning her also that she should render non-sacred food impure. But

also

they made her

like one impure through a corpse.

Gemara:

The Gemara explains the words of the Mishna:

Pouring

from the vessel—

yes, she touches

the water—

no. (It follows)

And the reason for this is that

non-sacred food prepared in purity for consecrated property —

is considered like consecrated property 116.

And not like non-sacred food, for one who immersed that day, who is like second-degree impurity, does not make third-degree impurity among non-sacred food.

And the Gemara explains the latter clause of the Mishna:

(Say the latter clause:) They went back and said: Behold, she is like contact with one impure through a corpse with regard to consecrated property.

With regard to consecrated property—

yes; with regard to non-sacred food—

no.

(It follows)

That is, they went back and said that

non-sacred food prepared in purity for consecrated property—

is not considered like consecrated property!

The Gemara explains:

The Mishna,

which was stringent to make one who immersed that day like contact with one impure through a corpse—

whose opinion is it?—

It is Abba Shaul’s.

For it was taught in a beraita: Abba Shaul says: One who immersed that day

has the status of

“first” with regard to consecrated property: to render two impure and to disqualify one.

That is, he is considered like “first-degree impurity” [like one touching one impure through a corpse], and therefore he renders two objects impure with regard to consecrated property. And the third-degree impurity, when it touches the fourth, merely “disqualifies” it [that is, the fourth is not “impure” so as to render others impure, but is itself merely “disqualified”].

Mishna:

And Beit Shammai concede

to Beit Hillel

that she eats second tithe

during her days of purity, like anyone who immersed that day, who eats second tithe.

And she sets aside a portion of dough for hallah,

and she is permitted to separate dough from the mixture for the purpose of separating hallah and place it in a vessel .

And she brings it close,

bringing the vessel near the dough,

and assigns a name to it,

imposing upon the dough she separated the designation of “hallah.”

And if some of her saliva or pure blood fell onto a loaf of teruma—

it is pure.

Beit Shammai say:

The woman who gave birth and sits over pure blood

requires immersion at the end,

when the days of purity end, which are completed after forty days for a male and eighty days for the birth of a female.

If she is a daughter of a kohein, she requires immersion in order to eat teruma, and if she is an Israelite woman, she requires immersion so that she will be fit to enter the Temple .

And Beit Hillel say: She does not require immersion at the end.

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: “And they concede that she eats second tithe”—and the Gemara explains:

For the master said: One who immersed and ascended—

eats second tithe,

immediately, without waiting for sunset.

We learned in the Mishna:

And she sets aside a portion of dough for hallah.

Because

non-sacred food that is subject to hallah,

which contains the prohibition of untithed produce because hallah was not separated from it,

is not considered like hallah.

And we do not say that since hallah will be made from this dough, the sanctity of hallah already applies to it; rather, it is entirely non-sacred food .

We learned in the Mishna:

And she brings it close. For the master said: It is a mitzva to separate from that which is brought close,

from that which is near.

We learned in the Mishna:

And she assigns a name to it.

And the Gemara explains that the innovation in this is:

It might enter your mind to say that we should decree

and not permit her to assign a designation to the hallah,

lest

perhaps

she come to touch it

the hallah

from the outside,

and it will be found that she renders the hallah impure;

it teaches us

that they did not decree.

We learned in the Mishna:

And if some of her saliva fell

onto a loaf of teruma—it is pure.

And the Gemara explains:

For we learned: A liquid

that emerges from a person who is

one who immersed that day—

is like liquids that he touches.

And these

the liquids that emerge from him,

and these

the liquids that he touches,

do not render impure.

Except for the liquid of a zav—

which is a primary source of impurity 121.

We learned in the Mishna:

Beit Shammai

say that she requires immersion at the end.

What is the difference between them?

What is between them

—what is the reason for their disagreement?

Rav Ketina said: “One who immersed for a long day” is between them.

For according to Beit Shammai, this immersion of a day differs from that of every one who immersed that day, who does not require an additional immersion at sunset, because “her day is long” and she diverted her attention from teruma and the Temple; therefore she must return and immerse a second time. And according to Beit Hillel there is no distinction, and she need not return and immerse.

Mishna:

A woman

who sees

blood

on

the

eleventh day,

which is the final day of her days of ziva, and she did not observe the twelfth day as one who observes one day corresponding to one day, but rather,

immersed in the evening

at the conclusion of the eleventh day,

and had intercourse [that is, she had marital relations]:

Beit Shammai say: They render

the woman and her partner

impure with regard to a lying place and a seat,

and they are liable for an offering!

For Beit Shammai hold that the eleventh day also requires observation of “one day corresponding to one day” on the twelfth day, like the other days of ziva, even though if she sees on the twelfth day, this day does not join with the days before it to make her a major zava, because the sighting on the twelfth day is a sighting of menstruation. Nevertheless, Beit Shammai hold that she requires observation of a clean day in order to become pure from the impurity of a “minor zava,” with which she became impure on the eleventh day.