Talmud su Levitico 15:78

MISHNAH: Rebbi Aqiba says, from where that idolatry makes impure by load like a menstruating woman? For it is said¹Is. 30:22., you shall throw it away like feeling miserable; you will call it excrement. Since the menstruating makes impure by load²In Lev. 15:20–21 it is stated that anything the menstruating woman lies on becomes an original source of impurity. This means that if a woman in her period lies on top of ten mattresses and somebody touches the lowest one, which the woman never touched, he becomes impure as if he had touched the woman herself., idolatry also makes impure by load³For R. Aqiba anybody who carries an idol becomes impure even if he never touched the idol..

We do not accept from them for offering [in the Temple] sacrificial birds brought by males with a flux,¹Lev. 15, 14. or sacrificial birds brought by females with a flux,²ibid. 29. or sacrificial birds brought by women after childbirth,³ibid. XII, 6, 8. or sin-offerings or trespass-offerings, but we receive from them vows and free-will-offerings.⁴The words ‘vows and free-will offerings’ have dropped out of the printed text and MS.K., but are added by H in agreement with Shek. I, 5 (Sonc. ed., p. 3).

HALAKHAH: ²⁹This and the the following paragraph also are Halakhah 3:8 in Avodah zara, where the differences in spelling are noted. Evidence points to Šabbat as the primary source. Much of the argument is found in Babli Šabbat 82b–83b. There is written abomination about the menstruating woman, and there is written abomination about idolatry, and there is written abomination about vermin. There is written abomination about the menstruating woman, for anybody who would commit any of these abomination s³⁰Lev. 18:29. The verse refers to all prohibitions of a sexual nature., etc. Abomination about idolatry, and do not bring any abomination into your house³¹Deut. 7:26. This verse refers uniquely to idols and idolatry., etc. Abomination about vermin, do not eat any abomination³²Deut. 14:2. The verse refers to all food prohibitions.. But I do not know to which of them it was compared. Rebbi Aqiba says, it was compared to abomination regarding the menstruating woman. As the menstruating woman imparts impurity by load, also idolatry imparts impurity by load²In Lev. 15:20–21 it is stated that anything the menstruating woman lies on becomes an original source of impurity. This means that if a woman in her period lies on top of ten mattresses and somebody touches the lowest one, which the woman never touched, he becomes impure as if he had touched the woman herself.. Or since the menstruating woman imparts impurity through a cover stone³³Stone is impervious to impurity. In general, anything not susceptible to impurity cannot transmit impurity. The one and only exception is impurity caused by genital discharges where impurity by load (Note 2) applies to anything under the affected person and even a stone plate covering a mattress will not shield the mattress from impurity if a person afflicted by a genital discharge sits on the stone. Babli Niddah 69b., does idolatry impart impurity through a cover stone? Rebbi Zeriqan in the name of Rav Jehudah, but some say in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Rebbi Aqiba agrees with the Sages that idolatry does not impart impurity through a cover stone. But the rabbis say it was compared to abomination s of vermin. As vermin imparts impurity by motion³⁴Here one has a serious discrepancy between the technical terminology of the Babli and the Yerushalmi. In the Babli impurity by motion is a form of impurity by load: If a person suffering from a genital discharge moves something indirectly or is moved with it, he imparts impurity. In the Yerushalmi this is consistently designated by its Mishnaic name, מִדְרָס, “stepping on.” This kind of impurity emphatically does not exist for vermin, or anything other than genital discharges. Therefore היסט the “motion” mentioned here must be that of a person’s hand touching an impure object. Transfer of impurity by touch is the only one mentioned for the eight kinds of impure vermin., so also idolatry imparts impurity by motion. Or as vermin in the size of a lentil imparts impurity³⁵Mishnah Ahilut 1:8. This minimum size for generation of impurity does not apply to complete limbs. does idolatry in the size of a lentil also impart impurity? Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They were yoked to Baal Peor and ate sacrifices to the dead³⁶Ps. 106:28.. As the dead in the volume of an olive impart impurity so idolatry in the volume of an olive imparts impurity. Or since a corpse imparts impurity once a person puts his finger tips in³⁷This refers to “tent” impurity (Ševuot 2:1 Note 34) which is created by any part of a person’s body being under the same roof as a corpse, even if it is only a finger tip., could I think that idolatry imparts once a person puts his finger tips in? Tearing down, tearing down from the leprous house³⁸A house afflicted with recurrent “leprosy” must be torn down (Lev. 14:45). Pagan altars must be torn down (Deut. 12:3). By the nature of the topics, the verb נתץ is used in the singular in the first case, in the plural in the second. Therefore this is a comparison (הקש), not an “equal cut” (גזירה שוה); the laws will be similar, not exactly identical.. Since in a leprous house when he entered with his head and most of his body³⁹Based on Lev. 14:46, which decrees impurity for anybody coming into the house, Sifra Meṣoraˋ Pereq 5(4), Mishnah Negaˋim 13:8., so idolatry when he entered with his head and most of his body. Rebbi Ḥanania said, this means that the impurity of idolatry is not consistent⁴⁰Neither R. Aqiba nor the rabbis are consistent in their comparisons.. For otherwise, why does one compare if for the facile [impurity] and does not compare for the strict? Rebbi Mana said, it is consistent. Why was it compared to a corpse and to vermin? To inform in both cases about the facile [impurity] attached to it⁴¹The impurity of idols and idolatry should follow the rules common for impurities generated either by dead vermin or by bodily discharges. This argument is known in the Babli tradition as הַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה “the equal part;” cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition, in: “Confrontations with Judaism”, ed. Ph. Longworth, London 1966, p. 185.. This is for a broken idol. But a whole one even in the most minute size⁴²This is consistent with the impurity of animals as food, where a complete creature always is biblically forbidden irrespective of size (cf. Nazir 6:1 Note 64)., as Rebbi Ḥuna, Rebbi Ḥama bar Gorion said in the name of Rav: Baal was the penis gland in the form of a bean: They selected the Baal of circumcision as god⁴³Jud. 8:33. Instead of “Baal of Covenant” one reads “Baal of circumcision” referring to the place of circumcision. This identifies the Semitic Baal with the Greek and Roman Priapus..

Rebbi Joḥanan said, Rebbi Jehudah declared impure only in the color of the four kinds of blood⁵In the Babli, 21a, R. Joḥanan is reported to hold that even the Sages agree that a lump in the color of the four types recognized as impure blood (taking red and black together) makes the woman impure; for him the disagreement between the Sages and R. Jehudah refers only to lumps that do not look like blood. R. Joḥanan’s opinion as quoted here is ascribed in the Babli to Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel.. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Simeon bar Abba, in the name of Rebbi Yose bar Nehorai: Practice follows Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Eleazar heard that and said, I do not accept this. Samuel said, practice follows Rebbi Jehudah. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, he did not say that practice follows Rebbi Jehudah but he saw that the rabbis are used to follow Rebbi Jehudah⁶There is no principle involved that practice should follow R. Jehudah; he only stated what he recognized as usual among Babylonian rabbis.. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai: One tears it open. If one finds blood collected there, she is impure, otherwise she is pure⁷In the Babli, 21b, this is a tannaїtic statement of Symmachos attributed to R. Meïr.. Rebbi Eliezer ben Jacob stated, disagreeing with Rebbi Simeon ben Ioḥai: “Blood would be her flow from her genitals,⁸. Lev. 15:19.” not what is in the amnion nor in a lump⁹In the Babli, 21b, this is an amoraic statement attributed to R. Ze‘ira. The explanation of the verse in Sifra Meṣora‘ Parašah 4(4) is rejected by R. Ze‘ira in the Babli, 21b, and by R. Simeon (ben Ioḥai) in Sifra..

⁵Babli 74b, Sifra Aḥare Pereq 7(1–4).“You shall deprive yourselves⁶.Lev. 15:29.. I could think that one should sit in the sun or in the cold to make himself feel badly, the verse says, do not do any work. The work which I forbade you elsewhere⁷All Sabbath prohibitions apply to the Day of Atonement.. And the deprivation of what I forbade you elsewhere. Since the work which I forbade you elsewhere is work for which one would be liable to extirpation, so also deprivation which I forbade you elsewhere is deprivation from which one would be liable to extirpation, and the following are those: piggul and leftovers⁸For piggul, cf. Chapter 5 Note 154. Eating sacrificial meat after the allotted time is sinful, Lev. 19:7.. From where to add ṭevel⁹Produce from which heave and tithes have not been taken? The verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. [I am adding ṭevel which is a deadly sin, but would not add carcass meat which is not a deadly sin; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added.]¹⁰Corrector’s addition, necessary by the context. I am adding carcass meat which is prohibited, but would not add profane meat which is not prohibited; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. I am adding profane meat which is not under a commandment to be eaten, but would not add heave and Second Tithe which is under a commandment to be eaten¹¹Heave must be eaten by Cohanim in purity, and Second Tithe by the farmer’s family in Jerusalem in purity. It is sinful to let pure heave and tithes go to waste. One could have thought that food for which there is a biblical commandment that it be eaten would be exempt from the prohibition.; the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. I am adding heave and tithe of which leftovers are not prohibited, but would not add sacrificial meat for which leftovers are prohibited, the verse says, you shall deprive yourselves; it added. Another explanation: You shall deprive yourselves, something which is a deprivation (father house) {which diminishes}¹²The incomprehensible אב בית has been emended to עֲבֵידת (Qorban ha-Edah). the spirit/ What is this? Eating and drinking. In the name of Rebbi Ismael they said, it is said here you shall deprive yourselves, and it says there, He deprived you and made you hungry¹³Deut. 8:3.. Since deprivation there is one of hunger, also deprivation here is one of hunger.”

It was stated: For the 24 hours which were stated, one suspends but one does not burn⁴⁰If heave was declared “impure” because a woman had handled it within 24 hours of her menstrual impurity, it cannot be burned as impure heave since the declaration was purely precautionary; the woman might have been impure when touching the heave. Since it is forbidden to destroy pure sanctified food, that heave neither can be destroyed, for perhaps it is pure, nor be used, for perhaps it is impure. It has to be left unused until it spoils, is no longer food, and automatically loses its sanctified status.. Rebbi Ze‘ira enjoyed this [because] he found stated⁴¹Tosephta 9:6,5; Babli 6a, both in slightly different formulation.: “A woman who detects a stain⁴²She detects a blood stain on her garment. This is proof that she bled sometime but she does not know when. makes impure retroactively⁴³The retroactivity extends all the time back until either the time when the woman had checked herself or the garment had been washed.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds⁴⁴By Lev. 15:20–23, any seat or couch used by a menstruating woman becomes a source of original impurity. The impurity of food is not mentioned in the verses; it is only secondary (cf. Note 36). The original impurity of beds and seats induced retroactively is also asserted in the Babli, 5b.; her count is in disorder⁴⁵By tradition, denied by Sadducees, there are 11 days after the end of seven days of a menstrual period in which no new menses are possible, in which any bloody discharge cannot be menstrual but must follow the rules of zava. But if the start of the period is unknown, the count is impossible and any discharge triggers a seven day menstrual period., and she makes her sex partner impure retroactively⁴⁶Since her impurity was unknown to her.. A woman who detects blood makes impure retroactively⁴⁷In Tosephta and Babli: For 24 hours. The Yerushalmi probably assumes the validity of the Sages’ statement in Mishnah 1.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds; her count is not in disorder⁴⁸She counts from the moment she notices the discharge., and she does not make her sex partner impure retroactively. Rebbi Aqiba says, she makes her sex partner impure retroactively. In both cases⁴⁹Stain or blood., one suspends but one does not burn.” There⁵⁰In Babylonia. This statement is missing in the Geniza text., they say: For the 24 hours which were stated, her bed is like her touch⁵¹Since her touch creates only derivative impurity, her seat and bed also do not become sources of original impurity.. How? Like one who sleeps with a menstruating woman⁵²Lev. 15:24 declares the man and his seat or bedding as impure but refrains from declaring seat and bedding as sources of original impurity. who does not make impure by moving⁵³Lev. 15:6 is interpreted that the male sufferer of gonorrhea imparts impurity to anything he moves, even if he never touches it. By biblical standards, a clay vessel cannot become impure by being touched from the outside; it becomes impure only by an original impurity inside its cavity. If a clay vessel has a cover fastened to it, it also cannot become impure by the impurity of the dead. But if either a (male or female) sufferer from gonorrhea or a menstruating woman indirectly moves a clay vessel, for example moving a wooden plank (in itself impervious to impurity) on which there is a closed clay vessel, that vessel and its contents become impure. and does not make clay vessels impure. It was found stated: He makes clay vessels impure by moving⁵⁴In the Tosephta (Note 41) this is asserted for both cases of menstrual impurity. The baraita quoted here disproves the earlier statement which denied the possibility of impurity by moving.. For the 24 hours which were stated, what is the status of what she touches in the public domain⁵⁵A general rule states that a doubt about matters of impurity in a public domain can be disregarded (cf. Note 9). The question is, if a woman had certainly touched something in the public domain within 24 hours of her menstruation, is this counted as a doubt or not?? Let us hear from the following⁵⁶A related text in Tosephta 3:8.: Pregnant and nursing women are pure for their husbands⁵⁷They are not supposed to menstruate., as is a woman with a regular period⁵⁸Except close to her time.. And all other women⁵⁹Excluding pre-puberty girls and post-menopausal women. There are not many women left in this category of “others”. are pure for sexual relations but impure in their touch⁶⁰Since at any time they could induce retroactive impurity.. That means, what she certainly touched in the public domain is impure.

It was stated: For the 24 hours which were stated, one suspends but one does not burn⁴⁰If heave was declared “impure” because a woman had handled it within 24 hours of her menstrual impurity, it cannot be burned as impure heave since the declaration was purely precautionary; the woman might have been impure when touching the heave. Since it is forbidden to destroy pure sanctified food, that heave neither can be destroyed, for perhaps it is pure, nor be used, for perhaps it is impure. It has to be left unused until it spoils, is no longer food, and automatically loses its sanctified status.. Rebbi Ze‘ira enjoyed this [because] he found stated⁴¹Tosephta 9:6,5; Babli 6a, both in slightly different formulation.: “A woman who detects a stain⁴²She detects a blood stain on her garment. This is proof that she bled sometime but she does not know when. makes impure retroactively⁴³The retroactivity extends all the time back until either the time when the woman had checked herself or the garment had been washed.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds⁴⁴By Lev. 15:20–23, any seat or couch used by a menstruating woman becomes a source of original impurity. The impurity of food is not mentioned in the verses; it is only secondary (cf. Note 36). The original impurity of beds and seats induced retroactively is also asserted in the Babli, 5b.; her count is in disorder⁴⁵By tradition, denied by Sadducees, there are 11 days after the end of seven days of a menstrual period in which no new menses are possible, in which any bloody discharge cannot be menstrual but must follow the rules of zava. But if the start of the period is unknown, the count is impossible and any discharge triggers a seven day menstrual period., and she makes her sex partner impure retroactively⁴⁶Since her impurity was unknown to her.. A woman who detects blood makes impure retroactively⁴⁷In Tosephta and Babli: For 24 hours. The Yerushalmi probably assumes the validity of the Sages’ statement in Mishnah 1.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds; her count is not in disorder⁴⁸She counts from the moment she notices the discharge., and she does not make her sex partner impure retroactively. Rebbi Aqiba says, she makes her sex partner impure retroactively. In both cases⁴⁹Stain or blood., one suspends but one does not burn.” There⁵⁰In Babylonia. This statement is missing in the Geniza text., they say: For the 24 hours which were stated, her bed is like her touch⁵¹Since her touch creates only derivative impurity, her seat and bed also do not become sources of original impurity.. How? Like one who sleeps with a menstruating woman⁵²Lev. 15:24 declares the man and his seat or bedding as impure but refrains from declaring seat and bedding as sources of original impurity. who does not make impure by moving⁵³Lev. 15:6 is interpreted that the male sufferer of gonorrhea imparts impurity to anything he moves, even if he never touches it. By biblical standards, a clay vessel cannot become impure by being touched from the outside; it becomes impure only by an original impurity inside its cavity. If a clay vessel has a cover fastened to it, it also cannot become impure by the impurity of the dead. But if either a (male or female) sufferer from gonorrhea or a menstruating woman indirectly moves a clay vessel, for example moving a wooden plank (in itself impervious to impurity) on which there is a closed clay vessel, that vessel and its contents become impure. and does not make clay vessels impure. It was found stated: He makes clay vessels impure by moving⁵⁴In the Tosephta (Note 41) this is asserted for both cases of menstrual impurity. The baraita quoted here disproves the earlier statement which denied the possibility of impurity by moving.. For the 24 hours which were stated, what is the status of what she touches in the public domain⁵⁵A general rule states that a doubt about matters of impurity in a public domain can be disregarded (cf. Note 9). The question is, if a woman had certainly touched something in the public domain within 24 hours of her menstruation, is this counted as a doubt or not?? Let us hear from the following⁵⁶A related text in Tosephta 3:8.: Pregnant and nursing women are pure for their husbands⁵⁷They are not supposed to menstruate., as is a woman with a regular period⁵⁸Except close to her time.. And all other women⁵⁹Excluding pre-puberty girls and post-menopausal women. There are not many women left in this category of “others”. are pure for sexual relations but impure in their touch⁶⁰Since at any time they could induce retroactive impurity.. That means, what she certainly touched in the public domain is impure.

It was stated: For the 24 hours which were stated, one suspends but one does not burn⁴⁰If heave was declared “impure” because a woman had handled it within 24 hours of her menstrual impurity, it cannot be burned as impure heave since the declaration was purely precautionary; the woman might have been impure when touching the heave. Since it is forbidden to destroy pure sanctified food, that heave neither can be destroyed, for perhaps it is pure, nor be used, for perhaps it is impure. It has to be left unused until it spoils, is no longer food, and automatically loses its sanctified status.. Rebbi Ze‘ira enjoyed this [because] he found stated⁴¹Tosephta 9:6,5; Babli 6a, both in slightly different formulation.: “A woman who detects a stain⁴²She detects a blood stain on her garment. This is proof that she bled sometime but she does not know when. makes impure retroactively⁴³The retroactivity extends all the time back until either the time when the woman had checked herself or the garment had been washed.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds⁴⁴By Lev. 15:20–23, any seat or couch used by a menstruating woman becomes a source of original impurity. The impurity of food is not mentioned in the verses; it is only secondary (cf. Note 36). The original impurity of beds and seats induced retroactively is also asserted in the Babli, 5b.; her count is in disorder⁴⁵By tradition, denied by Sadducees, there are 11 days after the end of seven days of a menstrual period in which no new menses are possible, in which any bloody discharge cannot be menstrual but must follow the rules of zava. But if the start of the period is unknown, the count is impossible and any discharge triggers a seven day menstrual period., and she makes her sex partner impure retroactively⁴⁶Since her impurity was unknown to her.. A woman who detects blood makes impure retroactively⁴⁷In Tosephta and Babli: For 24 hours. The Yerushalmi probably assumes the validity of the Sages’ statement in Mishnah 1.. What does she make impure? Food, and drinks, and seats, and beds; her count is not in disorder⁴⁸She counts from the moment she notices the discharge., and she does not make her sex partner impure retroactively. Rebbi Aqiba says, she makes her sex partner impure retroactively. In both cases⁴⁹Stain or blood., one suspends but one does not burn.” There⁵⁰In Babylonia. This statement is missing in the Geniza text., they say: For the 24 hours which were stated, her bed is like her touch⁵¹Since her touch creates only derivative impurity, her seat and bed also do not become sources of original impurity.. How? Like one who sleeps with a menstruating woman⁵²Lev. 15:24 declares the man and his seat or bedding as impure but refrains from declaring seat and bedding as sources of original impurity. who does not make impure by moving⁵³Lev. 15:6 is interpreted that the male sufferer of gonorrhea imparts impurity to anything he moves, even if he never touches it. By biblical standards, a clay vessel cannot become impure by being touched from the outside; it becomes impure only by an original impurity inside its cavity. If a clay vessel has a cover fastened to it, it also cannot become impure by the impurity of the dead. But if either a (male or female) sufferer from gonorrhea or a menstruating woman indirectly moves a clay vessel, for example moving a wooden plank (in itself impervious to impurity) on which there is a closed clay vessel, that vessel and its contents become impure. and does not make clay vessels impure. It was found stated: He makes clay vessels impure by moving⁵⁴In the Tosephta (Note 41) this is asserted for both cases of menstrual impurity. The baraita quoted here disproves the earlier statement which denied the possibility of impurity by moving.. For the 24 hours which were stated, what is the status of what she touches in the public domain⁵⁵A general rule states that a doubt about matters of impurity in a public domain can be disregarded (cf. Note 9). The question is, if a woman had certainly touched something in the public domain within 24 hours of her menstruation, is this counted as a doubt or not?? Let us hear from the following⁵⁶A related text in Tosephta 3:8.: Pregnant and nursing women are pure for their husbands⁵⁷They are not supposed to menstruate., as is a woman with a regular period⁵⁸Except close to her time.. And all other women⁵⁹Excluding pre-puberty girls and post-menopausal women. There are not many women left in this category of “others”. are pure for sexual relations but impure in their touch⁶⁰Since at any time they could induce retroactive impurity.. That means, what she certainly touched in the public domain is impure.

Ben Bathyra explained⁹⁹One returns to the discussion of Mishnah 1, explaining why the High Priest has to live in the Temple precinct for seven days prior to the Day of Atonement. Babli 6a, Tosephta 1:1.: Perhaps he would sleep with his menstruating wife and be pushed away all of seven days¹⁰⁰Lev. 15:24.. But are Israel suspected about menstruating women¹⁰¹Is not Ben Bathyra’s explanation an insult to the High Priest? If this Ben Bathyra is the early Tanna (and not the later R. Jehudah ben Bathyra to whom the statement is attributed in the Babli), his argument might be an anti-Sadducee statement, since Sadducees and Pharisees accused one another of sleeping with menstruating women by following their sectarian interpretation of the biblical law; cf. Niddah 4:1 Note 3 (SJ 34).? Following what was stated there¹⁰²Mishnah Ševuˋot 2:5, Notes 80,81.: “If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately he is liable, for his separation is as pleasurable to him as his entry¹⁰³If the wife becomes impure during intercourse, if then he stops moving immediately and separates after the erection has disappeared, he touched an impure woman, has to immerse himself in a miqweh, and becomes totally pure at the next sundown. But if he separates while still with erection, he had intercourse with a menstruating woman and is severely impure for seven days. Ben Bathyra’s argument presupposes that the High Priest is an ignoramus..” You have to say that he who transmits the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan needs that of Ben Bathyra, and he who transmits the statement of Rebbi Joḥanan needs that of Ben Bathyra. If Rebbi Joḥanan had said but not Ben Bathyra, we would have said that he may have sex but sleep in the Palhedrin lodge; therefore one needs that of Ben Bathyra. If Ben Bathyra had said but not Rebbi Joḥanan , we would have said, let him not have sex but he may sleep in his house; therefore one needs that of Rebbi Joḥanan , and one needs that of Ben Bathyra.

“One who whispers over a wound and says, any sickness that I put on Egypt I shall not put on you, for I am the Eternal, your Healer.” Rav said, only one who spits. Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, even if he only said, damage by skin disease if it be on a human¹²⁰Lev. 15:26. and spits, he has no part in the Future World¹²¹Using verses as part of magical rites is an unpardonable sin (in the absence of genuine repentance.).

What is the fence that the Torah made around its words? It says (Leviticus 18:19), “Do not come near woman during her period of impurity.” Perhaps [you would still think] one could hug her and kiss her and speak flirtatiously with her. So the verse tells you, “Do not come near.” Perhaps [you would still think] one could sleep next to her on the bed, as long as she was clothed. So the verse tells you, “Do not come near.” Perhaps [you would still think] she could wash her face and put makeup on her eyes. So the verse (Leviticus 15:33) tells you, “She is in her period of exile” – that is, all the days that she is in her period [of impurity], she will be in exile. Because of this they said: The spirit of the sages is pleased with anyone who makes herself unattractive during the days of her period [of impurity]. The spirit of the sages is displeased with anyone who makes herself attractive during the days of her period [of impurity].

There⁹⁶Mishnah Miqwaot 8:3., we have stated: “One who loses semen⁸Human semen is impure (Lev. 15:16–17 and sexual intercourse makes impure, v. 18. Semen which no longer can fertilize is not impure. The question is how long after intercourse must one suspect that semen released by the female still produces impurity? The answer which is given here states that semen may stay alive inside the woman’s body for three days. on the third day is pure, the words of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah⁹⁷As explained later in the Halakhah, he strictly goes by the count of days, not measuring the time elapsed.. Rebbi Ismael says, sometimes they are four terms, sometimes they are five, sometimes they are six⁹⁸He essentially accepts R. Eleazar ben Azariah’s interpretation; only he quantifies it in “terms”. A term is either a night, from sundown to sunrise, or a day, from sunrise to sundown. Six terms are required if the woman had intercourse at sundown or sunrise, when it is not clear whether ejaculation occurred before or after the start of a new term.. Rebbi Aqiba says, always they are five⁹⁹In fact he always requires 60 hours elapsed after ejaculation.. If part of the first term had elapsed, one completes it by the sixth term¹⁰⁰This sentence is not in the Mishnah mss., but since it also is quoted in the Babli 86a as appendix to this Mishnah and clarifies the statement of R. Aqiba, it should be considered part of the Mishnah..” Therefore Rebbi Ismael makes the day one term and the night one term; Rebbi Aqiba makes the day one term and the night one term. In what do they differ? They differ in complete terms. Rebbi Ismael treats part of a term like the whole, but Rebbi Aqiba does not treat part of a term like the whole. It was stated so about Rebbi Aqiba: “Therefore if part of the first term had elapsed, one completes it by the sixth term”¹⁰¹In order to complete the 60 hrs. required by R. Aqiba. The computation of R. Ismael is the same as that of R. Eleazar ben Azariah explained in the sequel.. It was stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah says, day and night each are a term, and part of a term is like the whole. It was stated so about Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah: Sometimes after slightly more than a day she is pure; sometimes after slightly less than two days she is impure. How does it happen that after slightly more than a day she is pure? She had intercourse Friday afternoon before sundown and lost Saturday night after nightfall; there is slightly more than a day she is pure¹⁰²For R. Eleazar ben Azariah the day of intercourse is day 1; she is pure if she loses some semen on day 3. The day starts at sundown. Let ε be a small fraction. If she had intercourse ε hours before sundown and then lost semen the next evening ε hours after sundown it already is the third day and she is pure after 24+2 ε hours.. How does it happen that after slightly less than two days she is impure? She had intercourse Friday night after sundown and lost Sunday night before nightfall; there is slightly less than two days she is impure¹⁰³If she had intercourse ε hours after sundown then the next 24 - ε still are day 1; if she loses semen ε hours before the end of day 2 she still is impure even though 48 – 2ε hrs. have elapsed.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, from the words of all of them, Israel received the Torah as immersed on the same day¹⁰⁴Babli 86b. For profane matters, a person either is pure or impure. But for sancta, the purification occurs in two stages. Impurity is removed by immersion in a miqweh but purity is acquired only at sundown (Lev. 22:6–7). In the meantime, the ṭevul yom person does not contaminate anything by his touch but is not permitted any sanctified food (cf. Berakhot 1:1 Note 3).. That is, the women; but the men already were purified. What is the reason? Sanctify them today and tomorrow and let them wash their garments¹⁰⁵Ex. 19:10. A man may immerse himself immediately after intercourse and become completely pure after the next sundown.. Rebbi Joḥanan said, these are the words of Rebbi Eleazar ben Azariah, and Rebbi Ismael, and Rebbi Aqiba. But the word of the Sages is, up to three days; after that it decayed. This parallels what Rebbi Zeˋira said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: This are the instructions for the sufferer from gonorrhea and from whom semen is ejaculated¹⁰⁶Lev. 15:32.. Since the instructions of the sufferer from gonorrhea are based on three days¹⁰⁷A sufferer from gonorrhea is impure, but he becomes severely impure requiring purification in flowing water only if he had three emissions within a three-day period (Mishnah Zavim 1:1)., also the instructions for semen are up to three days¹⁰⁸Babli 86b. While the day of intercourse is counted as day 1, the woman does not become impure by losing semen only on day 4. The derivation of these laws from Sinai is rejected since before the theophany at Sinai the people were not obligated to follow the rules promulgated there.
Here starts a Genizah fragment edited by L. Ginzberg (p. 87–88), G..

It was stated: ⁶³Babli 30a. Rebbi Jehudah says, they instituted this immersion only as immersion of discipline, for sometimes when a person goes to wash he remembers an old emission of semen which he had and turns back⁶⁴In itself this immersion is useless. If a person actually is impure, he is forbidden to partake of sancta and to enter the sacred domain. Immersion in a miqweh will remove the impurity but the disability regarding sancta and the sacred domain is removed only by the following sundown (Lev. 22:7). Therefore immersion in the morning is only for pure persons; for R. Jehudah it is instituted so people should not inadvertently enter the sacred domain while still not qualified for it.. There, we have stated⁶⁵Mishnah Berakhot 3:6. The Mishnah is truncated; the full text explains the plural form of the verb: “The person with gonorrhea who had an emission of semen, as well as a menstruating woman who lost semen, and the woman who started menstruating while having intercourse, need immersion, but Rebbi Jehudah declares them not liable.”
An emission of semen pollutes, but it is a minor impurity which is removed by immersion in water and, for sancta, the following sundown. But gonorrhea and menstruation cause severe impurity for which immersion is possible only after seven days (Lev. 15:13,19). An immersion because of emission, before the time where immersion for the severe impurity is possible, is totally ineffective.
A different version of the following discussion is in Berakhot 3:6, Notes 260–264.: “the woman who started menstruating while having intercourse, needs immersion, but Rebbi Jehudah declares them not liable.” Why does Rebbi Jehudah disagree? Is it about immersion of discipline or because even if he immerses himself what would be its use? What is the difference? If he⁶⁶The male sufferer from gonorrhea, mentioned in the Mishnah. He had an emission before he started suffering from gonorrhea. He was obligated for an immersion before he became severely impure. had an emission. If you say that Rebbi Jehudah disagrees about immersion of discipline, it is a word of the Torah⁶⁷Lev. 15:16.. If you say, even if he immerses himself, what would be its use? It is useful that he immerse himself, as it was stated, Rebbi Jehudah says, they instituted this immersion only as immersion of discipline, for sometimes when a person goes to wash he remembers an old emission of semen which he had and turns back. This implies that Rebbi Jehudah did not disagree about immersion of discipline but because even if he immerses himself, what would be its use?

“Even if she was married,⁸²This refers to the Mishnah which enumerates the women whose impurity is not retroactive, in particular the girl having a baby without ever having menstruated.” even if pregnant, even if nursing, and even if she was bleeding all seven [days] for a boy or all fourteen for a girl⁸³Lev. 15:25 creates a special category, zavah, for a woman whose discharge of blood is prolonged “many days after her menstrual period”, who is subject to more complicated rules of cleansing. Since “days” must mean a minimum of two days, “many days” must mean at least three days (by the hermeneutic principle of definiteness, cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, Ph. Longworth, ed., Blond, London 1966, pp. 174–175). Now it is stated here that bleeding after childbirth cannot induce a status of zavah since (1) the time span of 7 days after the birth of a boy and 14 after that of a girl are defined as “menstrual impurity” and (2) this is followed by a period of purity of 33 days (for a boy) or 66 (for a girl) in which no discharge has any implication for impurity (Lev.12:4–5). Therefore, the only way a birth is followed by a status of zavah would be if the bloody discharges persist all through the period of purity.. Does she have a charm in her hand⁸⁴This is a little pedantic about the formulation of the text, from which one might infer that the pregnancy already determines the length of the period of impurity. The text is then elaborated to indicate that this period is determined only at the time of delivery.? After [the birth of] a boy seven [days], after a girl fourteen, but only if she stopped during her period of purity. As it was stated: If she stopped during her period of purity and had no discharge, but later she had a discharge; this case came before the Sages who said that her timing was exact⁸⁵The status of the “blood virgin” is not changed by pregnancy and all the bleeding necessarily connected with giving birth.. In Rav’s opinion, who says that all is one source but the Torah purified it, it is understandable⁸⁶Here starts the discussion of the condition that the discharges stop sometime during the period of purity. Rav holds that the blood lost during childbirth and the menstrual blood are of equal character, the period of purity is a biblical decree whose reason is unknown but a continuation of the discharge beyond this period shows that menstrual blood is flowing for “many days”. (Everybody agrees that prolonged flow before the actual delivery creates a status of zavah.) Therefore, a retention of the status of “blood virgin” necessitates the cessation of discharge during the period of purity (or even earlier). Rav’s opinion is detailed in the Babli, 1 la, 35b.. In Rebbi Yannai’s opinion, who says that all is one source but it changes, it is in order⁸⁷This opinion is not reported in the Babli. The only difference to Rav’s opinion is theoretical, that the biblical decree of the period of purity has a biological explanation.. In Levi’s opinion, who says that there are two sources, should not her timing be exact even if she does not stop during her period of purity⁸⁸His opinion is also discussed in the Babli, 11a and 35b. He holds that the blood lost in childbirth is different in nature from menstrual blood. Then it is difficult to see why menstrual virginity should depend on a cessation of childbirth discharges during the period of purity.? Rebbi Mana said, the reason of Levi is that since she became used to pure blood, she might become used to impure blood⁸⁹Levi also subscribes to the cessation rule, but only as one of purely rabbinic character. Since she is used to discharges, she does not react to a menstrual discharge with the speed necessary to avoid retroactive contamination.. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, Levi can explain what we have stated⁹⁰Mishnah 1:5.: “Rebbi Yose said, the timing of a pregnant or a nursing woman who had stopped for three periods is exact.” On that it was stated⁹¹Tosephta 1:10: “R. Yose and R. Simeon say that the timing of a pregnant or a nursing woman is not exact unless there passed three periods (without menstruation); the days of her pregnancy and those of her nursing are added together.” It is clear that pregnancy and nursing cannot be counted together if the blood lost in childbirth is of menstrual character. Therefore, the Tosephta and the similar baraita quoted in the text are intelligible for Levi, not for Rav.: The days of her pregnancy and her nursing add up to three periods. Can he think that there is only one source?

MISHNAH: Jews were sharecroppers for Gentiles in Syria⁶¹The parts of David’s kingdom not conquered by the 12 tribes under Joshua; cf. Peah 7, Note 119. R. Eliezer holds that the laws of the Holy Land extend to Syria but Rabban Gamliel holds that Syria is essentially outside the Land and only selected laws of the Land are extended to apply there.; Rebbi Eliezer obligates their produce for tithes and the Sabbatical but Rabban Gamliel exempts them. Rabban Gamliel says there are two ḥallot in Syria⁶²As explained in Mishnah 8. Biblical law restricts the duty of ḥallah to the Land (Num. 15:18–19). Rabbinic practice extends the obligation to the rest of the world but, since the soil outside the Land is intrinsically impure, any ḥallah outside the Land is impure and must be burned. Nevertheless, in order to remind people that the original duty is to give ḥallah to a Cohen, it was established that some dough should be given to a Cohen. This dough cannot be sanctified, otherwise it would be forbidden to the recipient. but Rebbi Eliezer says one ḥallah⁶³He denies that Syrian soil is impure.. They took the leniency of Rabban Gamliel and the leniency of Rebbi Eliezer but then returned to follow Rabban Gamliel in both cases.
Rabban Gamliel says: There are three domains for ḥallah⁸⁵In the biblical Land of Israel.. The Land of Israel⁸⁶The actual Land of Israel of the Second Commonwealth; cf. Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3, for the geographic details. up to Akhzib, one ḥallah. From Akhzib to the Euphrates or Amanus⁸⁷One has to add, with Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, “any place held by the immigrants from Egypt,” i. e., the regions North of Akhzib described as tribal territories in the book of Joshua., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has a measure⁸⁸The true ḥallah which cannot be eaten since the impurity of Gentile lands is extended rabbinically to any region not inhabited by Jews. The “measure” is that for ḥallah of the Land, Mishnah 2:7., the one for the Cohen has no measure⁸⁹A purely symbolic ḥallah to be eaten in impurity, as a remembrance of the rules to be restored in the times of the Messiah.. From Euphrates or Amanus inside⁹⁰The rest of Syria, domain of biblical promise; cf. Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has no measure⁹¹Both ḥallot are symbolical since that region was not under obligation of ḥallah even during the First Commonwealth., the one for the Cohen has a measure but a ṭevul yom may eat it⁹²He is forbidden true ḥallah.. Rebbi Yose says one does not need immersion⁹³This also shows that the symbolic ḥallah is no true heave, cf. Berakhot 1, Note 3..
But it⁹⁴The purely symbolic ḥallah mentioned last in Mishnah 8. By rabbinic ordinance, it is forbidden for people whose impurity originates in their own body. is forbidden to people suffering from genital flux⁹⁵Lev. 15:1–15, 25–30., and to women during menstruation⁹⁶Lev. 15:19–24. or after childbirth⁹⁷Lev. 12:1–8.. It may be eaten at one table with a layman and may be given to any Cohen⁹⁸Even a vulgar who cannot be expected to follow all rules of purity..
The following may be given to any Cohen¹²²Irrespective of his level of observance and knowledge of the Law. Some of the prescribed gifts are given to priests serving in the Temple; there, they are under supervision and instruction. The other gifts are purely profane; they cannot be impaired by the impurity of the Cohen.: ḥērem-dedications¹²³Num. 18:14. According to most sources, this special dedication is not for the upkeep of the Temple but for the Cohanim [Sifra Beḥuqotay Pereq12(9), Babli Sanhedrin 88a, Arakhin28a]. However, Babylonian practice follows the dissenting opinion (Arakhin29a)., firstlings¹²⁴Ex. 13:1, Num. 18:15., the redemption money for a [firstborn] son¹²⁵Ex. 13:1,13, Num. 3:47, 18:15., the redemption value of a firstling donkey¹²⁶Ex. 13:1,13., foreleg, jawbone, and first stomach¹²⁷Deut. 18:3., the first shearing¹²⁸Deut. 18:4., oil to burn¹²⁹Impure heave olive oil., Temple sacrifices, and First Fruits¹³⁰Deut. 26:1–11.. Rebbi Jehudah forbids First Fruits¹³¹Since they have to follow rules of heave, Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1.. Heave vetch¹³²This is animal fodder except in times of famine. Rebbi Aqiba permits but the Sages forbid.

MISHNAH: The excess of sheqalim is profane⁷⁴Mishnah 3.. The excess of a tenth of an ephah⁷⁵Either the daily offering of the High Priest, which is the only obligatory offering by a single person which is neither a purification nor a reparation offering, or the purification offering of the very poor, Lev. 5:11., the excess of nests⁷⁶Couples of pigeons or turtle doves, needed to permit the person access to sancta. of male sufferers from gonorrhea⁷⁷Lev. 15:14., the nests of female sufferers from flux⁷⁸Lev. 15:29., the nests of women after childbirth⁷⁹Lev. 12:8., or purification offerings, or reparation offerings, their excesses are gift⁴¹Meaning the coins given as sheqel.. This is the principle: of anything brought for a sin or as reparation the excess is gift.
The excess⁹⁴In all these cases the money was saved for the purpose of a certain type of sacrifice. If not all the money was actually used, the excess may be used later for the same purpose. It cannot return to profane status since “a promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual”. of elevation sacrifices is for elevation sacrifices, the excess of flour offerings is for flour offerings, the excess of well-being sacrifices is for well-being sacrifices, the excess of Pesaḥ is for well-being sacrifices. The excess of nezirim is for nezirim, the excess of a nazir⁹⁵If money was collected in order to help any nazir who might apply for a subsidy for the cost of his sacrifices, the money remain in its status even if not used in the time frame originally envisaged. But if money either was set aside by a nazir himself or it was given to him personally for his sacrifices and not completely used, the excess goes to the Temple’s gift account. is for gift.

MISHNAH: Jews were sharecroppers for Gentiles in Syria⁶¹The parts of David’s kingdom not conquered by the 12 tribes under Joshua; cf. Peah 7, Note 119. R. Eliezer holds that the laws of the Holy Land extend to Syria but Rabban Gamliel holds that Syria is essentially outside the Land and only selected laws of the Land are extended to apply there.; Rebbi Eliezer obligates their produce for tithes and the Sabbatical but Rabban Gamliel exempts them. Rabban Gamliel says there are two ḥallot in Syria⁶²As explained in Mishnah 8. Biblical law restricts the duty of ḥallah to the Land (Num. 15:18–19). Rabbinic practice extends the obligation to the rest of the world but, since the soil outside the Land is intrinsically impure, any ḥallah outside the Land is impure and must be burned. Nevertheless, in order to remind people that the original duty is to give ḥallah to a Cohen, it was established that some dough should be given to a Cohen. This dough cannot be sanctified, otherwise it would be forbidden to the recipient. but Rebbi Eliezer says one ḥallah⁶³He denies that Syrian soil is impure.. They took the leniency of Rabban Gamliel and the leniency of Rebbi Eliezer but then returned to follow Rabban Gamliel in both cases.
Rabban Gamliel says: There are three domains for ḥallah⁸⁵In the biblical Land of Israel.. The Land of Israel⁸⁶The actual Land of Israel of the Second Commonwealth; cf. Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3, for the geographic details. up to Akhzib, one ḥallah. From Akhzib to the Euphrates or Amanus⁸⁷One has to add, with Mishnah Ševi‘it 6:1, “any place held by the immigrants from Egypt,” i. e., the regions North of Akhzib described as tribal territories in the book of Joshua., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has a measure⁸⁸The true ḥallah which cannot be eaten since the impurity of Gentile lands is extended rabbinically to any region not inhabited by Jews. The “measure” is that for ḥallah of the Land, Mishnah 2:7., the one for the Cohen has no measure⁸⁹A purely symbolic ḥallah to be eaten in impurity, as a remembrance of the rules to be restored in the times of the Messiah.. From Euphrates or Amanus inside⁹⁰The rest of Syria, domain of biblical promise; cf. Ševi‘it 6:1, Note 3., two ḥallot, one for the fire and one for the Cohen. The one for the fire has no measure⁹¹Both ḥallot are symbolical since that region was not under obligation of ḥallah even during the First Commonwealth., the one for the Cohen has a measure but a ṭevul yom may eat it⁹²He is forbidden true ḥallah.. Rebbi Yose says one does not need immersion⁹³This also shows that the symbolic ḥallah is no true heave, cf. Berakhot 1, Note 3..
But it⁹⁴The purely symbolic ḥallah mentioned last in Mishnah 8. By rabbinic ordinance, it is forbidden for people whose impurity originates in their own body. is forbidden to people suffering from genital flux⁹⁵Lev. 15:1–15, 25–30., and to women during menstruation⁹⁶Lev. 15:19–24. or after childbirth⁹⁷Lev. 12:1–8.. It may be eaten at one table with a layman and may be given to any Cohen⁹⁸Even a vulgar who cannot be expected to follow all rules of purity..
The following may be given to any Cohen¹²²Irrespective of his level of observance and knowledge of the Law. Some of the prescribed gifts are given to priests serving in the Temple; there, they are under supervision and instruction. The other gifts are purely profane; they cannot be impaired by the impurity of the Cohen.: ḥērem-dedications¹²³Num. 18:14. According to most sources, this special dedication is not for the upkeep of the Temple but for the Cohanim [Sifra Beḥuqotay Pereq12(9), Babli Sanhedrin 88a, Arakhin28a]. However, Babylonian practice follows the dissenting opinion (Arakhin29a)., firstlings¹²⁴Ex. 13:1, Num. 18:15., the redemption money for a [firstborn] son¹²⁵Ex. 13:1,13, Num. 3:47, 18:15., the redemption value of a firstling donkey¹²⁶Ex. 13:1,13., foreleg, jawbone, and first stomach¹²⁷Deut. 18:3., the first shearing¹²⁸Deut. 18:4., oil to burn¹²⁹Impure heave olive oil., Temple sacrifices, and First Fruits¹³⁰Deut. 26:1–11.. Rebbi Jehudah forbids First Fruits¹³¹Since they have to follow rules of heave, Mishnah Bikkurim 2:1.. Heave vetch¹³²This is animal fodder except in times of famine. Rebbi Aqiba permits but the Sages forbid.

MISHNAH: The excess of sheqalim is profane⁷⁴Mishnah 3.. The excess of a tenth of an ephah⁷⁵Either the daily offering of the High Priest, which is the only obligatory offering by a single person which is neither a purification nor a reparation offering, or the purification offering of the very poor, Lev. 5:11., the excess of nests⁷⁶Couples of pigeons or turtle doves, needed to permit the person access to sancta. of male sufferers from gonorrhea⁷⁷Lev. 15:14., the nests of female sufferers from flux⁷⁸Lev. 15:29., the nests of women after childbirth⁷⁹Lev. 12:8., or purification offerings, or reparation offerings, their excesses are gift⁴¹Meaning the coins given as sheqel.. This is the principle: of anything brought for a sin or as reparation the excess is gift.
The excess⁹⁴In all these cases the money was saved for the purpose of a certain type of sacrifice. If not all the money was actually used, the excess may be used later for the same purpose. It cannot return to profane status since “a promise to Heaven is like delivery to an individual”. of elevation sacrifices is for elevation sacrifices, the excess of flour offerings is for flour offerings, the excess of well-being sacrifices is for well-being sacrifices, the excess of Pesaḥ is for well-being sacrifices. The excess of nezirim is for nezirim, the excess of a nazir⁹⁵If money was collected in order to help any nazir who might apply for a subsidy for the cost of his sacrifices, the money remain in its status even if not used in the time frame originally envisaged. But if money either was set aside by a nazir himself or it was given to him personally for his sacrifices and not completely used, the excess goes to the Temple’s gift account. is for gift.

HALAKHAH: They shall arrange¹³⁷Lev. 1:7. The theme of the Halakhah is to find a biblical source for the number of Cohanim used to bring the parts of the daily sacrifices to the altar.. I could think, a hundred; I could think, a thousand. ¹³⁸The remainder of the Paragraph also is Sifra MesoraˋParashah 5(5–9). Its topic is the interpretation of prescriptive biblical verses in the absence of numerical data. The theory expounded here is what the author has called the axiom of definiteness: Biblical language in legal contexts is definite (H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, Ph. Longworth ed., London 1966., pp. 171–196, in particular pp. 174–175.) In the situation considered here it is noted that the set of numbers >1 has a smallest element, 2, but no largest one. Therefore an indefinite plural used in a biblical law must mean 2, otherwise the meaning would not be definite. This is applied to the laws of zava, a woman impure by non-menstrual blood flow for many days. By the principle of definiteness this means that days are 2, the number of many days is the smallest number >2, or 3. Rebbi Aqiba said, anywhere you could understand many or you could understand few, if you took the many you took nothing, if you took few you took¹³⁹Babli Megillah 17a, Sanhedrin 5a.. It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah ben Bathyra said, two measures; one finite, the other infinite. Everybody measures with the finite measure, but nobody measures with the infinite measure. Rebbi Nehemiah said, does the verse come to open or to lock in? It does not come to lock in but to open¹⁴⁰In Babylonian sources, this statement is credited to R. Yose; Seder Olam Chapter 1 (in the author’s edition, Northvale 1998, p. 3, Note 5, pp. 5–8.). If you are saying days¹⁴¹Lev. 15:25. are ten, they could be 100 or 200 or 1’000 or 10’000. But if you say days are two, you did unlock. Rebbi Muna¹⁴²The Tanna. said in the name of Rebbi Jehudah. Days are two. I could think that days are many. If they are many, why is it said, many? Therefore the verse only spoke of few days. How much are they? It means two; many are three. I could think that many (days) means ten. It says days and it says many. Since the minimum of days are two, so for many, the minimum of many are three. I could think that two and three make five. But is it said, days [and many]? It only is said, many days. How is this? These many should be more than two. How many are they? It implies three.

“What is the positive commandment about the menstruating woman?” Rebbi Abin said, Keep the Children of Israel away from their impurities⁷⁰Lev. 15:31. The verse continues: Lest they die in their impurities when they defile My abode which is in their midst. This is the positive commandment not to defile the Temple. The verse concludes the chapters on impurities created by the human body (childbirth, skin diseases, male and female venereal diseases, menstruation, and sexual relations with a menstruating woman). Therefore it also is the positive commandment regarding the menstruating woman and is interpreted to forbid sexual relations with a woman close to the expected onset of her menses. The question about the woman experiencing a discharge during sex must refer to an unexpected event. Babli Ševuot 18b, most of the paragraph.. Rebbi Jonathan sent to ask Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi Yose bar Lakonia, from where a warning for one having sex with an impure woman? He wanted to throw a stone after him; he told him, you are asking me something that children recite every day in the synagogue⁷¹Serving as elementary school under the system of compulsory elementary education instituted by Joshua ben Gamla.: To a woman in the separation ofher impurity you shall not come near to uncover her nakedness⁷²Lev. 18:19.. He answered him, that is not my problem. My only problem is rather “if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure,” if he separates immediately, is he liable⁷³As the Babli explains, interrupting the coition during an erection is pleasurable for the male and therefore forbidden under the circumstances. The end of the erection must precede the separation.? He told him, I and you have the same problem. Let us go out and learn. They went out and heard the voice of a Tanna who stated following Ḥiskiah: If lying a man will lie with her⁷⁴Lev. 15:24.. Not only that if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately, is he liable? The verse says, her secretion shall be⁷⁴Lev. 15:24., even if her secretion starts⁷⁵The rabbinic expression for the onset on the menses is פִּרֵס נִידָּה, “breaking through”. with him. What should he do? Rav Hoshaia, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel, he shall cool down. If he did not cool down? Rebbi Yose said, for him I am reading do not come near⁷²Lev. 18:19. as “do not separate”. Closeness is separation. Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav Abba: Those who say, be close to yourself, do not touch me for I sanctified you⁷⁶Is. 65:5. Also in the Babli the verse is quoted in support of the interpretation of the root קרב as “to separate”.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he should imagine that a sword is cutting into his flesh. Is everybody Rebbi Zeˋira? Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Ḥuna: He shall press his fingertips on the wall, then he will cool down⁷⁷Babli Ševuot 18a..

“What is the positive commandment about the menstruating woman?” Rebbi Abin said, Keep the Children of Israel away from their impurities⁷⁰Lev. 15:31. The verse continues: Lest they die in their impurities when they defile My abode which is in their midst. This is the positive commandment not to defile the Temple. The verse concludes the chapters on impurities created by the human body (childbirth, skin diseases, male and female venereal diseases, menstruation, and sexual relations with a menstruating woman). Therefore it also is the positive commandment regarding the menstruating woman and is interpreted to forbid sexual relations with a woman close to the expected onset of her menses. The question about the woman experiencing a discharge during sex must refer to an unexpected event. Babli Ševuot 18b, most of the paragraph.. Rebbi Jonathan sent to ask Rebbi Simeon ben Rebbi Yose bar Lakonia, from where a warning for one having sex with an impure woman? He wanted to throw a stone after him; he told him, you are asking me something that children recite every day in the synagogue⁷¹Serving as elementary school under the system of compulsory elementary education instituted by Joshua ben Gamla.: To a woman in the separation ofher impurity you shall not come near to uncover her nakedness⁷²Lev. 18:19.. He answered him, that is not my problem. My only problem is rather “if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure,” if he separates immediately, is he liable⁷³As the Babli explains, interrupting the coition during an erection is pleasurable for the male and therefore forbidden under the circumstances. The end of the erection must precede the separation.? He told him, I and you have the same problem. Let us go out and learn. They went out and heard the voice of a Tanna who stated following Ḥiskiah: If lying a man will lie with her⁷⁴Lev. 15:24.. Not only that if he was having sex with an impure woman, he is liable. If he was having sex with a pure one and she said to him, I became impure, if he separates immediately, is he liable? The verse says, her secretion shall be⁷⁴Lev. 15:24., even if her secretion starts⁷⁵The rabbinic expression for the onset on the menses is פִּרֵס נִידָּה, “breaking through”. with him. What should he do? Rav Hoshaia, Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel, he shall cool down. If he did not cool down? Rebbi Yose said, for him I am reading do not come near⁷²Lev. 18:19. as “do not separate”. Closeness is separation. Rav Ḥuna in the name of Rav Abba: Those who say, be close to yourself, do not touch me for I sanctified you⁷⁶Is. 65:5. Also in the Babli the verse is quoted in support of the interpretation of the root קרב as “to separate”.. Rebbi Zeˋira said, he should imagine that a sword is cutting into his flesh. Is everybody Rebbi Zeˋira? Rebbi Tanḥuma in the name of Rav Ḥuna: He shall press his fingertips on the wall, then he will cool down⁷⁷Babli Ševuot 18a..

MISHNAH: If one’s house was connected¹⁶⁸His house and the pagan temple share a wall. to a house of pagan worship and collapsed, it is forbidden to rebuild it. What should he do? He restricts himself to his property¹⁶⁹In the Babli: 4 cubits. His wall should be separated from the temple by 4 cubits. The text of Maimonides is that of the Yerushalmi. and builds. If it was his and the idolatry’s, it is judged half by half¹⁷⁰He may take half of the building material of the common wall for his own use; the remainder is forbidden for all usufruct for any Jew. Its stones, its wood, and its dust make impure like a crawling animal¹⁷¹As described in Lev. 11: 29–38, it makes impure by touch. This applies also to the stones which remain his property., as it is said¹⁷²Deut. 7:26. In Lev. 11:40–41, all crawling things which are forbidden as food are called abomination, including those which make impure by touch., you shall treat it as an abomination. Rebbi Aqiba says like a menstruating woman as it is said¹⁷³Is. 30:22. In Lev. 12:2 menstruation is called “the separation of her feeling miserable”., you shall throw it away like feeling miserable; you will call it excrement. Since the menstruating makes impure by load¹⁷⁴In Lev. 15:20–21 it is stated that anything she lies on becomes an original source of impurity. This means that if a woman in her period lies on top of ten mattresses and somebody touches the lowest one, which the woman never touched, he becomes impure as if he touched the woman herself. For R. Aqiba anybody who carries an idol becomes impure even if he never touched the idol., also idolatry makes impure by load.

MISHNAH: Even though they said that their timing was exact¹⁴¹The women enumerated in Mishnaiot 2 and 3., she has to check herself¹⁴²If she prepares food in ritual purity., except for the menstruating¹⁴³The menstruating woman for seven days cannot prepare pure food. In the period of purity, a woman cannot become impure by any genital discharge. and one in her period of purity⁸³Lev. 15:25 creates a special category, zavah, for a woman whose discharge of blood is prolonged “many days after her menstrual period”, who is subject to more complicated rules of cleansing. Since “days” must mean a minimum of two days, “many days” must mean at least three days (by the hermeneutic principle of definiteness, cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition, in: Confrontations with Judaism, Ph. Longworth, ed., Blond, London 1966, pp. 174–175). Now it is stated here that bleeding after childbirth cannot induce a status of zavah since (1) the time span of 7 days after the birth of a boy and 14 after that of a girl are defined as “menstrual impurity” and (2) this is followed by a period of purity of 33 days (for a boy) or 66 (for a girl) in which no discharge has any implication for impurity (Lev.12:4–5). Therefore, the only way a birth is followed by a status of zavah would be if the bloody discharges persist all through the period of purity.; even one who has intercourse with cloths^5,After intercourse (according to Rashi: before and after intercourse) she wipes herself with a clean cloth which can be inspected the next morning. The connection of the word עדים to the biblical hapax in Is. 64:5 is due to Qimhi; according to Rashi (Is. 64:5), the biblical word is an Aramaism and means “to be discarded”. In Niddah, Rashi seems to to read עֵד “a witness”.¹⁴⁴She is pure for her husband and if she checks herself in the evening and finds herself pure she can be certain that the food she prepared during the preceding day is pure; but for the next morning she still needs to check herself. except one in her period of purity and a virgin¹⁴⁵A “blood virgin” who can be married and even have children. whose blood is pure. Twice she has to check herself, morning¹⁴⁶If she prepared pure food during the preceding night. and evening¹⁴⁷To justify the food she prepared during the preceding day., and when she goes to have intercourse¹⁴⁸This is necessary only if she regularly prepares pure food.. In addition, wives of Cohanim when they go to eat heave¹⁴⁹They have to be sure that they are pure when they eat sanctified food.. Rebbi Jehudah says, also when they stop eating heave¹⁵⁰If there is any leftover food, they have to check themselves to be sure that it remained pure and usable..

HALAKHAH: “Five kinds of blood are impure from a woman,” etc. Rav and Rebbi Joḥanan both say that there are four kinds of blood. The red one oxydizes and becomes black⁸⁷In the Babli, 19a, 20a, this is a statement of R. Ḥanina supported by a Tannaїtic statement. Samuel’s statement is ascribed there to Rami bar Abba, a student of Rav Huna.. Samuel said, black comes from all of them. From where that there are five kinds of blood impure by the Torah? Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, “she uncovered the source of her bloods⁸⁸Lev. 20:18.,” “she shall be purified from the source of her bloods,⁸⁹Lev. 12:7.” “blood will be the excretion of her genitals.⁹⁰Lev. 15:19.This verse is not quoted in the Babli, 19a, since only four kinds of blood have to be established. Also, that verse is needed to establish the fact that a menstruating woman is impure; in the hermeneutics of the Babli it cannot be used to establish details of the rule. The other two verses mention the blood as a kind of side remark; they can be used to establish the details. The argument is that in both verses the plural is used; an indefinite plural always means 2 (cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition; cf. Chapter 1, Note 83), and 2+2 = 4.” But “a woman whose excretion of blood flows”⁹¹Lev. 15:25. is also there! That only comes to her in the days of her excessive flow to turn her into a zavah⁹²The verse deals with a different subject, with blood that is not menstrual.. From where that there is impure and pure blood? Rebbi Ḥama ben Joseph in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah⁹³Quoted in the Babli, 19a, in the names of the same authors.: It is written: “If something in the law is too difficult for you;” then it is not written “whether blood and blood” but “between blood and blood”⁹⁴Deut. 17:8., that shows that there is impure and pure blood⁹⁵That there are cases of impurity of blood which need a judicial determination..

HALAKHAH: “If one’s house was connected to a house of pagan worship,” etc. ¹⁷⁵This Halakhah also is Halakhah 9:1 in Šabbat(ש). Evidence points to Šabbat as the primary source. Much of the argument is found in Babli Šabbat 82b–83b. There is written abomination about the menstruating women, abomination about vermin, abomination about idolatry. About the menstruating woman, for anybody who would commit any of these abominations¹⁷⁶Lev. 18:29. The verse refers to all prohibitions of a sexual nature.. About vermin, do not eat any abomination¹⁷⁷Deut. 14: 2. The verse refers to all food prohibitions.. About idolatry, and do not bring any abomination into your house¹⁷⁸Deut. 7:26. This verse refers uniquely to idols and idolatry.. But I do not know for which purpose it was compared. Rebbi Aqiba says, it was compared to abomination regarding the menstruating woman. As the menstruating woman imparts impurity by load¹⁷⁴In Lev. 15:20–21 it is stated that anything she lies on becomes an original source of impurity. This means that if a woman in her period lies on top of ten mattresses and somebody touches the lowest one, which the woman never touched, he becomes impure as if he touched the woman herself. For R. Aqiba anybody who carries an idol becomes impure even if he never touched the idol., also idolatry imparts impurity by load. Or since the menstruating woman imparts impurity through a cover stone¹⁷⁹Stone is impervious to impurity. In general, anything not susceptible to impurity cannot transmit impurity. The one and only exception is impurity caused by genital discharges where impurity by load (Note 174) applies to anything under the affected person and even a stone plate covering a mattress will not shield the mattress from impurity if a person afflicted by a genital discharge sits on the stone. Babli Niddah 69b., does idolatry impart impurity through a cover stone? Rebbi Zeriqa in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina¹⁸⁰In, Šabbat: Rav Jehudah. On one hand, the tradent in Šabbat is mentioned as R. Zeriqan, the Yerushalmi form, not the Babli form Zeriqa as here; but this is to be explained by the babylonized spelling of the text of the present Tractate. On the other hand, the tradent in the Babli (Šabbat 82b) is R. Eleazar, a known student of R. Ḥanina., but some say in the name of Rav Ḥisda: Rebbi Aqiba agrees with the Sages that idolatry does not impart impurity through a cover stone. But the rabbis say it was compared to abominations of vermin. As vermin imparts impurity by motion¹⁸¹Here one has a serious discrepancy between the technical terminology of the Babli and the Yerushalmi. In the Babli impurity by motion is a form of impurity by load: If a person suffering from a genital discharge moves something indirectly or is moved with it, he imparts impurity. In the Yerushalmi this is consistently designated by its Mishnaic name, מִדְרָס, “stepping on.” This kind of impurity emphatically does not exist for vermin, or anything other than genital discharges. Therefore היסט the “motion” mentioned here must be that of a person’s hand touching an impure object. Transfer of impurity by touch is the only one mentioned for the eight kinds of impure vermin., so also idolatry imparts impurity by motion. Or as vermin in the size of a lentil imparts impurity¹⁸²Mishnah Ahilut 1:8. This minimum size for generation of impurity does not apply to complete limbs. does also idolatry in the size of a lentil impart impurity? Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman, Rebbi Eleazar, Rebbi Abbahu in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: They were yoked to Baal Peor and ate sacrifices to the dead¹⁸³Ps. 106:28.. As the dead in the size of an olive impart impurity¹⁸²Mishnah Ahilut 1:8. This minimum size for generation of impurity does not apply to complete limbs. so idolatry in the size of an olive imparts impurity. Or since a corpse imparts impurity once a person puts his finger tips in¹⁸⁴This refers to “tent” impurity (Ševuot 2:1 Note 34) which is created by any part of a person’s body being under the same roof as a corpse, even if it is only a finger tip., could I think that idolatry imparts once a person puts his finger tips in? Tearing down, tearing down one infers from the leprous house¹⁸⁵A house afflicted with recurrent “leprosy” must be torn down (Lev. 14:45). Pagan altars must be torn down (Deut. 12:3). By the nature of the topics, the verb נתץ is used in the singular in the first case, in the plural in the second. Therefore this is a comparison (הקש), not an “equal cut” (גזירה שוה); the laws will be similiar, not exactly identical.. Since in a leprous house when he entered with his head and most of his body¹⁸⁶Based on Lev. 14:46, which decrees impurity for anybody coming into the house, Sifra Meṣoraˋ Pereq 5(4), Mishnah Negaˋim 13:8., so idolatry when he entered with his head and most of his body. Rebbi Ḥanina¹⁸⁷In Šabbat: Ḥanania. The latter attribution is correct since he must have been a contemporary of R. Mana (II). said, this means that the impurity of idolatry is not consistent¹⁸⁸Neither R. Aqiba nor the rabbis are consistent in their comparisons.. For otherwise, why does one compare if for the facile [impurity] and does not compare for the strict? Rebbi Mana said, it is consistent. Why was it compared to a corpse and to vermin? To inform in both cases about the facile [impurity] attached to it¹⁸⁹The impurity of idols and idolatry should follow the rules common to impurities generated either by dead vermin or by bodily discharges. This argument is known in the Babli tradition as הַצַּד הַשָּׁוֶה “the equal part;” cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition, in: “Confrontations with Judaism”, ed. Ph. Longworth, London 1966, p. 185.. This is for a broken idol. But an entire one even in the most minute size¹⁹⁰This is consistent with the impurity of animals as food, where a complete creature always is biblically forbidden irrespective of size (cf. Nazir 6:1 Note 64)., as Rebbi Yose hen Rebbi Abun¹⁹¹In ש: R. Ḥuna. said, Rav Ḥama bar Gorion in the name of Rav: Baal was the penis gland in the form of a bean. What is the reason? They selected the Baal of circumcision as god¹⁹²Jud. 8:33. Instead of “Baal of Covenant” one reads “Baal of circumcision” referring to the place of circumcision. This identifies the Semitic Baal with the Greek and Roman Priapus..

HALAKHAH: “Five kinds of blood are impure from a woman,” etc. Rav and Rebbi Joḥanan both say that there are four kinds of blood. The red one oxydizes and becomes black⁸⁷In the Babli, 19a, 20a, this is a statement of R. Ḥanina supported by a Tannaїtic statement. Samuel’s statement is ascribed there to Rami bar Abba, a student of Rav Huna.. Samuel said, black comes from all of them. From where that there are five kinds of blood impure by the Torah? Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said, “she uncovered the source of her bloods⁸⁸Lev. 20:18.,” “she shall be purified from the source of her bloods,⁸⁹Lev. 12:7.” “blood will be the excretion of her genitals.⁹⁰Lev. 15:19.This verse is not quoted in the Babli, 19a, since only four kinds of blood have to be established. Also, that verse is needed to establish the fact that a menstruating woman is impure; in the hermeneutics of the Babli it cannot be used to establish details of the rule. The other two verses mention the blood as a kind of side remark; they can be used to establish the details. The argument is that in both verses the plural is used; an indefinite plural always means 2 (cf. H. Guggenheimer, Logical Problems in Jewish Tradition; cf. Chapter 1, Note 83), and 2+2 = 4.” But “a woman whose excretion of blood flows”⁹¹Lev. 15:25. is also there! That only comes to her in the days of her excessive flow to turn her into a zavah⁹²The verse deals with a different subject, with blood that is not menstrual.. From where that there is impure and pure blood? Rebbi Ḥama ben Joseph in the name of Rebbi Hoshaiah⁹³Quoted in the Babli, 19a, in the names of the same authors.: It is written: “If something in the law is too difficult for you;” then it is not written “whether blood and blood” but “between blood and blood”⁹⁴Deut. 17:8., that shows that there is impure and pure blood⁹⁵That there are cases of impurity of blood which need a judicial determination..

HALAKHAH: “If somebody by a vow bars his wife from sexual intercourse,” etc. ¹⁷⁰Tosephta 5:6. The House of Shammai say, two weeks as after the birth of a girl¹⁷¹After the birth of a girl, the mother is forbidden intercourse for two weeks, Lev. 12:5. Since this is a normal occurrence in a marriage, the wife can be assumed to be able to live for two weeks without intercourse.. But the House of Hillel say one¹⁷²The masculine אֶחָד refers to שָׁבוּעַ “week”, the intended meaning of שַׁבָּת in this context. week, as after the birth of a boy¹⁷³Lev. 12:2. or the days of her menstruation¹⁷⁴Lev. 12:2, 15:19. Since a forced abstinence of seven days is routine in the marriage, it is reasonable to ask the wife to wait for 7 days before giving her the right to sue in court (the Babli’s interpretation of the House of Hillel, 61b)..