MISHNAH: Every hand which checks frequently [To check for genital emissions.] is praiseworthy [Since she minimizes impurity of foods.] for women but should be cut off for men [Since it will arouse the man sexually.] . If an insane woman, or a blind, or a mentally disturbed [The insane is permanently mentally disabled; the mentally disturbed is ill temporarily.] have sane [Depending on the context, פיקח can mean either “sane” or “seeing”; here it means both.] women friends, they can put them in order [They can check them out and certify that they are not menstruating.] so they can eat heave [If they are members of a Cohen’s household.] . It is the way of Jewish women to have intercourse with cloths, one for him and one for her [If they are preparing their food in purity and are required to check themselves at least twice a day, so they can wipe themselves after intercourse and inspect the cloths the next morning to be sure no blood appears on any cloth.] , and the religious ones prepare a third to put their house in order [Since the requirement was already stated in Halakhah 1:7 that a woman engaged in preparing pure food has to check herself before intercourse, the question arises in the Halakhah what this Mishnah adds to Mishnah 1:7.] .
HALAKHAH: “Every hand which checks frequently is praiseworthy for women,” etc. So is the baraita [A similar text is quoted piecewise in the Babli, 13a/b. A continuous text is in Tosephta 2:8: “Every hand which checks frequently is praiseworthy for women but should be cut off for men; Rebbi Ṭarphon says, it should be cut off on his navel. One said to him, does that not split open his belly? He said to them, that is what I said, to what can this be compared? To one who forcefully puts his hand on his eye who will have tears. When has this been said? In the matter of semen. But in a case of gonorrhea, every hand which checks more frequently than another is more praiseworthy than the other.”] : “Any one who frequently puts his hand on his eye will frequently have tears. Rebbi Ṭarphon says, it should be cut off on his navel. One said to him, does that not split open his belly? He said to them, that is what I said, for such a person’s death is better than his life.” The colleagues say, Rebbi Ṭarphon curses him in his body. Rebbi Yose said, he only explains that it is forbidden to manipulate lower than the navel. “That is, in the matter of semen. But in a case of gonorrhea, every hand which checks more frequently than another is more praiseworthy than the other. [An exact check is necessary to determine the duration of his impurity and the correct way of purification once the patient is healed.] ”
The religious women were checking themselves out for every amphora and every loaf. [A similar story appears in the Babli, 6b, where Rabban Gamliel had to rule that only the last amphora was impure. Rabban Gamliel here is clearly Gamliel I, Hillel’s grandson, since libations are possible only in the Temple. The Babli has great trouble with the story because it identifies the master as Gamliel II of Jabne.] It happened that Tabitha, the slave girl of Rabban Gamliel, was carrying wine for libations and checked herself for every amphora. She said to him, my master, I detected a stain. Rabban Gamliel started. She said to him, I was checking myself for every amphora and was impure only for that amphora.
They said in Rabbi Yannai’s name: There is no blind woman. Does this hold up? They said in Rabbi Yose ben Rebbi Ḥanina’s name: There is no blind woman. Does this hold up? Rebbi Ila, Rabbi Yose ben Ḥanina, in the name of the House of Rebbi Yannai: There is no blind woman [One has to omit the reference to a blind woman in the Mishnah. It seems that there was opposition to this statement and it was accepted only on the authority of R. Ilai. The Babli, 13b, quotes the statement in R. Yose ben R. Ḥanina’s name and explains that a blind woman can check herself and show the cloth to a seeing friend. While she needs help, she acts on her own and does not have to be certified.] .
Rebbi Yannai said, the first one [The woman working on pure food mentioned in Mishnah 1:7 who is required to check herself before intercourse.] also is called religious. We have stated “they have to check themselves”, and you say so [In Mishnah 1:7, the checking is stated as a requirement. In Mishnah 2:1, a similar statement appears as an act of special piety. It is impossible to explain Mishnah 2:1 as dealing with a woman not occupied with pure food since Mishnah 2:3 very clearly states that all women are permitted to their husbands without any checking.] ? Rebbi Ila said, to tell you that everybody who keeps the directives of the rabbis is called religious [The Babli, 12a, quotes the explanation attributed here to R. Ila in the name of R. Immi and rejects it since a person who does not follow the rabbis’ directives is called evil. Rava explains there that the religious women take a new piece of textile for every check whereas others use the same piece repeatedly.] .
Rebbi Jeremiah [Later in the Halakhah he correctly is called Rav Jeremiah (bar Abba).] in the name of Rav: If she checked herself with an unchecked hand [An unwashed hand which might have blood on it from other sources.] or if she hit hard with her body on her genitals [The expression is elliptic and uses the masculine for the feminine. If the woman sat down hard, or hit herself with a hard object on the outer genitals, and now there are blood drops found there. Rav declares her impure as menstruating since one has to assume that any blood found came from the body at the time it was found, and that her body, including her hand, was free of blood drops beforehand.] , the presumption is that her body was checked. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, the Mishnah [Mishnah 2:2.] says so: “If it was found on his [cloth], they are impure and obligated for a sacrifice. [If the next morning there was nothing on her cloth but a bloodstain was found on his, it is assumed that both their bodies were clean at the start of intercourse and that, therefore, the bloodstain had to come from her.] ” Does that not mean that there is a presumption that the body was checked? Rebbi Ḥanina said, explain it if he had checked himself. Rebbi Ze‘ira was offended. Do people do that [Nobody checks himself out like that.] ? Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of Rav Jeremiah: Up to a broken bean she hangs it, more than that its needs an explanation [This statement seems to be elliptic and should read: If the stain is smaller than a broken bean, one may presume it is the blood of a louse or flea. If the stain is larger, it comes from menstrual blood unless there is an explicit explanation, i. e., a known source of the blood. Yerushalmi מתלא is the same as Babylonian אמתלא “an explanation” (etymologically: a peg to hang on.)] . They said, Rav Jeremiah retracted this. They said, he retracted it when he was informed of the words of the rabbis [In the following story.] . Rebbi praised Rebbi Ḥama, the father of Rebbi Hoshaiah, before Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose. Rebbi Ḥama, the father of Rebbi Hoshaiah, asked before Rebbi Ismael ben Rebbi Yose: If she checked herself with an unchecked hand or if she hit hard with her body on her genitals? He said to him, according to him are you asking me? Following the teacher or following the student? My father [R. Yose, Rebbi’s teacher. In the Babli, 14a, R. Yose’s opinion is credited to R. Ḥiyya (the Elder).] said, a stain [Which creates a doubt that it be menstrual blood.] . But Rebbi said, an episode of bleeding [A case of certain menstrual bleeding.] . He said to him: That is the one of whom you are proud [The reaction is unintelligible here. It is explained in the Babli, 14b, where R. Ḥama’s question was about the situation discussed in the next paragraph and where R. Ḥama insisted to hear Rabbi’s opinion, not that of R. Yose (R. Ismael’s father and Rebbi’s teacher), about which R. Ismael was offended.] ? Rebbi Ze‘ira said, it profits a man to learn his own teacher’s reasons [R. Ḥama’s question was justified (but he could have asked in a more diplomatic way.)] .
If she checked [She wiped herself with a cloth and put it away for inspection later when it was found stained.] and deposited it in a glass box, Rebbi Ḥiyya said, a stain; Rebbi said, an episode of bleeding. Rebbi Ḥiyya objected to Rebbi: Do you not give her the possibility of an explanation? Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, Rebbi’s reason is that a box is safe from crawling things, it is not safe from lice [Which might have been on the cloth. The size of a squeezed louse is the upper limit of a stain which may be explained away.] . Up to the size of a broken bean she explains it; if it is larger, by what can it be explained?
MISHNAH: If [a stain] is found on his [cloth] [Irrespective of when it was inspected, blood on his cloth is evidence of her menstrual blood.] , they are impure and obligated for a sacrifice [If the Temple is rebuilt in their lifetime, they have to bring a purification sacrifice to atone for a sin committed inadvertently.] . If it is found on hers immediately [Greek εὐθέως “immediately”.] , they are impure and obligated for a sacrifice. If it is found on hers later [She cleansed herself later when there was no possibility to determine whether she bled during or after intercourse.] , they are possibly impure but free from the duty of a sacrifice.
HALAKHAH: “If [a stain] is found on his [cloth],” etc. It was stated in this regard: If it is found on his, whether immediately or not immediately [Unless he has an open wound on his penis, the bloodstain can only come from her; he is unlikely to have a bloody discharge.] .
“Immediately, they are impure.” They said immediately for wiping, not for examination [That should be done later in a leisurely fashion.] . Rav Huna said, that she should wipe the face of the house from the outside, but not what is in the rooms nor in the crevices [The woman is the house, the face of the house is the opening of the vagina; the rooms are the inner genitals, the crevices the folds of her skin.] . They asked before Rav Naḥman bar Jacob: Should she not examine it immediately? Rebbi Abba said, if you say that she should examine it immediately, you abolish immediacy [You would have to extend the duration of “immediately”.] . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, if you say that she should examine it immediately, is that not checking, to be reduced from 24 hours, as we have stated: Checking reduces from 24 hours? [Since the only purpose of the cloths is to let the woman check herself before she goes to work on pure food the next time, nothing could be gained by requiring an immediate inspection of her cloth.] Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, as an example, if the beadle and a witness were standing at the lintel. When the beadle comes out and the witness enters, that is “immediately” [A witness waits outside the courtroom to be called. The definition of “immediate” is the time required for the beadle to appear, to motion the witness to enter, and the witness to enter the courtroom. The same criterion is quoted in the Babli, 12a, 14b.] .
“They are free from the duty of a sacrifice.” They are free from a purification sacrifice but are obligated for an expiation sacrifice [Required when it is unknown whether a sin has been committed; cf. Chapter 1, Note 139. The same statement is in the Babli, 14 b and Keritut 17b.] .
MISHNAH: What is “later” [Mentioned in Mishnah 2; Note 35.] ? That she should leave her bed and wipe her face [Her outer genitals.] . After that time [If she waits longer and then finds blood on her cloth.] she would retroactively make impure for 24 hours but does not make her sex partner impure; Rebbi Aqiba says, she makes her sex partner impure. The sages agree with Rebbi Aqiba that one who finds a stain makes her sex partner impure [A red stain found on her garment, even if it is not proven that it is a blood-stain.] .
HALAKHAH: “What is ‘later’,” etc. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, that is not later but after later. What is later? That she can stretch out her arm and take the cloth from under the bedsheet. But after later, her husband is pure [The Sages disagree with R. Aqiba in the situation described in the Mishnah, that a stain is found after the woman left her bed to check herself. But in the situation described by R. Yose ben R. Abun the Sages will agree with R. Aqiba that both are impure. In the Babli, 14b, and the Tosephta, 3:6, the statement of R. Yose ben R. Abun is attributed to the Tanna R. Eleazar ben R. Ṣadoq (II), of R. Aqiba’s generation.] .
Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rav: The words of those Sages who follow the method of Rebbi Meïr [The source which attributes the power to impart retroactive impurity to stains found on a garment (Chapter 1, Note 42) is attributed to R. Meïr. Rav thinks that if the Sages follow R. Aqiba in extending impurity to the sex partner in case a stain was found, they also must hold that the impurity is retroactive for 24 hours.] . Rebbi Joḥanan said, really the Sages [They deny retroactive impurity caused by stains.] . How is that? The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: We shall infer the point of view of the Sages from that of Rebbi Aqiba. Just as Rebbi Aqiba says, she makes her sex partner impure retroactively but her count is not in disorder [Chapter 1, Note 45.] , so the Sages say, she makes her sex partner impure retroactively but her count is not in disorder [If the count is not in disorder, i. e., the 8th day after the onset of menstruation is well defined, then the onset is well defined and there is no place for retroactive impurity.] .
MISHNAH: All women are presumed pure for their husbands [Unless they tell them explicitly that they are impure.] . The wives of men coming from a trip are presumed pure. The House of Shammai say, she needs two cloths for each intercourse or she should have sex by candle light [This refers back to Mishnah 1. If a woman has to use cloths to check herself because of her occupation with pure food, the Hause of Shammai require that she use a separate cloth for each sex act, even if she examines them only the next morning, or, if she has only one cloth, that she examine it between any two sex acts. The House of Hillel admit repeated use of a single cloth for the entire night.] . The House of Hillel say, two cloths for entire night suffice.
HALAKHAH: Abba bar Jeremiah, Cahana in the name of Samuel: Any woman without a definite period is forbidden to her house unless she checked herself [In the Babli, 54b, this is restricted to women preparing pure food. But the present paragraph seems to speak of women in general. Her house is her husband.] . But did we not state: “All women are presumed pure for their husbands.” He explains it, for those who come from a trip. But did we not state: “The wives of men coming from a trip are presumed pure”? Rebbi Abun bar Ḥiyya said, explain it if he came and found her awake [It is understood that she would inform him if she were forbidden to him.] . But was it not stated: Whether he found her awake or found her sleeping. Rebbi Abba said, explain it if he left her in a state of purity [One may assume that a prior state continues until one is appraised of a change. In the Babli 11b (Tosephta 3:8), this is a Tannaїtic statement; it is accepted as operative (16b) while in the Yerushalmi it is rejected at the end (Note 62).] . {What is the period that is counted for her? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said: One gives her 30 days as average period.} [It does not seem that this belongs here; it is an echo from Chapter 1, Note 132. It seems clear that if the wife has a regular period, the husband has to use that period to compute whether his wife is pure or impure at the time of his return, not any theoretical average.] Rebbi Joḥanan said, I am stating that it is permitted even after three years, but only for a woman who has a regular period [Whose husband can compute in advance her days of purity. Then there is no question anymore of assuming the wife to be pure by her prior status of purity but of prior length of the period which may be assumed to remain unchanged. This is also the interpretation given R. Joḥanan’s statement in the Babli, 15b.] . Rebbi Abbahu said, only if it was seven days after the onset of her period [Since the biblical days of impurity are 7, irrespective of the length of the menstruation.] . Are you not worried that maybe she did not immerse herself [And remain impure since her husband is away. This argument proves that in this paragraph one does not speak about a woman engaged in preparing pure food; if she prepared impure food her only reason for immersing herself in a miqweh would be to be able to sleep with her husband.] ? Rebbi Ḥanina said, that means that it is forbidden for a woman to stay in her impurity. Samuel bar Abba asked: Even if it was certain that she had given birth [In that case, the prior regular period has ceased to exist and the woman has to establish a new period after she finishes nursing her baby. Even if she reestablishes a regular period of the same length, in most cases its position in the month will change. A prior knowledge cannot be used when it is known to be obsolete. In the Babli, 15b, he addresses his question to R. Abba.] ? Rebbi Yose said, so we are saying, even if she became impure. But since her prior state was invalidated when she gave birth, so her prior state was invalidated when she became impure [It is obvious that the computation based on the prior period cannot be used after it is known that the woman has given birth. Then it is also clear that if for any reason whatsoever the continuation of the regular period is in doubt, there can be no computation. The explanation given by R. Abba earlier in this paragraph is shown to be invalid since the woman is certain to have become impure by the time of her regular period and, therefore, has no presumption of purity. The only way to admit R. Joḥanan’s statement is one based on the computation of pure days when there is no known change in the wife’s regular period.] .
“The House of Shammai say, she needs two cloths for each intercourse or she should have sex by candle light.” But was it not stated: The person who engages in sex by light is blameworthy [Also quoted in the Babli, 16b.] ? So is the Mishnah: She may have sex [In the dark. The Babli takes the Mishnah as it is written.] and [then] check by candle light. Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rav Ḥiyya bar Ashi in the name of Rav: If she had intercourse using a cloth, she is forbidden to her house [She is working with pure food and, therefore, is cleansing herself after intercourse. If in the morning (following the House of Hillel) the cloth cannot be found, she is declared impure until she checks herself out a second time.] . Rebbi Ze‘ira said, if her proof exists, she is permitted; if there is no proof, not so much more [A woman who does not work with pure food can have sex without checking herself with a cloth and is always presumed pure unless known to be impure. Why should a woman using a cloth be in a worse position than one who does not use it?] ? Rebbi Yose said, there, you can determine the facts; here, you cannot determine the facts [If she already has to use a cloth, that cloth must be of use. The use is to confirm her status of purity. If the status cannot be confirmed because the cloth was lost, why should her status of purity be confirmed?] .
MISHNAH: The Sages gave a simile about a woman’s anatomy: The room [The uterus.] , the anteroom [The vagina. The Babli version is פְּרוֹזְדּוֹר. Cf. Greek πρόθυρον “front door; porch”, also πρόσοδος “approach, onset; sexual intercourse”.] , and the upper floor [The ovary. The Fallopian tubes leading from the ovary to the uterus in the Babli are called לוּל “staircase, chicken coop”.] . The blood from the room is impure. If it is found in the anteroom it is impure even in the case of a doubt since it is presumed to come from the source [The walls of the room. The implication is that blood originating in the ovary or the tubes is pure.] .
HALAKHAH: “The Sages gave a simile about a woman’s anatomy,” etc. So is the Mishnah: The blood from the room is impure but the blood from the upper floor is pure [The second part of the Mishnah would be superfluous if all blood in the genital apparatus were impure.] . Rav Jehudah in the name of Samuel: The room is inwards from the anteroom; the upper floor is over the room up to the middle of the anteroom, the door of the upper floor opens to the anteroom [It is not known what is the source of anatomical knowledge in Babylonian medical schools. The anatomy of Palestinian authors seems to be derived from lost Roman sources; it is reported (Babli 30b, Tosephta 4:17) that the slave girls who had helped with Cleopatra’s suicide were delivered to Roman doctors who made them pregnant and then killed them in various stages of pregnancy to study the development of the fetus. In the Babli, 17b, the statement is credited to the school of Rav Huna.] . Rav Naḥman bar Rav Isaac asked Rav Huna: Does the Mishnah [deal with the case that blood was found] inwards of the door of the upper floor [Does the presumption of impurity of the blood presuppose proof that it is unlikely to come from the tubes?] ? He said to him, if it was found inwards of the door of the upper floor it is certainly [impure]. But we deal with the case that it was found outwards from the door of the upper floor [Therefore, the blood is treated as probably, but not certainly, impure. If the woman touched heave, the heave would be in limbo, could not be used nor be burned before it spoils.] . The words of the rabbis disagree, since Rebbi Joḥanan said, three are like a doubt but they treated them as certain, viz., the following: A woman who has a miscarriage in the form of a cut-off hand or cut-off foot [Mishnah 3:1. If the miscarriage produces something that does not look at all like a human fetus, one might think that it was questionable whether there really had been a pregnancy and there should be no pure period but this is treated like a birth and the woman becomes impure (as for a female) and subsequently pure (as for a male).] , or a placenta [An empty placenta is treated as sign of a birth even if it was not preceded by any child, Mishnah 3:4.] , and blood found in the anteroom [The case of the Mishnah here. According to R. Joḥanan, heave becomes certainly impure and has to be burned immediately. In the Babli, 17b, the disagreement between the Babylonian Rav Huna and the Galilean R. Joḥanan is quoted as one between the Babylonian Rav Qaṭina (a colleague of Rav Huna) and the Galilean R. Ḥiyya (the Elder).] . What are we speaking of? If it was found inwards of the door of the upper floor it is certainly [impure]. But we must deal with the case that it was found outwards from the door of the upper floor. Rebbi Abba the son of Rebbi Pappaios asked before Rebbi Yose: We have stated many doubts [There are many more Mishnaiot (partially enumerated in the Babli, 18a) in which cases of impurity are resolved by rabbinic rules without all the facts being known which would allow a factual determination. Why does R. Joḥanan count only three?] and you say so? He said to him, Rebbi Joḥanan spoke only of a woman [The same answer in the Babli, 18a.] .
MISHNAH: Five kinds of blood are impure from a woman: Red, black, like saffron stigma [Which has the shape of a horn, קרן.] , and like earth water [Reddish ochre.] , and like mixed wine [Red wine mixed with water.] . The Hause of Shammai say, also like fenugreek water and like roast beef juice, but the House of Hillel declare these pure. The green [Yellowish green, the color of an etrog(citrus medica).] Aqabia ben Mahalalel declares impure but the Sages declare it pure. Rebbi Meïr said, if it does not cause impurity as a stain, it causes impurity as a body fluid [The body fluids (blood, urine) of a menstruating woman are sources of original impurity.] . Rebbi Yose says, neither one nor the other.
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 black [In 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 bloods [Lev. 20:18.] ,” “she shall be purified from the source of her bloods, [Lev. 12:7.] ” “blood will be the excretion of her genitals. [Lev. 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” [Lev. 15:25.] is also there! That only comes to her in the days of her excessive flow to turn her into a zavah [The 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 Hoshaiah [Quoted 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” [Deut. 17:8.] , that shows that there is impure and pure blood [That there are cases of impurity of blood which need a judicial determination.] .
“The Hause of Shammai say, also like fenugreek water and like roast beef juice.” That makes seven [The preceding paragraph established that there can be only five kinds.] . They are similar to earth water [Not counted separately.] . Rebbi Yose in the name of Rav, the colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Meïr did not declare impure, only Aqabia mentioned it [As explained in Tractate Demay, Chapter 2, Notes 136, 137, 141, dry harvested produce remains impervious to impurity as long as it remains dry. But if it is wetted by human body fluids, it becomes susceptible to impurity. R. Meïr agrees that green discharge is not menstrual blood and therefore not impure in itself, but as a body fluid it will have the power to prepare dry food for impurity. R. Yose objects since a green discharge is not blood and only blood, breast milk, sweat, spittle, semen, and urine are the body fluids which prepare for impurity.] . Then it also should bring impurity like fenugreek water and like roast beef juice which were mentioned by the House of Shammai! These are similar to earth water [Therefore, the House of Hillel will agree that they can prepare for impurity.] . Pure blood prepares for impurity, impure blood does not prepare [This is a minority opinion of R. Eleazar ben Azariah, Mishnah Makhširin 6:5. According to the majority opinion, in general what prepares does not make impure but menstrual blood prepares and transfers impurity at the same moment. For this opinion, one would translate: “Impure blood does not need preparation.”] .
MISHNAH: How is red? Like blood from a wound. Black, like inkstone [Ink is made by scraping of flakes and dissolving them in water.] ; lighter than that is pure. Like saffron stigma, like the uniformly colored part of it [Which is reddish, not yellow.] . Like earth water, from the valley of Bet Kerem [Near Jerusalem, from where the stones for the Temple were quarried (Mishnah Middot 3:4).] on which water was poured. And like mixed wine, two parts water for one part Sharon wine.
HALAKHAH: “How is red,” etc. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa, Rebbi Ulla from Caesarea in the name of Rebbi Ḥanina; Rebbi Abba in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Menasia: Like blood of a wound which was hit a second time. Rebbi Jacob bar Sosai said before Rebbi Yose: The Mishnah implies this, “red like blood from a wound. [Blood coming from a pre-existing wound. In the Babli, 19b, many different characterizations are given and one of them is “blood from a wound on the small finger of an unmarried teenager which had healed and opened a second time.” Such a string of conditions is characteristic for the Babli which wants to make sure that these criteria are never used in praxi.] ” Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman and Rebbi Eudaimon from Haifa were sitting together when a man passed by them [It seems that he had an open wound.] . Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman said to Rebbi Eudaimon from Haifa: That one is close to produce blood of a menstruating woman. Does he disagree? If he would be hit a second time, it would be like menstrual blood.
“And black, like ink-stone.” How do you check that? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah: One takes the ink-stone and puts in on white leather [On a white background to make the black appear deeper. In the Babli, 20a, Samuel requires a white cloth.] . Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, on colored leather [To make the black appear more muted.] . Rebbi Ze‘ira in the name of the rabbis: Black like a raven, black like a grape berry, black like asphalt are pure. The colleagues in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Black like liquid ink is pure [In the Babli, 20a, liquid ink and grape are classified as impure by Samuel, asphalt and raven as pure by R. Eleazar.] . Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Like a felt hat imported from overseas is impure. Rebbi Ze‘ira asked before Rebbi Immi: Are all these facts to be acted upon? He answered him, yes. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, all of them, if they are lighter than the standard they are pure, darker than the standard impure [Tosephta 3:11. In the Babli, 20a, this is the position of Ulla and Bar Qappara (who is mentioned in the same sense later in this paragraph); the latter explicitly excludes the looks of mixed wine from this rule. The question is whether the list of shades given in the Mishnah is to be taken as limit of what is impure or is an exact description.] . Rebbi Joḥanan said, all of them, if they are lighter than the standard they are pure, darker than the standard pure except for black [In the Babli, 20a, this is a definite minority opinion ascribed tentatively to Rebbi Immi (bar Abba). It is not mentioned in the Tosephta.] . The Mishnah supports Rebbi Joḥanan, as we have stated: “And black like ink-stone is impure, lighter than that is pure.” Therefore, darker than that is impure, but only black was mentioned in that connection. Therefore, all others, even if they are darker than the standards, are pure. The town of Rav Jehudah followed Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish but Rav Jehudah himself followed Rebbi Joḥanan. Bar Qappara stated a support for Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish [Tosephta 3:11. In the Babli, 20a, this is the position of Ulla and Bar Qappara (who is mentioned in the same sense later in this paragraph); the latter explicitly excludes the looks of mixed wine from this rule. The question is whether the list of shades given in the Mishnah is to be taken as limit of what is impure or is an exact description.] but one does not follow him in practice, since Rebbi Ḥanina mixed wine for Bar Qappara and asked him, if it is like that, what is its status? He answered, impure. He lightened it, then he answered, pure. He said to him, peace shall be on him who erred with his mouth but not with his eyes [In the Babli, 20a, the same story is told with R. Ḥanina praising Bar Qappara who sticks to his teachings since he had exempted mixed wine from his general rule. In the Yerushalmi he is praised for following in practice what two generations later would be the teachings of R. Joḥanan while formulating support for what would be the position of R. Simeon ben Laqish.] . They wanted to say that he who says pure, refers to when it was polished [If it forms a shiny crust.] . But he who says impure , if it is not polished. Let us hear from the following: It happened that a woman from the Patriarchate had a discharge of black blood. The case came before Rebbi Jacob bar Zabdi and Rebbi Isaac bar Ṭabelai; they wanted to declare her impure. Rebbi Ḥelbo told them: So says Rav Huna in the name of Rav: Black which penetrates [The blood colors any textile but the stain never reflects light.] is pure, that which polishes is impure. He said that only about black. Therefore, all others are pure even if they polish [And do not exactly represent any of the colors described in the Mishnah.] .
“Like saffron stigma, like the uniformly colored part of it.” Moist, not dried [Agreed to in the Babli, 20a, and in Tosephta 3:11.] . From the upper part, not the lower [Put in doubt in the Babli, 20a; confirmed in Tosephta 3:11.] . From the part in the shadow, not exposed to the sun. Rebbi Abbahu brought before Rebbi Eleazar [He brought him blood to examine, probably in a glass vessel.] in cupper’s vessels. He said to him, its looks already are dimmed. Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi brought before Rebbi Abbahu goat’s blood as [example of] red, fish blood as [example of] black. He said to him, its looks already are dimmed [The color of blood can be judged only when it is fresh.]
“Like earth water, from the valley of Bet Kerem on which water was poured.” Rebbi Ḥanina and Rebbi Jonathan both say one pours the water on a piece of cloth [One checks the color remaining on the cloth. In the Babli, 20a, R. Ḥanina is reported having used dry ochre; cf. Note 130.] .
“And like mixed wine.” Abba bar Ḥana [It seems rather that this should be R. Abba bar bar Ḥana, known as student of R. Joḥanan, and not his father Rav Abba bar Ḥana, nephew of R. Ḥiyya the Elder.] in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: As one sees a cup of mixed wine from the outside. They wanted to say, in a Tiberian cup. Rebbi Eudaimon from Sepphoris said before Rebbi Mana: As in a small phial [Diminutive of פִייַלֵי, Greek φιάλη, Latin phiala, “phial, saucer”.] whose walls do not cast a shadow [In a colorless glass phial (Rashi 21a), cf. Babli 21a.] . Samuel said, anybody who has no experience in seeing kinds of pure blood should not judge kinds of impure blood [He wants to restrict the authority to deliver an opinion on purity or impurity of blood to surgeons like himself.] . Rav said, only if he is competent about them and their names [An academically trained medical expert.] . The words of Rebbi Joḥanan say so: I know all kinds of pure blood and of impure blood. The pure is the most red; the impure is like earth water. “If he has no experience [A quote from Samuel’s statement.] ,” therefore, if he has experience he can judge it. In addition, from what we have stated [Referring to the “earth water”, paint made from ochre earth. In the Tosephta (3:11) the opposite is stated: One checks the color only if the water is turbid (i. e., if the entire fluid has a uniform color), not if it is clear (if the ochre has separated and settled on the bottom.)] : clear but not turbid. Rebbi Ḥanina used it turbid [Confirmed in the Babli, 20a.] . They said before Rebbi Joḥanan: Rebbi Ḥanina uses it turbid, but you said, not turbid. He said to them, Rebbi Ḥanina drinks old [wine], Rebbi Joḥanan does not drink old [wine], Rebbi Ḥanina drinks oldest [wine] [R. Ḥanina, of the generation of R. Joḥanan’s teachers, had old traditions. In the Babli, 20b, R. Joḥanan complains that he never had training in judging kinds of blood because R. Ḥanina (a medical man) was so competent that he handled all cases by himself. This agrees with the story told here.] . Rebbi Hoshaiah said: Since Rebbi Hoshaiah’s eye is full of happenings [He has seen so many cases that he can use shortcuts to quickly come to a decision.] , even turbid is not disqualified for him. Rebbi Shammai in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: Rebbi Ḥanina estimated with a lump of earth [He did not have to dissolve it in water; confirmed by the Babli, 20a.] . Rebbi Abun, Rebbi Shammai in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: Since we know that Rebbi Ḥanina is competent, do we follow his precedents [People with less competence have to follow the rules painstakingly.] ? Rebbi Ḥanina was living in Sepphoris, they brought cases before him and he decided on the basis of three precedents. Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish were there but he did not invite them to sit with him [There were young rabbis there but the Chief Rabbi kept them out of the decision process. R. Joḥanan himself said that he moved to Tiberias since he would never have amounted to much in Sepphoris because of R. Ḥanina’s dominance.] . They said, the old man is a Sage since his irons are sharp [His iron knife is sharp; i. e., he has no difficulty to decide. The Hebrew word for “judicial decision” is פְּסָק “what is cut off”, a translation of Latin decisio, from caedo “to cut”.] ! Once he invited them to sit with him. They said, for what reason do you take notice of us this time? He said, so should come over me [An oath inviting disaster if he was lying.] if I had not heard every single case from Rebbi in theory as many times as there are hairs on my head, and in a practical way three times; but the present case did come before Rebbi only twice. Therefore, I adjoined you with me.
Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman learned from Rebbi Eleazar the kinds of pure blood. Does this mean, not the impure kinds? But did not Rebbi Isaac bar Naḥman say to Rebbi Eudaimon from Haifa [Earlier, Note 105.] : That one is close to produce blood of a menstruating woman [This shows that he was an expert in the matter of impure blood.] ? But one who learns one kind, learns at the same time the other kind. Isaac bar Jonathan and Rav Huna were sitting together when a woman came and asked them [Showed them a blood stain.] . Isaac bar Jonathan said to her, did you see it more smoky than that [Whether the stain originally was darker.] ? Rav Huna said to him, so says Rav: Instruct according to what comes before you [One has to decide according to the evidence produced. In the Babli, 20b, the formulation is: The judge has only what his eyes are seeing.] ! Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa said in the name of Rebbi Simeon bar Abba: A number of chests full of problems came before Rebbi Ḥanina and about what came before him, he did pronounce [The “problems” were stained garments. He never investigated whether the stains had changed color in the meantime.] .
May one review stains at night? [The same story in a different version is in the Babli, 20b.] Rebbi reviewed at night and declared impure. He said, let it stay until morning. He reviewed at daylight and declared pure. He said, great are the words of the Sages who said, one does not review stains at night [Quoted also in the Babli, Megillah 14a.] . He said, let it stay until the evening. He reviewed at night and found pure. He said, I did not make a mistake [One reviews stains at the first possible moment, even at night.] ; that one faded!
If she saw on the bedsheet, is she trustworthy if she says, it looked like such and such? Rebbi Abba in the name of Rav Jehudah; Rebbi Ḥelbo, Rebbi Ḥiyya in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: if she saw on the bedsheet, she is trustworthy if she says, it looked like such and such. It was stated so: She is trustworthy [Such a baraita is also quoted I the Babli, 20b.] . I could think that in the same way she shows the looks of her stain so she shows the looks of skin disease, the verse says [Lev. 13:2 Skin disease can be judged only by examining the patient personally, not by description.] : “He shall be brought to Aaron the priest or to one of his descendants, the priests.”