## Niddah Daf 14a

###### Niddah 14a:1
[Niddah 14a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:1)

רוֹכְבֵי גְמַלִּים אֲסוּרִין לֶאֱכוֹל בִּתְרוּמָה. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: רוֹכְבֵי גְמַלִּים — כּוּלָּם רְשָׁעִים, הַסַּפָּנִים — כּוּלָּם צַדִּיקִים,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is prohibited for camel riders to partake of *teruma*,** due to the concern for a seminal emission that might result from the friction. The Gemara notes: **This** opinion of Abaye **is also taught** in a *baraita*: **Camel riders are all wicked,** as they are suspected of emitting semen for naught. **Sailors are all righteous,** because they are in a constant state of danger at sea, and therefore their hearts are always turned to God in prayer.


###### Niddah 14a:2
[Niddah 14a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:2)

הַחַמָּרִים — מֵהֶן רְשָׁעִים מֵהֶן צַדִּיקִים. אִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי: הָא דְּמִכַּף, הָא דְּלָא מִכַּף; וְאִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי: הָא דִּמְטַרְטֵין, הָא דְּלָא מְטַרְטֵין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: As for **donkey drivers,** some **of them are wicked** while some **of them are righteous.** With regard to the difference between wicked and righteous donkey drivers, **there are** those **who say** that **this** donkey driver is righteous, **as** his donkey **is saddled,** and therefore his penis does not rub against it, whereas **that** donkey driver is wicked, **as** his donkey **is not saddled,** which can cause a seminal emission. **And there are** those **who say: This** donkey driver is wicked, **as he spreads [*demittartein*]** his thighs on either side of the donkey, whereas **that** donkey driver is righteous **as he does not spread** his thighs in this manner, but rides with both legs on one side of the donkey, so that his penis does not rub against the donkey.


###### Niddah 14a:3
[Niddah 14a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:3)

רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי לָיֵיט אַמַּאן דְּגָנֵי אַפַּרְקִיד. אִינִי? וְהָאָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: פְּרַקְדָּן לֹא יִקְרָא ״קְרִיַּת שְׁמַע״ — קְרִיַּת שְׁמַע הוּא דְּלֹא יִקְרָא, הָא מִגְנָא שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further discusses actions that are apt to lead to a seminal emission. **Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi would curse one who sleeps lying on his back [*aparkeid*],** as this might lead to a seminal emission. The Gemara asks: **Is that so? But doesn’t Rav Yosef say:** One who is **lying on his back may not recite *Shema*?** From this it may be inferred that **it is only *Shema* that one may not recite** in this position, **but** to sleep **lying** in that position is **permitted.**


###### Niddah 14a:4
[Niddah 14a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:4)

לְעִנְיַן מִגְנָא, כִּי מַצְלֵי — שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי. לְעִנְיַן קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע, כִּי מַצְלֵי — אָסוּר. וְהָא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מַצְלֵי וְקָרֵי קְרִיאַת שְׁמַע! שָׁאנֵי רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּבַעַל בָּשָׂר הֲוָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **With regard to** the prohibition against **sleeping** while lying on one’s back, **when one leans slightly** to the side it is **permitted.** But **with regard to reciting *Shema*** while lying face upward, even **when one leans slightly** to the side it is **prohibited.** The Gemara asks: **But wouldn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan** lie on his back **leaning slightly** to the side **and recite *Shema*** in this manner? The Gemara answers: The *halakha* in the case of **Rabbi Yoḥanan is different, as he was corpulent,** and consequently he could lean only slightly.


###### Niddah 14a:5
[Niddah 14a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:5)

**מַתְנִי'** דֶּרֶךְ בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל מְשַׁמְּשׁוֹת בִּשְׁנֵי עֵדִים, אֶחָד לוֹ וְאֶחָד לָהּ, וְהַצְּנוּעוֹת מְתַקְּנוֹת שְׁלִישִׁי לְתַקֵּן אֶת הַבַּיִת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** It is **the custom of Jewish women** that **they engage in intercourse** with their husbands **while** using **two examination cloths, one for** the husband, to see if there is any of the wife’s blood on him after intercourse, **and one for her,** to ascertain after intercourse whether her menstrual flow has begun. **And the modest** women **prepare a third** examination cloth, **to** examine themselves and **prepare** the pubic **area** for intercourse.


###### Niddah 14a:6
[Niddah 14a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:6)

נִמְצָא עַל שֶׁלּוֹ — טְמֵאִין וְחַיָּיבִין קׇרְבָּן. נִמְצָא עַל שֶׁלָּהּ אוֹתְיוֹם — טְמֵאִין וְחַיָּיבִין בְּקׇרְבָּן. נִמְצָא עַל שֶׁלָּהּ לְאַחַר זְמַן — טְמֵאִין מִסָּפֵק, וּפְטוּרִין מִן הַקׇּרְבָּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If blood **was found on his** cloth, the woman and her husband are both **ritually impure** for seven days, in accordance with the *halakha* of a menstruating woman and of one who engages in intercourse with a menstruating woman, **and are** each **liable to** bring a sin **offering** for unwittingly performing an action punishable with excision from the World-to-Come [*karet*]. If blood **was found on her** cloth **immediately [*otyom*]** after intercourse, the woman and her husband are likewise **ritually impure** for seven days **and are** each **liable to** bring a sin **offering.** If blood **was found on her** cloth **after time** passed, they are both **ritually impure due to uncertainty,** as it is possible that the blood appeared only after intercourse, **and they are exempt from** bringing **the** sin **offering.**


###### Niddah 14a:7
[Niddah 14a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:7)

אֵיזֶהוּ אַחַר זְמַן? כְּדֵי שֶׁתֵּרֵד מִן הַמִּטָּה וְתָדִיחַ פָּנֶיהָ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת, וְאֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: אַף מְטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**What is** considered as being: **After time** passed? It is a period of time **equivalent to** the time needed **for her to descend from the bed and rinse her face,** a euphemism for her pubic area. **And afterward, she** retroactively **transmits impurity** to all ritually pure items with which she came into contact **for** the preceding twenty-four-hour **period,** by rabbinic law, **but she does not transmit** seven-day **impurity to the man with whom she engaged in intercourse.** He is impure with this impurity by rabbinic law only until the evening, like one who came in contact with a menstruating woman. **Rabbi Akiva says:** In the case where blood was found on her cloth after time passed, **she even transmits** seven-day **impurity** by rabbinic law **to the man with whom she engaged in intercourse.**


###### Niddah 14a:8
[Niddah 14a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:8)

מוֹדִים חֲכָמִים לְרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא בְּרוֹאָה כֶּתֶם שֶׁמְּטַמְּאָה אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna concludes: **The Rabbis concede to Rabbi Akiva in** the case of a woman who **sees** a blood **stain** and then engages in intercourse, **that she transmits** seven-day **impurity to the man with whom she engaged in intercourse,** although this impurity also applies by rabbinic law.


###### Niddah 14a:9
[Niddah 14a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:9)

**גְּמָ'** וְנֵיחוּשׁ דִּלְמָא דַּם מַאֲכוֹלֶת הוּא? אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: אוֹתוֹ מָקוֹם בָּדוּק הוּא אֵצֶל מַאֲכוֹלֶת. וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: דָּחוּק הוּא אֵצֶל מַאֲכוֹלֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna states that if blood is found on the husband’s cloth after intercourse the husband and wife are both definitely impure. The Gemara asks: **But let us be concerned** that **perhaps it is the blood of a louse,** as it is possible that there was a louse in the woman’s pubic area that was squashed during intercourse, and its blood was found on the husband’s penis. Accordingly, it should be uncertain if they are impure. **Rabbi Zeira says:** There is no concern for this possibility, as **that place,** a woman’s genitals, **is** considered **examined [*baduk*] with regard to** the appearance of **a louse,** i.e., it is clear that no louse was there. **And some say** a different version of Rabbi Zeira’s statement: **That place is** too **narrow [*daḥuk*] for a louse** to enter, and therefore this is not a concern.


###### Niddah 14a:10
[Niddah 14a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:10)

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ דְּאִשְׁתְּכַח מַאֲכוֹלֶת רְצוּפָה. לְהָךְ לִישָּׁנָא דְּאָמַר ״בָּדוּק הוּא״ — הָא מֵעָלְמָא אֲתַאי, לְהָךְ לִישָּׁנָא דְּאָמַר ״דָּחוּק הוּא״ — אֵימָא שַׁמָּשׁ רְצָפָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the practical difference **between** these two versions of Rabbi Zeira’s statement? The Gemara answers: There is a practical difference **between them** in a case **where a squashed louse was found** on the husband’s cloth, near the blood: **According to this version, which states** that a woman’s genitals are considered **examined with regard to a louse, this** louse certainly **came from elsewhere,** as a louse is never found in her pubic area, so the blood on the cloth is clearly from the woman, and therefore the couple is ritually impure. By contrast, **according to that version, which states** that the place **is** too **narrow for a louse** to enter, one can **say** that although it is generally too narrow, in this case one did enter and the man’s **organ squashed it** during intercourse, and therefore their impurity is uncertain.


###### Niddah 14a:11
[Niddah 14a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:11)

אִתְּמַר: בָּדְקָה בְּעֵד הַבָּדוּק לָהּ, וְטָחַתּוּ בִּירֵכָהּ, וּלְמָחָר מָצָאתָה עָלָיו דָּם. אָמַר רַב: טְמֵאָה נִדָּה. אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב שִׁימִי בַּר חִיָּיא: וְהָא ״חוֹשֶׁשֶׁת״ אֲמַרְתְּ לַן!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It **was stated:** If the woman **examined** herself **with a cloth that was examined by her** before she used it and found free of blood, **and** after the examination **she pressed it against her thigh,** and did not look at the cloth, **and on the following day she found blood on** her thigh, **Rav says:** In such a case she is definitely **impure** as **a menstruating woman.** Since it is known that the cloth was clear of blood before the examination, the blood on her thigh must be from her examination, and it must have passed onto her thigh after the cloth was pressed there. **Rav Shimi bar Ḥiyya said to** Rav: **But didn’t you say to us** with regard to this case that **she** needs to be **concerned** for ritual impurity, which indicates that her impurity is uncertain?


###### Niddah 14a:12
[Niddah 14a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:12)

אִיתְּמַר נָמֵי, אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: טְמֵאָה נִדָּה. וְכֵן מוֹרִין בֵּי מִדְרְשָׁא: טְמֵאָה נִדָּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
In this regard it **was also stated** that **Shmuel says: She** is definitely **impure** as **a menstruating woman. And they likewise rule** as a practical *halakha* in **the study hall** that this woman is definitely **impure** as **a menstruating woman.**


###### Niddah 14a:13
[Niddah 14a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:13)

אִתְּמַר: בָּדְקָה בְּעֵד שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּדוּק לָהּ, וְהִנִּיחַתּוּ בְּקוּפְסָא, וּלְמָחָר מָצְאָה עָלָיו דָּם. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: כׇּל יָמָיו שֶׁל רַבִּי חִיָּיא טִימֵּא, וּלְעֵת זִקְנָתוֹ טִיהֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to a similar case, it **was stated:** If a woman **examined** herself **with a cloth that was not examined by her** before its use, **and she** then **placed it in a box** without looking at it, **and on the following day she found blood on** this cloth, the question is whether the blood was on the cloth before the examination and the woman is consequently not impure, or whether the blood is from the examination, and she is impure. **Rav Yosef says: All the days of Rabbi Ḥiyya he would deem** such a woman **impure, but in his old age he would deem** her **pure.**


###### Niddah 14a:14
[Niddah 14a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:14)

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: הֵיכִי קָאָמַר? כׇּל יָמָיו טִימֵּא מִשּׁוּם נִדָּה, וּלְעֵת זִקְנָתוֹ טִיהֵר מִשּׁוּם נִדָּה, וְטִימֵּא מִשּׁוּם כֶּתֶם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A dilemma was raised before** the Sages with regard to this statement of Rav Yosef: With regard to **what** type of impurity status **is he speaking?** Does he mean that **all his days** Rabbi Ḥiyya **would deem** the woman definitely **impure as a menstruating woman,** and therefore any *teruma* with which she came into contact required burning; **and in his old age he would deem** her **pure** from the definite impurity status of **a menstruating woman, but would deem** her **impure as** a woman who discovered **a stain,** which is an uncertain source of impurity? If so, according to his ruling from his old age any *teruma* she touches is not burned but may not be eaten.


###### Niddah 14a:15
[Niddah 14a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:15)

אוֹ דִלְמָא: כׇּל יָמָיו טִימֵּא מִשּׁוּם כֶּתֶם, וּלְעֵת זִקְנָתוֹ טִיהֵר מִוְּלֹא כְּלוּם?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Or perhaps** does Rav Yosef mean that **all his days** Rabbi Ḥiyya **would deem** the woman **impure** as a matter of uncertainty **due to** the **stain, and in his old age he would deem** her **pure from any** type of impurity status?


###### Niddah 14a:16
[Niddah 14a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/14a:16)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: בָּדְקָה בְּעֵד שֶׁאֵינוֹ בָּדוּק לָהּ, וְהִנִּיחַתּוּ בְּקוּפְסָא, וּלְמָחָר מָצְאָה עָלָיו דָּם, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: טְמֵאָה מִשּׁוּם נִדָּה, וְרַבִּי חִיָּיא אָמַר: טְמֵאָה מִשּׁוּם כֶּתֶם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a resolution for this dilemma, **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: If a woman **examined** herself **with a cloth that was not examined by her** before its use, **and she placed it in a box, and on the following day she found blood on** this cloth, **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: She is** definitely **impure as a menstruating woman, and Rabbi Ḥiyya says: She is impure** as a matter of uncertainty **due to** the **stain.**