## Niddah Daf 9a

###### Niddah 9a:1
[Niddah 9a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:1)

קוֹשִׁי סָמוּךְ לַלֵּידָה רַחֲמָנָא טַהֲרֵיהּ! אָמַר רַב פַּפֵּי: הַנַּח מֵעֵת לְעֵת דְּרַבָּנַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
as with regard to blood emitted while experiencing **labor** pain **close to** the time of a proper **birth, the Merciful One deems it pure,** and it should not be treated as the blood of a *zava*. **Rav Pappi says:** The miscarriage is not considered a proper birth and therefore her blood is considered the blood of a *zava*. And **leave** aside the first *baraita* and do not raise a contradiction from it, as the *halakha* that a woman who sees menstrual blood is retroactively impure **for** a twenty-four-hour **period,** which is the topic under discussion in that *baraita*, applies **by rabbinic law,** and they did not impose this stringency in the case of a woman who miscarries.


###### Niddah 9a:2
[Niddah 9a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:2)

רַב פָּפָּא אָמַר: מִידִּי הוּא טַעְמָא אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּרֹאשָׁהּ כָּבֵד עָלֶיהָ וְאֵבָרֶיהָ כְּבֵדִין עָלֶיהָ, הָכָא נָמֵי רֹאשָׁהּ וְאֵבָרֶיהָ כְּבֵדִין עָלֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Pappa says: That reason** for the *halakha* that a pregnant woman is not retroactively impure when she experiences bleeding is **only because her head and limbs** feel **heavy to her.** Her physical state is compromised, which also causes her regular menstrual cycle to cease. **Here, too,** in the case of a pregnancy that precedes a miscarriage, even if it is not considered a proper birth, **her head and limbs** felt **heavy to her** during her pregnancy, and therefore it can be assumed that she did not experience a prior menstrual flow.


###### Niddah 9a:3
[Niddah 9a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:3)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מֵרַבִּי זֵירָא: רָאֲתָה, וְאַחַר כָּךְ הוּכַּר עוּבָּרָהּ, מַהוּ? כֵּיוָן דִּבְעִידָּנָא דַּחֲזַאי לֹא הוּכַּר עוּבָּרָהּ — מְטַמְּיָא, אוֹ דִלְמָא, כֵּיוָן דִּסְמִוךְ לַהּ חֲזַאי — לָא מְטַמְּיָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to the mishna’s ruling that the time of a pregnant woman is sufficient, **Rabbi Yirmeya asked Rabbi Zeira:** If **she saw** blood **and** only **afterward her fetus became known** to all who see her, **what is** the *halakha*? One can claim that **since at the time when she saw** the blood **her fetus was not** yet **known,** therefore she **becomes impure; or perhaps, since she saw** blood **in close** proximity **to** the time that her fetus became known, she does **not become impure.**


###### Niddah 9a:4
[Niddah 9a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:4)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִידִּי הוּא טַעְמָא אֶלָּא מִשּׁוּם דְּרֹאשָׁהּ כָּבֵד עָלֶיהָ וְאֵבָרֶיהָ כְּבֵדִין עָלֶיהָ? בְּעִידָּנָא דַּחֲזַאי — אֵין רֹאשָׁהּ כָּבֵד עָלֶיהָ וְאֵין אֵבָרֶיהָ כְּבֵדִין עָלֶיהָ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Zeira **said to him: That reason** for the *halakha* that a pregnant woman’s time is sufficient is **only because her head and limbs** feel **heavy to her.** In this case, where she was yet unaware of her pregnancy **at the time when she saw** her menstrual flow, **neither her head nor her limbs** felt **heavy to her.** Therefore she is impure retroactively, like any other woman.


###### Niddah 9a:5
[Niddah 9a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:5)

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ הָהוּא סָבָא מֵרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: הִגִּיעַ עֵת וִסְתָּהּ בִּימֵי עִבּוּרָהּ וְלֹא בָּדְקָה, מַהוּ? קָא מִיבַּעְיָא לִי אַלִּיבָּא דְּמַאן דְּאָמַר וְסָתוֹת דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא. מַאי? כֵּיוָן דִּוְסָתוֹת דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה, אוֹ דִלְמָא כֵּיוָן דְּדָמֶיהָ מְסוּלָּקִין לָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **A certain elder asked Rabbi Yoḥanan:** If the **time** of a woman’s fixed menstrual **cycle arrived during her pregnancy and she did not perform an examination, what is** the *halakha*? **I raise** this **dilemma** only **according to** the opinion **of the one who said** that the obligation for a woman to perform a self-examination during her fixed menstrual **cycle** applies **by Torah law. What** is the *halakha*? According to that opinion, one can claim that **since** the obligation of an examination during one’s fixed menstrual **cycle** is **by Torah law,** she is **required** to perform **an examination** even during her pregnancy. **Or perhaps, since her blood has stopped,** as a pregnant woman generally does not experience a flow of menstrual blood, she is **not required** to perform **an examination.**


###### Niddah 9a:6
[Niddah 9a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:6)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: תְּנֵיתוּהָ, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר: אִם הָיְתָה בְּמַחֲבֵא וְהִגִּיעַ שְׁעַת וִסְתָּהּ וְלֹא בָּדְקָה — טְהוֹרָה, שֶׁחֲרָדָה מְסַלֶּקֶת אֶת הַדָּמִים. טַעְמָא דְּאִיכָּא חֲרָדָה, הָא לֵיכָּא חֲרָדָה וְהִגִּיעַ וִסְתָּהּ וְלֹא בָּדְקָה — טְמֵאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yoḥanan **said to him: You learned** the answer to your dilemma from a mishna (39a): **Rabbi Meir says: If** a woman **was in hiding** from danger, **and the time of her** fixed menstrual **cycle came and she did not examine** herself, nevertheless she is **ritually pure, as** it may be assumed that she did not experience bleeding because **fear dispels** the flow of menstrual **blood.** Rabbi Yoḥanan explains the proof: The **reason** she is pure is **that there is fear,** from which it may be inferred that in a case where **there is no fear and the time of her** fixed menstrual **cycle arrived and she did not examine** herself, she would be **impure.**


###### Niddah 9a:7
[Niddah 9a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:7)

אַלְמָא וְסָתוֹת דְּאוֹרָיְיתָא, וְכֵיוָן דְּאִיכָּא חֲרָדָה — דָּמֶיהָ מְסוּלָּקִין, וְלָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה. הָכָא נָמֵי — דָּמֶיהָ מְסוּלָּקִין, וְלָא בָּעֲיָא בְּדִיקָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rabbi Yoḥanan concludes: **Evidently,** from the fact that Rabbi Meir rules that a woman is impure if the time of her period passed without a proper examination, he maintains that the obligation for a woman to perform an examination at the time of her fixed menstrual **cycle** applies **by Torah law. And,** nevertheless, **since there is fear, her blood has stopped and** she is **not required** to perform **an examination. Here, too,** in the case of a pregnant woman, **her blood has stopped and** therefore she is **not required** to perform **an examination.**


###### Niddah 9a:8
[Niddah 9a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:8)

מְנִיקָה עַד שֶׁתִּגְמוֹל וְכוּ׳. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: מְנִיקָה שֶׁמֵּת בְּנָהּ בְּתוֹךְ עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע חֹדֶשׁ — הֲרֵי הִיא כְּכׇל הַנָּשִׁים, וּמְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה. לְפִיכָךְ, אִם הָיְתָה מְנִיקָתוֹ וְהוֹלֶכֶת אַרְבַּע אוֹ חָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים — דַּיָּהּ שְׁעָתָהּ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: The time of **a nursing woman** is sufficient **until she weans** her child from nursing. **The Sages taught** in a *baraita* (see *Tosefta* 2:1): With regard to **a nursing woman whose child dies within twenty-four months** of his birth, **she is like all** other **women** with regard to her impurity status after seeing menstrual blood, **and** therefore **she transmits ritual impurity** retroactively **for** a twenty-four-hour **period or from examination to examination. Therefore, if** a woman **continued to nurse** her child **for four or five years, her time is sufficient** and she does not retroactively transmit impurity for the entire four or five years. This is **the statement of Rabbi Meir.**


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

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמְרִים: דַּיָּין שְׁעָתָן כׇּל עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע חֹדֶשׁ, לְפִיכָךְ אִם הָיְתָה מְנִיקָתוֹ אַרְבַּע וְחָמֵשׁ שָׁנִים — מְטַמְּאָה מֵעֵת לְעֵת וּמִפְּקִידָה לִפְקִידָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Shimon** all **say:** With regard to nursing women, **their time is sufficient** for **an entire twenty-four months. Therefore, if she nursed him for four or five years,** then after the first twenty-four months have passed, **she transmits ritual impurity** retroactively **for** a twenty-four-hour **period or from examination to examination.**


###### Niddah 9a:10
[Niddah 9a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:10)

כְּשֶׁתִּמָּצֵא לוֹמַר, לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר — דָּם נֶעְכָּר וְנַעֲשָׂה חָלָב, לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יוֹסֵי וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן — אֵבָרֶיהָ מִתְפָּרְקִין, וְאֵין נַפְשָׁהּ חוֹזֶרֶת עַד עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע חֹדֶשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara discusses the reasoning of each opinion: **When** you analyze the matter **you will find** that one must **say that according to the statement of Rabbi Meir** the case is that menstrual **blood spoils and becomes milk.** Therefore, it follows that this status continues for as long as she is nursing. By contrast, **according to the statement of Rabbi Yosei and Rabbi Yehuda and Rabbi Shimon, her limbs become dislocated and her spirit,** i.e., her full strength and her regular menstrual cycle, **does not return** to her **until twenty-four months** have passed.


###### Niddah 9a:11
[Niddah 9a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:11)

״לְפִיכָךְ״ דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר לְמָה לִי? מִשּׁוּם ״לְפִיכָךְ״ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Why do I** need the statement **of Rabbi Meir: Therefore,** if a woman continued to nurse her child for four or five years, her time is sufficient? Since his reasoning is that the menstrual blood of a nursing woman spoils and becomes milk, it is obvious that this applies as long as she continues to nurse him. The Gemara answers: This statement is indeed extraneous. It merely serves to form a parallel between the statement of Rabbi Meir and that of the other Sages. In other words, it was appended **due to** the statement: **Therefore,** if she was nursing him for four or five years, then after the first twenty-four months have passed, she transmits ritual impurity retroactively for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination, which is referring to the opinion **of Rabbi Yosei.**


###### Niddah 9a:12
[Niddah 9a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:12)

וּ״לְפִיכָךְ״ דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי לְמָה לִי? מַהוּ דְּתֵימָא רַבִּי יוֹסֵי תַּרְתֵּי אִית לֵיהּ, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further asks: **And why do I** need the statement: **Therefore,** if she was nursing him for four or five years, then after the first twenty-four months have passed, she transmits ritual impurity retroactively for a twenty-four-hour period or from examination to examination, which is referring to the opinion **of Rabbi Yosei?** The Gemara explains that this clause is necessary, **lest you say** that **Rabbi Yosei holds** that there are **two** reasons that a pregnant woman’s time is sufficient, both because her blood spoils and because her limbs become dislocated. Therefore, the additional clause **teaches us** that Rabbi Yosei maintains that the reason is only that her limbs become dislocated, and consequently she transmits retroactive impurity after twenty-four months.


###### Niddah 9a:13
[Niddah 9a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:13)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: דָּם נֶעְכָּר וְנַעֲשָׂה חָלָב, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: אֵבָרֶיהָ מִתְפָּרְקִין, וְאֵין נַפְשָׁהּ חוֹזֶרֶת עָלֶיהָ עַד עֶשְׂרִים וְאַרְבַּע חֹדֶשׁ. אָמַר רַבִּי אִלְעַאי: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי מֵאִיר? דִּכְתִיב: ״מִי יִתֵּן טָהוֹר מִטָּמֵא לֹא אֶחָד״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**That** explanation **is also taught** in a *baraita*: Menstrual **blood spoils and becomes milk;** this is **the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: Her limbs become dislocated and her spirit does not return to her until twenty-four months** have passed. The Gemara analyzes their respective reasons. **Rabbi Ilai says: What is the reason of Rabbi Meir?** It is based upon a verse, **as it is written: “Who can bring a pure thing out of an impure?** Is it **not the One?”** (Job 14:4). In other words, is it not true that the One, i.e., God, can bring a pure thing, such as milk, out of an impure thing, such as menstrual blood?


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

וְרַבָּנַן? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: זוֹ שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע, שֶׁהוּא — טָמֵא, וְאָדָם הַנּוֹצֵר מִמֶּנּוּ — טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the** other **Sages,** i.e., Rabbi Yosei, Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Shimon, how do they interpret this verse? **Rabbi Yoḥanan says** that according to those Sages **this** verse is referring to **semen, which is impure, and** yet **the person that is formed from it is pure.**


###### Niddah 9a:15
[Niddah 9a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:15)

וְרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אֵלּוּ מֵי הַנִּדָּה, שֶׁהַמַּזֶּה וּמַזִּין עָלָיו — טָהוֹר, וְנוֹגֵעַ — טָמֵא. וּמַזֶּה טָהוֹר? וְהָכְתִיב: ״וּמַזֵּה מֵי הַנִּדָּה יְכַבֵּס בְּגָדָיו״! מַאי ״מַזֶּה״? — נוֹגֵעַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Elazar says:** Those Sages maintain that this verse is referring to **the water of sprinkling,** i.e., the purification water mixed with the ashes of the red heifer. **As** the individual who **sprinkles** the water and the one **upon whom** the water is **sprinkled** are both **pure, and** yet one who **touches** the purification water is rendered **impure.** The Gemara asks: **Is** the **one who sprinkles** the water actually **pure? But isn’t it written: “He who sprinkles the water of sprinkling will wash his clothes,** and he who touches the water of sprinkling will be impure until evening” (Numbers 19:21)? The Gemara responds: **What** is the meaning of the term: **“He who sprinkles”?** It means: **He who touches.**


###### Niddah 9a:16
[Niddah 9a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:16)

וְהָכְתִיב ״מַזֶּה״, וְהָכְתִיב ״נוֹגֵעַ״! וְעוֹד, ״מַזֶּה״ בָּעֵי כִּבּוּס, ״נוֹגֵעַ״ לָא בָּעֵי כִּבּוּס! אֶלָּא, מַאי ״מַזֶּה״? נוֹשֵׂא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But it is written: “He who sprinkles,” and it is written** in the same verse: “And **he who touches.”** How can these two terms be referring to the same individual? **And furthermore,** that verse states that **one who sprinkles requires** the **washing** of his **clothes,** indicating a severe level of impurity, whereas **one who touches does not require** the **washing** of his **clothes.** Evidently, the phrase “he who sprinkles” is not referring to one who touches. **Rather,** the Gemara explains: **What** is the meaning of: **“He who sprinkles”?** This is referring to **one who carries** the purification waters.


###### Niddah 9a:17
[Niddah 9a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:17)

וְלִיכְתּוֹב ״נוֹשֵׂא״! קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דְּעַד דְּדָרֵי כְּשִׁיעוּר הַזָּאָה. הָנִיחָא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר הַזָּאָה צְרִיכָה שִׁיעוּר, אֶלָּא לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֵין צְרִיכָה שִׁיעוּר, מַאי אִיכָּא לְמֵימַר?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** if so, **let** the Torah **write** explicitly: **One who carries.** Why does it state “he who sprinkles” when it is referring to carrying? The Gemara answers: The use of the term sprinkling in reference to carrying **teaches us** that one becomes impure **only by carrying** the **measure** required for **sprinkling.** The Gemara asks: **This works out well according to the one who said** that **sprinkling requires** a minimum **measure** of water. **But according to the one who said** that **sprinkling does not require** a minimum **measure** of water, **what can be said?** According to this opinion, there is apparently no concept of a measure required for sprinkling.


###### Niddah 9a:18
[Niddah 9a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:18)

אֲפִילּוּ לְמַאן דְּאָמַר אֵינָהּ צְרִיכָה שִׁיעוּר, הָנֵי מִילֵּי — אַגַּבָּא דְּגַבְרָא, אֲבָל בְּמָנָא — בָּעֵינַן שִׁיעוּר. כְּדִתְנַן: כַּמָּה יִהְיוּ בַּמַּיִם וִיהֵא בָּהֶן כְּדֵי הַזָּאָה? כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּטְבּוֹל רָאשֵׁי גִבְעוֹלִין וְיַזֶּה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: **Even according to the one who said** that **sprinkling does not require** a minimum **measure** of water, **that statement** applies only to the measure of purification water that must be sprinkled **onto the back,** i.e., onto the body, **of** the impure **man.** In this regard, any amount will suffice. **But with regard to the vessel** into which one dips the hyssop in order to sprinkle the water, it **requires** a certain **measure** of water. **As we learned** in a mishna (*Para* 12:5): **How much** water must **be in** the vessel so that it **will be enough for sprinkling?** It must be **enough to dip the tops of the stems** of the hyssop branch, used in the rite of purification, into the water **and sprinkle** it.


###### Niddah 9a:19
[Niddah 9a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:19)

וְהַיְינוּ דְּאָמַר שְׁלֹמֹה: ״אָמַרְתִּי אֶחְכָּמָה וְהִיא רְחוֹקָה מִמֶּנִּי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara concludes the discussion of the purification waters with the following observation: **And that is** the meaning of that **which** King **Solomon said: “I said I would become wise, but it eludes me”** (Ecclesiastes 7:23). According to tradition, even Solomon in his great wisdom could not understand the contradictory nature of the sprinkling of purification water, as it renders an impure person pure, and a pure person impure.


###### Niddah 9a:20
[Niddah 9a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/9a:20)

אֵיזוֹ הִיא זְקֵנָה? כֹּל שֶׁעָבְרוּ עָלֶיהָ שָׁלֹשׁ עוֹנוֹת [סָמוּךְ לְזִקְנָתָהּ]. הֵיכִי דָמֵי סָמוּךְ לְזִקְנָתָהּ? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה: כֹּל שֶׁחַבְרוֹתֶיהָ אוֹמְרוֹת עָלֶיהָ ״זְקֵנָה הִיא״. וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **Who is** the woman characterized as **an elderly woman** in this context? It is **any** woman for **whom three** typical menstrual **cycles** of thirty days **passed** at a stage of her life **close to her old age,** during which she saw no menstrual blood. The Gemara asks: **What is considered close to old age? Rav Yehuda says: Any** woman **about whom her friends say** that **she is an elderly woman. And Rabbi Shimon says:**