Niddah 20a

בְּקִילוֹר, וְרַבִּי תָּלָה בִּשְׂרַף שִׁקְמָה. מַאי לַָאו אַאָדוֹם?

it to an eye salve [ bekilor ], which the woman had previously handled. And likewise, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi attributed a stain to the sap of a sycamore tree the woman had touched. The Gemara explains the objection: What, is it not the case that Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi attributed red bloodstains to these causes because they are red, albeit not as red as blood? Evidently, the color of impure blood can be similar to such shades of red as well, which means that all these distinctions mentioned by the amora’im above are irrelevant.

לָא, אַשְּׁאָר דָּמִים.

The Gemara answers: No; Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi attributed stains to an eye salve and the sap of a sycamore tree because those stains were like the other types of blood mentioned in the mishna.

אַמֵּימָר וּמַר זוּטְרָא וְרַב אָשֵׁי הֲווֹ יָתְבִי קַמֵּיהּ אוּמָּנָא, שָׁקְלִי לֵיהּ קַרְנָא קַמַּיְיתָא לְאַמֵּימָר, חַזְיֵיהּ, אֲמַר לְהוּ: ״אָדוֹם״ דִּתְנַן כִּי הַאי, שָׁקְלִי לֵיהּ אַחֲרִיתִי, אֲמַר לְהוּ: אִשְׁתַּנִּי, אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כְּגוֹן אֲנָא דְּלָא יָדַעְנָא בֵּין הַאי לְהַאי — לָא מִבְּעֵי לִי לְמִחְזֵי דְּמָא.

The Gemara relates that Ameimar and Mar Zutra and Rav Ashi were sitting before a bloodletter, to receive treatment. The bloodletter removed blood in a bloodletter’s horn from Ameimar for his first treatment. Ameimar saw the blood and said to his colleagues: The red color that we learned about in the mishna is like this blood in the horn. The bloodletter again removed blood from Ameimar, this time using another horn. Upon seeing the blood in this horn, Ameimar said to them: The color of this blood has changed compared to the blood in the first horn. Rav Ashi, who saw both types of blood, said: Any Sage such as myself, as I do not know how to distinguish between this blood and that blood, should not see, i.e., examine, different types of blood to issue a ruling as to whether they are pure or impure.

שָׁחוֹר — כְּחֶרֶת. אָמַר רַבָּה בַּר רַב הוּנָא: חֶרֶת שֶׁאָמְרוּ — דְּיוֹ. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: שָׁחוֹר כְּחֶרֶת, וְשָׁחוֹר שֶׁאָמְרוּ — דְּיוֹ. וְלֵימָא דְּיוֹ! אִי אָמַר דְּיוֹ — הֲוָה אָמֵינָא כִּי פִכְחוּתָא דִּדְיוֹתָא, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן כִּי חֲרוּתָא דִּדְיוֹתָא.

§ The mishna teaches: What is the black color that is impure? It is blood as black as ḥeret . Rabba bar Rav Huna says: This ḥeret of which the Sages spoke is ink. The Gemara notes that this opinion is also taught in a baraita : This black color is like ḥeret , and the black of which the Sages spoke is ink. The Gemara asks: But if so, why does the tanna of this baraita mention both terms? Let him say simply: Ink. The Gemara explains: If the tanna had said only: Ink, I would say that he means that it is like the clear part of the ink, i.e., the upper portion of ink in an inkwell, which is very bright. Therefore, the tanna of the baraita teaches us that it is like the blackness [ ḥaruta ] of the ink, the lower part of the inkwell, which is darker.

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: בְּלַחָה אוֹ בְּיַבִּשְׁתָּא? תָּא שְׁמַע: דְּרַבִּי אַמֵּי פָּלֵי קוּרְטָא דִּדְיוֹתָא וּבָדֵיק בֵּהּ.

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: To which type of ḥeret were the Sages referring? Were they referring to moist or dry ḥeret ? Come and hear a resolution from a practical ruling, as when black blood was brought before Rabbi Ami he would break up pieces of dried ink and examine blood with it.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: כְּקִיר, כִּדְיוֹ וּכְעֵנָב — טְמֵאָה, וְזוֹהִי שֶׁשָּׁנִינוּ: ״עָמוֹק מִכֵּן — טְמֵאָה״. אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: כְּזַיִת, כְּזֶפֶת וּכְעוֹרֵב — טָהוֹר, וְזוֹהִי שֶׁשָּׁנִינוּ: ״דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר״.

§ The mishna states that if the blackness of the blood is deeper than ink, it is impure, whereas if it is lighter it is pure. In this regard, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: If a woman saw blood whose color was like black wax [ kekir ] or like black ink or like a black grape, she is ritually impure. And this is the meaning of that which we learned in the mishna: If the black is deeper than that, it is ritually impure. Rabbi Elazar says: If a woman saw blood whose color was like a black olive, or like black tar, or like a black raven, this blood is pure. And this is the meaning of that which we learned in the mishna: If the black is lighter than that, it is ritually pure.

עוּלָּא אָמַר: כִּלְבוּשָׁא סִיּוּאָה. עוּלָּא אִקְּלַע לְפוּמְבְּדִיתָא, חַזְיֵיהּ לְהָהוּא טַיָּיעָא דִּלְבִושׁ לְבוּשָׁא אוּכָּמָא. אָמַר לְהוּ: ״שָׁחוֹר״ דִּתְנַן כִּי הַאי. מְרַטוּ מִינֵּיהּ פּוּרְתָּא פּוּרְתָּא, יְהַבוּ בֵּיהּ אַרְבַּע מְאָה זוּזֵי.

Ulla says: When the mishna states that black blood is impure, it means like the garments of the inhabitants of Siva’a, which were extremely black. The Gemara relates that when Ulla happened to go to Pumbedita, he saw a certain Arab [ tayya’a ] who was dressed in a black garment. Ulla said to the Sages of Pumbedita: The black color that we learned about in the mishna is like this color. Since people wanted a sample of the shade of blood mentioned in the mishna, they tore the Arab’s garment from him bit by bit, and in recompense they gave him four hundred dinars.

רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֵלּוּ כֵּלִים הָאוֹלְיָירִין הַבָּאִים מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם. לְמֵימְרָא דְּאוּכָּמֵי נִינְהוּ? וְהָאָמַר לְהוּ רַבִּי יַנַּאי לְבָנָיו: בָּנַי, אַל תִּקְבְּרוּנִי לֹא בְּכֵלִים שְׁחוֹרִים וְלֹא בְּכֵלִים לְבָנִים. שְׁחוֹרִים — שְׁמָא אֶזְכֶּה וְאֶהְיֶה כְּאָבֵל בֵּין הַחֲתָנִים, לְבָנִים — שֶׁמָּא לֹא אֶזְכֶּה וְאֶהְיֶה כְּחָתָן בֵּין הָאֲבֵלִים, אֶלָּא בְּכֵלִים הָאוֹלְיָירִין הַבָּאִים מִמְּדִינַת הַיָּם.

Rabbi Yoḥanan says: The black blood that the mishna says is impure is like these cloths of the bath attendants [ haolyarin ] who come from overseas. The Gemara asks: Is that to say that these are black cloths? But didn’t Rabbi Yannai say to his sons: My sons, do not bury me in black cloths nor in white cloths. Not in black, lest I be acquitted in judgment and I will be among the righteous like a mourner among the grooms. And not in white, lest I not be acquitted in judgment and I will be among the wicked like a groom among the mourners. Rather, bury me in the cloths of the bath attendants who come from overseas, which are neither black nor white. Apparently, these cloths of the bath attendants are not black.

אַלְמָא לָאו אוּכָּמֵי נִינְהוּ! לָא קַשְׁיָא — הָא בִּגְלִימָא, הָא בְּפָתוּרָא.

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult, as a distinction can be made. When Rabbi Yannai indicates that they are not black, that is referring to a regular garment, whereas with regard to the statement of Rabbi Yoḥanan that indicates that they are black, that is referring to a cloth placed on an item such as a table or a bed.

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: וְכוּלָּם, אֵין בּוֹדְקִין אֶלָּא עַל גַּבֵּי מַטְלֵית לְבָנָה. אָמַר רַב יִצְחָק בַּר אֲבוּדִימִי: וְשָׁחוֹר עַל גַּבֵּי אָדוֹם.

§ With regard to the examination of the five types of blood mentioned in the mishna, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: And with regard to all of them, in their various shades, one examines them only when they are placed on a white linen cloth, as only in this fashion can one properly discern the precise color of the blood. Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi says: And in the case of black blood, one must place it on a red linen cloth.

אָמַר רַב יִרְמְיָה מִדִּפְתִּי: וְלָא פְּלִיגִי — הָא בְּשָׁחוֹר, הָא בִּשְׁאָר דָּמִים. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ רַב אָשֵׁי: אִי הָכִי, לֵימָא שְׁמוּאֵל ״חוּץ מִשָּׁחוֹר״! אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: בְּשָׁחוֹר גּוּפֵיהּ קָמִיפַּלְגִי.

Rav Yirmeya of Difti says: And Shmuel and Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi do not disagree, as this statement of Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi is referring specifically to black blood, whereas that ruling of Shmuel that one must use a white cloth is referring to the other four types of blood listed in the mishna. Rav Ashi objects to this interpretation: If so, let Shmuel say: With regard to all of them except for black, one examines them only when they are placed on a white linen cloth. Rather, Rav Ashi says: Shmuel and Rav Yitzḥak bar Avudimi disagree with regard to black blood itself, whether it should be examined against the background of a white or a red cloth.

אָמַר עוּלָּא: כּוּלָּן, עָמוֹק מִכֵּן — טָמֵא, דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר, כַּשָּׁחוֹר.

Ulla says: With regard to all of these five types of blood enumerated in the mishna, if the color is deeper than that which is described in the mishna the blood is ritually impure; if it is lighter than it, the blood is ritually pure, as explicitly stated in the mishna with regard to black.

וְאֶלָּא מַאי שְׁנָא שָׁחוֹר דְּנָקֵט? סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ אֲמִינָא: הוֹאִיל וְאָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא ״שָׁחוֹר אָדוֹם הוּא אֶלָּא שֶׁלָּקָה״, הִילְכָּךְ אֲפִילּוּ דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן נָמֵי לִיטַמֵּא? קָמַשְׁמַע לַן.

The Gemara asks: But if so, what is different about black, that the mishna mentions this halakha only with regard to that color? The Gemara answers: The reason is that it might enter your mind to say that since Rabbi Ḥanina says: The black blood mentioned in the mishna is actually red but its color has faded, therefore, even if it is lighter than that which is described in the mishna, it should also be impure. Consequently, the mishna teaches us that even with regard to black blood, if the color is lighter than the shade mentioned in the mishna, it is pure.

רַבִּי אַמֵּי בַּר אַבָּא אָמַר: וְכוּלָּן, עָמוֹק מִכֵּן — טָמֵא, דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן — נָמֵי טָמֵא, חוּץ מִשָּׁחוֹר. אֶלָּא מַאי אַהֲנִי שִׁיעוּרֵיה דְרַבָּנַן? לְאַפּוֹקֵי דֵּיהֶה דְּדֵיהָה.

Rabbi Ami bar Abba says: And with regard to all of these five types of blood, if the color is deeper than that which is described in the mishna, the blood is ritually impure; if it is lighter than that which is described in the mishna, it is also ritually impure, except for black, which is pure if it is lighter. The Gemara asks: But if these types of blood, except for black, are impure whether they are deeper or lighter than the specific shade described in the mishna, what purpose do the measures specified by the Sages in the mishna serve? The Gemara answers that these descriptions are to the exclusion of a color that is lighter than lighter, i.e., the color is so faint that it does not qualify as impure blood.

וְאִיכָּא דְאָמְרִי, רָמֵי בַּר אַבָּא אֲמַר: וְכוּלָּן, עָמוֹק מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר, דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר, חוּץ מִשָּׁחוֹר, וּלְהָכִי מַהֲנֵי שִׁיעוּרֵיה דְרַבָּנַן.

And there are those who say a different version of the above statement. Rami bar Abba says: And with regard to all of these five types of blood, if the color is deeper than that which is described in the mishna, it is ritually pure; if it is lighter than that, it is also ritually pure, except for black, which is impure if it is deeper. And for this reason the measures, i.e., descriptions, of the Sages are effective, as any discrepancy from these descriptions means that the blood is pure.

בַּר קַפָּרָא אָמַר: וְכוּלָּן, עָמוֹק מִכֵּן — טָמֵא, דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר. חוּץ מִמֶּזֶג, שֶׁעָמוֹק מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר, דֵּיהֶה מִכֵּן — טָהוֹר. בַּר קַפָּרָא אֲדִיהוּ לֵיהּ — וְדַכִּי, אַעֲמִיקוּ לֵיהּ — וְדַכִּי. אָמַר רַבִּי חֲנִינָא: כַּמָּה נְפִישׁ גַּבְרָא דְּלִבֵּיהּ (כמשמעתיה) [כִּשְׁמַעְתֵּיהּ]!

Bar Kappara says: And with regard to all of them, if the color is deeper than that, the blood is impure; if it is lighter than that, it is pure, except for blood the color of diluted wine, with regard to which if the color is deeper than that, the blood is pure, and if it is lighter than that, it is also pure. The Gemara relates that in an effort to test bar Kappara, the Sages brought before him blood that had the appearance of diluted wine and they lightened it, and bar Kappara deemed it pure. On another occasion they deepened the color of blood that looked like diluted wine, and again bar Kappara deemed it pure. Rabbi Ḥanina says in astonishment: How great is this man whose heart, which is so sensitive it can distinguish between such similar shades of blood, is in accordance with his ruling of halakha .

וּכְקֶרֶן כַּרְכּוֹם. תָּנָא: לַח, וְלֹא יָבֵשׁ.

§ The mishna teaches, with regard to the colors of impure blood: And what is the color that is like the bright color of the crocus flower that is impure? It is like the brightest part of the flower, which is used to produce the orange-colored spice saffron. The Sages taught: This is referring to the appearance of moist saffron that is still fresh and not to its dry counterpart.

תָּנֵי חֲדָא: כַּתַּחְתּוֹן, לֹא כָּעֶלְיוֹן. וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: כָּעֶלְיוֹן, וְלֹא כַּתַּחְתּוֹן. וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: כָּעֶלְיוֹן, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן כַּתַּחְתּוֹן. וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: כַּתַּחְתּוֹן, וְכׇל שֶׁכֵּן כָּעֶלְיוֹן.

With regard to this color, it is taught in one baraita that it is like the lower part of the crocus flower, not like its upper part; and it is taught in another baraita that it is like the upper part of the flower and not like its lower part; and it is taught in another baraita that it is like its upper part, and all the more so blood whose color is like its lower part is impure; and it is taught in yet another baraita that it is like its lower part, and all the more so blood whose color is like its upper part is impure.

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: תְּלָתָא דָּרֵי וּתְלָתָא טַרְפֵי הָוְיָין.

Abaye says that these baraitot do not contradict one another, as the crocus has three layers of the brightly colored parts of the crocus flower harvested for saffron, one above the other, and in each layer there are three leaves, i.e., styles or stigmata.

נְקוֹט דָּרָא מְצִיעָאָה, וְטַרְפָּא (מציעתא) [מְצִיעָא] בִּידָךְ.

In order to examine blood whose color is similar to saffron, you should grasp the middle leaf of the middle layer in your hand and compare it to the blood. If they are similar, the blood is impure. Consequently, the four baraitot do not contradict one another: The first two baraitot are referring to the layer of leaves that must be examined. The first baraita says that it is the lower one, as the middle layer is lower than the upper one, while the second baraita states the reverse because the middle layer is higher than the lower one. Meanwhile, the last two baraitot are dealing with the leaves within the middle layer. The baraita that states: Like its lower part, and all the more so like its upper part, means: Like the lowest of the three leaves and all the more so like the middle leaf, which is above that leaf, while the other baraita states a similar idea with regard to the upper and middle leaves. In any event, all four baraitot are referring to the part of the crocus flower that is called by the mishna its brightest part.

כִּי אָתוּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי אֲבָהוּ, אָמַר לְהוּ: בְּגוּשַׁיְיהוּ שָׁנִינוּ.

The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rabbi Abbahu for him to examine blood whose color was similar to saffron, he would say to them: We learned that the mishna is referring specifically to crocus flowers that are still in their clumps of earth in which they grew, as once they are detached from that earth their color changes.

וּכְמֵימֵי אֲדָמָה. תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: כְּמֵימֵי אֲדָמָה — מֵבִיא אֲדָמָה שְׁמֵנָה מִבִּקְעַת בֵּית כֶּרֶם, וּמֵצִיף עָלֶיהָ מַיִם, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר: מִבִּקְעַת יוֹדְפַת. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: מִבִּקְעַת סִכְנִי. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אַף מִבִּקְעַת גִּנּוֹסַר וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן.

§ The mishna states: And what is the color that is like water that inundates red earth that is impure? In this regard the Sages taught in a baraita : In order to examine blood that is like water that inundates red earth, one brings fertile earth from the Beit Kerem Valley and one inundates the earth with enough water until it pools on the surface; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Akiva says: One brings earth from the Yodfat Valley. Rabbi Yosei says: From the Sikhnei Valley. Rabbi Shimon says: One can even bring earth from the Genosar Valley or from similar places.

תַּנְיָא אִידַּךְ: וּכְמֵימֵי אֲדָמָה — מֵבִיא אֲדָמָה שְׁמֵנָה מִבִּקְעַת בֵּית כֶּרֶם, וּמֵצִיף עָלֶיהָ מַיִם כִּקְלִיפַּת הַשּׁוּם, וְאֵין שִׁיעוּר לַמַּיִם, מִשּׁוּם דְּאֵין שִׁיעוּר לֶעָפָר, וְאֵין בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָן צְלוּלִין, אֶלָּא עֲכוּרִין. צָלְלוּ — חוֹזֵר וְעוֹכְרָן, וּכְשֶׁהוּא עוֹכְרָן — אֵין עוֹכְרָן בַּיָּד אֶלָּא בִּכְלִי.

It is taught in another baraita : And to test whether blood is like water that inundates red earth, one brings fertile earth from the Beit Kerem Valley and one inundates the earth with an amount of water that rises above the earth by the thickness of the husk of garlic. And there is no required measure for the water, because there is no required measure for the earth with which the examination must be performed; it is sufficient to use a small amount of earth with a small amount of water. And one does not examine it when the water is clear, as it does not have the color of the earth, but rather when it is muddy from the earth. And if the water became clear because the earth settled, one must muddy it again. And when one muddies it he does not muddy it by hand but rather with a vessel.

אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: אֵין עוֹכְרִין אוֹתָן בַּיָּד אֶלָּא בִּכְלִי — דְּלָא לִרְמְיֵהּ בִּידֵיהּ וְלַעְכְּרִינְהוּ, אֲבָל בְּמָנָא כִּי עָכַר לֵיהּ בִּידֵיהּ — שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי, אוֹ דִלְמָא דְּלָא לַעְכְּרִינְהוּ בִּידֵיהּ אֶלָּא בְּמָנָא?

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: Does the statement that one does not muddy it by hand but rather with a vessel mean that one should not put the dirt into his hand and muddy the water with dirt in his hand, but in a case where the earth is in a vessel, when one muddies it by mixing the earth and water with his hand one may well do so? Or perhaps the baraita means that even when the earth is in a vessel one should not muddy the water by mixing it with earth with his hand, but rather with a vessel?

תָּא שְׁמַע: כְּשֶׁהוּא בּוֹדְקָן, אֵין בּוֹדְקָן אֶלָּא בְּכוֹס. וַעֲדַיִין תִּבְּעֵי לָךְ: בְּדִיקָה בְּכוֹס, עֲכִירָה בְּמַאי? תֵּיקוּ.

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear a baraita : When one examines this water, he examines it only with a cup. Evidently, it is necessary to use a vessel. The Gemara rejects this proof: But you still have a dilemma. This baraita merely states that the examination must be performed while the water is in a cup, but with what is the muddying performed? Must this be done by means of a vessel alone, or may one use his hand as well? The Gemara concludes: The dilemma shall stand unresolved.

כִּי אָתוּ לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ, אָמַר לְהוּ: בִּמְקוֹמָהּ שָׁנִינוּ. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא פָּלֵי קוּרְטָא דְגַרְגִּשְׁתָּא וּבָדֵיק בֵּיהּ, לָיֵיט עֲלֵיהּ רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּאַסְכָּרָה.

§ The Gemara relates: When people would come before Rabba bar Avuh to examine blood that is similar to water that inundates red earth, he would say to them: We learned that the examination must be conducted in its place, i.e., the location the earth was taken from. But if the earth was transported elsewhere, the examination is no longer effective. The Gemara further relates that Rabbi Ḥanina would break up a clump of earth and examine with it, without mixing it in water. Rabbi Yishmael, son of Rabbi Yosei, would curse anyone who used this method that they should be punished with diphtheria.