Niddah 64b

וְנֶאֱסַר יוֹם עֶשְׂרִים, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאוֹרַח בִּזְמַנּוֹ בָּא.

And she is prohibited on the twentieth day, because it is the manner of women that their blood flow comes at its usual time.

מַתְנִי' נָשִׁים בִּבְתוּלֵיהֶם כִּגְפָנִים, יֵשׁ גֶּפֶן שֶׁיֵּינָהּ אָדוֹם, וְיֵשׁ גֶּפֶן שֶׁיֵּינָהּ שָׁחוֹר, וְיֵשׁ גֶּפֶן שֶׁיֵּינָהּ מְרוּבֶּה, וְיֵשׁ גֶּפֶן שֶׁיֵּינָהּ מוּעָט. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: כׇּל גֶּפֶן יֵשׁ בָּהּ יַיִן, וְשֶׁאֵין בָּהּ יַיִן — הֲרֵי זֶה דּוֹרְקְטִי.

MISHNA: Women, with regard to the blood that flows when their hymens are ruptured, are like grapevines: There is a vine that produces wine that is red, and there is a vine that produces wine that is black; and there is a vine that produces wine in abundance, and there is a vine that produces only a meager amount of wine. Rabbi Yehuda says: In every vine, there are grapes fit to produce wine, but any vine in which there are no grapes fit to produce wine, this is a dry vine [ durkati ]. Likewise, any woman who experiences bleeding is capable of giving birth, whereas one who does not experience bleeding is like a dry vine, unable to give birth.

גְּמָ' תָּנָא: דּוֹר קָטוּעַ. תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַשְּׂאוֹר יָפֶה לָעִיסָּה, כָּךְ דָּמִים יָפִין לָאִשָּׁה. תָּנָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: כׇּל אִשָּׁה שֶׁדָּמֶיהָ מְרוּבִּין — בָּנֶיהָ מְרוּבִּין.

GEMARA: With regard to the term durkati , the Gemara explains that this means truncated generation [ dor katua ]. As Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches: Just as leaven is good for dough, so too, blood is good for a woman. It was likewise taught in the name of Rabbi Meir: Any woman whose blood is plentiful, her children are plentiful.

הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ הָאִשָּׁה.

MISHNA: In the case of a young girl whose time to see a menstrual flow, i.e., the age of puberty, has not yet arrived, and she married and engaged in intercourse and her hymen was torn, Beit Shammai say: The Sages give her four nights after intercourse during which the blood is attributed to the torn hymen and she remains ritually pure. Thereafter, any blood is assumed to be menstrual blood and renders her impure. And Beit Hillel say: The blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals.

מַתְנִי' תִּינוֹקֶת שֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת וְנִיסֵּת — בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹתְנִין לָהּ אַרְבַּע לֵילוֹת, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: עַד שֶׁתִּחְיֶה הַמַּכָּה.

In the case of a young woman whose time to see a menstrual flow has arrived but she has not yet begun to menstruate, and she married and engaged in intercourse and her hymen was torn, Beit Shammai say: The Sages give her the first night during which the blood is attributed to the torn hymen. Thereafter, any blood is assumed to be menstrual blood. And Beit Hillel say: The blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the conclusion of Shabbat, and she may engage in intercourse with her husband for four nights, as it was customary for a virgin to marry on Wednesday.

הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ לִרְאוֹת וְנִיסֵּת, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹתְנִין לָהּ לַיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: עַד מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת (ארבע) [אַרְבָּעָה] לֵילוֹת.

In the case of a young woman who saw menstrual blood before marriage while she was still in her father’s house, Beit Shammai say: The Sages give her permission to engage only in relations that consummate a marriage, which are a mitzva, after which she is ritually impure due to the blood. And Beit Hillel say: The husband and wife may engage even in several acts of intercourse, as any blood seen throughout the entire night is attributed to the torn hymen.

רָאֲתָה וְעוֹדָהּ בְּבֵית אָבִיהָ, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: נוֹתְנִין לָהּ בְּעִילַת מִצְוָה, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: כׇּל הַלַּיְלָה (כּוּלָּהּ) [שֶׁלָּהּ].

GEMARA: The mishna first addresses the case of a young girl who has not yet reached puberty. Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak says: And this halakha applies to her even if she has seen menstrual blood. He explains his reasoning: From where do I derive this? I derive it from the fact that the tanna distinguishes in the latter clause of the mishna between a young girl who has seen menstrual blood and a young girl who has not seen menstrual blood. By inference, in the first clause of the mishna the halakha is no different in this case, where the young girl has experienced menstrual bleeding, and it is no different in that case, where she has not yet experienced menstrual bleeding.

גְּמָ' אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: וַאֲפִילּוּ רָאֲתָה. מִמַּאי? מִדְּקָא מְפַלֵּיג בְּסֵיפָא בֵּין רָאֲתָה בֵּין בְּשֶׁלֹּא רָאֲתָה, מִכְּלָל דְּרֵישָׁא — לָא שְׁנָא הָכִי וְלָא שְׁנָא הָכִי.

This explanation of Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak is also taught in a baraita : Beit Hillel say: With regard to a young girl who has not yet reached puberty, the blood she emits is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals, regardless of whether she has seen menstrual blood beforehand or whether she has not yet seen menstrual blood.

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בֵּית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: עַד שֶׁתִּחְיֶה הַמַּכָּה, בֵּין רָאֲתָה בֵּין לֹא רָאֲתָה.

§ The mishna teaches that Beit Hillel say: The blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the wound heals. The Gemara clarifies: Until when can the blood be attributed to the torn hymen? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: All the time that she is noḥeret . Rav Yehuda continues: When I subsequently said this halakha before Shmuel, he said to me: This noḥeret , I do not know what it is, nor do I know what Rav means by it. Rather, all the time that the saliva is in her mouth due to sexual intercourse, she may attribute the blood to the torn hymen. Shmuel is using a euphemism, i.e., as long as there is blood in her vagina resulting from sexual intercourse.

עַד שֶׁתִּחְיֶה הַמַּכָּה. עַד כַּמָּה? אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר רַב: כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁנּוֹחֶרֶת. כִּי אַמְרִיתַהּ קַמֵּיהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל, אֲמַר לִי: נְחִירָה זוֹ אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מָה הִיא, אֶלָּא כׇּל זְמַן שֶׁהָרוֹק מָצוּי בְּתוֹךְ הַפֶּה מֵחֲמַת תַּשְׁמִישׁ.

The Gemara clarifies: This noḥeret that Rav says; what is it like? What did he mean? Rav Shmuel bar Rav Yitzḥak said: It was explained to me by Rav as follows: If the young girl stands up and sees blood, but she sits and does not see blood, it is known that the wound has not yet healed, and the blood is still attributed to the torn hymen. Similarly, if she sits on the ground and sees blood, but she sits on cushions and blankets and does not see blood, it is known that the wound has not yet healed and she may attribute the blood to the torn hymen, as the blood flows due to the strain of sitting on the ground. But if she sometimes sits on all of them, i.e., the ground, cushions, and blankets, and sees blood, and on other occasions she sits on all of them and does not see blood, it is known that the wound has healed, and this blood must now be menstrual blood.

נְחִירָה דְּקָאָמַר רַב, הֵיכִי דָמֵי? אָמַר רַב שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר רַב יִצְחָק: לְדִידִי מִפָּרְשָׁא לִי מִינֵּיהּ דְּרַב — עוֹמֶדֶת וְרוֹאָה, יוֹשֶׁבֶת וְאֵינָהּ רוֹאָה — בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁלֹּא חָיְתָה הַמַּכָּה. עַל גַּבֵּי קַרְקַע וְרוֹאָה, עַל גַּבֵּי כָּרִים וּכְסָתוֹת וְאֵינָהּ רוֹאָה — בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁלֹּא חָיְתָה הַמַּכָּה. עַל גַּבֵּי כּוּלָּם וְרוֹאָה, עַל גַּבֵּי כּוּלָּם וְאֵינָהּ רוֹאָה — בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁחָיְתָה הַמַּכָּה.

§ The mishna teaches: In the case of a young woman whose time to see a menstrual flow has arrived, Beit Hillel say: The blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the conclusion of Shabbat and she may engage in intercourse with her husband for four nights. It was stated that there is a dispute between amora’im with regard to the following case: If she engaged in intercourse with her husband during the daytime, in addition to engaging in intercourse at night, Rav says: She has not lost her nights, and the blood is still attributed to the torn hymen for four nights. Levi says: She has lost her nights, since she has engaged in intercourse twice during the daytime and twice at night, and therefore she has already used up the equivalent of four nights.

הִגִּיעַ זְמַנָּהּ וְכוּ׳. אִיתְּמַר: שִׁימְּשָׁה בַּיָּמִים — רַב אָמַר: לֹא הִפְסִידָה לֵילוֹת, וְלֵוִי אָמַר: הִפְסִידָה לֵילוֹת.

The Gemara explains: Rav says that she has not lost her nights, as we learned in the mishna that the blood is attributed to the torn hymen until the conclusion of Shabbat, and it does not limit the number of times she may engage in intercourse during that time. And Levi says: She has lost her nights, as what is the meaning of the term: Four nights, that is taught in the mishna? It means four twelve-hour periods, either days or nights.

רַב אָמַר: לֹא הִפְסִידָה לֵילוֹת, עַד ״מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת״ תְּנַן. וְלֵוִי אָמַר: הִפְסִידָה לֵילוֹת. מַאי ״אַרְבַּע לֵילוֹת״ דְּקָתָנֵי? אַרְבָּעָה עוֹנוֹת.

The Gemara asks: And according to the opinion of Rav, why do I need the mishna to teach: Four nights? The mishna should have stated four days, which would include both days and nights. Rav would respond that the mishna teaches us proper conduct, as it is proper that intercourse should be performed only at night. The Gemara suggests: And according to the opinion of Levi, let the mishna teach only: Four nights. Why do I need the mishna to specify: Until the conclusion of Shabbat? Levi would answer that this teaches us that it is permitted to engage in intercourse for the first time on Shabbat. Since the custom was for a virgin to marry on Wednesday, which means that one of the four first nights is Shabbat, it is permitted to engage in intercourse on that night, despite the fact that it may cause her to bleed.

וּלְרַב, לְמָה לִי לְמִיתְנֵא ״אַרְבָּעָה לֵילוֹת״? אוֹרַח אַרְעָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן, דְּדַרְכָּהּ דְּבִיאָה בַּלֵּילוֹת. וּלְלֵוִי, לִיתְנֵי ״אַרְבָּעָה לֵילוֹת״, ״עַד מוֹצָאֵי שַׁבָּת״ לְמָה לִי? הָא קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן דִּשְׁרֵי לְמִבְעַל לְכַתְּחִלָּה בְּשַׁבָּת.

The Gemara notes that Levi’s ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Shmuel, as Shmuel said: It is permitted to enter into a narrow opening in a wall on Shabbat, and this is the halakha even though doing so causes pebbles to fall from the wall. Similarly, although engaging in intercourse might cause a wound and bleeding, it is permitted on Shabbat.

כְּדִשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: פִּרְצָה דְּחוּקָה מוּתָּר לִיכָּנֵס בָּהּ בְּשַׁבָּת, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמַּשִּׁיר צְרוֹרוֹת.

It was stated that the amora’im engaged in a dispute: If a husband engaged in intercourse with a virgin and did not find blood, and he went back within the first four nights and again engaged in intercourse with her and this time he found blood, Rabbi Ḥanina says: The wife is ritually impure, as this is menstruation blood. And Rabbi Asi says: She is ritually pure, as it is blood from the wound resulting from the act of intercourse.

אִיתְּמַר: בָּעַל וְלֹא מָצָא דָּם, וְחָזַר וּבָעַל וּמָצָא דָּם, רַבִּי חֲנִינָא אָמַר: טְמֵאָה, וְרַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר: טְהוֹרָה.

Rabbi Ḥanina says: She is ritually impure, as if it is so that it is blood from her hymen, i.e., the blood of her virginity, it would have come at the outset, after the first time they engaged in intercourse. And Rabbi Asi said: She is ritually pure, as perhaps it happened for him that he engaged in intercourse like Shmuel described. As Shmuel said: I can engage in intercourse several times without the appearance of blood. In other words, I can engage in intercourse with a virgin while leaving her hymen intact. And the other Sage, Rabbi Ḥanina, does not allow for that possibility, since he maintains that Shmuel is different, as his strength was great. Shmuel was particularly skilled at this, while others cannot accomplish this.

רַבִּי חֲנִינָא אָמַר: טְמֵאָה, דְּאִם אִיתַהּ דַּהֲוָה דַּם בְּתוּלִים — מֵעִיקָּרָא הֲוָה אָתֵי. וְרַבִּי אַסִּי אָמַר: טְהוֹרָה, דִּילְמָא אִתְרְמִי לֵיהּ כְּדִשְׁמוּאֵל, דְּאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: ״יָכוֹלְנִי לִבְעוֹל כַּמָּה בְּעִילוֹת בְּלֹא דָּם״. וְאִידָּךְ — שָׁאנֵי שְׁמוּאֵל דְּרַב גּוּבְרֵיהּ.

§ The mishna teaches the halakha of a young girl. The Gemara discusses the case of a girl who is older than twelve and a half. Rav says: The Sages give a grown woman, who engaged in intercourse on her wedding night, the entire first night, during which she may engage in intercourse with her husband several times. And this statement applies only if she did not see any blood. But if she saw blood, she has only the relations that consummate a marriage, which are a mitzva, and nothing more.

אָמַר רַב: בּוֹגֶרֶת נוֹתְנִין לָהּ לַיְלָה הָרִאשׁוֹן, וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי שֶׁלֹּא רָאֲתָה, אֲבָל רָאֲתָה — אֵין לָהּ אֶלָּא בְּעִילַת מִצְוָה וְתוּ לָא.

The Gemara raises an objection to Rav’s statement from a baraita : There was an incident involving a virgin who married, and Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi gave her four nights in which to engage in intercourse within twelve months of her wedding when the blood is considered to be like blood resulting from the torn hymen. The Gemara asks: What are the circumstances of this case? If we say that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi gave her all of those nights of purity in her days as a minor,

מֵיתִיבִי: מַעֲשֶׂה וְנָתַן לָהּ רַבִּי (ארבע) [אַרְבָּעָה] לֵילוֹת מִתּוֹךְ שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. הֵיכִי דָּמֵי? אִילֵּימָא דְּיָהֵיב לַהּ כּוּלְּהוּ בִּימֵי קַטְנוּת,