|  |  | Previous Folio / Niddah Directory / Tractate List / Navigate Site # Babylonian Talmud: Tractate Niddah ### Folio 49a And if you prefer I might say: R. Simeon, and [the reference is to evidence] after the period,1 for he does not uphold the principle of Raba's presumption. BECAUSE THEY MAINTAIN: IT IS POSSIBLE etc. What need again was there for this statement, seeing that it was already taught in the earlier clause? And were you to reply: Because it was desired to lay down an anonymous statement2 in agreement with the Rabbis [it could be objected:] Is not this obvious, since in a dispute between an individual authority and a number of authorities the halachah is in agreement with the majority? — It might have been presumed that R. Meir's reason is more acceptable because Scriptural texts3 provide support for his view, hence we were informed4 [that the halachah is in agreement with the view of the Rabbis]. And if you prefer I might reply: Because it was desired to state,5 'Similarly'.6 MISHNAH. SIMILARLY7 ANY [HOLE IN] AN EARTHEN VESSEL THAT LETS IN A LIQUID8 WILL9 LET IT OUT,10 BUT THERE MAY BE ONE THAT WILL LET IT OUT AND WILL NOT LET IT IN.11 ANY LIMB12 THAT GROWS A NAIL HAS ALSO A BONE IN IT13 BUT THERE MAY BE ONE THAT HAS A BONE IN IT BUT GROWS NO NAIL.14 WHATEVER CONTRACTS MIDRAS-UNCLEANNESS15 ALSO CONTRACTS CORPSE-UNCLEANNESS16 BUT THERE ARE SUCH AS CONTRACT CORPSE UNCLEANNESS17 AND DO NOT CONTRACT MIDRAS-UNCLEANNESS.18 GEMARA. A vessel with a hole THAT LETS IN A LIQUID is unfit for the water of purification19 and is [even more so] unfit20 as a defective vessel;21 one with a hole THAT WILL LET IT OUT22 is fit for the water of purification23 but unfit as a defective vessel.24 R. Assi stated, It was learnt,25 The minimum size [of a hole to render] an earthen vessel [unfit for the consecration of the water of purification] is one that will let a liquid in;26 and one that will let a liquid out22 was mentioned only in respect of a defective vessel.24 What is the reason?27 — Mar Zutra son of R. Nahman replied: Because people do not say,28 'Bring a defective vessel for another defective vessel'.29 Our Rabbis taught: How is an earthen vessel to be tested in order to ascertain whether its perforation is big enough to admit a liquid or not? One brings a tub full of water and puts the pot30 into it. If it absorbs any of the liquid, it may be taken for granted that it lets liquids in; and if not, it may be taken for granted that it only lets liquids out. To Part b Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files And even then women's evidence is accepted only in so far as to impose restrictions (denial of the right of mi'un). It is not accepted, however, for the purpose of relaxing the law (allowing the performance of halizah). Which, as a rule, is the accepted law. From Ezekiel XVI and XXIII (supra 48a). By the anonymous statement, BECAUSE THEY MAINTAIN etc. (cf. prev. n. but one). In the next Mishnah. Introducing similar cases where one process follows or is the result of another though the reverse is impossible. Cf. prev. n. In which the vessel stands, If the liquid was within the vessel. A lesser hole in fact being required for the latter process than for the former. Cf. prev. n. mut. mut. The legal purpose of this statement is discussed in the Gemara infra. Sc. a redundant finger. And is, therefore, regarded as a proper limb which (cf. supra 43b) conveys uncleanness by overshadowing even though it is smaller than the minimum prescribed for the flesh of a corpse. In such a case, if the limb is a redundant one, the conveyance of uncleanness (cf. prev. n.) is subject to the prescribed minimum. Of a zab, to be a 'father of uncleanness (v. Glos.). Of the same grade (cf. prev. n.) since whatever object is suitable as midras for a zab has the status of a 'vessel' and is, therefore, subject to corpse-uncleanness also. Having the status of a vessel in respect of susceptibility to all forms of uncleanness including that of 'father of uncleanness' if it came in contact with a corpse. Sc. to become a 'father of uncleanness' through the midras of a zab. This is further discussed infra in the Gemara. Which (cf. Num. XIX, 17) must be consecrated in a sound vessel. To contract uncleanness. Defective vessels which are still suitable for certain uses are, under given conditions, susceptible to uncleanness (cf. Hul. 54b) but when they have a hole of the nature mentioned they lose even the status of a defective vessel and, like broken sherds, are immune from all forms of uncleanness. But will not let it in, sc. a smaller hole. Such a small hole being disregarded in the case of an otherwise sound vessel. Being already defective the smallest hole deprives it altogether of its status (cf prev. n. but two). Shonin Sc. as an oral tradition handed down to Moses from Sinai (Rashi). If the hole is smaller the vessel retains in all respects the status of a sound one (cf. Shab. 95b.). For the last ruling. When there is a leak in a defective vessel. That the former should receive the leakage from the latter. A defective vessel may be so used under an otherwise sound one, since the latter is not discarded on account of a very small hole. When such a hole, however, occurs in a defective vessel it is completely discarded and, therefore, loses its status (cf. supra n. 10). That is to be tested. Tractate List / Glossary / / Bible Reference ### Niddah 49b R. Judah1 said: One inverts the handles of the pot into the tub2 and allows water to float over it. If it then absorbs any, it may be taken for granted that it will let liquids in; but if not, it may be taken for granted that it only lets liquids out. Or else, it3 may be put upon a fire. If the fire stops the leakage it is certain that the pot will only let liquids out; but if not it is certain that it also lets liquids in. R. Jose said: One does not put it upon the actual4 fire since the fire stops it,5 but it is put upon embers. If the embers stop it, it is certain that it only lets liquids out, but if not, it is certain that it also lets liquids in. If it drips drop after drop6 it is certain that it lets liquids in. What is the practical difference between the first Tanna7 and R. Judah? — 'Ulla replied: The practical difference between them is a case of absorption under pressure.8 ANY LIMB THAT GROWS A NAIL etc. If it grows a nail9 it10 conveys uncleanness11 by means of touch, carriage and overshadowing. If it contains a bone but grows no nail it conveys uncleanness12 by means of touch and carriage but does not convey it by means of overshadowing.13 R. Hisda stated: The following was said by our great Master,14 may the Omnipresent be his help. A redundant finger that contains a bone but grows no nail conveys uncleanness12 by means of touch and carriage but does not convey it by means of overshadowing. Rabbah b. Bar Hana explained: This is the case only when it15 is not counted in [the row of the fingers of] the hand.16 WHATEVER CONTRACTS MIDRAS — UNCLEANNESS etc. Whatever object is fit for midras contracts corpse-uncleanness, but there are such as contract corpse-uncleanness and do not contract midras-uncleanness. What is this rule intended to include? — It is intended to include a se'ah measure and a tarkab;17 for it was taught: And he that sitteth on any thing;18 as it might have been presumed that if the zab inverted a se'ah measure and sat upon it or a tarkab measure and sat upon it, it shall be unclean,19 it was explicitly stated, Whereon he that hath the issue sat,18 implying20 that the text refers only to a thing that is appointed for sitting;21 but this one22 is excluded, since people would tell him, 'Get up that we may do our work with it'.23 MISHNAH. WHOSOEVER IS FIT TO TRY CAPITAL CASES IS ALSO FIT TO TRY MONETARY SUITS, BUT ONE MAY BE FIT TO TRY MONETARY SUITS AND YET BE UNFIT TO TRY CAPITAL CASES. GEMARA. Rab Judah stated: This24 was meant to include a bastard.25 Have we not, however, learnt this once before: 'All are eligible to try monetary suits but not all eligible to try capital cases';26 and when the question was raised, 'What was this intended to include?' Rab Judah replied, 'It was intended to include a bastard'?27 — One statement was intended to include a proselyte and the other to include a bastard. And both statements were necessary. For if we had been informed of the proselyte only it might have been presumed that it applied to him alone because he is eligible to enter the Assembly28 but not to a bastard who is not eligible to enter the Assembly.29 And if we had been informed of the bastard only it might have been presumed to apply to him alone because he issues from an eligible source30 but not to a proselyte who issues from an ineligible source.31 Hence the necessity for both rulings. MISHNAH. WHOSOEVER IS ELIGIBLE TO ACT AS JUDGE IS32 ELIGIBLE TO ACT AS WITNESS, BUT ONE MAY BE ELIGIBLE TO ACT AS WITNESS AND NOT AS JUDGE. GEMARA. What [was this33 intended] to include? — R. Johanan replied: To include one who is blind in one eye;34 and who is the author? - To Next Folio - Original footnotes renumbered. See Structure of the Talmud Files Objecting to the previous test which, since the bottom of the pot is inevitably pressed against the water, would cause the latter to penetrate even through the smallest of holes. Lit., 'into it', while it is still empty. The pot to be tested, with water in it. Lit., 'even not'. Even if the hole is big. This is another test, independent of the former. Supra 49a ad fin. According to the first Tanna this also is proof that the vessel lets liquids in, while according to R. Judah this is no proof (cf. supra n. 2). Though the limb is a redundant one, a sixth finger for instance. Being regarded as a proper limb (cf. relevant n. on our Mishnah). However small its bulk. If the bone is not smaller than a barley-grain. Unless the bulk of the flesh was no less than that of an olive. Rab. Being situated outside the row of the normal fingers. A normal finger, or even a redundant one in the normal row, conveys uncleanness by overshadowing, however small in bulk it may be, as any proper limb. A measure of capacity containing two kabs; Aliter: [G] = three kabs or half a se'ah, a dry measure. Lev. XV, 6. Midras-uncleanness that is conveyed to men and objects which become thereby a 'father of uncleanness'. Emphasis on 'sat' (v. Hag. Sonc. ed., p. 149, n. 2). Such an object only is subject to the major grade of uncleanness (cf. prev. n. but two). An inverted measure. Hence they contract from a zab the uncleanness of touch only and this subjects them only to the uncleanness of the first grade, while through contact with a corpse they become a 'father of uncleanness'. The second clause of our Mishnah. Who is a fit person to act as judge in monetary suits but not in capital cases (cf. Sanh. 36b). Sanh. 32a. That he is fit to adjudicate in indictory cases. Ibid. 36b. Why then the repetition. Sc. to marry the daughter of an Israelite. Cf. Deut. XXIII, 3. Lit., 'a fit drop', sc. pure Israelite origin. Heathen origin. Cf. prev. n. mut. mut. Much more so. The second rule in our Mishnah. Such a person is eligible as witness but not as judge. One blind in both eyes is ineligible even as witness. Tractate List / Glossary / / Bible Reference |  |  |