Gemara Clarity

Niddah 56b

נדה נ״ו ע״ב

Learn Niddah 56b step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Niddah 56b in Gemara Clarity

Topic

How far back stains and a שרץ make things impure, which found stains are pure, and when the כותים are believed

Overview

The amud first finishes a question about how far back impurity reaches. A שרץ found in a מבוי, or a כתם found on a garment, makes things impure only back to the last sweeping or laundering. The גמרא asks whether that is because the person surely checked at that time, or because the cleaning itself would have removed the problem. From רבי מאיר's ברייתא it concludes that sweeping and laundering count because a check is presumed (חזקתו בדוק). רבי אחא and רבי then give ways to tell whether a stain came before or after a laundering. רבי אלעזר explains that רבי שמעון's leniency for a moist item applies only to a שרץ, because a moist כתם might be an old stain that got wet. A new משנה then rules on stains coming from רקם, from גוים, and from places with ישראל and כותים. The גמרא uses that משנה to discuss accepting converts from תרמוד and rereads the dispute about the כותים. A final משנה teaches that stains found lying anywhere are pure, with two exceptions. It also covers the כותים's בית הטמאות and lists what the כותים are and are not believed about. It closes with the rule that they are not believed about any matter they are suspected of not keeping.

Opening lines

אִי נָמֵי דְּאִשְׁתְּכַח בְּגוּמָּא,

Alternatively, where it was found in a hole,

אִי אָמְרַתְּ חֶזְקָתוֹ בָּדוּק —

if you say its presumption is that it was examined,

מַאן דְּבָדֵק בְּגוּמָּא נָמֵי בָּדֵיק,

then one who examines also examines in the hole;

אִי אָמְרַתְּ חֶזְקָתוֹ מִתְכַּבֵּד —

if you say its presumption is that it was swept,

The steps (30)

  1. ResponseA second difference for the alley: the שרץ was found in a hole
  2. QuestionThe same question about laundering a stained garment
  3. QuestionWhat difference would it make?
  4. ResponseFirst difference: he laundered but did not check
  5. ResponseSecond difference: the stain was found on the side of the garment
  6. Proofרבי מאיר: sweeping counts because people check while sweeping
  7. Proofרבי מאיר: laundering counts because women check while laundering
  8. Statementרבי אחא: wash it again to see when the stain came
  9. Statementרבי: a stain's texture shows when it came
  10. ConclusionConclusion: swept or laundered means checked
  11. StatementA moist stain is still retroactive, even for רבי שמעון
  12. ChallengeWhy not say the same about a moist creeping animal?
  13. ResolutionA dried creeping animal that got wet would fall apart
  14. StatementNew משנה: stains from רקם, from גוים, and from mixed places
  15. StatementThe משנה makes no exception, so it includes תרמוד
  16. Conclusionרבי יוחנן: converts may be accepted from תרמוד
  17. ChallengeBut רבי יוחנן said converts are not accepted from תרמוד
  18. ChallengeHe cannot just be explaining the משנה without agreeing
  19. ResolutionLater אמוראים disagree about רבי יוחנן's view
  20. QuestionWhose stains do the חכמים call impure?
  21. ResolutionThe משנה is missing words: the dispute is whether כותים are real converts
  22. ChallengeThe משנה's reason does not fit this reading
  23. ResolutionA new reading: stains from ישראל and כותים are impure, but stains found in Jewish towns are pure
  24. ResolutionIn the towns of the כותים, רבי מאיר and the חכמים disagree
  25. StatementStains found anywhere are pure, with two exceptions
  26. StatementThe כותים' house of impurity spreads corpse impurity
  27. Statementרבי יהודה: they threw the stillborns out, they did not bury them
  28. StatementWhat the כותים are trusted to say
  29. StatementWhat the כותים are not trusted about
  30. ConclusionThe general rule: no trust where they are suspected