meir

All objects that defile by overshadowing which were divided and then brought into a house: Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas declares clean. But the sages declare [it] unclean. What is the case? One who touches two pieces of nevelah, each the size of half an olive, or carries them, Or, in the case of a corpse, if he touches a piece the size of half an olive and overshadows [another piece] the size of half an olive, Or if he touches [a piece] the size of half an olive and [another piece] the size of half an olive overshadows him, Or if he overshadows two [pieces, each] the size of half an olive, Or if he overshadows [a piece] the size of half an olive and [another piece] the size of half an olive overshadows him: Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas declares him clean, And the sages declare him unclean. But if he touches [a piece] the size of half an olive and another object overshadows him and [another piece] the size of half an olive, Or if he overshadows [a piece] the size of half an olive and another object overshadows him and [another piece] the size of half an olive, he is clean. Rabbi Meir says: Even here Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas declares him clean and the sages declare him unclean. Every [case] is unclean except [a case of] contact [combined] with carriage or of carriage [combined] with overshadowing. This is the general principle: every object [whose defilement] proceeds from one cause is unclean, from two causes is clean.

A wall serving a house is treated as if it was separate halves. How so? A wall serving an open space, that has uncleanness within it: If it is in the inward half, the house is unclean, But what is above [the wall] remains clean. If it is in the outward half, the house remains clean, But what is above [the wall] becomes unclean. If it is exactly in the middle, the house becomes unclean, And as for what is above, Rabbi Meir declares it unclean, But the sages declare it clean. Rabbi Judah says: the whole of the wall belongs to the house.

If [at the birth of twins] the first came out dead and the second came out alive, the [live one] is clean. If the first was alive and the second dead, the [live child] is unclean. Rabbi Meir says: if they were in one sac, [the live child] is unclean, but if there were two sacs, it remains clean.

Projections from a wall, balconies, dovecotes, crevices and crags, grottoes, [overhanging] pinnacles, interlaced boughs and protruding stones as long as they are cable of sustaining thin plasterwork, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say a medium plasterwork. What are interlaced boughs? A tree which casts shade over the ground. Protruding stones? [Stones] that project from a wall.

If the hatchway does not have an opening of a square handbreadth: If there is uncleanness in the house, what is directly [below] the hatchway remains clean. If the uncleanness is directly [below] the hatchway, the house remains clean. When the uncleanness is in the house, if he placed his leg above [the hatchway], he remains clean. [When] the uncleanness is directly [below] the hatchway, if he placed his leg above it, Rabbi Meir declares [him] unclean, But the sages say: if the uncleanness was [in position] before his leg, he becomes unclean, but if his leg was [in position] before the uncleanness, he remains clean. Rabbi Shimon says: [in the case where] two [men's] legs, one above the other, were [in position] before the uncleanness, if the first person withdrew his leg and the other person's leg was still there, [the second] remains clean, because the first person's leg was [in position] before the uncleanness.

If part of the uncleanness is in the house and part directly [below] the hatchway, the house becomes unclean, and what is directly [above] the uncleanness becomes unclean, the words of Meir. Rabbi Judah says: the house becomes unclean but what is directly [above] the uncleanness remains clean. Rabbi Yose says: if there is sufficient of the uncleanness for it to be divided so that [one part] defiles the house and [the other part] defiles what is directly [above] the uncleanness, [both spaces] become unclean; if not, the house becomes unclean but what is directly [above] the uncleanness remains clean.

A dog which had eaten the flesh of a corpse and then died and was lying over the threshold: Rabbi Meir says: if its neck has a thickness of one handbreadth it can bring the uncleanness, but if not, it does not bring the uncleanness. Rabbi Yose says: we [examine to] see where the uncleanness is. If it is beneath the lintel and inwards, the house becomes unclean; if from the lintel and outwards, the house remains clean. Rabbi Eliezer says: if its mouth [points] inwards, the house remains clean; if its mouth [points] outwards, the house becomes unclean, since the uncleanness goes out through its hind. Rabbi Judah ben Batera says: in either case the house becomes unclean. How long can [the uncleanness] remain in its entrails? Three whole days. [If in the entrails] of fishes or birds, as long as [it takes for the uncleanness] to fall in the fire and be consumed, the words of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Judah ben Batera says: in the case of fishes or birds, twenty-four hours.

The following do not reduce [the area of the window]: Bone does not reduce [the area] for [other] bones; Nor [corpse] flesh for [other] flesh; Nor an olive-sized [portion] of a corpse; Nor an olive-sized portion of carrion; Nor a lentil-sized portion of reptile; Nor an egg-sized portion of food; Nor produce growing in the windows; Nor a cobweb having no substance; Nor the carcass of a clean bird which had been intended [for food]; Nor the carcass of an unclean bird which had been intended [for food] and had been rendered susceptible to uncleanness; Nor warp and woof threads that have negaim; Nor a brick from a bet haperas, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the brick can reduce, because the dust [of the bet haperas] is clean. This is the general rule: what is clean reduces [the area], and what is unclean does not reduce it.

A jar full of clean liquid and sealed with a tightly fitting lid, which had been made the covering stone of a tomb, a person touching it contracts seven-day uncleanness but the jar and the liquid remain clean. An animal that had been used as a covering stone, a person touching it contracts seven-day uncleanness. Rabbi Meir says: anything possessing the breath of life does convey uncleanness on account of [its being used as] a covering stone.

How so? A spindle stuck into the wall, with [a portion of corpse] of half an olive-size above it and [a portion of corpse] of half an olive-size below it. Even though one [portion] is not directly [above] the other, [the spindle] becomes unclean. Hence it is found that [a movable object] conveys uncleanness to come upon itself whatever its thickness. A pot seller passes by a grave with a yoke over his shoulder, one end of which overshadows a grave, vessels on the other side remain clean. If the yoke is one handbreadth wide, they become unclean. Mounds which are near to a city or to a road, whether they are new or old, are unclean. [As for those that are] far away, new ones are clean but old ones are unclean. What counts as near? Fifty cubits. And old? Sixty years old, the words of Rabbi Meir. R. Judah says: Near means there is none nearer than it, and old means that no one remembers [when it was made].

There are three [kinds of] bet peras: A field in which a grave was plowed may be planted with any kind of plant, But must not be sown with any kind of seed, except with seed [yielding produce] which is reaped. If [such produce] were plucked, the threshing-floor must be piled up in [the field] itself, and the [grain] sifted through two sieves, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: grain [must be sifted] through two sieves, but pulse through three sieves. And he must burn the stubble and the stalks. [Such a field] conveys uncleanness by contact and carriage but does not convey uncleanness by overshadowing.

The signs of negaim are two which, in fact, are four. The bright spot (baheret) is bright white like snow; secondary to it is the sign as white as the lime of the Temple. The rising (se'et) is as white of the skin of an egg; secondary to it is the like white wool, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the rising (se'et) is white wool and secondary to it is like the white of the skin of an egg.

Negaim may not be inspected in the early morning or in the evening, nor in a house, nor on a cloudy day, because then the dull white appears like bright white; nor may they be inspected at noon, because then the bright white appears like dull white. When are they to be inspected? During the third, fourth, fifth, seventh, eighth or ninth hour, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah ruled: during the fourth, fifth, eighth or ninth hour.

All negaim may be examined by a person, except his own. Rabbi Meir ruled: not even the negaim of his relatives. All vows may be released by a person, except his own. Rabbi Judah says: not even those vows of his wife that affect relationships between her and others. All firstlings may be examined by a person, except his own firstlings.

If the two hairs were black at the root and white at the tip he is clean. If they were white at the root and black at the tip he is unclean. How much whiteness must there be? Rabbi Meir says: any amount. Rabbi Shimon says: enough to be cut with a pair of scissors. If it was single at the root but split at the tip, and it looks like two hairs, he is clean. If a bright spot had [two] white hairs or black hair he is unclean, for we are not concerned that the place of the black hair lessened the space of the bright spot, since the former is of no consequence.

A bright spot the size of a split bean and in it there was quick flesh less than the size of a lentil: If the bright spot grew larger it is unclean, but if it grew smaller it is clean. If the quick flesh grew larger it is unclean, but if it grew smaller, Rabbi Meir rules that it is unclean; But the sages rule that it is clean, since a nega cannot spread within itself.

If there were two bright spots, one unclean and the other clean, and they broke out from one to the other, and then [a nega] broke out covering all of his skin, he is clean. [If the bright spots] were on his upper lip and lower lip, or on two of his fingers, or on his two eyelids, even though they cleave together and appear as one, he is clean. If it broke out covering all his skin except white scurf, he is unclean. If the ends of his limbs reappeared in the color of white scurf, he is clean. If the ends of his limbs reappeared to the extent of less than a lentil: Rabbi Meir rules that he is unclean, But the sages rule that a piece of white scurf less in size than a lentil, is a sign of uncleanness in the beginning, but it is not a sign of uncleanness at the end.

Colored hides and garments are not susceptible to negaim. Houses whether they are colored or not colored, are susceptible to negaim, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: hides are like houses. Rabbi Shimon says: those that are naturally [colored] are susceptible to uncleanness but those that are artificially [dyed] are not susceptible to uncleanness.

What is the procedure for the inspection of a house? "The owner of the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, "Something like a plague has appeared upon my house" (Leviticus 14:35). Even if he is a learned sage and knows that it is definitely a nega, he may not speak with certainty saying, "A plague has appeared upon my house," but rather, "Something like a plague has appeared upon my house." "The priest shall order the house cleared before the priest enters to examine the plague, so that nothing in the house may become unclean; after that the priest shall enter to examine the house." Even bundles of wood and even bundles of reeds [must be removed], the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Shimon said: clearing keeps him occupied. Rabbi Meir said: But which [of his goods] could become unclean? If you were to say, his articles of wood, of cloth or of metal, he could immerse them and they will become clean. What is it that the Torah has spared? His earthenware, even his cruse and his bucket. If the Torah thus spared a man's humble possessions, how much more so would it spare his cherished possessions! If for his material possessions, how much more so for the life of his sons and daughters! If for the possessions of a wicked man, how much more so for the possessions of a righteous one!

If he enters a synagogue, a partition ten handbreadths high and four cubits wide must be made for him. He should enter first and come out last. Any vessel that affords protection by having a tightly fitting cover in the tent of a corpse affords protection by a tightly fitting cover in the house of one afflicted by a nega, And whatsoever affords protection when covered in the tent of a corpse affords protection when covered in the house of one afflicted with a nega, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: any vessel that affords protection by having a tightly fitting cover in the tent of a corpse affords protection when covered in the house of one afflicted with a nega; and whatsoever affords protection when covered in the tent of a corpse remains clean even when uncovered in a leprous house.

Rabbi Eliezer says: the heifer is no more than one year old and the cow no more than two years old. But the sages ruled: the heifer may be even two years old and the red cow even three or four years old. Rabbi Meir says: even five years old, though she is old. But they did not wait with it so long since it might in the meantime grow some black hairs and [thus] become invalid. Rabbi Joshua said: I only heard of [a cow] that was three years old [shelashit]. They said to him: What does "shelashit" mean? He replied: thus have I heard it without any explanation. Ben Azzai said: I will explain: if you say "shelishit" the meaning is ‘the third’ in number to others, but when you say "shelashit" the meaning is one that is three years old. Similarly they said a vineyard that is "revai." They said to him: what does "revai" mean? He replied: thus have I heard it without any explanation. Ben Azzai said: I will explain: if you say "revii" the meaning is the fourth in number to others, but when you say "revai" the meaning is one that is four years old. Similarly it was ruled: if a man ate in an afflicted house half a loaf, three of which can be made from a kav, he becomes unclean. They said to him: say rather "eighteen of which are made of a se'ah." He replied: thus have I heard it without any explanation. Ben Azzai said: I will explain: when you say, three of which are made of a kav it would not contain hallah, but if you say, eighteen of which are made of a se'ah, it has been reduced by its hallah.

Rabbi Yose the Galilean said: bulls must be no more than two years old, for it is said, "And the second bull you shall take for a sin-offering" (Numbers 8:8). But the sages say: they may be even three years old. Rabbi Meir says: even those that are four or five years old are valid, but old animals are not brought out of respect.

If it had two black or white hairs growing within one follicle, it is invalid. Rabbi Judah said: within one kos; if they grew within two kosot that were adjacent to one another, it is invalid. Rabbi Akiva says: even if there were four or five but they were dispersed, they may be plucked out. Rabbi Eliezer says: even as many as fifty. Rabbi Joshua ben Batera says: even if it had but one on its head and one on its tail, it is invalid. If it had two hairs with their roots black and their tips red or with their roots red and their tips black, everything goes according to what is visible, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: by the root.

If they did not find the residue of the ashes of the seven [red cows] they performed the sprinkling with those of six, of five, of four, of three, of two or of one. And who prepared these? Moses prepared the first, Ezra prepared the second, and five were prepared from the time of Ezra, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: seven from the time of Ezra. And who prepared them? Shimon the Just and Yohanan the high priest prepared two each; Elihoenai the son of Ha-Kof and Hanamel the Egyptian and Ishmael the son of Piabi prepared one each.

A potters’ egg is fit [as a vessel]. Rabbi Yose rules that it is unfit. A hen's egg: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Judah rule it is fit [as a vessel]; But the sages rule that it is unfit.

If the ashes floated on the water: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon rule: one may take some of them and use them in another preparation; But the sages say: with any ashes that have touched water no other mixture may be prepared from them. If he emptied out the water and some ashes were found at the bottom: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon rule: one may dry them and then use them for another preparation; But the sages rule: with any ashes that have touched water no other mixture may be prepared.

If the ashes floated on the water: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon rule: one may take some of them and use them in another preparation; But the sages say: with any ashes that have touched water no other mixture may be prepared from them. If he emptied out the water and some ashes were found at the bottom: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon rule: one may dry them and then use them for another preparation; But the sages rule: with any ashes that have touched water no other mixture may be prepared.

All seas are equivalent to a ritual bath (mikveh), for it is said, "And the gathering (ulemikveh) of the waters He called the seas" (Genesis 1:10), the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: only the Great Sea is equivalent to a ritual bath, for it says "seas" only because there are in it many kinds of seas. Rabbi Yose says: all seas afford cleanness when running, and yet they are unfit for zavim and metzoraim and for the preparation of the hatat waters.

All that require immersion in water according to the rulings of the Torah defile consecrated things, terumah, unconsecrated food, and [second] tithe; And he is forbidden to enter the sanctuary. After immersion [but before the sun sets] he defiles holy things and invalidates terumah, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages ruled: he invalidates consecrated things and terumah. But he is permitted to unconsecrated food and [second] tithe. And if he entered the sanctuary, whether before or after his immersion, he incurs guilt.

All that require immersion in water according to the words of the scribes defile consecrated things and invalidate terumah to be unfit, but they are permitted to unconsecrated food and second tithe, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages forbid second tithe. After immersion [but before the sun sets] he is permitted to all these. And if he entered the sanctuary, whether before or after his immersion, he incurs no guilt.

All that require immersion in water, whether according to the words of the Torah or according to the words of the scribes, defile hatat waters, hatat ashes, and the one who sprinkled the hatat waters, either through contact or through carrying. And [they defile] hyssop that has been rendered susceptible to uncleanness, and water that had not yet been prepared, and an empty vessel that is clean for the hatat through contact and carrying, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: only by contact but not by carrying.

The hyssop that was used for sprinkling [the hatat waters] is also fit for cleansing the metzora. If it was gathered for firewood, and liquid fell upon it, it may be dried and it becomes fit. If it was gathered for food, and liquid fell upon it, even though it was dried, it is invalid. If it was gathered for [the sprinkling of the waters of] the hatat, it is subject to the same law as if it were gathered for food, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah, Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon ruled: as if it were gathered for firewood.

Thirteen rulings govern the carrion of a clean bird: There must be intention; It need not be rendered susceptible; It conveys food uncleanness if its minimum bulk is that of an egg; And it conveys uncleanness when in one's gullet if its minimum bulk is that of an olive; He that eats of it must wait until sunset [to be clean]; Guilt is incurred on account of it for entering the sanctuary; Terumah is burned on account of it; He who eats a limb of it while it is alive suffers forty lashes; Slaughtering it or nipping [off its neck] cleanses it even if it is terefah, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: they do not cleanse it. Rabbi Yose says: the slaughtering does cleanse it but nipping does not.

Rabbi Meir says: oil always remains unclean in the first degree. And the sages say: honey also. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: also wine. A mass of olives that fell into an oven that was heated: If [the olives] were exactly the size of an egg it [the oven] remains pure; But if it was more than that of an egg the oven becomes unclean, for as soon as the first drop came out it became unclean by contact with an egg's bulk. If the olives were separated even if there was a se'ah of them, it remains clean.

A child was found next to dough with a piece of dough in his hand: Rabbi Meir says that the dough is clean; But the sages say that it is unclean, since it is the nature of a child to slap dough. Dough that bears traces of hens’ pickings and there is unclean liquid in the same house: if there was distance enough between the liquid and the loaves for the hens to dry their mouths on the ground, the dough is clean. And in the case of a cow or a dog, if there was distance enough for it to lick its tongue. And in the case of all other beasts, if there was distance enough for their tongue to dry. Rabbi Eliezer ben Jacob holds the dough to be clean in the case of a dog who is smart; for it is not its habit to leave food and go after the water.

If a man sat in a public domain and someone came and trod on his clothes, or spat and he touched his spit, on account of the spit terumah must be burnt, but on account of the clothes the majority principle is followed. If a man slept in the public domain, when he rises his clothes have midras uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say that they are clean. If a man touched someone in the night and it is not known whether it was one who was alive or dead, but in the morning when he got up he found him to be dead: Rabbi Meir says that he is clean. But the sages rule that he is unclean, since all doubtful cases of uncleanness are [determined] in accordance with [their appearance at] the time they are discovered.

If a man sat in a public domain and someone came and trod on his clothes, or spat and he touched his spit, on account of the spit terumah must be burnt, but on account of the clothes the majority principle is followed. If a man slept in the public domain, when he rises his clothes have midras uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say that they are clean. If a man touched someone in the night and it is not known whether it was one who was alive or dead, but in the morning when he got up he found him to be dead: Rabbi Meir says that he is clean. But the sages rule that he is unclean, since all doubtful cases of uncleanness are [determined] in accordance with [their appearance at] the time they are discovered.

If one witness says, "You have become unclean," but he says, "I have not become unclean," he is regarded as clean. If two witnesses say, "You have become unclean," and he says, "I have not become unclean," Rabbi Meir says: he is unclean. But the sages say: he may be believed on his own evidence. If one witness says, "You have become unclean," and two witnesses say, "He has not become unclean," whether in a private domain or in a public domain, he is regarded as clean. If two witnesses say, "He has become unclean’, and one witness says, ‘"He has not become unclean," whether in a private domain or in a public domain, he is regarded as unclean. If one witness says, "He has become unclean," and another says, "He has not become unclean," or if one woman says, "He has become unclean’, and another woman says, "He has not become unclean," he is regarded as unclean if in the private domain, but if in a public domain he is regarded as clean.

A covered forum:: is a private domain in respect of Shabbat and a public domain in respect of the laws of uncleanness; And so too the sides. Rabbi Meir says: the sides are regarded as a private domain in both respects.

If he left an am haaretz in his house awake and found him awake, or asleep and found him asleep, or awake and found him asleep, the house remains clean. If he left him asleep and found him awake, the house is unclean, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the only part that is unclean is where he can stretch out his hand and touch it.

One who left craftsmen in his house, the house is unclean, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the only part that is unclean is where they can stretch out their hand and touch it.

If the wife of a haver left the wife of an am haaretz grinding grain in her house, if the handmill stopped turning, the house is unclean. But if the handmill did not stop turning, that part of the house which she can stretch out her hand and touch is unclean. If there were two women, the house is unclean in either case, since while the one is grinding, the other can go about touching, the words of Meir. But the sages say: the only part that is unclean is where she can stretch out her hand and touch it.

One who left his house open and found it open, or locked and found it locked, or open and found it locked, it remains clean. But if he left it closed and found it open: Rabbi Meir says that it is unclean; But the sages say that it remains clean, since, though thieves had been there, they may have changed their mind and gone away.

One who had finished [the gathering of his olives] and put aside one basketful, let him put it [in the container] in front of a priest, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: he must hand him over the key immediately. Rabbi Shimon says: within twenty-four hours.

If one locked in olive-workers in the olive-press and there were objects in there that had midras uncleanness: Rabbi Meir says: the olive-press is deemed to be unclean. Rabbi Judah says: the olive-press remains clean. Rabbi Shimon says: if they regard them as clean, the olive-press is deemed unclean; but if they regard them as unclean,the olive-press remains clean. Rabbi Yose: why are they unclean? Only because the am haaretz is not an expert in the laws of hesset.

If the olive-workers or the grape harvesters were only brought within the domain of the cavern, it is sufficient, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: he should stand over them until they immerse. Rabbi Shimon say: if they regard the vessels as clean, one must stand over them until they immerse; but if they regard them as unclean, it is not necessary to stand over them until they immerse.

A mikveh which contains forty seahs of water and mud [combined]: Rabbi Eliezer says: one may immerse objects in the water but one may not immerse them in the mud. But Rabbi Joshua says: in the water and also in the mud. In what kind of mud may objects be immersed? Mud over which water floats. If the water was on one side only, Rabbi Joshua agrees that objects may be immersed in the water but may not be immersed in the mud. Of what kind of mud have they spoken? Mud into which a reed will sink of itself, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: [mud] in which a measuring-rod will not stand upright. Abba Elazar ben Dulai says: [mud] into which a plummet will sink. Rabbi Eliezer says: such as will go down into the mouth of a jar. Rabbi Shimon says: such as will enter into the tube of a water-skin. Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: such as can be measured in a log measure.

If one put vessels under a water-spout, whether they be large vessels or small vessels or even vessels of dung, vessels of stone or earthen vessels, they make the mikveh invalid. It is all alike whether they were put there [purposely] or were [merely] forgotten, the words of Bet Shammai. But Bet Hillel declare it clean in the case of one who forgets. Rabbi Meir said: they voted and Bet Shammai had a majority over Bet Hillel. Yet they agree in the case of one who forgets [and leaves vessels] in a courtyard that the mikveh remains clean. Rabbi Yose said: the controversy still remains as it was.

All seas are equivalent to a mikveh, for it is said, "And the gathering (ulemikveh) of the waters He called the seas" (Genesis 1:10), the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: only the Great Sea is equivalent to a mikveh, for it says "seas" only because there are in it many kinds of seas. Rabbi Yose says: all seas afford cleanness when running, and yet they are unfit for zavim and metzoraim and for the preparation of the hatat waters.

The outlet of a bath-basin: if it is in the center, it renders [the bath] invalid [as a mikveh]; but if it is at the side, it does not render it invalid, because then it is like one mikveh adjoining another mikveh, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: if the bath-basin can contain a quarter-log of [water] before it reaches the outlet, it is valid; but if not, it is not valid. Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: if the outlet can contain any amount of [water], it is invalid.

Who is regarded as "virgin"? Any woman who has never yet observed a blood flow, even if she is married. "A woman in pregnancy"? One whose fetus is notice. "A nursing woman"? Until she has weaned her child. If she gave her child to a nursing woman, if she weaned him, or if he died: Rabbi Meir says: she conveys uncleanness retroactively for twenty-four hours; But the sages say: it suffices for her [to reckon her period of uncleanness from] the time of her [observation of the flow].

Five kinds of blood in a woman are unclean: red, black, like bright crocus, like earthy water, or like diluted wine. Bet Shammai says: also like fenugreek water or the juice of roasted meat. But Bet Hillel declares these clean. One that is yellow: Akavia ben Mahalalel declares unclean And the sages declare clean. Rabbi Meir said: even if it does not convey uncleanness as a bloodstain it conveys uncleanness as a liquid. Rabbi Yose says: it does neither the one nor the other.

If a woman miscarried an object that was like a rind, like a hair, like earth, like red flies, let her put it in water: If it dissolves she is unclean, But if it does not she is clean. If she miscarried an object in the shape of fishes, locusts, or any forbidden things or creeping things: If there was blood with them she is unclean, If not, she is clean. If she miscarried an object in the shape of a beast, a wild animal or a bird, whether clean or unclean: If it was a male she sits in uncleanness as she would for a male; And if it was a female she sits in uncleanness as she would for a female. But if the sex is unknown she sits in uncleanness for both male and female, the words of Rabbi Meir. The sages say: anything that has not the shape of a human being cannot be regarded as a human child.

How long can protracted labor [be considered] as lasting? Rabbi Meir says: even forty or fifty days. Rabbi Judah say: the [ninth] month suffices for her. Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon says: protracted labor is not for more than two weeks [before birth].

Throughout all the eleven days a woman is in a presumption of cleanness. If she did not examine herself if this was unwittingly, under duress or intentionally, she is clean. If the time of her regular period arrived and she did not examine herself she is unclean. Rabbi Meir says: if a woman was in a hiding place when the time of her regular period arrived and she didn't examine herself she is clean, because fear suspends the flow of blood. But during the days prescribed for a zav or a zavah or for one who waits day against day, these are presumed to be unclean.

If the lower sign appears before the upper sign, she can perform halitzah or yibbum. If the upper sign appears before the lower sign, even though this is impossible: Rabbi Meir says: she doesn't perform halitzah or yibbum. And the sages say: she can perform halitzah or yibbum. For they have said: it is possible for the lower sign to appear before the upper sign, but it is impossible for the upper sign to appear before the lower sign.

A woman who found a blood-stain is in a spoiled condition and must take into consideration the possibility that it was due to zivah, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: in the case of blood-stains there is no [need to consider the possibility of their being] due to zivah.

All bloodstains that come from Rekem are clean. Rabbi Judah declares them unclean, because the people who live there are proselytes though misguided. Those that come from non-Jews are clean. Those that come from Israelites or from Samaritans: Rabbi Meir declares them unclean, But the sages declare them clean because they are not suspected in regard to their stains.

A woman who was attending to her needs and observed an issue of blood: Rabbi Meir says: if she was standing she is unclean but if she was sitting she remains clean. Rabbi Yose says: in either case she is clean.

If three women slept in one bed, and blood was found under the middle one, they are all unclean. If it was found under the inner one, the two inner ones are unclean while the outer one is clean. If it was found under the outer one, the two outer ones are unclean while the inner one is clean. Rabbi Judah said: when is this so? When they passed by way of the foot of the bed, but if they passed across it, they are all unclean. If one of them examined herself and was found clean, she remains clean while the two others are unclean. If two examined themselves and were found to be clean they remain clean while the third is unclean. If the three examined themselves and were found to be clean, they are all unclean. To what may this be compared? To an unclean heap that was mixed up with two clean heaps: If they examined one of them and found it to be clean, it is clean while the two others are unclean; If they examined two of the heaps and found them to be clean, they are clean while the third one is unclean; And if they examined the three and they were all found to be clean, they are all unclean, the words of Rabbi Meir, For Rabbi Meir used to say: any object that is presumed to be unclean remains unclean until it is known to you where the uncleanness is. But the sages say: one continues the examination of the heap until one reaches bedrock or virgin soil.

If three women slept in one bed, and blood was found under the middle one, they are all unclean. If it was found under the inner one, the two inner ones are unclean while the outer one is clean. If it was found under the outer one, the two outer ones are unclean while the inner one is clean. Rabbi Judah said: when is this so? When they passed by way of the foot of the bed, but if they passed across it, they are all unclean. If one of them examined herself and was found clean, she remains clean while the two others are unclean. If two examined themselves and were found to be clean they remain clean while the third is unclean. If the three examined themselves and were found to be clean, they are all unclean. To what may this be compared? To an unclean heap that was mixed up with two clean heaps: If they examined one of them and found it to be clean, it is clean while the two others are unclean; If they examined two of the heaps and found them to be clean, they are clean while the third one is unclean; And if they examined the three and they were all found to be clean, they are all unclean, the words of Rabbi Meir, For Rabbi Meir used to say: any object that is presumed to be unclean remains unclean until it is known to you where the uncleanness is. But the sages say: one continues the examination of the heap until one reaches bedrock or virgin soil.

If one found produce on the road: If the majority [of the inhabitants] gathered produce into their homes, he is exempt [from tithes]; If [the majority gathered it] for selling in the market, he is liable [for tithes]; If they were half and half, the produce is demai. A granary into which both Israelites and non-Jews put their produce, If the majority were non-Jews, [the produce must be considered] certainly untithed; If the majority were Israelites, [it must be considered] demai; If they were half and half, [it must be considered] certainly untithed, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: even if they were all non-Jews, and only one Israelite put his produce into the granary, [it must be considered] demai.

One who drew hot bread off the side of an oven and put it upon the mouth of a jar of wine: Rabbi Meir declares it susceptible to uncleanness; But Rabbi Judah declares it insusceptible. Rabbi Yose declares it insusceptible in the case of wheat bread and susceptible in the case of barley bread, because barley absorbs [liquids].

One who carries up to the roof bundles [of vegetables] or cakes of figs or garlic so as to keep them fresh, it does not come under the law of ‘if water be put’. All bundles [of vegetables] in the market places are unclean. Rabbi Judah declares them clean if they are fresh. Rabbi Meir said: Why did they declare them unclean? Only because of liquid from the mouth. All coarse and fine flours of the market places are unclean. Crushed wheat, groats, and pearl-barley are unclean everywhere.

Derivatives of water are: the liquids that come from the eye, from the ear, from the nose and from the mouth, and urine, whether of adults or of children, whether [its flow is] conscious or unconscious. Derivatives of blood are: blood from the slaughtering of cattle and wild animals and birds that are clean, and blood from bloodletting for drinking. Whey is like milk, And the sap of olives is deemed like oil, since it is never free from oil, the words of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Meir says: even though it contains no oil. The blood of a sheretz is like its flesh, it causes uncleanness but does not cause susceptibility to uncleanness, and there is nothing else like it.

Unshelled barley or spelt, root of crowfoot, asafoetida, silphium--Rabbi Judah says: even black beans remain clean even [when coming into contact] with a ‘father of uncleanness’, and there is no need to say [if touched] by a tevul yom, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: they are clean if touched by a tevul yom, but unclean [when touched] by other sources of impurity. Shelled barley or spelt, or wheat whether shelled or unshelled, or black cumin, or sesame or pepper Rabbi Judah says: also white beans become unclean even when touched by a tevul yom, and there is no need to say [when they have come into contact] with other sources of impurity.

Handles to food, which count as connectives when touched by a "father of uncleanness," also count as connectives when touched by a tevul yom. If a food was divided into two yet a small part was still attached: Rabbi Meir says: if one takes hold of the larger part and the smaller part is pulled away with it, behold it is like it. Rabbi Judah says: if one takes hold of the smaller part and the greater is also pulled away with it, then behold it is like it. Rabbi Nehemiah says: [this refers] to the case of the clean portion. But the sages say: [it refers] to the unclean portion. In the case of all other foods, those usually held by the leaf should be taken by the leaf, and those usually held by the stalk should be taken by the stalk.

A clean person who chewed food and it fell on his garments and on a loaf of terumah, it [the loaf] is not susceptible to uncleanness. If he ate crushed olives or moist dates, [or] if his intention was to suck out the pit, and it fell on his garments and on a loaf of terumah, it is susceptible to uncleanness. If he ate dried olives, or dried figs or it was not his intention to suck out the pit, and they fell on his garments and on a loaf of terumah, it is not susceptible to uncleanness. This is the case irrespective of whether it was a clean person or a tevul yom [who was eating]. Rabbi Meir says: in either case it becomes susceptible to uncleanness in the case of a tevul yom, since liquids issuing from unclean persons render anything susceptible whether it was to his liking or not. But the sages say: a tevul yom is not regarded as an unclean person.

If he poured water over one of his hands with a single rinsing his hand becomes clean. If over both his hands with a single rinsing: Rabbi Meir declares them to be unclean until he pours a minimum of a quarter of a log of water over them. If a loaf of terumah fell on the water the loaf is clean. Rabbi Yose declares it to be unclean.

Roots of garlic, onions or leeks that are still moist, or their top-parts, whether they are moist or dry, also the central stalk that is within the edible part, the roots of lettuce, the radish and the turnip, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: only the large roots of the radish are included, but its fibrous roots are not included. The roots of the mint, rue, wild herbs and garden herbs that have been uprooted in order to be planted elsewhere, and the spine of an ear of grain, and its husk. Rabbi Elazar says: also the earth covering of roots; All these things contract and convey impurity and are included.

In its written (Gen. 37:2): “And Joseph reported their evil slander to their father.” What did he say? Rebbi Meir, Rebbi Jehudah, and Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Meir said, they are suspected of eating flesh from a living animal. Rebbi Jehudah said, they abuse the sons of the handmaidens and treat them like slaves. Rebbi Simeon said, they are infatuated with local girls. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, (Prov. 16:11) “Balance and scales of justice are the Eternal’s; all weight-stones are His work. “What did he say, they are suspected of eating flesh from a living animal? The Holy One, praise to Him, said: So I testify for them that they first slaughter and then eat, (Gen. 37:31) “they slaughtered the he-goat and dipped the coat into the blood.” What did he say, they abuse the sons of the handmaidens and treat them like slaves? (Ps. 105:17) “Joseph was sold as a slave.” What did he say, they are infatuated with local girls? Lo, a she-bear will attack you, (Gen. 39:7) “his master’s wife lifted her eyes to Joseph, etc.”

In its written (Gen. 37:2): “And Joseph reported their evil slander to their father.” What did he say? Rebbi Meir, Rebbi Jehudah, and Rebbi Simeon. Rebbi Meir said, they are suspected of eating flesh from a living animal. Rebbi Jehudah said, they abuse the sons of the handmaidens and treat them like slaves. Rebbi Simeon said, they are infatuated with local girls. Rebbi Judah ben Pazi said, (Prov. 16:11) “Balance and scales of justice are the Eternal’s; all weight-stones are His work. “What did he say, they are suspected of eating flesh from a living animal? The Holy One, praise to Him, said: So I testify for them that they first slaughter and then eat, (Gen. 37:31) “they slaughtered the he-goat and dipped the coat into the blood.” What did he say, they abuse the sons of the handmaidens and treat them like slaves? (Ps. 105:17) “Joseph was sold as a slave.” What did he say, they are infatuated with local girls? Lo, a she-bear will attack you, (Gen. 39:7) “his master’s wife lifted her eyes to Joseph, etc.”

MISHNAH: Pumpkin in the middle of vegetables goes by the rules of vegetables, in the middle of grain it needs a bet rova‘. If one’s field was sown with grain and he desired to plant there one row of pumpkin, he must allow six hand-breadths to tend it. If it grows, he has to uproot before it. Rebbi Yose said, he allows four cubits to tend it. They said to him, are you making this more restrictive than for a vine? He said to them, we find that this case is more restrictive than that of a vine. For a single vine one allows six hand-breadths to tend it, but for a single pumpkin a bet rova‘. Rebbi Meir says in the name of Rebbi Ismael, if there are three pumpkin plants in a bet seah one should not sow in that bet seah. Rebbi Yose, the son of the Snatcher from Efrat, says in the name of Rebbi Ismael, if there are three pumpkin plants in a bet kor one should not sow in that bet kor.

MISHNAH: Two boxes, one of heave and one profane. A seah of heave fell into one of them and it is not known into which one; I say it fell into heave. If it is not known which [box] is heave and which one is profane, if one ate [the contents of] one of them, he is free. The [contents of] the second he treats as heave but it is subject to ḥallah, the words of Rebbi Meïr; but Rebbi Yose declares it free. If another person ate from the second [box], he is free. If he ate from both of them, he pays according to the lesser of the two. If one of them fell into profane [produce] it would not make it dema‘. The [contents of] the second he treats as heave but it is subject to ḥallah, the words of Rebbi Meïr; but Rebbi Yose declares it free. If the [contents of the] second [box] fell into another place, they would not make it dema‘. If both together fell into one place they would create dema‘ relative to the smaller one. sup>118 If he sowed [the contents of] one of them, he is free. The [contents o f ] the second he treats as heave but it is subject to ḥallah, the words of Rebbi Meir; but Rebbi Yose declares it free. If another person sowed the second one, he is free. If one person sowed [the contents of] both of them, if it is a kind whose seeds disappear, all is permitted, if they do not disappear, it is forbidden.

MISHNAH: Fruits from which he gave heave before they were completely processed, Rebbi Eliezer prohibits to eat snacks from them but the Sages permit it except for harvesting-baskets of figs. Rebbi Simeon permits from a harvesting-basket of figs from which heave was taken but the Sages forbid. If somebody says to another person, here take this as and give me five figs for it, he should not eat before he tithed, the words of Rebbi Meir. Rebbi Jehudah says, if he eats them singly he is free, if he takes them together he is obligated. Rebbi Jehudah said, there is a story that a rose garden was in Jerusalem whose figs were sold three or four for an as and nobody ever gave heave and tithes for them.

“The following are liable for agio,” etc. The Mishnah is Rebbi Meïr’s, since Rebbi Meïr said, even though his sheqel is not from the Torah, his agio is from the Torah. Rebbi Meir is of the opinion that one who gives his sheqel as a piece is not liable for the agio, Rebbi Meïr said, like a kind of coin made of fire did the Holy One, praise to Him, bring out from under the Throne of Glory and showed it to Moses. He said to him, this they shall give, like this they shall give.

Rav Jeremiah in the name of Rav: Practice follows Rebbi Meir. Samuel said, the Mishnah is inverted. In what is the Mishnah inverted? The senior colleagues said, “witnesses.” The junior colleagues said, no “witnesses”: did they only disagree about witnesses? Rebbi Aḥa said, since I told you to write “bedridden” and you did not write it, you are liers.

Rebbi Meir says, why does the verse say, he who blesses unlawful gain slanders the Eternal? These are Joseph’s brothers, as it is is said: What is the gain if we slay our brother, etc.”

I quote the following against our Mishnah : From what time may we begin to read the Shema' in the evening? From the time that people go home to eat their bread on the Sabbath-eve. These are the words of R. Meir ; but the Sages say : From the time the priests are entitled to partake of their Terumah. A sign for the matter is the appearance of the stars, and although there is no proof of this, yet is there some indication ; as it is said, "So we wrought in the work : and half of them held the spears from the rising of the morning till the stars appeared" (Neh. iv. 15), and it continues "That in the night they may be a guard to us, and may labour in the day" (ibid. v. 16).

The thought has occurred to thee that the poor man and people generally have the same standard of time. Shouldest thou, however, maintain that the poor man and the priest have the same standard of time, then the opinion of the Sages and R. Meir would be identical !

The poor man and the priest have the same standard of time ! Against this I quote : From what time do we begin to read the Shema' in the evening ? From the time that the day becomes hallowed on the Sabbath-eve. These are the words of R. Eliezer. R. Joshua says : From the time the priests become ritually clean to partake of their Terumah. R. Meir says: From the time the priests bathe so as to be able to partake of their Terumah. (R. Judah asked him, "But do not the priests bathe while it is yet day ?") R. Hannina says : From the time the poor man goes home to eat his bread with salt. R. Ahai (another version : R. Aha) says : From the time when the majority of people go home to have their evening repast.

R. Judah's question to R. Meir is a forcible one !

But R. Meir answered him thus : Dost thou think that I agree with thy opinion of "twilight" ? I agree with R, Jose's opinion. For R. Jose said : The twilight is like a flicker of the eye ; the night comes on and the day passes without anyone being able to perceive it.

R. Meir has contradicted himself! There are two Tannaim in the sense of R. Meir.

R. Meir has contradicted himself! There are two Tannaim in the sense of R. Meir.

It has been taught in the name of R. Meir : At the hour when the sun shines forth and all the kings of the East and West place their crowns upon their heads and worship it, at once the Holy One, blessed be He, is filled with wrath.

This is opposed to the teaching of R. Meir ; for R. Meir said that God granted two of Moses' requests and refused one. As it is said, "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious" (Exod. xxxiii. 19), i.e. although he may not be deserving; "And I will show mercy on whom I will show mercy" (ibid.), i.e. although he may not be deserving.

This is opposed to the teaching of R. Meir ; for R. Meir said that God granted two of Moses' requests and refused one. As it is said, "I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious" (Exod. xxxiii. 19), i.e. although he may not be deserving; "And I will show mercy on whom I will show mercy" (ibid.), i.e. although he may not be deserving.

There is a teaching : R. Meir says : [The morning Shema' is to be read] from the time one can distinguish between a wolf and a dog. R. 'Akiba says : Between an ass and a wild ass. Others say : When he can see an associate of his at a distance of four cubits and recognise him.

There were some lawless men living in the neighbourhood of R. Meir, and they used to vex him sorely. Once R. Meir prayed that they should die. His wife, Beruriah, exclaimed, "What thinkest thou? Is it because it is written, 'Let sinners cease out of the earth'? But has the text hoteim? It is written hata'im.

There were some lawless men living in the neighbourhood of R. Meir, and they used to vex him sorely. Once R. Meir prayed that they should die. His wife, Beruriah, exclaimed, "What thinkest thou? Is it because it is written, 'Let sinners cease out of the earth'? But has the text hoteim? It is written hata'im.

R. Meir offered prayer on their behalf and they repented.

Between the sections, he may greet a man out of respect for him and return a salutation ; but in the middle [of the sections] he may greet a man because of fear for him and return a salutation. These are the words of R. Meir.

Our Rabbis have taught : "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut. vi. 4) — up to here Kawwanah is required. These are the words of R. Meir. Raba said : The Halakah is in accord with R. Meir.

Our Rabbis have taught : "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut. vi. 4) — up to here Kawwanah is required. These are the words of R. Meir. Raba said : The Halakah is in accord with R. Meir.

[The text of the Mishnah] is defective and should read thus : "Between the sections, he may greet a man out of respect for him, and there is no need to state that he may return the salutation ; and in the middle [of the sections], he may greet a man because of fear for him, and there is no need to state that he may return a salutation. These are the words of R. Meir. R. Judah says : In the middle, he may greet [[fol. 14a.]] because of fear and return a salutation out of respect;

There is a teaching to the same effect : If one is reading the Shema', and his teacher or one greater than himself meet him, between the sections he may greet him out of respect, and there is no need to state that he may return a salutation; and in the middle [of the sections], he may greet one because of fear, and there is no need to state that he may return a salutation. These are the words of R. Meir. R. Judah says : In the middle, he may greet because of fear and return a salutation out of respect ; and between the sections, he may greet out of respect and return the salutation of any person.

It is certainly in agreement with R. Judah, even though it be ab initio ; and there is no contradiction. The latter is his own opinion, the other the opinion of his teacher. For there is a teaching : R. Judah says in the name of R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah : When one reads the Shema' he must make it audible to his ear ; as it is said, "Hear, O Israel, the Lord our God, the Lord is one" (Deut. vi. 4). R. Meir said to him : Behold the Scriptures state, "And these words which I command thee this day shall be upon thy heart" (ibid. v. 6), i.e. the words depend on the Kawwanah of the heart. Since thou hast reached so far, thou mayest even suppose that

It is certainly R. Judah's view, and even ab initio it is valid. Nor is there any contradiction ; the latter being R. Judah's own opinion, the other that of his teacher. For there is a teaching : R. Judah says in the name of R. Eleazar b. 'Azariah : He who reads the Shema' must make it audible to his ear ; as it is said, "Hear O Israel." R. Meir said to him : Behold the Scriptures state, "And these words which I command thee this day shall be upon thy heart," i.e. the words depend upon the Kawwanah of the heart.

R. Johanan said : R. Meir, on concluding the reading of the Book of Job, used to say: It is the fate of man to die and of cattle to be slaughtered, and all are destined to die. Happy is he who has grown in Torah and whose labour has been in Torah ; who has caused tranquillity of spirit to his Creator, advanced in good repute, and departed from the world with a good name. Of him said Solomon, "A good name is better than precious oil, and the day of death than the day of one's birth " (Eccles. vii. 1).