Study Niddah folio 58A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
by rabbinic law. Accordingly, Shmuel agrees that if she examined the ground, found it clean, sat upon it, and later found blood, even if she did not sense that she emitted blood she is impure by rabbinic law.
Rav Ashi said: Shmuel said this woman is pure even by rabbinic law, in accordance with the opinion of R' Neḥemya, as we learned in a Mishnah (59b) that R' Neḥemya says: Any item that is not susceptible to ritual impurity, e.g., the ground, is not susceptible to ritual impurity due to blood stains.
The Talmud asks: Granted, according to the opinion of Rav Ashi with regard to Shmuel’s opinion, that is why Shmuel says the woman examined the ground beneath her, as the ground is not susceptible to ritual impurity. But according to the opinion of Rav Yirmeya, why does Shmuel refer specifically to t
The Talmud elaborates: It is not necessary to state that if a woman examined a cloak, found it pure, sat upon it, and then saw a blood stain on it, she is pure. The reason is that it is not easy to examine a cloak well, due to its creases, and therefore there is room to say the stain on the cloak
§ The Mishnah teaches: If a stain was discovered on her heel or on the tip of her large toe, although it is not adjacent to her vagina she is ritually impure, as blood from the uterus could have reached there. The Talmud comments: Granted, when blood is found on her heel she is impure, as it is w