Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : and only thereafter the twilight of Rabbi Yosei begins, when there is uncertainty, and there is a concern that perhaps she saw blood at that time. And that tanna of the second baraita holds that the twilight of Rabbi Yosei is subsumed within and occurs at the end of the twilight of Rabbi Yehuda. According to the opinion of this tanna, since she examined herself throughout the twilight of Rabbi Yehuda, she also necessarily examined herself throughout the twilight of Rabbi Yosei and therefore there is no need to be concerned about her status.
וַהֲדַר חָיֵיל בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי, וְהַאי תַּנָּא סָבַר, בֵּין הַשְּׁמָשׁוֹת דְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי מֵישָׁךְ שָׁיֵיךְ בִּדְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : § On the topic of a woman seeing a stain, the Sages taught in a baraita: A woman who sees a red stain on her garment renders herself and consecrated items that she touched impure retroactively, from the time when that garment was last laundered. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: הָרוֹאָה כֶּתֶם — מְטַמְּאָה עַצְמָהּ וְקָדָשִׁים לְמַפְרֵעַ, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: She does render consecrated items that she touched impure retroactively, but she does not render herself impure with regard to rendering impure objects that she touched since the time the garment was last laundered. The reason is that her stain should not be more stringent than her actual seeing of blood. If she experiences bleeding, she renders impure only objects that she touched during the previous twenty-four-hour period.
רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: קָדָשִׁים — מְטַמְּאָה, עַצְמָהּ — אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה, שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא כִּתְמָהּ חָמוּר מֵרְאִיָּיתָהּ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara asks: But don’t we find that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar himself holds that her stain is more stringent than her actual seeing of blood with regard to consecrated items? Her stain renders such items impure retroactively from the time that the garment was laundered, whereas her actually seeing blood renders impure only those items that she touched during the past twenty-four-hour period.
וְהָא מָצִינוּ, כִּתְמָהּ חָמוּר מֵרְאִיָּיתָהּ לְעִנְיַן קָדָשִׁים!
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara answers: Rather, teach the baraita like this: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says that she does not even render consecrated items that she touched impure retroactively from the time that the garment was laundered, but only those items that she touched during the past twenty-four-hour period. The reason is that her stain should not be more stringent than her actual seeing of blood with regard to any matter.
אֶלָּא תָּנֵי הָכִי: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף קָדָשִׁים אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה, שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא כִּתְמָהּ חָמוּר מֵרְאִיָּיתָהּ לְכׇל דָּבָר.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : § The Sages taught in a baraita: In the case of a woman who saw a red stain on her garment, and afterward saw blood, what is the halakha? She attributes her stain to her seeing blood, i.e., the stain is treated as part of the seeing of blood, which means that she is impure only from when she found the stain, as it assumed that it appeared no earlier. This is the halakha provided that she saw the blood within a twenty-four-hour period of her discovery of the stain. But if more than twenty-four hours passed, she cannot attribute the stain to her sighting. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן: רָאֲתָה כֶּתֶם, וְאַחַר כָּךְ רָאֲתָה דָּם — תּוֹלָה כִּתְמָהּ בִּרְאִיָּיתָהּ מֵעֵת לְעֵת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: She may attribute the stain to the sighting only if she experienced bleeding on the day of discovering the stain. If she experienced bleeding after that day, even if it was within twenty-four hours, she may not attribute the stain to the sighting, which means that she is impure retroactively from when she found the stain, in case it appeared earlier. Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi said: The statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar appears to be more correct than mine, as he fixes her situation, i.e., he is lenient, and I ruin her situation, as my ruling is stringent. Since the impurity of a stain applies by rabbinic law, one should follow the more lenient opinion.
רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: יוֹמוֹ. אָמַר רַבִּי: נִרְאִין דְּבָרָיו מִדְּבָרַי, שֶׁהוּא — מְתַקְּנָהּ, וַאֲנִי — מְעַוְּותָהּ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara asks: But does Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar actually fix her situation? Does he not ruin her situation? If she experiences bleeding the day after she found the stain, but within twenty-four hours of finding the stain, according to Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar she renders items impure retroactively. By contrast, according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi she renders objects impure only from when she discovered the stain. Ravina says: Reverse Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s statement, so that it states: My statement appears to be more correct than that of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, as I fix her situation and he ruins her situation.
מְתַקְּנָהּ? עַוּוֹתֵי מְעַוֵּית לַהּ! אָמַר רָבִינָא: אֵיפוֹךְ.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : Rav Naḥman says: Actually, do not reverse Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi’s statement, as Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi meant the following: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar’s opinion appears to be more correct, as he fixes her halakhot with regard to ziva. If she experiences bleeding on the day after discovering the stain, the count of her seven days of menstrual flow begins on that day of her actual sighting, not from when she saw the stain. This is due to the fact that the stain is not attributable to the seeing of the blood. Therefore, if she experiences bleeding on the seventh day after first experiencing bleeding, which is the eighth day after discovering the stain, she is not considered a lesser zava, and she can be purified from her status as a menstruating woman.
רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר: לְעוֹלָם לָא תֵּיפוֹךְ, שֶׁהוּא מְתַקֵּן הִלְכוֹתֶיהָ לִידֵי זִיבָה,
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : But I, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, ruin her halakhot with regard to ziva. Since the stain is attributable to the seeing of the blood within twenty-four hours, her counting starts from when she found the stain, and therefore the blood that she sees on the eighth day after discovering the stain is considered ziva. Consequently, she is considered a lesser zava and must observe a clean day for each day she experiences a discharge.
וַאֲנִי מְעַוֵּות הִלְכוֹתֶיהָ לִידֵי זִיבָה.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : § Rabbi Zeira asked Rabbi Asi: Are stains like the actual sight of blood, in that they require an examination in which she is clean of blood, marking the first step in her transition from impurity to purity before immersion on the night following the seventh day, or not? Rabbi Asi was silent and said nothing to Rabbi Zeira.
בָּעֵי מִינֵּיהּ רַבִּי זֵירָא מֵרַבִּי אַסִּי: כְּתָמִים צְרִיכִין הֶפְסֵק טׇהֳרָה אוֹ לָא? אִשְׁתִּיק, וְלָא אֲמַר לֵיהּ וְלָא מִידֵי.
Traduction française en préparation — version anglaise (Steinsaltz) : The Gemara relates that on another occasion Rabbi Zeira found Rabbi Asi sitting and saying that a woman who sees a stain and afterward experiences bleeding attributes her stain to her seeing blood, if she saw the blood within a twenty-four-hour period of when she discovered the stain. This is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi.
זִימְנִין אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ דְּיָתֵיב וְקָאָמַר: תּוֹלָה כִּתְמָהּ בִּרְאִיָּיתָהּ מֵעֵת לְעֵת, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי.