Niddah

Our Rabbis taught: A woman who observes a bloodstain causes uncleanness to herself  and to consecrated things retrospectively;  so Rabbi. R. Simeon b. Eleazar ruled: She causes uncleanness  to consecrated things but does not cause uncleanness to herself, since her bloodstain cannot be subject to greater restrictions than her observation.  But  do we not find that her bloodstain is subject to greater restrictions in regard to consecrated things? — Read rather thus: R. Simeon b. Eleazar ruled, Even to consecrated things she conveys no uncleanness,  since her bloodstain should in no case be subject to greater restrictions than her observation. Our Rabbis taught: If a woman observed first a bloodstain and then  she observed a discharge of blood she may for a period of twenty-four hours ascribe her stain to her observation;  so Rabbi. R. Simeon b. Eleazar ruled: Only during the same day.  Said Rabbi: His view seems more acceptable than mine, since he improves  her position while I make it worse. 'He improves it'! Does he not in fact  make it worse? — Rabina replied: Reverse the statement,  R. Nahman said: You need not really reverse it, [the meaning being:] Since he improves her position in regard to the laws of zibah while I make her position worse as regards the laws of zibah. R. Zera enquired of R. Assi: Do stains  necessitate an interval of cleanness  or not? The other remained silent, answering him nothing at all. Once he  found him  as he was sitting at his studies and discoursing as follows: 'She may for twenty-four hours ascribe her stain to her observation. This is the ruling of Rabbi. In connection with this Resh Lakish explained that it applied only where she has examined herself,  while R. Johanan explained: Even though she did not examine herself'.  'Thus it follows', he  said to him,  'that  stains necessitate an interval of cleanness'. 'Yes', the other  replied. 'But did I not ask you this question many a time and you gave me no answer at all? It is likely that you recalled the tradition  in the rapidity of your reviewing?'  — 'Yes', the other replied, 'in the rapidity of my reviewing I recalled it'. MISHNAH. IF A WOMAN OBSERVED A DISCHARGE OF BLOOD ON THE ELEVENTH DAY  AT TWILIGHT,  AT THE BEGINNING OF A MENSTRUATION PERIOD AND AT THE END OF A MENSTRUATION PERIOD,  AT THE BEGINNING OF A ZIBAH PERIOD AND AT THE END OF A ZIBAH PERIOD,  ON THE FORTIETH DAY AFTER THE BIRTH OF A MALE  OR ON THE EIGHTIETH DAY AFTER THE BIRTH OF A FEMALE,  [THE DISCHARGE HAVING BEEN OBSERVED] AT TWILIGHT IN ALL THESE CASES,  BEHOLD WOMEN IN SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES  ARE IN A STATE OF PERPLEXITY.  SAID R. JOSHUA: BEFORE YOU MAKE PROVISION FOR THE FOOLISH WOMEN  COME AND MAKE PROVISION FOR THE WISE ONES. GEMARA. AT THE BEGINNING OF A MENSTRUATION PERIOD AND AT THE END OF A MENSTRUATION PERIOD! Is it  not rather the beginning of a menstruation period and the end of a zibah period?  — R. Hisda replied: It is this that was meant: IF A WOMAN OBSERVED A DISCHARGE OF BLOOD ON THE ELEVENTH DAY AT TWILIGHT a time which is THE BEGINNING OF A MENSTRUATION PERIOD AND THE END OF A ZIBAH PERIOD, or on the seventh day of her menstruation when it is THE END OF A MENSTRUATION PERIOD AND THE BEGINNING OF A ZIBAH PERIOD. SAID R. JOSHUA: BEFORE YOU MAKE PROVISION FOR THE FOOLISH WOMEN etc. But are these