The Woman’s Responsibility and Asking a Rabbi
אחריות האשה ושאלת חכם
The responsibility for determining the state of impurity and purity rests with the woman: when the period begins, she is responsible for telling her husband that she has become impure. If she saw a discharge about which there is doubt, she is obligated to ask a rabbi (ḥakham), either herself or with her husband’s help. After she becomes impure, the mitzva is upon her to become pure as soon as possible, as it is stated: “When she becomes clean of her discharge, she shall count off seven days, and after that she shall be clean” (Vayikra 15:28) – thus she counts “for herself” (Ketubot 72a).¹
After the Sages agreed to forbid all types of blood, distinguishing between blood and other discharges became easier, since all that remains is to look and see whether the discharge that came out of the uterus contains traces of blood or not. For this purpose, the woman must learn to recognize the color of her menstrual blood while it is moist and when it is dry, and through this she will be able to know when the discharge that came out of her uterus contains blood and she is forbidden, and when it does not and she is permitted; and in a case of doubt, she should ask a rabbi. Since young brides are not experienced in this distinction, nor in other halakhic questions of family purity, the proper guidance for young couples is to ask a rabbi about every doubt that arises for them; and after a period of asking questions and becoming accustomed to seeing menstrual blood, the woman will learn to distinguish in most cases between what is permitted and what is forbidden, and only occasionally, when a doubt arises, will she ask a rabbi. There are women who find it difficult to decide, either because their discernment is not sharp, or because by nature they frequently see borderline discharges, and they should continue asking in every situation in which they are in doubt. In any case, one must be careful not to be stringent needlessly, and whenever there is a chance that the discharge is pure because of its color or size, or because its source is a wound, they should ask a rabbi, for it is forbidden to be stringent in this, since stringency here causes the neglect of the mitzva of ona, which is a great Torah mitzva.²
Notes (2)
- This law is one of the foundations on which the rule “a single witness is believed regarding prohibitions” was established (Tosafot, Gittin 2b, s.v. “ed”; Peninei Halakha: Kashrut 38:1). Indeed, it is fitting and appropriate that we learn the foundation of trustworthiness from this sacred realm, which concerns the mitzva of ona, and husband and wife must be careful not to breach their faithfulness and trustworthiness in anything concerning the covenantal bond between them. If a woman told her husband that she had become impure, and afterward retracted and said, ‘I am pure,’ he cannot believe her. For since the trust is given to her, once she said that she became impure, she is impure, and she cannot claim that she lied at first. They must ask a rabbi how she can repent so that her husband can once again believe her. However, if she gave an amatla, that is, a logical explanation of why she lied – for example, because she was in a quarrel with him and did not want to be intimate with him – she is believed (SA YD 185:3).
- We find that in situations of doubt, women would ask the Sages about blood discharges (Ketubot 72a; Nidda 20b). It seems that when they would distinguish between impure blood and pure blood, women asked more, since this distinction was subtle and only those with experience and very sharp vision could rule on it, as we learned in Nidda 19b, cited above 2:2. However, even after it was agreed to forbid all blood, as explained above, sometimes a doubt arises whether the discharge has a reddishness of blood, and whenever there is a doubt one must ask a rabbi. But a woman or man who knows that there is no appearance of blood on the examination need not ask. Likewise, discharges about which they were initially in doubt, if after asking a rabbi several times they learned that they are pure, they need not ask about them again (Rashba, Nidda 20b; SA YD 188:2; Badei Ha-shulḥan 188:33, Bi’urim, s.v. “ein somkhin alah”; Igrot Moshe, YD 2:71). Likewise, if a woman was in doubt about her discharge and showed it to a responsible and experienced friend, who told her that it has no reddishness at all, she need not ask a rabbi about it, since there is no doubt about it (Ritva, Nidda 20b; Binat Adam 5).
However, Sidrei Tahara, at the end of section 188, wrote “that this ruling was never entrusted to women,” and wrote there (188:3) that whenever she is able to ask, she must ask, and only when she has no possibility of asking may she rely on herself. He is cited by Pitḥei Teshuva 188:6 and by the Ḥafetz Ḥayim in Taharat Yisrael 13:2. However, it is clear that they too agree that when the woman has no doubt, she need not ask. That is, the question is in a situation where there is some aspect of doubt, but the woman knows that in practice the rabbi will permit it: according to most poskim she need not ask, and some are stringent. In practice, the usual guidance for most women is that over time they learn to distinguish between the forbidden and the permitted, and only rarely do they need to ask. And to remove excessive concern, it should be mentioned that since the custom became to be stringent regarding all blood, we have distanced ourselves from doubt (see Responsa Maharsham 1:68; Maharash Engel 8:8). This is especially so when the discharge came out without a sensation, in which case the entire basis of its prohibition is only rabbinic. So wrote Taharat Ha-bayit 6:3. It is important to emphasize that one must caution against being stringent where one can be lenient. So wrote Rosh, Nidda 10:3. And Responsa Admat Kodesh 2, YD 4, wrote that women who are stringent where it would have been possible to permit “diminish the Divine image and delay the Messiah of God from coming.” So wrote Maharsham 1:81 (and see Masekhet Semaḥot 8:8).