Question (against Rav Ashi - Beraisa): R. Eliezer bar Tzadok asked Chachamim in Usha "what is considered 'later'? Do you hold like R. Akiva, who considers a man to be a Bo'el Nidah if his wife sees within 24 hours after Bi'ah?"

Chachamim: We did not hear what is considered later. We do not hold like R. Akiva.

R. Eliezer: Chachamim in Yavneh said that it is less than the time to get off the bed and clean the area. They are Safek Teme'im. They do not bring a Chatas, rather, an Asham;

If she delayed the time to get off the bed and clean the area, this is later. The regular law of 24 hours applies to her. Her husband is Safek Tamei like one who touched a Nidah (i.e. a Rishon l'Tum'ah);

R. Akiva says, he is Tamei like a (Safek) Bo'el Nidah.

R. Yehudah the son of R. Yochanan ben Zakai says, he may enter the Heichal and offer Ketores.

We understand according to Rav Chisda. The time to get off the bed is after "later", therefore Chachamim are Metaher;

According to Rav Ashi, Chachamim agree that he is Safek Tamei in this time!

Suggestion: The Beraisa discusses when she was not holding a cloth. (Therefore, the time to get off the bed and take a cloth is after "later".)

Objection: If so, the Beraisa should have specified that she was not holding a cloth (lest people err)!

This is left difficult.

Question (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): He may enter the Heichal and offer Ketores.

Even though he is not Bo'el Nidah, he is (Safek) Tamei because he touched her in the 24 hours before she saw blood!

Answer: R. Yehudah holds like Shamai, who says that all women are Dayan Sha'atan.

Question: In any case, he is a Ba'al Keri (one who had a seminal emission. He is Tamei due to his semen!)

Answer: The case is, he had Bi'ah without semen.

(Mishnah): Chachamim agree that if she finds a Kesem, he is Safek Bo'el Nidah.

(Rav): They agree that he is retroactively (Safek) Bo'el Nidah (if the garment was last checked before they had Bi'ah);

The Mishnah is like R. Meir (who is stringent about Kesamim).

(Shmuel): They agree that if he has Bi'ah with her after the Kesem was found, he is Bo'el Nidah;

The Mishnah is like Chachamim.

Objection: Obviously, if he has Bi'ah with her after the Kesem was found, he is a Bo'el Nidah!

Answer: Kesamim are mid'Rabanan. One might have thought that just like the 24 hours are mid'Rabanan and they do not make a man Bo'el Nidah, also Kesamim. The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

Question: Why don't we say so?

Answer: Regarding the 24 hours, there is no evidence that she was Teme'ah at the time. Regarding a Kesem, blood suggests that she is Teme'ah.

Reish Lakish holds like Rav, and R. Yochanan holds like Shmuel.

(Mishnah): A woman is Muchzekes to be Tehorah regarding her husband;

If a man returns from travelling, his wife is Muchzekes to be Tehorah.

(Gemara) Question: Why is the latter clause necessary?

Answer: One might have thought that she is Muchzekes Tehorah only when he is in the city, for she checks herself to be ready when he will want to have Bi'ah, but when he is away, she is Safek Teme'ah;

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Reish Lakish): The Mishnah discusses one who returned within an (average) Onah (30 days) of her last sighting.

Version #1 (Rav Huna): The Mishnah discusses a woman without a Veses, but if she has a Veses, she is forbidden.

Objection: Just the contrary! If she has no Veses, we should be concerned lest she saw!

Correction (Rav Huna): The Mishnah discusses one who returned before her Veses came. After this, she is forbidden.

He holds that Vestos are mid'Oraisa. (Mid'Oraisa, a woman must check herself at the time of her Veses. If she did not, she is Muchzekes to be Nidah.)

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): The Mishnah is even if he returned after her Veses came. (Rashi - this is even if this was right after the Veses. Ramban - it is up to 30 days after, but past this, we are concerned lest she saw. Tosfos - he returned more than a week afterwards. Even if she saw, perhaps she immersed.)

He holds that Vestos are mid'Rabanan. (If she did not check herself at the time of her Veses, she is Muchzekes to be Tehorah.)

Version #2 - Rav Ashi - (Rav Huna): The Mishnah discusses a woman without a Veses based on days alone, rather, she has a Veses based on days and jumping (or some other action);

Since it depends on an action, we may assume that she did not jump and did not see.

If she had a Veses based on days alone, she would be forbidden.

He holds that Vestos are mid'Oraisa.

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): The Mishnah is even if she had a Veses based on days alone;

He holds that Vestos are mid'Rabanan.

(R. Yochanan): If a woman has a Veses, her husband (when he returns home) can calculate when her last sighting should have been. If enough time elapsed since then for her to immerse, he may assume that she is Tehorah.

Question (Rav Shmuel bar Yeiva): Does R. Yochanan say this even regarding a Yoledes, who is afraid to immerse (for 30 days - Tosfos; Rashi - regarding a young girl, who is embarrassed to immerse)?

Answer (R. Aba): R. Yochanan did not permit when she was definitely Teme'ah!

He permits when it is possible that she never became Teme'ah, for then, even if she saw, perhaps she immersed;

If she definitely was Teme'ah, and we are in Safek whether or not she immersed, this Safek does not overturn what was certain.

Question: A Safek does permit what was definitely forbidden!

(Beraisa): If a Chaver (someone trustworthy about tithing) died and left produce, even if it was harvested that day, we assume that he tithed it.

Even though it was definitely Tevel, and it is a Safek whether or not he tithed it, we permit it!

Answer #1: There, he definitely tithed it, like R. Chanina Chuza'ah taught;

(R. Chanina Chuza'ah): There is a Chazakah that any produce that came from a Chaver was tithed.

Answer #2: The produce was not definitely forbidden. Perhaps he used R. Oshaya's scheme;

(R. Oshaya): One may scheme, and bring produce into his house with the chaff, and his animal (or himself, if he eats casually) may eat without tithing.

Question (Beraisa - R. Yehudah): A case occurred in which a slave miscarried, and cast the miscarriage into a pit. A Kohen stood over it to see if it was a male or female. Chachamim ruled that he is Tahor, because weasels are often in pits. Perhaps they dragged the miscarriage away, and he was not over it.

There definitely was a miscarriage in the pit. We are unsure whether it was dragged away, and we assume that it was!

Answer #1: She cast a fetal sac in the pit. (perhaps no baby was inside, and it is not Tamei).

Objection: It says that a Kohen looked to see if it was a male or female!

Answer: It means, he looked to see whether or not it was a miscarriage; and if it was a miscarriage, whether it was male or female.

Answer #2: Since weasels are in the pit, certainly they dragged it away.