Siman 195, Seif 1 - 4

 

  1. A man is required to separate from his wife during her days of impurity until she counts the required number of days and has gone to mikvah even if she has gone a long period of time, she is in her state of impurity until she immerses. He may not play or make lightheaded fun with her even verbally lest the couple come to commit a sin.  It is, however, permitted to be alone with her.  Since he has had relations with her before, he will be able to control his urges.
     

  2. He may not touch his wife even with his small finger and nothing may be passed from his hand to hers nor may he accept something directly from her hands because they might touch. Similarly, they cannot exchange things by throwing to each other.
     

  3. He may not eat with her at the same table unless there is some modification in the table setting so that there is something separating between his plate and her plate, such as bread or a pitcher. Alternatively, they may each have their own placemat. There are those who say that the requirement for a separation between their plates is specifically when they normally do not eat from one plate when she is pure.  However, if they do, then it is adequate to merely have separate plates and they do not need another difference, and so is our custom.  There are those who say that it is prohibited to eat her leftovers just as it is prohibited to drink leftovers in her glass and as shall be explained.
     

  4. One may not drink from the remains of a cup that she drank from if there has been no third party between them or if they poured from the cup into another cup, even if they poured it back into the first cup.  If she drank from a cup and he does not know and he wishes to drink from that cup she is not required to tell him not to drink from it.  She is permitted to drink from a cup that he has used.  If she drank from a cup and left the area, he is permitted to drink from her cup, because doing so iwould not be a sign of affection.
     

What's Going On - During the Niddah Period

The prohibition of the Shulchan Aruch incorporates sexual intercourse, other physical forms of affection and activities that create the possibility of a display of physical affection.  Sexual intercourse is certainly a Torah-level prohibition with a punishment of kores.  The Rambam interprets the verse of "lo sikrav" in Leviticus 18:19 as providing for a Torah-level prohibition on all displays of affection, with a punishment of 39 lashes.  The Ramban, however, holds that other than intercourse, the various prohibitions are rabbinic.  Later on in the Siman we will see how these two different views create a practical difference in at least one area of the halacha.  Although some of the Harchakos- distancing laws  - appear to be decrees on top of other decrees, we are nevertheless strict in various areas that exceed basic legal requirements, since the potential sin is one of such gravity.

Rav Shamshon Rafael Hirsch writes in his commentary that the law of Niddah is placed after the law of the prohibition of intercourse with one's sister perhaps to tell us that are periods in Jewish married life in which husband and wife may only live together as brother and sister.

Shach (1) points out that the laws of harchaka - separation apply not only during the time of her actual period, but during the count of 7 clean days as well.  The extent of impurity is the same regardless of the woman's physical state; so long as she has not immersed, she is considered to be impure.  The rule about conversation, as brought down by Shach (2), extends to any topic that relates to any erotic or sexual topic.  Pischei Tshuvah (1) brings down that it is prohibited to smell one's wife's perfume while she is a niddah.  The prohibition according to him extends to smelling perfume that is in the bottle, if it is his wife's regular perfume. Rav Wozner notes that there is a basis for prohibiting playing games together, with the example he uses being playing dreidel on Channukah.

Another issue raised by Rav Wozner is about each parent holding a child's hands.  He suggests that one be strict and not walk a child in that madder.  A couple is permitted to hang clothing on a clothes line together

The final halacha in the Seif regarding yichud should include another condition - that he will be able to control himself because she will be permitted to him after a brief time period.

In regards to the law in Seif 2 about passing objects, Shach (3) points out that the prohibition includes long items that would reduce the likelihood of physical contact.  On the issue of physical contact, Pischei Tshuvah (2) relates a question that was asked about a couple who lived in a village where there were no other Jews and there was no other community mikvah accessible.  The question was whether it would be permitted for the husband to oversee his wife's immersion to make sure that all of her hair is in the water and whether he can push her head down in order to help her immersion.  The ruling was that in an extreme case such as this, this would be permitted because although it is prohibited for him to see her undressed and to touch her, the fact that she will be pure the moment she is immersed mitigates against the possibility of his being overcome with passion and have intercourse with an impure woman.

Pischei Tshuvah (3) remarks that it is prohibited for a woman to hold a candle for her husband so that he may smoke tobacco or warm himself by the light of the candle.

As one can probably derive from the language of Seifim 3 and 4, it is also prohibited for one to eat leftovers off of another's plate.  The prohibition of drinking the remains out of  wife's cup includes a case in which she drinks a portion of a cup and then has it refilled.  However, if she completely drained the cup, then there is no prohibition.

The rule about not eating on the same table applies to the small tables that they used in the time of the Gemara.  In order to share the table the couple would need to huddle very close together - this was considered a form of affection or something that could lead to the possibility of physical contact.  Today, if a man and woman are sitting on opposite sides of of the table, there would be no problem.  Rav Moshe Feinstein dealt with the issue of whether the rule of "leftovers" applied to food that the woman leaves completely uneaten on her plate.  In general it is good to be strict and refrain from eating untouched food from her plate.

There are views that would impose the law of "leftovers" on a common loaf of bread that the wife takes a slice of.  Rav Wozner rules that there is no reason to adhere to this stringency.

Shach (7) brings down the view of the Bach that eating on separate plates is acceptable only when there are other members of the household at the the table.  Otherwise, they require an additional indication of separation.

The Sidrei Tahara states that an acceptable differentiation would be for the woman to simply change the seat that she normally sits in.  The Tzemach Tzedek notes that neither the Shulchan Aruch or the Rama bring down this leniency, but that on can use this ruling if there is no other way of establishing a differentiation.

In Seif 4, Rav Wozner ponders whether the phrase "she has left" means that she has left from the room only or from the entire house.  He comes to no firm conclusion, though he tends towards leniency in this matter.

 

 

Back to Summary

 

 

Back one page

 

 

Forward one page

Have a question?