Talk:Niddah - Knowledge

2139:

authorities who rule leniently on xyz in manner abc. My problem with this (essentially quite redundant) approach is twofold: 1) It's really pretty awkward and weird to repeat so much. If we write, on the other hand, "same as Orthodox, except" that's still awkward, and aggravates my second problem, viz.: 2) It really carries an implication of delegitimation to have Orthodox practice be what's stated first and have everything else be discussed with that as the baseline. On the other hand, my writing handled Conservative poskim the same way uniquely Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Gerer, etc. practices or opinions are mentioned about particular practices. This method doesn't privilege one POV (which in almost all English-language material on Judaism, is usually Ashkenazi (especially Polish) Orthodox) over any other, while stil making clear what are things that only some Sephardim do, some Conservatives do, some Charedim do, Gerers, etc.

2225:. The whole point of the work (both written and life-project) of founders of what we now call the Conservative movement was that 1) the modern-academic approach is compatible and positive in the study and practice of Judaism, and, by contrast, 2) the ossification of Jewish law and ideology represented by those traditionalists who rejected the haskalah out of hand (who formed what we now call the Orthodox community) were misrepresenting normative, historical Judaism. As an adherent of Frankel, Schechter, etc., I agree; if we were organising Knowledge according to my (Conservative) POV, the "practical law" section would refer exclusively to Conservative sources, with a separate section for "Orthodox" opinions and practices. But that would violate 1410:

Torah are not susceptible to ritual impurity, as the prophet (Jeremiah 23) cries out, "Is it not so that My words are like fire," says the Lord; and just as fire is not susceptible to ritual impurity, neither is Torah susceptible to ritual impurity'" (B.T. Brachot 22a), quoted in the Jerusalem Post, Parashat Tazira: Blood sisters, Apr. 3, 2008, by Shlomo Riskin. As long as the hands are clean, so she doesn't carelessly soil the Torah, a woman can handle a Torah at any phase of her cycle, and there is therefore no revelation of her status either as Niddah or Tehorah. So there is no violation of modesty inherent in women becoming Rabbis or handling Torah scrolls.

1131:

by keeping track of her expected onset over the course of a couple or so months. (AMong Chasidim this is far easier because they typically have seperated engagements of 1 yr; the Litvishe Maaseh of getting married after two months of contact makes it harder, but doable.) She looks for the days when she will be tahor and calculates her wedding day by when she will be tahor. Also, the bride and groom do go home together, they just take litte relatives with them. Like a niece and nephew. These relatives stay with the spouse of the same gender, and both spouses sleep in seperate rooms.

855:. Not only do non-Orthodox Jews sometimes make jokes, but so do many Orthodox Jews I have known, including Modern Orthodox and Lubavitch. And a (stunningly beautiful) non-Jewish ex-girlfriend of mine worked for a couple of summers in the Satmar Hasidic community, and was privy to (and sometimes the subject of) many such jokes. (For some reason, since she was non-Jewish, and pretty, the men didn't seem to think that regular laws of tzniout applied.) Maybe we can say that Jewish law codes hold that one does not make jokes about private bedroom matters; that would be more accurate. 564: 546: 1110:("hymenal" bleeding) ensues (in the majority of cases, first-time Orthodox brides are assumed to be virgins.) The percentage of women who do this in the Haredi community is quite high and it is ok'd by most Haredi rabbis. This is nothing new, it's been practiced since the pill was introduced on a mass commercial scale in the 1960s, and was shown to have very few side-effects, especially if taken for a very short duration of a few months. 2229:. Insomuch as halachic practice is much more uniform in the Orthodox community than in the Conservative one (not least because far more laypeople give a hoot in the former than the latter, something noted appropriately in this article and elsewhere), this is 1) really irrelevant, and 2) probably speaks against Orthodoxy as the indisputable straight continuation of "time-honed" premodern practices -- see not only Conservative, 964:"As society has rediscovered the importance of spirituality," Huh?? Cite some examples of society's rediscoverance of spirituality. I see no evidence of it here...perhaps you are living in another society... Or did you mean Jewish society? I am not qualified to comment on that, but I would assume the spirituality of the Jewish community is not that different from the community of the U.S. (or any other nation) as a whole. 345: 355: 327: 462: 243: 441: 222: 472: 253: 191: 671: 618: 3119:- in some ways exacting and esoteric articles are easier than overviews as you can cram in all explanatory sources, provisos, exceptions, local customs etc. -just be sure all sentence reflect what the sources say and don't generalise unless the sources do. It sounds like there are local variations etc. so find sources on all and build something 1978:

material, I'll think about how best to reword it. I agree that the text as it is straightforward and clear from the mechaber, but the distinction is, I think, important, and I doubt that R' Karo himself would really try to argue that a rule we learn as Rashi's personal practice is really of the same legal status as a decree of the Rabbis.

2964:

article is impossible. In addition, as a rabbi, I can tell you from personal experience that in Israel women who you would never have expected to do anything about being Jewish, and who indeed don't do almost anything, might still go to the mikveh. In short, the statement is untrue in its present form, and the sources do not support it.

2783:). And even if we didn't, it is not a reliable source. 2. This source does not contain the information that is comes to source. It only says "broad sectors of the Jewish community disregard or are ignorant of these laws" without specifying Ashkenazi or Sefaradi, and without mentioning the various degrees of observance below Orthodox. 2909:." That's rich. Here's a Reform "responsum" claiming that most Orthodox Jews don't keep taharat hamishpacha. But leaving aside that example of stunning ignorance (or propaganda; it's sometimes hard to tell what the source of misinformation is), that's a pretty clear source about niddah in the Reform Movement. 1097:" (it's not a desirable scenario, and is generally avoided, because the bride and groom do not go home together after their wedding, a rather unfortunate outcome for both) and that therefore many Orthodox women who are engaged to be married go to a doctor and receive a precsription for a dosage of a safe 3299:

I have no problem with the notion of making changes to this article. But some of the changes he makes are not good. Now if he were to make them step by step, we could revert just the problematic ones. Things I oppose are 1. the removal of alternative spellings 2. the use of capitals where such is not

2742:

For my part, I'm kind of surprised that Debresser continued to revert my edit even after I gave a source. I'm not sure why he was so adamant about denying the fact, well known to everyone who is Jewish even if there weren't a source, that non-Orthodox Ashkenazi women, with rare exceptions, virtually

2550:

is simply proposing a unique standard for the Conservative tendency in Judaism: every other religious group's normative beliefs and practices are recorded in the encyclopedia as they are expounded by the duly recognised religious authorities, but Conservative Jewish ones only if they're subscribed to

1332:

stuff. Most people never heard of the priestly code and the holiness code (didn't it used to be just the P document?) and it is irelevant to the subject of niddah. Why not just discuss leviticus where all this is written. Why is this viewed as two codes anyway one is the description of the reality of

1130:

Wait wait wait. Who does this? A person needs a heter to use birth control, and it requires serious risk of death, blindness or insanity. I've never heard of this in my life. The young girl plans her wedding like so. She calculates her menstration the same way a married woman does for nddah purposes,

1073:

Due to tzniut, at least some Orthodox couples refrain from even the mildest PDA anyhow, so it's not a "problem" from that standpoint. I've definitely seen Jewish weddings where the bride and groom don't kiss, as well as ones where they do, I'm not sure that there's a "standard" other than the levels

2998:

Then put in a clarification that things are different in Israel and in the US. The statement was vague and unhelpful in its previous form. Furthermore, given that the majority of Jews do not live in Israel (at least Jews according to Knowledge definition), if you want to tell us that your personal

1388:

I agree. The current, as it has been for quite a while, reads much like an Orthodox Jewish manual, not an NPOV encyclopedia article. Also, encyclopedic content has repeatedly been deleted, and subtle attacks on non-Orthodox interpretations of Judaism have been substituted. Not good. I have tried

3283:

Debresser—I'm in favor of allowing Marecheth Ho'eElohuth to make some major changes to the article, at least temporarily. I have confidence in the edits that I see being made. I am heartened by what I see as quality information being put in, and a reorganizing that seems to make sense. I see little

3181:

At the moment I see no reason to trim this article. There are guidelines for when an article should be split, and we haven't reached them here. In addition, the subject is presented here in its entirety, and splitting it into smaller article would mean loosing part of the present article's clarity.

2963:

We are talking about different things. In Israel the situation is very different, and even non-Orthodox people, including of Ashkenazi decent, go to the mikveh. I agree as to the Conservative and Reform movements, but these are close to non-existent in Israel. Therefore, a general statement in this

2385:

I don't think the fact that this has tended to be the way articles have been written does (or ought to) carry weight here. Let's return to this after Shabbes, though I'm going to be moving on Sunday, and traveling a lot for the week or so after that, so my WP checking may be more sporadic than I'd

2261:

What is POV about that? Conservatism is a young movement in Judaism. It basic creeds are ill defined, and it has no unified line in its "halacha". Some choose to accept one thing, others another thing, and so on. No POV here. When you hear the 10 commandments on Shavuot, try consider that they have

2164:

diff, I side with Savant. Unless we're going to have a separate section titled "Niddah in the Gerrer community", to have one regarding the conservative community presents an undue POV. The phrasing used of "The _____ community rules on this matter _____" seems fine whether you fill the blank with

2138:

I see what you're proposing as entailing essentially this: We create a subheading under "Practical Law": Orthodox. In that subsection we have what there was before I added anything. New subsection: Conservative. We repeat essentially all the material, except cite that there are some Conservative

1977:

I'm certainly not a "very big rabbi", but I've seen enough dapim of the Shulchan Aruch to say with confidence that the words of the mechaber are by no means themselves sacrosanct. Nevertheless, I think that this argument is basically irrelevant. :) When and if I get around to finding the relevant

1883:

reverted my deletion of "passing of objects even without touching" as an harchaka "added by the sages". I deleted it as a personal custom (minhag) of Rashi, rather than an actual requirement of the Sages (derabbanan). I don't have the daf of the Talmud off the top of my head, but I am fairly sure

1827:

I've noticed that a lot of references to Niddah practice on this page are to the Mishneh Torah. These are certainly not valid sources for what people do today, which is the implication of how they're placed. They're certainly legit primary sources for the halacha, but not really the best even for

1377:

My suggestion would be to restructure the article by beginning with the Biblical rules, outline the role of the Talmud and classical commentaries, then outline the classical rules in one place, then discuss contemporary Orthodox practices, then outline the Conservative movement's views, then Reform

1030:

Happens all the time. Orthodox women try to take their cycles into account in planning their wedding day, but irregularities happen. A women who marries while a niddah can't consummate the marriage until after niddah ends and she immerses. Not the best situation, but part of being an Orthodox Jew.

1025:

Avi: There is actually nothing wrong with a woman being a niddah at her wedding. It can be uncomfortable for her but it is not forbidden. In some Orthodox circles engagements are very short (weeks, not months or years) so the timeframe is not necessarily a problem. Other women may choose to use

3405:

i cannot commit to getting to this page for another week or so, but in the coming week bez"h id like to spend a few hours over a few days contributing to this article to my ability. i will put up a "under construction" tag for the above mentioned time period and ask that no reverts are made till i

2928:

Now. If you want to ignore statements from the Conservative Movement that say Conservative Jews don't observe the laws of niddah, and statements from the Reform Movement that say Reform Jews don't observe the laws of niddah, I'm not sure what exactly you want in the way of reliable sources. Stop

2839:

I'll go further and say that in the face of the fact that this is common knowledge the way it's common knowledge that apples are a fruit (no source needed for that), the burden of proof is on Debresser, or anyone else who wants to contest it. Extraordinary claims, Debresser, require extraordinary

2421:

weight to the Conservative view. Again, any observance of niddah whatsoever is extremely fringe among Conservative Jews. To present the Conservative view here on equal par with the Orthodox view, when Orthodox Jews universally hold the observance of niddah to be an absolute requirement, would be

2356:

That is, to a large extent, the de facto status quo, indeed -- something I've been working a little on fixing myself. It's certainly not a standard of the MoS or anything, though, for the (what seems to me to be) obvious reason of NPOV. Note that I did, in fact, post there about our disagreement;

2292:

try to think about how the 10 (and other 603) commandments have been interpreted for many centuries and millennia (though not always "consistently"). I just don't think that it's consistent with that tradition of interpretation to insist that anyone who denies that one particular Rabbinic midrash

2123:

You know what, I agree with you. That was POV. But that is besiders the point. The point is that we have a section for Conservative views, and it is bad editing to add those two sentences about the Conservative point of view outside of that section. IMHO. And the additional problem of doing so, is

1758:

The statement "It initially was a custom of the pious, not a law for all" is not correct. However, it WAS initially a law for all: "The Biblical requirement of niddah is 7 days from the beginning of the menstrual period" (see "Duration of menstruation and niddah status"). I corrected the statement

1141:

You have not heard it, but it is true. And the problem with birth control inherent in such pills is taken care of by the rabbinical tradition that (with rare exeptions) "a woman does not get pregnant from the first intercourse". Apart from that, I'd like to correct you on 2 points: Chabad chasidim

830:

Conservative Judaism, a step(s) away from Torah faithfulness, does not enforce these laws communally but is attached enough to recognise them as being something Jewish and deeply rooted in Jewish heritage. Denominations of Judaism which adhere even less directly, if at all, to the Torah's teaching

2615:

I can't skim knowledgeably through all of this. But stating different points of view is fairly common in Christian articles. And yes, it is the same as Judaism, though I suspect that branches of Judaism are actually closer. Unfortunately, it seems a human vice that the closer we are in views, the

1899:

Sorry, but in any article on Judaism, the Shulchan Aruch is a reliable source, and it is decisive in Judaism. Saying that the Shulchan Aruch is wrong in its interpretation is original research at best, and unacceptable in normative Judaism in any case, so not relevant. For your information, it is

2523:

keeps those laws today. For the good folks at JTS to say that it's obligatory really has no meaning when they don't even make any serious effort to see to it that their laity is familiar with the concept. I say this as someone who was raised on the more knowledgable side of Conservative (Ramah

1409:

I've corrected a common misunderstanding, and perhaps either a deliberate or inadvertent slur, concerning contact with a Sefer Torah by a Niddah. Since a Torah is inherently holy, it canot become ritually impure, and cannot be defiled by a Niddah. R. Yehuda ben Beteira would often say, 'Words of

1221:. This article should be an overview, as it relates to family alone. Yes, Jewish laws of family purity is tied to Mikveh, and Menses, and Marriage, but that's not all. Threats to shalom bayit. Birth Control. Dishonest spouses. There is a gamut of things that have not been put in one place. 836:

When viewed from Torah law, births resulting from non-practicing Jews are considered "Ben or Bat Niddah". I.e. the child of a relationship where the parents where not practicing the laws of purity, and it is therefore assumed to be conceived at a time where conjugal realtions are prohibited. The

2518:

I would argue that Catholicism is irrelevant here. Different religions have different paradigms. I would argue further that a huge majority of Conservative Jews have never even heard of niddah. Unlike kashrut, which they have at least heard of, they don't know niddah from Abu-Nidal. You can

2104:

marginal is certainly the Orthodox view -- heck, it's basically why there is an "Orthodoxy" as such -- and should certainly be presented as such here, but it's definitely not okay as an organising principle of Knowledge -- and is, by the way, offensive. (This is, of course, not relevant to the

2029:

has objected to (and deleted) my placing of the word "many" in "It is used by many observant Jewish women to determine whether they have finished menstruation." I take it to be assumed here (not that I object to it) that "observant women" means here "women who observe Jewish law in the area of

2221:'s assertion that "Orthodox Judaism" constitutes "time-honed and more stable" traditions in contrast with Conservatisms "modern . . . varying and instable practises" (sic) is the Orthodox POV. Again, it must be stated where appropriate, but as an organising policy of Knowledge simply violates 3600:

The issue is not so much whether it is correct. It is simply superfluous. The article at present gives a simple and correct etymology, choosing the most relevant occurrence, and no more is needed. It is only confusing, superfluous, and also original research mostly, to give an overview of all

824:

Keeping the laws of purity promote acute awareness of sexuality and limit stagnation in relationships. However, they are also a challange for both man & woman alike to overcome basal urges. If one questions the authenticity of Judaism as a whole then compliance with these laws will appear

2554:

I really don't see what the objection is in terms of content: in talking about what the prescriptive practice is, we cite all notable authorities with appropriate labels. In talking about social trends of what Jews do, we cite that -- including, absolutely, that very few self-identified or

1425:

Your words are not the orthodox opinion, that sees a violation of modesty (and a sacrilige of the holiness of the Torah) not so much in the physical contact with the Torah, but in the role-changing involved when a woman starts fullfilling a function that has throughout Jewish history been a

779:

Great article. I have added the views of Conservative Judaism; since these are not accepted by Orthodoxy (and are obviously a change from how this practice has been understood for a long time) I tried to make it clear that this view was only found within parts of the Conservative movemment.

2188:

I disagree. Conservatism is a relatively modern movement in Judaism, with varying and instable practises. When writing about Judaism, we should stick to the traditions of Orthodox Judiasm, which are time-honed and more stable, and award sectons to the various related movements (including

1263:

enough to warrant a brief mention. Perhaps this may also be so regarding the view of Taharat HaMishpacha you espouse. Currently, however, no sources have been produced to confirm it, and the Conservative proposal for a conscious change of terminology tends to confirm the opposite. Best,

1884:

that what I said is correct: it is a personal custom of Rashi which gained popularity through the Tosafists and others. As far as I know, it is incorrect, then to state it as it is and conflate the two, even though I have no doubt that the Shulchan Aruch does, in fact, do just that.

2124:

that is makes it necessary to specify every time whether we are talking about Orthodox or Conservative point of view, which may come a little confusing, as in our case. So why not leave the Conservative point of view intheir section, perhaps enlarge them, and avoid the problems?

1954:

First of all, if commentaries by rabbinical authorities struggle to understand the words of the Shulchan Aruch, we may learn from that 1. to say "wrong" only in last resort 2. take care to be very big rabbis ourselves before we do so. I don't think you and I are up to that, are

2640:, the Judaism section is structured to include all opinions (and cites conservative responsa on Niddah). I'd like to see something similar here. The challenge (as pointed out above) is partly that there is a much larger body of information from the orthodox perspective. 2317:

between our POVs. I recognise your POV that Orthodoxy is premodern Judaism, continued, with the consistent line of interpetation, etc. It's notable and needs to be included. I'm just saying that it's not appropriate as an organising principle of Knowledge. Happy Shavuos!

3258:

it should be spelled without the "e", just Tvilah. I don't think 'Niddah" and "Family purity" should be separate articles, although I am open to hear your arguments, but I do think that "Niddah" should be a redirect to "Family purity", rather than the other way around.

2659:

I think here the way I did it makes sense to me: in the section on practical law, we have the law presented with disputes noted and ideological labels as appropriate. In areas where there's broader difference between the movements -- e.g., institutional responses to

3685:

Taking that further, there are dozens of References at the bottom of the article that use texts (Torah, Talmud, Shulchan Aruch, etc.) as references to themselves. This whole article would collapse on itself if we eliminated everything that isn't properly sourced.

2293:

about how the written Torah was written (i.e., Moses writing every letter at God's dictation) constitutes a dogma about an historical event, and that anyone who denies it is an heretic (which is the "Orthodox" position). I think that that Tradition supports the

1101:

that stops their menstrual period for a month or two during which time the actual marriage is scheduled to be held. They stop taking the pill a few days after the wedding night when, in most cases, the bride becomes a Niddah due to losing her virginity after her

2213:

of the time and remains a standard halacha lemaaseh guide in the Conservative community to this day. That it details the laws of niddah (and without any of the leniencies given in the recent responsa) seems quite noteworthy regarding Niddah in the Conservative

2309:'s and the rest of the Orthodox rabbinical groups', etc. My POV, and I think the mainline classical Conservative POV, is that Orthodoxy is a "young movement in Judaism", and, to go farther than most would like, is characterised primarily by its contempt for 3386:

Even I agree with you on that one. :) Would you mind making them one at a time? Or discussing them beforehand? Or even make a temporary subpage to review them before implementing here. I feel sure we can work this out, and I also am in favor of progress.

3436:

you make them. And if they are no good, I see no reason not to revert them even before they are finished. In general, since you see there is another editor who seems to have a problem with your edits, I think you really should consider getting consensus

2891:, out of the magazine Reform Judaism. "Others may wish to utilize the mikvah or other kinds of spiritual immersion not only for conversion but for periodic experiences of purification." That certainly doesn't sound like niddah is being observed at all. 2189:

Conservatism, Karaism and others) as relevant. Just imagine what would happen if we were to mention the various rulings and customs of each and every movement and community! As I see it, this is not a matter of personal preference, but of good editing.

1932:

on the Shulchan Aruch. That "passing objects without touching" is halacha I have no doubt is the view of maran hammachaber (the Shulchan Aruch itself), but the article implies that it's a derabbanan requirement like a Talmudic decree, not a matter of

3314:

Specifically, I had no problem with Marecheth Ho'eElohuth's most recent edit. I made a few technical fixes, and removed part of a sentence that was repeated and not relevant to that section, but in general found that a laudable and constructive edit.

754:

I have radically reduced the amount of links. Some linked articles were off the topic (this is on Niddah, not on sexuality in Judaism). Others were multiple links to the same resource. I have linked to the main resource pages, effectively reducing

1431:

There exists a custom that a woman should not look at a Torah scroll when she actually has blood (which is less than the time of her being Nidah). This is not a law, but a custom of piety. See Shulchan Aruch Harav 88, 2 and Mishnah Brurah 88, 6.

1937:(the halachic principle that "the custom of our ancestors is Torah"). This is, at best, controversial. If I bring sources to cite the controversy with maran hammachaber, will you object to changing the wording and citing that controversy? 1556:" mere collections of external links or Internet directories. There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Knowledge." 3578:

indeed, now that u mention it i do recall s/t to that effect. but perhaps we could reword to make the difference understood (as not to confuse with rashi about שלשה ימים אל תגשו אל אשה that we r concerned about ופולטת שכבת זרע מחמת טומאת

2168:

Regarding Klein's book, I agree with Debresser that it was out of place. Perhaps a section should be created for popular lit on the topic (Lamm, Klein, Zimmerman, Knohl). The only challenge I see to this is that it is just begging for

1843:

I retract that on further consideration and looking at it. They still aren't the best refs for halacha lemaaseh, but in context they're not bad and I shan't delete them. Anyone know where to find strikethrough in the new interface?

3253:

The "Ritual washing in Judaism" article at the moment combines washing the hands and immersing oneself in a Mikveh. These two issues should be split, and the latter could be called "Tvilah". On a sidenote, I think that according to

1791:

This paragraph has an incomplete ending: Either the word "concerning" should be deleted or someone add the appropriate ending to: "The term is overwhelmingly used in Judaism to refer to the rules of Jewish law concerning..." What?

2030:

niddah." Debresser objected, in his edit summary, that "Also, Io though Conservative has its own section. Why mix them back in in every place?" The context of the article here is clearly that of contemporary practical law (

1008:

I suppose as a purely practical matter a woman can't be niddah on her wedding day and night. But how is she to know far enough ahead of time to plan the wedding whether or not she's going to be niddah on a particular day?

2812:

I'm honestly also very surprised at your objection, Debresser; it would seem to me that Lisa's edit is uncontroversial. I agree entirely with her that (as much as it pains me) very few non-Orthodox Jews observe niddah.

2616:

harder it is to understand disagreement. Catholics find it easy to talk to Baptists and Jews, whose views are "somewhat" divergent from Catholicism. Not so easy to talk to Orthodox whose views are nearly identical!

2276:

Respectfully, I'm having an hard time reading your reply as having much more content than "uh-uh". Rabbinic Judaism generally hasn't had "well-defined creeds", or a "unifed line" of halacha. That Rabbinic Judaism

2644:'s comment on the Judaism discussion board is a valid one but I'm not sure how to best implement it. Can people propose a structure here and once there is consensus on the structure, implement it in the article? 2416:

normative among Conservative Jews, it seems fairly obvious that the Orthodox view should be presented as the default, with the Conservative view mentioned in a section of its own. To do otherwise would be giving

3541:

I have deleted the following sentence: "Because the leaking of semen nullifies the counting of a "clean" day, the Sages enacted that the counting of seven days not begin until a minimum of 72 hours has passed".

3162:

In addition, there seem to be a few concepts repeating themselves (at times even more than twice). I have placed a "under construction" template on the page and invite others to help remove redundant content.

2610:

If sect x believes xx. That should be reported. Probably Orthodox first, since it was first chronologically. Then one can say that sect y believes yy. X mandates bathing.(ref) Y does not mandate bathing.(ref)

1958:

I can not, and will not object to adding sourced material. I do think that bringing a controversy about a halacha in the Shulchan Aruch is too much detail for this article. Agreeing with you that the precise

1452:

The statements made are based on limited scholarship, without citation, and do not indicate at all that there are Halachic explanations. I corrected to reflect that this section is based non-Orthodox bias.

2057:

I solved the problem in another way, easier a lot. We already have a section for Conservative views. The main body of the text is about normative, orthodox, Judaism. So no need to specify that every time.

1389:

to improve the article by including some discussion with references on historical study, and on the responsa within the Conservative movement. (Much of it had been in the article before, and was deleted.)

1142:

also typically wait only a few months between the engagement and the chuppah; all the calculations of the girl are messed up by her anticipation of the marriage, which wrecks havoc on her menstrual cycle.

1048:

her husband, right? How can they hold hands during the ceremony, or kiss at the end, or dance at the reception? (I don't know if any of those are customary at Orthodox weddings anyway, but if they are...)

153: 811:, an editor's unsourced, strongly-worded, clearly partisan opinion, presented as fact. No factual information or other encyclopedic information provided. Am removing to talk page and it's listed below. -- 2519:

reduce that enormous -- overwhelming -- majority a bit by saying "family purity" instead of niddah, but I would go so far as to say that the vast majority of Conservative Jews are entirely unaware that

1951:

Always nice to discuss with you, Savant1984. But I wish you'd stop redoing your edits in the mean time. After all, they are your innovations. Now that they are challenged, please first defend them.

2412:

I don't know whether Orthodox Judaism is the default in articles on Judaism here. I suspect it isn't. But in an article about a practice which is normative among Orthodox Jews, and definitely

1963:

of that ruling is subject of discussion, I urge you to leave the text like it is, which is straightforward and uncomplicated. If you stilll feel you have to, perhaps delegate it to a footnote.

2721:. Sort it out here and invite folks from the relevant wikiproject to discuss. I add that I haven't a clue about the subject but please discuss here before moving forward (in 24 hours time) 1259:

articles, where the "Eco-Kosher" view that the term "Kashrut" shouldn't be limited to dietary laws but should encompass views of ethical relations with the environment as a whole was found

2885:, out of Kenyon College. "Most Conservative and Reform Jews do not incorporate this aspect of Judaism into their life; it is mainly Orthodox Jewish families that practice niddah laws." 2084:. The founding thesis of the Conservative/Positive-Historical/Masorti approach is precisely that academic approach to Torah study and having that influence one's perception of Judaism 2247:

It occurs to me that it's nearly Shavuot in the land of Israel by this time. I'm in the Diaspora, so I'll be offline until Thursday night at the earliest. Chag sameach to all Jews!

1297:

required immersion in running water among other special niddah practices, although I understand that upon immigration to Israel their practices have become more assimilated. Best, --

787:

I have disputed the neutrality of this section as I feel that it uses a tone that suggests condemnation and may not be in the spirit of both Knowledge's neutrality policy as well as

2371:

Most certainly not. :) I disagree with you based on this de facto default, with which I agree, and also based on the more "technical" arguments of good editing, as specified above.

1370:

are more or less arbitrarily divided between the latter two categories. There are still traces of a binary divide between "Orthodox Judaism" and "Progressive Judaism": in this area

1247:, ritual purity, and has a well-established meaning of those aspects of ritual purity that apply within families. Because of this well-established meaning, there was a proposal in 1500:

I'm not sure about the technical answer to your question, but in everyday conversation I think either of the first 2 would be ok. I think the second one is actually more common.

3652:

If she notices a bloodstain of uncertain origin, for example on her underclothing, there are a series of complicated criteria used by rabbinical law to determine whether she is

3509:

my oposition. But this is not a matter of counting votes, but of logic. Do as you please, but I think that discussion is almost per definition the best path of action. See also

3041:

Not really. Your source is valid only for the US and other places with a relatively strong Conservative or Reform population. You should have changed the sentence accordingly.

1546:

There is a dispute regarding the inclusion of an external link to www.mymikvahcalendar.com. I don't think it's clear cut, but I'm inclined to allow the link for a few reasons:

2038:. I have currently replaced "many" with a sentence at the end of the paragraph noting that this is, indeed, required by all Orthodox authorities. (The difficulty of finding 2779:

But now I did, and I have two comments: 1. If I am not mistaken we discussed this source before in relation with Judaism articles, and decided that it is not reliable (see

2879:, out of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism. "One area of Jewish law practiced by many Orthodox Jews but ignored by most Conservative Jews is family purity." 2905:

by only a small percentage even within the Orthodox community. The practice has been further hindered by endless Orthodox debates about the technical requirements of

147: 3725: 633: 417: 1807:

I noticed this before, but didn't look into it. After reading this post I looked it up and saw that one word somehow got lost in one of the revisions. Fixed.

842:

Adherence to these laws are viewed as the best present one can bestow upon the unborn child - giving them the best most 'kosher' start in life, at conception.

3755: 1366:

The current article is written in classical historic fashion of "Bible", "Rabbinic literature" and "Modern Judaism". The result is that the Orthodox laws of

3750: 2583: 2480:. All Conservative authorities agree that niddah is obligatory. It is normative as a matter of practical law. Where we talk about what people actually 2472:

because so few people will actually agree with him or care, even if by affiliation or self-indentification they recognise his authority? By the standard

1000:

subject of medieval debate was innacurate and deleted. There are several debates and Im not sure which the author was refering to. thus did not correct.

686: 79: 3368:'s focus, everyone agrees it is easier being freinds with the "revert" button than the "edit" one -but here we'd like to see some good contribution. -- 3740: 3715: 2468:-- the great majority of lay Catholics neither know nor care. Is citing the Pope's view of a Catholic theological matter in an article a violaton of 528: 518: 423: 381: 299: 1202:(the article focuses on menstruation laws, though there are many applicablities to family life and marriage that are left out. Here is a good book: 309: 1828:

that, as far as contemporary halacha lemaaseh is concerned. Head's up -- as such, I plan to delete them soon with tags for appropriate sources.

2341:, because the de facto default in all general Judaism articles is the orthodox point of view, with sections or ammendments for other movements. 825:

difficult at best. As such, compliance with the laws of purity is viewed as a high degree of observence in all denominations of Jewish practice.

3745: 3730: 3334:

that they should be written in italics, as indeed is done in part of the article. It would make sence to make one edit just to fix this issue.

2210: 2542:

And one can quite easily get most any lay Roman Catholic to commit material heresy on any one of dozens of dogmas, including ones which carry

85: 2313:-- the halachic prohibition on sectarianism. Ultimately, however, our debate about this is irrelevant to Knowledge; Knowledge needs to be 889:

Currently all the sections are the same level, even some with similar subject matter aren't grouped. I won't be hurt by any changes, just

389: 2901:

has been undertaken by liberal Jewish authorities. The custom has fallen into disuse, but was never actually rejected. It is followed for

1707:

article with a direct link to this page as the main article on the subject. Niddah is the common word and there is no reason to move. --

3505:

I am not sure that is the correct interpretation of their words, nor that they haven't changed their mind in the mean time, perhaps even

2897:, out of the Central Conference of American Rabbis (the rabbinic arm of the Reform Movement). "Except in a cursory way, no discussion of 705:. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see 652:. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see 3760: 3590: 3554: 2484:, we should of course note (and we do in this article) that very few self-identified or affiliated Conservative Jews follow these laws. 1491: 863: 735: 494: 2357:

the only respondent has agreed with me. Does this mean that you concede the point, though, and we have consensus to restore my edits?

3735: 3720: 2780: 2692:

In the interest of keeping this discussion from going totally all over the place on the page, I'm going to continue it above as well.

2338: 275: 3219: 2209:

strongly about the inclusion of Klein, but I think it's in there because it was compiled by one of the pre-eminent halachists of the

1992:

If its important to you. But I do think ou should keep it in a footnote, because of ]. Most sources connsider it undisputed halacha.

3710: 3662:

as I find this hard to believe and it's been there for eight years unsourced. If this is true, it should be easy to confirm, right?

1159: 2929:

screwing around and edit warring about something that's so obviously true, it took me only a few minutes to find those sources. -

3682:"I find this hard to believe and it's been there for eight years unsourced. If this is true, it should be easy to confirm, right?" 3480: 3415: 3373: 3171: 3088: 3083:

I agree with debresser on this one. many jewish women who are otherwise not religious do indeed make a point of mikvah immersion--

1858:

I also think they are good enough, since they are the factual basis for many modern halachot, and use clear and concise language.

3484: 3419: 3377: 3092: 1775: 1098: 1093:

I'm surpised that no-one here has mentioned that when a Jewish bride is a Niddah at her wedding the entire ceremony is called a "

580: 385: 3564:

It is true nevertheless. The connection is that the sages worried that perhaps a drop of blood might be conceiled in the semen.

758: 99: 30: 2882: 2678:

I also think the way I did it makes sense. There is a speial section for it. I argued this in detail above, please see there.

3633: 3242: 3136: 2732: 2587: 485: 446: 393: 369: 332: 104: 44: 20: 2302: 266: 227: 74: 3175: 837:

child may have certain legal restrictions and may have a character that shows signs of an uncouth or boorish inclination.

1251:(described in the Niddah article) to stop using the term "family purity" and substitute "family holiness". If you have 202: 2551:

by most of their laity. It frankly seems to me be such a transparent violation of our NPOV pillar as to beyond debate.

1747:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

1634:

Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

3476: 3411: 3369: 3167: 3084: 571: 551: 65: 2664:-- I think it makes sense to have wholly different sections. Here, though, it would just be awkward and redundant. 168: 3586: 3550: 3472: 274:-related articles on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join 3673: 3008: 2938: 2752: 2533: 2431: 135: 3622:

will (hopefully) ensure material stays on the page for longer and hopefully solve some arguments. Just saying....

3205: 3197: 3156: 2637: 2306: 682: 629: 3155:(for all nuances relating to the Issur aspect -harchakot etc. -as opposed to the Tumah and Taharah aspect) and 1236: 3152: 2448:

beliefs and practices of self-identified adherents of a religous group constitute what we should consider the

2262:

been interpreted consistently for many centuries and millenia, and connect to those roots. Happy holiday. :)

1475:

If we understand the hebrew, niddah is a descriptive. As such option 1 is correct, similar to "I am white".

739: 2034:), as indicated by the use of the present tense. To restrict that to Orthodox opinions would be to violate 1487: 1333:

niddah and one is the laws and punishments related to it. It sounds like just two chapters of the same code?

1218: 867: 109: 3691: 1348: 563: 545: 1657: 2461: 2106: 1729: 1644: 1590: 1510: 1483: 208: 129: 3687: 2818: 2697: 2669: 2595: 2560: 2489: 2391: 2362: 2323: 2252: 2238: 2144: 2114: 2047: 1983: 1942: 1889: 1849: 1833: 1797: 1771: 1767: 1763: 1691: 1479: 1371: 1248: 873: 731: 3656:

or not; the woman herself is not expected to know these criteria, and must seek the assistance of a

2894: 2233:

and secular authors on the topic, but also Haim Soloveitchik's famous "Rapture and Reconstruction".

190: 3606: 3569: 3518: 3446: 3392: 3339: 3320: 3305: 3264: 3213: 3187: 3046: 2969: 2795: 2770: 2683: 2376: 2346: 2294: 2267: 2230: 2194: 2129: 2100:. That the opinions of rabbis who accept academic method and conclusions (i.e., Conservative) are 2063: 1997: 1968: 1919: 1905: 1863: 1812: 1712: 1610: 1531: 1437: 1313: 1147: 161: 125: 55: 1255:

that some people use the term differently, the article can mention this. An analogous case is the

579:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

493:

on Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join

3627: 3289: 3237: 3201: 3130: 2726: 2621: 2555:

affiliated Conservative Jews give a hoot. But the latter doesn't make the former "meaningless".

2170: 1415: 973: 948: 920: 896: 766: 70: 1283:

water is never required. This seems to be a common misconception. I will slowly fix the errors.

3585:

btw, the etymology of niddah that was here yesterday seemed okay to me..no reason to revert --

3522: 3450: 3331: 3209: 3191: 2282: 2097: 1914:

As we rabbis like to joke: you can't even beat your wife with a stick while she is niddah. :)

1682:. We are written in English, not Hebrew; there is a Hebrew Knowledge for those who prefer it. 1669: 1573: 1551: 1379: 1352: 1298: 1265: 1171:

nb: meta-commentary like this always belongs on the talk page. I'm redirecting the article to

1032: 812: 698: 645: 175: 51: 3284:

reason why you should not let these changes stand for the duration of at least several days.

2543: 2444:

do is irrelevant to the matter of practical law, which is what the section is about. If the

2165:

Chabad or Jewish Renewal. The material should be divided according to topic, not community.

3255: 2649: 2178: 2093: 1725: 1640: 1581: 1501: 1184: 2999:

experience as a rabbi in Israel differs, the burden of proof is very definitely on you. -

1928:

Um, respectfully, Debresser, saying the Shulchan Aruch is wrong is the 3/4 time job of the

2814: 2693: 2665: 2641: 2591: 2556: 2485: 2477: 2469: 2418: 2387: 2358: 2319: 2248: 2234: 2140: 2110: 2043: 1979: 1938: 1885: 1845: 1829: 1793: 1687: 1580:

Personally, I can't stand extraneous external links, but in this case I think it belongs.

1558:

This link is useful, it is content-relevant, and there aren't excessive links on the page.

1334: 1308:

That will be worth noting indeed, as soon as you can bring a source for that information.

1284: 477: 360: 3668: 3602: 3565: 3514: 3442: 3407: 3388: 3365: 3335: 3316: 3301: 3260: 3183: 3042: 3004: 2965: 2934: 2791: 2766: 2748: 2679: 2529: 2427: 2372: 2342: 2263: 2226: 2222: 2218: 2190: 2125: 2081: 2059: 2035: 2026: 1993: 1964: 1915: 1901: 1880: 1859: 1808: 1708: 1686:

is demonstrably the loan word; if you wish to make that distinction, edit the article.

1606: 1562: 1527: 1433: 1309: 1143: 1055: 1015: 890: 808: 258: 1279:

There are a lot of mistakes and inaccuracies in this area of the article. For example

3704: 3623: 3510: 3468: 3352: 3285: 3232: 3227: 3159:

for specifics already listed on this page and for more information that is lacking.

3126: 2722: 2718: 2617: 2089: 1565:(it DOES provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it was a 1411: 1343:

A couple of Knowledge editors seem to have a fetish of taking every reference to the

969: 944: 915: 807:

Agree the material that was added to the end of this section is a clear violation of

762: 141: 3121: 2088:

compatible with normative Judaism. It's a major theme of the work of gedolim like

2039: 1703:. The term and its scope are so clear and obvious, there is a section in the main 1665: 1566: 1394: 1252: 1230: 1075: 985:

Could the above anonymous user please sign his comments with the four ~~~~ tildes.

831:

generally do not expect any adherence to these laws or practices nor focus on them.

795: 3330:

One thing that I tried to change was the use of capitals for words in hebrew. See

2876: 2160:

Sorry for opening a new thread before checking existing ones. After looking over

3651: 2042:

for matters of consensus among Orthodox posekim I leave for another discussion.)

3410:

come on and retouch, add and change as needed. gentlemen, do i have approval?--

3151:

Noticing the extensive page length, I propose creation of the additional pages (

2790:. It is clear Knowledge policy that the burden of proof is on her in this case. 2645: 2465: 2453: 2174: 1294: 1260: 1178: 725: 354: 1243:

I respectfully disagree. "Family purity" is a quasi-translation of the hebrew

1132: 862:

Anectodal and suspect evidence is not a basis for editing a Knowledge article.

851:

I made one deletion: "Jews do not make jokes about private bedroom matters."

467: 350: 248: 3475:

seem in favor of my contributing w/o having your seal of approval beforhand--

3355:

for your support! its always good to get a boost from folks once in a while..

2857:

But because I'm such a nice person, I'll offer up some other sources for you.

1374:

is distinctly different from both in theory (although less so in practice).

3663: 3000: 2930: 2744: 2605:

This will probably sound more clueless, than helpful. But it is neutral! :)

2547: 2525: 2473: 2423: 1121: 1111: 1050: 1010: 986: 943:

On the whole, I personally try to avoid level 4 headers. Good work, though.

344: 326: 2786:

In short, this source has to go, and so does the change Lisa introduced in

2546:

if held intentionally. I don't see the difference. As far as I can tell,

1203: 1194:

Stub. Here's the scope: right now, the concept of tahara (purity) goes to

724:

There seems to be a fair amount of identical text between this article and

461: 440: 242: 221: 2888: 2109:-- but I hope that people will keep it in mind in discussion.) Reverted. 380:-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us 2717:

Ok folks. I locked this up for 24 hours before anyone does anything they

2661: 2298: 1217:(guidelines for physical contact). All of these are touched upon in the 490: 376: 3406:

remove the tag, at which point i'd (or should i say we'd?) like to see

3223: 1704: 1390: 1293:

It's worth noting that although outside the topic of Rabbinic Judaism,

1256: 1206: 856: 781: 271: 1378:

etc. Will await comments before any attempt at rearrangement. Best, --

1653: 1244: 1214: 1210: 1199: 1195: 1172: 702: 649: 24: 2460:

different: we can't possibly, for example, explain the dogma of the

1628:

The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal.

3657: 1741:

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal.

1344: 1103: 576: 3546: 1660:— "Taharat Hamishpakha" describes the entire practice. The term 1233:(peace and harmony in the relationship between husband and wife) 1347:

and turning it into a reference to one of the documents in the

2072:

Whoa, Debresser, to say that contemporary Orthodox Judaism is

1074:

of modesty demanded by the couple's particular community. --

665: 612: 184: 15: 3695: 3676: 3637: 3610: 3594: 3573: 3558: 3549:

has not much to do with zavah..(or nidah for that matter)--

3396: 3343: 3324: 3309: 3293: 3268: 3248: 3140: 3050: 3012: 2973: 2942: 2822: 2799: 2774: 2756: 2736: 2701: 2687: 2673: 2653: 2625: 2599: 2564: 2537: 2493: 2435: 2395: 2380: 2366: 2350: 2327: 2285:'s essay "The Dogmas of Judaism" deals with the former well. 2271: 2256: 2242: 2198: 2182: 2148: 2133: 2118: 2067: 2051: 2001: 1987: 1972: 1946: 1923: 1909: 1893: 1867: 1853: 1837: 1816: 1801: 1779: 1733: 1716: 1695: 1673: 1648: 1614: 1599: 1535: 1519: 1441: 1419: 1398: 1382: 1355: 1337: 1317: 1301: 1287: 1268: 1189: 1151: 1135: 1124: 1114: 1078: 1060: 1035: 1020: 989: 978: 953: 877: 815: 798: 743: 3432:

Doesn't sound good. I'd prefer a discussion of your edits

1213:(prohibitions of secluding oneself with a stranger), and 2456:

in particular (but really all religions), ought to look

728:

I dont know which came first or which copied the other

3230:(both currently redirects) as in the Hebrew Knowledge. 2787: 2161: 2022:" -- entangled with the matter of Conservative Opinions 710: 706: 677: 657: 653: 624: 2582:

I want to note that I've reported this dispute at the

2464:

as normative Cathlic belief, or the official Catholic

2440:

Respectfully, what Jews (of whatever stripe) actually

160: 3441:

you make them. Sounds like the sensible thing to do.

1754:

Non-Orthodox historical study of the seven extra days

1120:

Hmm, looks like this can go into the article now...

575:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 489:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 270:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of 2883:

Blood, Gender and Power in Judaism and Christianity

1664:only refers to a specified period of the month. -- 1026:contraceptives to control their menstrual cycles. 422:This article has not yet received a rating on the 1569:, it's not a website that requires payment, etc.) 2743:never observe any kind of niddah whatsoever. - 757:Niddah probably needs no more than three links. 33:for general discussion of the article's subject. 3222:)). I do propose creation of separate pages on 374:, a project to improve Knowledge's articles on 2281:dogmas and laws is of course, true -- I think 174: 8: 3616:(jumps up on soapbox and picks up megaphone) 2452:beliefs and practices, then our articles on 1209:(modest behavior) has its own page, as does 726:http://www.beingjewish.com/cycle/niddah.html 2297:'s approach to dealing with allegations of 3117:note from the temporary referee passing by 540: 435: 321: 216: 1448:Historical Study of Additional Seven Days 1198:. the concept of family purity goes to 968:It is indeed a rather bold speculation. 542: 437: 323: 218: 188: 3620:inline references to scholarly sources 1724:- name is descriptive of the article. 2895:Contemporary American Reform Responsa 7: 3726:Unknown-importance Religion articles 1044:But if she's niddah, she can't even 569:This article is within the scope of 483:This article is within the scope of 366:This article is within the scope of 264:This article is within the scope of 3756:All WikiProject Women-related pages 3601:occurrences of the this word-root. 2765:Sorry. I didn't notice the source. 893:-out a grouping to get it started. 207:It is of interest to the following 23:for discussing improvements to the 3751:B-Class WikiProject Women articles 2632:non-orthodox opinions and practice 2339:Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism 2217:Back to the more important issue: 759:Knowledge is not a link repository 14: 3545:To the good of my knowledge, the 3364:I'm kind of confused though with 2889:Ten Principles for Reform Judaism 1160:Talk:Jewish laws of family purity 3741:Mid-importance Feminism articles 3716:High-importance Judaism articles 1876:Passing Objects Without Touching 669: 616: 562: 544: 470: 460: 439: 353: 343: 325: 251: 241: 220: 189: 45:Click here to start a new topic. 3332:Knowledge:ITALICS#Foreign_terms 2476:proposes, that indeed violates 523:This article has been rated as 304:This article has been rated as 3467:you seem outnumbered here. as 2337:I propose you take this up at 503:Knowledge:WikiProject Feminism 402:Knowledge:WikiProject Religion 1: 3746:WikiProject Feminism articles 3731:WikiProject Religion articles 3696:03:03, 11 December 2022 (UTC) 3269:21:00, 23 February 2016 (UTC) 3249:20:19, 23 February 2016 (UTC) 2303:Rabbinical Council of America 2018:observant women" or implied " 1734:17:00, 11 November 2009 (UTC) 1717:00:10, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 1696:00:01, 10 November 2009 (UTC) 1649:22:38, 15 November 2009 (UTC) 1542:www.mymikvahcalendar.com link 1089:Chupas Niddah versus the pill 775:Views of Conservative Judaism 583:and see a list of open tasks. 506:Template:WikiProject Feminism 497:and see a list of open tasks. 405:Template:WikiProject Religion 284:Knowledge:WikiProject Judaism 278:and see a list of open tasks. 42:Put new text under old text. 2713:Fully protected for 24 hours 2524:staff, 4 years running). - 1780:13:19, 25 January 2010 (UTC) 1674:00:04, 9 November 2009 (UTC) 1399:03:55, 15 January 2009 (UTC) 1383:03:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC) 1356:03:07, 26 October 2007 (UTC) 1302:03:13, 26 October 2007 (UTC) 1079:07:40, 19 January 2007 (UTC) 1021:16:34, 31 October 2006 (UTC) 990:10:20, 7 December 2005 (UTC) 979:08:04, 6 December 2005 (UTC) 878:16:40, 14 January 2008 (UTC) 816:16:25, 19 January 2007 (UTC) 799:07:43, 19 January 2007 (UTC) 287:Template:WikiProject Judaism 1461:What is the correct usage? 1061:05:28, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 1036:05:25, 4 January 2007 (UTC) 954:21:45, 31 August 2005 (UTC) 589:Knowledge:WikiProject Women 50:New to Knowledge? Welcome! 3777: 3761:WikiProject Women articles 3638:22:45, 28 March 2011 (UTC) 3611:17:07, 26 March 2011 (UTC) 3595:17:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC) 3574:08:50, 25 March 2011 (UTC) 3559:00:20, 25 March 2011 (UTC) 3523:00:36, 31 March 2011 (UTC) 3485:23:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC) 3451:21:51, 29 March 2011 (UTC) 3420:16:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC) 3397:15:22, 28 March 2011 (UTC) 3378:14:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC) 3344:10:57, 24 March 2011 (UTC) 3325:03:35, 24 March 2011 (UTC) 3310:03:16, 24 March 2011 (UTC) 3294:18:52, 23 March 2011 (UTC) 3192:23:40, 22 March 2011 (UTC) 3176:17:01, 22 March 2011 (UTC) 3147:Page length and redundancy 3093:18:10, 22 March 2011 (UTC) 2588:Wikiproject:Religion board 1817:17:55, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1802:02:47, 13 March 2010 (UTC) 1526:The first: "I am niddah." 1269:23:08, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 1190:01:52, 20 April 2007 (UTC) 1125:09:25, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 1115:09:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC) 595:WikiProject Women articles 592:Template:WikiProject Women 529:project's importance scale 424:project's importance scale 310:project's importance scale 3736:B-Class Feminism articles 3721:B-Class Religion articles 3587:The soft voice of Judaism 3551:The soft voice of Judaism 3473:The soft voice of Judaism 3198:Stringency of Rabbi Zeira 3157:Stringency of Rabbi Zeira 2638:Religious response to ART 2307:Chief Rabbinate of Israel 2032:halacha lemaaseh bizmeinu 1615:15:51, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 1536:15:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 1442:16:04, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 1420:14:00, 30 June 2009 (UTC) 1338:19:17, 30 July 2007 (UTC) 1318:16:06, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 1288:04:26, 30 July 2007 (UTC) 1158:old comments merged from 1152:16:11, 16 July 2009 (UTC) 1136:13:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC) 771:10:38, 25 Jun 2004 (UTC) 744:06:55, 8 April 2008 (UTC) 709:; for its talk page, see 656:; for its talk page, see 557: 522: 455: 421: 338: 303: 236: 215: 80:Be welcoming to newcomers 3711:B-Class Judaism articles 3677:02:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC) 3618:Adding my 2c, providing 3206:Rabbi Zeira's stringency 3153:Niddah (Halachic detail) 3141:12:21, 25 May 2010 (UTC) 3051:10:23, 25 May 2010 (UTC) 3013:18:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2974:17:50, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2943:16:24, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2823:15:18, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2800:09:48, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2775:09:41, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2757:03:57, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2737:23:56, 23 May 2010 (UTC) 2702:23:58, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2688:23:25, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2674:21:42, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2654:21:04, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2626:20:28, 26 May 2010 (UTC) 2600:20:03, 24 May 2010 (UTC) 2565:21:01, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2538:20:35, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2494:18:18, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2436:17:54, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2396:16:45, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2381:16:15, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2367:13:47, 21 May 2010 (UTC) 2351:20:07, 19 May 2010 (UTC) 2328:16:44, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2272:16:08, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2257:13:26, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2243:13:02, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2199:10:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2183:03:35, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2149:00:07, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 2134:23:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2119:13:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2068:09:22, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2052:02:36, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 2002:10:43, 18 May 2010 (UTC) 1988:23:57, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 1973:23:20, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 1947:02:24, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 1935:minhag avoteinu torah hi 1924:02:02, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 1910:02:00, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 1894:01:18, 17 May 2010 (UTC) 1868:21:52, 16 May 2010 (UTC) 1854:18:51, 16 May 2010 (UTC) 1838:18:44, 16 May 2010 (UTC) 1823:Mishneh Torah References 1744:Please do not modify it. 1631:Please do not modify it. 1600:17:02, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 1520:16:54, 7 July 2009 (UTC) 1237:Role of women in Judaism 392:standards, or visit the 3208:(created 18/Dec/13‎ by 1605:I second this opinion. 1219:Jewish view of marriage 1099:oral contraceptive pill 2584:neutrality noticeboard 1405:Niddah and Sefer Torah 1349:Documentary hypothesis 1328:What with documentery 847:Jews and bedroom jokes 197:This article is rated 75:avoid personal attacks 3477:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth 3412:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth 3370:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth 3168:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth 3085:Marecheth Ho'eElohuth 2462:Immaculate Conception 2074:the normative Judaism 1561:Seems to meet all of 1362:Restructuring article 100:Neutral point of view 2586:, as well as at the 2205:First, I don't feel 1494:) 08:12, 7 July 2009 1372:Conservative Judaism 1249:Conservative Judaism 1175:, per the merge tag. 1166:Content from article 697:. Its contents were 693:with a consensus to 644:. Its contents were 640:with a consensus to 486:WikiProject Feminism 370:WikiProject Religion 105:No original research 2301:much more than the 2295:Rabbinical Assembly 1658:Taharat Hamishpakha 1275:rabbinic literature 1205:). The concept of 267:WikiProject Judaism 2422:inappropriate. - 2105:article itself -- 1576:seem to all be OK. 1572:The guidelines in 750:Reducing the links 681:was nominated for 628:was nominated for 382:assess and improve 203:content assessment 86:dispute resolution 47: 2283:Solomon Schechter 2098:Solomon Schechter 1783: 1766:comment added by 1694: 1496: 1482:comment added by 1188: 976: 951: 937: 913: 880: 769: 746: 734:comment added by 717: 716: 664: 663: 611: 610: 607: 606: 603: 602: 572:WikiProject Women 539: 538: 535: 534: 509:Feminism articles 434: 433: 430: 429: 408:Religion articles 396:for more details. 320: 319: 316: 315: 183: 182: 66:Assume good faith 43: 3768: 3672: 3661: 3537:Deleted sentence 2094:Solomon Schecter 2080:in violation of 1782: 1760: 1746: 1690: 1633: 1596: 1595: 1587: 1586: 1567:featured article 1516: 1515: 1507: 1506: 1495: 1476: 1253:reliable sources 1182: 974: 949: 939: 936: 933: 930: 927: 924: 921: 912: 909: 906: 903: 900: 897: 871: 767: 729: 691:17 November 2009 673: 672: 666: 638:25 November 2009 620: 619: 613: 597: 596: 593: 590: 587: 566: 559: 558: 548: 541: 511: 510: 507: 504: 501: 480: 475: 474: 473: 464: 457: 456: 451: 443: 436: 410: 409: 406: 403: 400: 394:wikiproject page 363: 358: 357: 347: 340: 339: 329: 322: 292: 291: 290:Judaism articles 288: 285: 282: 261: 256: 255: 254: 245: 238: 237: 232: 224: 217: 200: 194: 193: 185: 179: 178: 164: 95:Article policies 16: 3776: 3775: 3771: 3770: 3769: 3767: 3766: 3765: 3701: 3700: 3666: 3648: 3539: 3281: 3247: 3196:I just created 3149: 2715: 2642:User:Savant1984 2634: 2024: 1878: 1825: 1789: 1761: 1756: 1751: 1742: 1688:Septentrionalis 1629: 1623: 1593: 1592: 1584: 1583: 1544: 1513: 1512: 1504: 1503: 1477: 1471:I am in niddah. 1459: 1450: 1407: 1364: 1326: 1277: 1227: 1168: 1163: 1091: 1006: 1004:At the wedding? 998: 996:Textual sources 962: 934: 931: 928: 925: 922: 910: 907: 904: 901: 898: 894: 887: 849: 777: 752: 722: 670: 617: 594: 591: 588: 585: 584: 508: 505: 502: 499: 498: 478:Feminism portal 476: 471: 469: 449: 407: 404: 401: 398: 397: 361:Religion portal 359: 352: 306:High-importance 289: 286: 283: 280: 279: 257: 252: 250: 231:High‑importance 230: 201:on Knowledge's 198: 121: 116: 115: 114: 91: 61: 12: 11: 5: 3774: 3772: 3764: 3763: 3758: 3753: 3748: 3743: 3738: 3733: 3728: 3723: 3718: 3713: 3703: 3702: 3699: 3698: 3683: 3647: 3644: 3643: 3642: 3641: 3640: 3583: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3538: 3535: 3534: 3533: 3532: 3531: 3530: 3529: 3528: 3527: 3526: 3525: 3494: 3493: 3492: 3491: 3490: 3489: 3488: 3487: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3455: 3454: 3453: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3422: 3400: 3399: 3383: 3382: 3381: 3380: 3359: 3358: 3357: 3356: 3328: 3327: 3312: 3280: 3277: 3276: 3275: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3271: 3231: 3148: 3145: 3144: 3143: 3125:even already. 3112: 3110: 3109: 3108: 3107: 3106: 3105: 3104: 3103: 3102: 3101: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3095: 3066: 3065: 3064: 3063: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3057: 3056: 3055: 3054: 3053: 3026: 3025: 3024: 3023: 3022: 3021: 3020: 3019: 3018: 3017: 3016: 3015: 2985: 2984: 2983: 2982: 2981: 2980: 2979: 2978: 2977: 2976: 2952: 2951: 2950: 2949: 2948: 2947: 2946: 2945: 2919: 2918: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2914: 2913: 2912: 2911: 2910: 2892: 2886: 2880: 2865: 2864: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2858: 2848: 2847: 2846: 2845: 2844: 2843: 2842: 2841: 2830: 2829: 2828: 2827: 2826: 2825: 2805: 2804: 2803: 2802: 2784: 2777: 2760: 2759: 2714: 2711: 2709: 2707: 2706: 2705: 2704: 2676: 2633: 2630: 2629: 2628: 2612: 2611: 2607: 2606: 2580: 2579: 2578: 2577: 2576: 2575: 2574: 2573: 2572: 2571: 2570: 2569: 2568: 2567: 2552: 2505: 2504: 2503: 2502: 2501: 2500: 2499: 2498: 2497: 2496: 2403: 2402: 2401: 2400: 2399: 2398: 2335: 2334: 2333: 2332: 2331: 2330: 2286: 2245: 2215: 2202: 2201: 2158: 2157: 2156: 2155: 2154: 2153: 2152: 2151: 2107:WP:NOTCENSORED 2023: 2012: 2011: 2010: 2009: 2008: 2007: 2006: 2005: 2004: 1975: 1956: 1952: 1912: 1877: 1874: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1824: 1821: 1820: 1819: 1788: 1785: 1759:accordingly. 1755: 1752: 1750: 1749: 1737: 1736: 1719: 1698: 1637: 1636: 1624: 1622: 1621:Suggested move 1619: 1618: 1617: 1578: 1577: 1570: 1559: 1543: 1540: 1539: 1538: 1523: 1522: 1473: 1472: 1469: 1468:I am a niddah. 1466: 1458: 1455: 1449: 1446: 1445: 1444: 1428: 1427: 1406: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1363: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1325: 1324:Priestly code? 1322: 1321: 1320: 1305: 1304: 1276: 1273: 1272: 1271: 1240: 1239: 1234: 1226: 1223: 1167: 1164: 1162: 1156: 1155: 1154: 1128: 1127: 1106:is broken and 1090: 1087: 1086: 1085: 1084: 1083: 1082: 1081: 1066: 1065: 1064: 1063: 1039: 1038: 1005: 1002: 997: 994: 993: 992: 982: 981: 961: 958: 957: 956: 886: 883: 882: 881: 853:Oh yes they do 848: 845: 844: 843: 839: 838: 833: 832: 827: 826: 821: 820: 819: 818: 802: 801: 794:Respectfully, 792: 789:Ahavas Yisrael 776: 773: 756: 751: 748: 721: 718: 715: 714: 689:was closed on 687:The discussion 674: 662: 661: 636:was closed on 634:The discussion 621: 609: 608: 605: 604: 601: 600: 598: 581:the discussion 567: 555: 554: 549: 537: 536: 533: 532: 525:Mid-importance 521: 515: 514: 512: 495:the discussion 482: 481: 465: 453: 452: 450:Mid‑importance 444: 432: 431: 428: 427: 420: 414: 413: 411: 365: 364: 348: 336: 335: 330: 318: 317: 314: 313: 302: 296: 295: 293: 276:the discussion 263: 262: 259:Judaism portal 246: 234: 233: 225: 213: 212: 206: 195: 181: 180: 118: 117: 113: 112: 107: 102: 93: 92: 90: 89: 82: 77: 68: 62: 60: 59: 48: 39: 38: 35: 34: 28: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 3773: 3762: 3759: 3757: 3754: 3752: 3749: 3747: 3744: 3742: 3739: 3737: 3734: 3732: 3729: 3727: 3724: 3722: 3719: 3717: 3714: 3712: 3709: 3708: 3706: 3697: 3693: 3689: 3684: 3681: 3680: 3679: 3678: 3675: 3671: 3670: 3665: 3659: 3655: 3645: 3639: 3635: 3632: 3629: 3625: 3621: 3617: 3614: 3613: 3612: 3608: 3604: 3599: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3592: 3588: 3577: 3576: 3575: 3571: 3567: 3563: 3562: 3561: 3560: 3556: 3552: 3548: 3543: 3536: 3524: 3520: 3516: 3512: 3508: 3504: 3503: 3502: 3501: 3500: 3499: 3498: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3486: 3482: 3478: 3474: 3470: 3466: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3462: 3461: 3460: 3459: 3452: 3448: 3444: 3440: 3435: 3431: 3430: 3429: 3428: 3427: 3426: 3421: 3417: 3413: 3409: 3404: 3403: 3402: 3401: 3398: 3394: 3390: 3385: 3384: 3379: 3375: 3371: 3367: 3363: 3362: 3361: 3360: 3354: 3350: 3349: 3348: 3347: 3346: 3345: 3341: 3337: 3333: 3326: 3322: 3318: 3313: 3311: 3307: 3303: 3298: 3297: 3296: 3295: 3291: 3287: 3278: 3270: 3266: 3262: 3257: 3252: 3251: 3250: 3246: 3245: 3241: 3240: 3236: 3235: 3229: 3228:Family purity 3225: 3221: 3218: 3215: 3211: 3207: 3203: 3199: 3195: 3194: 3193: 3189: 3185: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3177: 3173: 3169: 3164: 3160: 3158: 3154: 3146: 3142: 3138: 3135: 3132: 3128: 3124: 3123: 3118: 3115: 3114: 3113: 3094: 3090: 3086: 3082: 3081: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3077: 3076: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3072: 3071: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3052: 3048: 3044: 3040: 3039: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3035: 3034: 3033: 3032: 3031: 3030: 3029: 3028: 3027: 3014: 3010: 3006: 3002: 2997: 2996: 2995: 2994: 2993: 2992: 2991: 2990: 2989: 2988: 2987: 2986: 2975: 2971: 2967: 2962: 2961: 2960: 2959: 2958: 2957: 2956: 2955: 2954: 2953: 2944: 2940: 2936: 2932: 2927: 2926: 2925: 2924: 2923: 2922: 2921: 2920: 2908: 2904: 2900: 2896: 2893: 2890: 2887: 2884: 2881: 2878: 2875: 2874: 2873: 2872: 2871: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2856: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2852: 2851: 2850: 2849: 2838: 2837: 2836: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2832: 2831: 2824: 2820: 2816: 2811: 2810: 2809: 2808: 2807: 2806: 2801: 2797: 2793: 2789: 2785: 2782: 2778: 2776: 2772: 2768: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2761: 2758: 2754: 2750: 2746: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2734: 2731: 2728: 2724: 2720: 2712: 2710: 2703: 2699: 2695: 2691: 2690: 2689: 2685: 2681: 2677: 2675: 2671: 2667: 2663: 2658: 2657: 2656: 2655: 2651: 2647: 2643: 2639: 2631: 2627: 2623: 2619: 2614: 2613: 2609: 2608: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2601: 2597: 2593: 2589: 2585: 2566: 2562: 2558: 2553: 2549: 2545: 2541: 2540: 2539: 2535: 2531: 2527: 2522: 2517: 2516: 2515: 2514: 2513: 2512: 2511: 2510: 2509: 2508: 2507: 2506: 2495: 2491: 2487: 2483: 2479: 2475: 2471: 2467: 2463: 2459: 2455: 2451: 2447: 2443: 2439: 2438: 2437: 2433: 2429: 2425: 2420: 2415: 2411: 2410: 2409: 2408: 2407: 2406: 2405: 2404: 2397: 2393: 2389: 2384: 2383: 2382: 2378: 2374: 2370: 2369: 2368: 2364: 2360: 2355: 2354: 2353: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2329: 2325: 2321: 2316: 2312: 2308: 2304: 2300: 2296: 2291: 2287: 2284: 2280: 2275: 2274: 2273: 2269: 2265: 2260: 2259: 2258: 2254: 2250: 2246: 2244: 2240: 2236: 2232: 2228: 2224: 2220: 2216: 2212: 2208: 2204: 2203: 2200: 2196: 2192: 2187: 2186: 2185: 2184: 2180: 2176: 2172: 2166: 2163: 2150: 2146: 2142: 2137: 2136: 2135: 2131: 2127: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2116: 2112: 2108: 2103: 2099: 2095: 2091: 2090:Sabato Morais 2087: 2083: 2079: 2075: 2071: 2070: 2069: 2065: 2061: 2056: 2055: 2054: 2053: 2049: 2045: 2041: 2037: 2033: 2028: 2021: 2017: 2013: 2003: 1999: 1995: 1991: 1990: 1989: 1985: 1981: 1976: 1974: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1957: 1953: 1950: 1949: 1948: 1944: 1940: 1936: 1931: 1927: 1926: 1925: 1921: 1917: 1913: 1911: 1907: 1903: 1898: 1897: 1896: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1882: 1875: 1869: 1865: 1861: 1857: 1856: 1855: 1851: 1847: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1839: 1835: 1831: 1822: 1818: 1814: 1810: 1806: 1805: 1804: 1803: 1799: 1795: 1786: 1784: 1781: 1777: 1773: 1769: 1765: 1753: 1748: 1745: 1739: 1738: 1735: 1731: 1727: 1723: 1720: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1701:Not convinced 1699: 1697: 1693: 1689: 1685: 1681: 1680:Not convinced 1678: 1677: 1676: 1675: 1671: 1667: 1663: 1659: 1655: 1651: 1650: 1646: 1642: 1635: 1632: 1626: 1625: 1620: 1616: 1612: 1608: 1604: 1603: 1602: 1601: 1598: 1597: 1589: 1588: 1575: 1571: 1568: 1564: 1560: 1557: 1553: 1549: 1548: 1547: 1541: 1537: 1533: 1529: 1525: 1524: 1521: 1518: 1517: 1509: 1508: 1499: 1498: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1484:62.219.162.23 1481: 1470: 1467: 1464: 1463: 1462: 1456: 1454: 1447: 1443: 1439: 1435: 1430: 1429: 1424: 1423: 1422: 1421: 1417: 1413: 1404: 1400: 1396: 1392: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1381: 1375: 1373: 1369: 1361: 1357: 1354: 1350: 1346: 1342: 1341: 1340: 1339: 1336: 1331: 1323: 1319: 1315: 1311: 1307: 1306: 1303: 1300: 1296: 1295:Falashan Jews 1292: 1291: 1290: 1289: 1286: 1282: 1274: 1270: 1267: 1262: 1258: 1254: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1241: 1238: 1235: 1232: 1229: 1228: 1224: 1222: 1220: 1216: 1212: 1208: 1204: 1201: 1197: 1192: 1191: 1186: 1180: 1176: 1174: 1165: 1161: 1157: 1153: 1149: 1145: 1140: 1139: 1138: 1137: 1134: 1126: 1123: 1119: 1118: 1117: 1116: 1113: 1109: 1105: 1100: 1096: 1095:Chupat Niddah 1088: 1080: 1077: 1072: 1071: 1070: 1069: 1068: 1067: 1062: 1059: 1058: 1054: 1053: 1047: 1043: 1042: 1041: 1040: 1037: 1034: 1029: 1028: 1027: 1023: 1022: 1019: 1018: 1014: 1013: 1003: 1001: 995: 991: 988: 984: 983: 980: 977: 971: 967: 966: 965: 960:Spirituality? 959: 955: 952: 946: 942: 941: 940: 938: 919: 918: 914: 892: 884: 879: 876:was added at 875: 869: 865: 864:38.117.213.19 861: 860: 859: 858: 854: 846: 841: 840: 835: 834: 829: 828: 823: 822: 817: 814: 810: 806: 805: 804: 803: 800: 797: 793: 790: 786: 785: 784: 783: 774: 772: 770: 764: 760: 749: 747: 745: 741: 737: 736:202.153.4.250 733: 727: 719: 712: 708: 704: 700: 696: 692: 688: 684: 680: 679: 675: 668: 667: 659: 655: 651: 647: 643: 639: 635: 631: 627: 626: 625:Bedikah cloth 622: 615: 614: 599: 582: 578: 574: 573: 568: 565: 561: 560: 556: 553: 550: 547: 543: 530: 526: 520: 517: 516: 513: 496: 492: 488: 487: 479: 468: 466: 463: 459: 458: 454: 448: 445: 442: 438: 425: 419: 416: 415: 412: 395: 391: 387: 383: 379: 378: 373: 372: 371: 362: 356: 351: 349: 346: 342: 341: 337: 334: 331: 328: 324: 311: 307: 301: 298: 297: 294: 277: 273: 269: 268: 260: 249: 247: 244: 240: 239: 235: 229: 226: 223: 219: 214: 210: 204: 196: 192: 187: 186: 177: 173: 170: 167: 163: 159: 155: 152: 149: 146: 143: 140: 137: 134: 131: 127: 124: 123:Find sources: 120: 119: 111: 110:Verifiability 108: 106: 103: 101: 98: 97: 96: 87: 83: 81: 78: 76: 72: 69: 67: 64: 63: 57: 53: 52:Learn to edit 49: 46: 41: 40: 37: 36: 32: 26: 22: 18: 17: 3688:NewkirkPlaza 3667: 3653: 3649: 3646:Menstruation 3630: 3619: 3615: 3584: 3544: 3540: 3506: 3438: 3433: 3329: 3300:called for. 3282: 3279:Recent edits 3243: 3238: 3233: 3216: 3165: 3161: 3150: 3133: 3120: 3116: 3111: 2906: 2902: 2898: 2877:Torah Sparks 2729: 2716: 2708: 2635: 2581: 2520: 2481: 2457: 2449: 2445: 2441: 2413: 2336: 2314: 2311:lo titgodedu 2310: 2289: 2278: 2206: 2167: 2159: 2101: 2085: 2077: 2073: 2031: 2025: 2019: 2015: 1960: 1934: 1930:commentaries 1929: 1879: 1826: 1790: 1757: 1743: 1740: 1721: 1700: 1683: 1679: 1661: 1652: 1638: 1630: 1627: 1591: 1585:-shirulashem 1582: 1579: 1555: 1545: 1511: 1505:-shirulashem 1502: 1474: 1465:I am niddah. 1460: 1451: 1408: 1380:Shirahadasha 1376: 1367: 1365: 1353:Shirahadasha 1329: 1327: 1299:Shirahadasha 1280: 1278: 1266:Shirahadasha 1231:Shalom bayit 1193: 1170: 1169: 1129: 1107: 1094: 1092: 1056: 1051: 1045: 1033:Shirahadasha 1024: 1016: 1011: 1007: 999: 963: 916: 888: 885:Organisation 852: 850: 813:Shirahadasha 788: 778: 753: 723: 694: 690: 676: 641: 637: 623: 570: 524: 484: 384:articles to 375: 368: 367: 305: 265: 209:WikiProjects 171: 165: 157: 150: 144: 138: 132: 122: 94: 19:This is the 2466:Christology 2454:Catholicism 2231:Progressive 2171:WP:LINKSPAM 1762:—Preceding 1726:Tzu Zha Men 1641:Vegaswikian 1639:Not moved. 1478:—Preceding 1108:dam betulim 872:—Preceding 755:duplicates. 730:—Preceding 720:plagiarism? 707:its history 654:its history 148:free images 31:not a forum 3705:Categories 3650:I removed 3507:in view of 2815:Savant1984 2694:Savant1984 2666:Savant1984 2592:Savant1984 2557:Savant1984 2486:Savant1984 2388:Savant1984 2359:Savant1984 2320:Savant1984 2305:'s or the 2249:Savant1984 2235:Savant1984 2141:Savant1984 2111:Savant1984 2102:ipso facto 2044:Savant1984 2014:Bedikah: " 1980:Savant1984 1939:Savant1984 1886:Savant1984 1846:Savant1984 1830:Savant1984 1794:Paleocon44 1768:Myrrhmayde 1692:PMAnderson 1574:WP:SPAMMER 1552:WP:NOTLINK 1351:. Best, -- 1335:Benignuman 1330:hypothesis 1285:Benignuman 678:Ben niddah 3603:Debresser 3566:Debresser 3515:Debresser 3443:Debresser 3408:Debresser 3389:Debresser 3366:Debresser 3336:Debresser 3317:Debresser 3302:Debresser 3261:Debresser 3256:WP:HEBREW 3184:Debresser 3043:Debresser 2966:Debresser 2792:Debresser 2788:this edit 2767:Debresser 2680:Debresser 2450:normative 2373:Debresser 2343:Debresser 2264:Debresser 2219:Debresser 2214:movement. 2191:Debresser 2126:Debresser 2078:very much 2060:Debresser 2027:Debresser 1994:Debresser 1965:Debresser 1916:Debresser 1902:Debresser 1900:halacha. 1881:Debresser 1860:Debresser 1809:Debresser 1709:AFriedman 1607:Debresser 1528:Debresser 1434:Debresser 1310:Debresser 1144:Debresser 88:if needed 71:Be polite 21:talk page 3634:contribs 3624:Casliber 3469:Bus stop 3353:Bus stop 3286:Bus stop 3220:contribs 3202:redirect 3137:contribs 3127:Casliber 3009:contribs 2939:contribs 2753:contribs 2733:contribs 2723:Casliber 2662:mamzerut 2618:Student7 2534:contribs 2478:WP:UNDUE 2470:WP:UNDUE 2432:contribs 2299:mamzerut 2211:Seminary 1776:contribs 1764:unsigned 1662:"Niddah" 1492:contribs 1480:unsigned 1412:Lee-Anne 1225:See also 1031:Best, -- 917:JNDRLINE 891:stubbing 732:unsigned 683:deletion 630:deletion 500:Feminism 491:Feminism 447:Feminism 399:Religion 377:Religion 333:Religion 56:get help 29:This is 27:article. 3351:Thanks 3224:Tevilah 2899:tevilah 2544:anethma 2446:popular 2315:neutral 2227:WP:NPOV 2223:WP:NPOV 2082:WP:NPOV 2036:WP:NPOV 1722:no move 1705:Judaism 1666:Xyz7890 1563:WP:ELNO 1550:As per 1457:grammer 1281:running 1261:notable 1257:Kashrut 1207:Tzeniut 1076:Batshua 874:comment 809:WP:SOAP 796:Batshua 527:on the 308:on the 281:Judaism 272:Judaism 228:Judaism 199:B-class 154:WP refs 142:scholar 3654:niddah 3511:WP:BRD 3439:before 3434:before 2907:miqveh 2903:niddah 2840:proof. 2719:regret 2646:Joe407 2521:anyone 2386:like. 2175:Joe407 2096:, and 1961:status 1787:NIDDAH 1684:Niddah 1654:Niddah 1594:(talk) 1514:(talk) 1426:man's. 1368:Niddah 1245:Tahara 1215:Negiah 1211:Yichud 1200:Niddah 1196:mikveh 1179:phoebe 1173:Niddah 703:Niddah 699:merged 650:Niddah 646:merged 205:scale. 126:Google 25:Niddah 3658:rabbi 3200:as a 2458:a lot 2419:undue 2040:WP:RS 1345:Bible 1133:Shia1 1104:hymen 1046:touch 935:: --> 701:into 695:merge 648:into 642:merge 586:Women 577:women 552:Women 169:JSTOR 130:books 84:Seek 3692:talk 3669:Soap 3628:talk 3607:talk 3591:talk 3579:קרי. 3570:talk 3555:talk 3547:keri 3519:talk 3481:talk 3471:and 3447:talk 3416:talk 3393:talk 3374:talk 3340:talk 3321:talk 3306:talk 3290:talk 3265:talk 3226:and 3214:talk 3188:talk 3172:talk 3131:talk 3122:good 3089:talk 3047:talk 3005:talk 3001:Lisa 2970:talk 2935:talk 2931:Lisa 2819:talk 2796:talk 2781:here 2771:talk 2749:talk 2745:Lisa 2727:talk 2698:talk 2684:talk 2670:talk 2650:talk 2622:talk 2596:talk 2561:talk 2548:Lisa 2530:talk 2526:Lisa 2490:talk 2474:Lisa 2428:talk 2424:Lisa 2392:talk 2377:talk 2363:talk 2347:talk 2324:talk 2268:talk 2253:talk 2239:talk 2195:talk 2179:talk 2162:this 2145:talk 2130:talk 2115:talk 2064:talk 2048:talk 2016:many 1998:talk 1984:talk 1969:talk 1943:talk 1920:talk 1906:talk 1890:talk 1864:talk 1850:talk 1834:talk 1813:talk 1798:talk 1772:talk 1730:talk 1713:talk 1670:talk 1645:talk 1611:talk 1532:talk 1488:talk 1438:talk 1416:talk 1395:talk 1314:talk 1185:talk 1148:talk 1122:IZAK 1112:IZAK 987:IZAK 975:T@lk 950:T@lk 899:< 868:talk 768:T@lk 740:talk 711:here 658:here 388:and 386:good 300:High 162:FENS 136:news 73:and 3210:יבק 3204:to 2636:In 2414:not 2279:has 2173:. 2076:is 2020:all 1955:we? 1177:-- 970:JFW 945:JFW 870:) 763:JFW 685:. 632:. 519:Mid 418:??? 390:1.0 176:TWL 3707:: 3694:) 3636:) 3609:) 3593:) 3572:) 3557:) 3521:) 3513:. 3483:) 3449:) 3418:) 3395:) 3376:) 3342:) 3323:) 3308:) 3292:) 3267:) 3244:-- 3239:-- 3234:-- 3190:) 3174:) 3166:-- 3139:) 3091:) 3049:) 3011:) 3007:- 2972:) 2941:) 2937:- 2821:) 2798:) 2773:) 2755:) 2751:- 2735:) 2700:) 2686:) 2672:) 2652:) 2624:) 2598:) 2590:. 2563:) 2536:) 2532:- 2492:) 2482:do 2442:do 2434:) 2430:- 2394:) 2379:) 2365:) 2349:) 2326:) 2290:do 2288:I 2270:) 2255:) 2241:) 2207:so 2197:) 2181:) 2147:) 2132:) 2117:) 2092:, 2086:is 2066:) 2050:) 2000:) 1986:) 1971:) 1945:) 1922:) 1908:) 1892:) 1866:) 1852:) 1836:) 1815:) 1800:) 1778:) 1774:• 1732:) 1715:) 1672:) 1656:→ 1647:) 1613:) 1554:, 1534:) 1490:• 1440:) 1418:) 1397:) 1391:RK 1316:) 1264:-- 1187:) 1150:) 1057:gr 1052:An 1017:gr 1012:An 972:| 947:| 895:— 857:RK 782:RK 765:| 761:. 742:) 156:) 54:; 3690:( 3674:— 3664:— 3660:. 3631:· 3626:( 3605:( 3589:( 3568:( 3553:( 3517:( 3479:( 3445:( 3414:( 3391:( 3372:( 3338:( 3319:( 3304:( 3288:( 3263:( 3217:· 3212:( 3186:( 3170:( 3134:· 3129:( 3087:( 3045:( 3003:( 2968:( 2933:( 2817:( 2794:( 2769:( 2747:( 2730:· 2725:( 2696:( 2682:( 2668:( 2648:( 2620:( 2594:( 2559:( 2528:( 2488:( 2426:( 2390:( 2375:( 2361:( 2345:( 2322:( 2266:( 2251:( 2237:( 2193:( 2177:( 2143:( 2128:( 2113:( 2062:( 2046:( 1996:( 1982:( 1967:( 1941:( 1918:( 1904:( 1888:( 1862:( 1848:( 1832:( 1811:( 1796:( 1770:( 1728:( 1711:( 1668:( 1643:( 1609:( 1530:( 1486:( 1436:( 1414:( 1393:( 1312:( 1183:( 1181:/ 1146:( 1049:— 1009:— 932:K 929:L 926:A 923:T 911:K 908:L 905:A 902:T 866:( 791:. 738:( 713:. 660:. 531:. 426:. 312:. 211:: 172:· 166:· 158:· 151:· 145:· 139:· 133:· 128:( 58:.

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Index