There are various reasons that the Poskim nowadays give to explain that there still is a concept of Nidda Min Hatorah despite women not having a Hargasha. From what I have managed to see, there seem to be three approaches:

  1. The Aruch Hashulchan writes that a woman has Hargosho but doesn't recognise it.
  2. An approach based on the Sidrei Tahara that Hargasha is an indicator that the dam came from the mekor.
  3. Tumas Nidda was based on what is normal: Then, it was Hargasha; now, it is Derech Reiya.

I have found all these approaches very hard to understand. It would seem that when a woman does a Bedika, we are suddenly concerned that she may have had a Hargosha. If so, why do Kesamim not create such a concern for hargasha, as there is no minimum limit for Dam with Hargasha (possibly one needs a minimum of two drops - Bach 183)?

Could it be that Nidda nowadays is only Miderabnan? This would seem to be the simplest approach but no one seems to want to go with this approach.

Or one could learn the other way based on the Aruch Hashulchan and make the novel suggestion that nowadays there is no Hilchos Kesomim as we say that we are always concerned that a woman had a Hargasha but she didn't feel it just as we say when a woman does a Bedika that it is a Sfeika De'oirayso? R' Moshe explains the Aruch HaShulchan that this was only said by a woman getting her regular period but we are not concerned in that way in the case of a Kesem. So the question I had on it is: Why are we concerned that a woman had a Hargasha when she does a Bedika then?

Is there another approach to explain this?

  • 4
    Why are you so sure there's no hargasha? The simplest mehalach is that women have hargasha nowadays just like always. The fact that the hargashot don't usually match their interpretation of a written description composed by a man who probably interviewed one woman (his wife) before writing it is not that surprising.
    – Double AA
    Apr 21, 2021 at 21:15
  • 2 Is correct. You use the word mekor correctly. Because it can also come from the rechem without it being the Mekor and therefore not dam nidda and only midrabbonon where there are heterim. If it comes from the Mekor it cannot come without a spasm. The aruch hashulcan is totally mistaken in what he considers hargosho which you do not state. He says it is like one feels the bladder emptying. He is totally wrong. Although I have read that the bladder can sometimes also have spasms. I think my answer, answers everything you ask.
    – interested
    Apr 22, 2021 at 10:10
  • I should mention that a non-red colour can also come from the mekor with a spasm. This has to usually be shown to a rov who decides what it is. But just measuring it to see if it is less than a gris with a red colour is no heter whatsoever if there is a spasm. The shevet halevi writes the used to ask the woman over and over again to be sure she had no hargosho (I am not sure he knew it was a spasm) before he gave a heter. And very often after asking a few times she remembered she did have a hargosho.
    – interested
    Apr 22, 2021 at 10:27

3 Answers 3


I think that each of the three approaches you mention will answer your question differently.

1. Hargoshos Still Exist:

This mehalach holds that there remain hargoshos today. This seems to be the reality reported by women. Zivas davar lach, in particular, appears to still be common.

According to this mehalech, your questions are much weaker. We are choshesh by bedikah because there's no alternative source of the blood--it is a vadai from the uterus--and she may have been margash. It is one safek d'oraysa.

By a kesem, there was no hargasha and it isn't for sure from the mekor. It is a sfek sfeka. Moreover there isn't a known basis for why she would have missed the hargasha.

2. Hargosho is Lav Davka, the Key is Whether it Came From the Uterus

The Sidrei Tahara (and Tosafos Niddah 3a, DH: V'Ha Ika) holds that hargosho creates a certainty that the blood came from the uterus. But if we would have other means to establish the same certainty, she would be tamei m'd'oraysa.

According to this mehalach as well, your questions are answered. A bedika--with an ed boduk--creates the same level of knowledge that the blood came from the mekor as a hargasha. And since tipas dam is enough, she is tamei vadai.

A kesem on the other hand is a safek, did it come from her or did it come from elsewhere. And the Torah only prohibited a niddah vadai, not a nidda safek (according to the Sidrei Tahara).

3. The Key is Derech Reiya--Whether Through Hargosho in Talmudic Times or a Regular Flow in Modern Times.

According to this mehalech (R' Ovadia Yosef?), the halacha of hargasha is that niddah is only tamei d'oraysa if it is the normal way of seeing a period.

A kesem is still not the ordinary way of seeing a period, so it remains a gezeirah. But what about a Bedikah? How is a Bedikah the ordinary way of seeing a period.

I think the answer might be because halacha requires bedikos around the time of a woman's period. Because a woman is bodek during her vest and in the periods after her period, it is a normal way that a woman sees period blood just like seeing a regular flow is normal. So she saw blood that is for sure from the mekor and it is normal way of seeing dam nidda--tamei.


I concur with others who have written that hargasha exists nowadays as well. As far as I know all women are aware when they are having a period. Women also commonly find discharges in their underwear without having been aware of anything previously, and that is a kesem. How exactly to treat all the cases in between is a question which I won't get into.

The real difficulty is why we treat things differently when there is a Bedika. The Rambam (Issurei Biah 9:1) actually answers this question explicitly, writing that any blood found internally is assumed to have come with hargasha. However, this answer is difficult conceptually and also seems to contradict the gemara in Niddah 57b, which states that liability to bring a korban after finding blood on a cloth following relations is contingent on hargasha (and even then, in some circumstances we are concerned that this hargasha may have been imagined because of the feeling of the cloth).

I prefer to say that blood found on a bedika cloth is different to other kesamim on a rabbinic level only. The whole purpose of bedika is a safeguard to a severe transgression, and as such no leniencies were given. I am aware that this contradicts the Shulchan Aruch, who rules that blood found on a bedika cloth also counts as a standard emmission of blood regarding the laws of vesatot (YD 190:54).

  • I refer you to the oz v'hodor otsar halocho available on the otsar hachomo who discusses this at length on Page 532 bringing many achronim. Basically because she has seen three times. I must again say I dont agree to most what is written there which is based on women dont feel hargosho. The shevet halevi seems to agree with me. I say the others have no idea like my answer here. I may copy it for chat.
    – interested
    Apr 28, 2021 at 9:44
  • It is also all based on it being exactly the same dam as with hargosho. Therefore tomai she isnt but a veses it makes since it will come again at the same time and next time with hargosho. I say it is not the same dam and therefore even if it comes again from that place it will again be without hargosho.
    – interested
    Apr 28, 2021 at 9:57

I am afraid all the poskim are mistaken. Hargosho is nothing to what they say it is. The pardes rimonim asks if the rechem is open why doesnt it all come out at once why take five or more days. He answers niflaos haborai. Other poskim ask similar questions with similar replies. The truth is they have no idea of how niddah works.So let me explain my understanding of it having looked at the internet. Goyim are also niddos and no different to Jewish ones. I know I am coming very strongly on this going against all poskim something I being orthodox would never usually do. But this is a grave issur kores d'orayse so I have to make an exception.

First let me say how a child is concieved. The rechem is always open, the opening gets bigger during niddos and child birth. When a man has intercourse part of his zera goes into the rechem and up the fallopian tube where if it meets the womans zera a child gets born there. It stays there slowly going down into the rechem where it eat the dam. If no child then there is a chemical in the womans zera which causes the dam. Now how does the dam come out.

Unlike what the poskim think it just doesnt come out when the 'door' is open. The door is open all the time. The dam is enclosed in some kind of 'case' and has to be squeezed out through a cramp or spasm. The dam cannot otherwise come out and this is what hargosho is. The chasam sofer writes that if a woman puts her mind to it she can feel it and the internet also says the woman also feels it however slight.

I am in no sofek that the poskim are all wrong and this is the correct hargosho.

I will add a few things. We know that there are heterim , less than a gris and coloured clothes. This is wrong. There is no heterim for real niddah. The reason for the heter is only if there is no hargosho where it is only an issur drabonon. For an issur d'orayso there is no heter. It is not that the woman decides which kind of an issur it is. But like I have written and am sure about, without this spasm it cannot be dam nidda.But comes from a different place. Nidda can only come with a spasm and if there is none it is only drabonon and heterim apply.

I should add that in my opinion a woman who never feels this spasm has no heter whatsoever because maybe she had one. Only a woman who always feels the spasm can have the heter when there isnt one for less than a gris or coloured clothes. I should also add that a kalla teacher should be teaching a girl what hargosho is.The spasm is on a special part of the body and like the chasam sofer says one can be trained to feel it. I think that is all. If I am mistaken about the metsius I would very much like to be put right.

  • Comments are not for extended discussion; this conversation has been moved to chat.
    – Isaac Moses
    Apr 22, 2021 at 13:38

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .