## Niddah Daf 27b

###### Niddah 27b:1
[Niddah 27b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:1)

פְּרִידָה אַחַת עָפָר, וְנָפֵיל לֵיהּ שִׁיעוּרָא!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**one grain of dirt** in a certain place in the mixture. That grain of dirt is thereby nullified by the dust of the corpse, **and** consequently **the measure** of the dust **increases.**


###### Niddah 27b:2
[Niddah 27b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:2)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבָּה: הַיְינוּ טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, סוֹפוֹ כִּתְחִלָּתוֹ — מָה תְּחִלָּתוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה לוֹ דָּבָר אַחֵר גַּנְגִּילוֹן, אַף סוֹפוֹ נַעֲשֶׂה לוֹ דָּבָר אַחֵר גַּנְגִּילוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rabba said** that **this is the reason** for the opinion **of Rabbi Shimon:** The *halakha* with regard to a corpse in **its ultimate state** of dust **is like** the *halakha* in **its initial state** of decomposition: **Just as** with regard to **its initial state,** if **another matter** is mixed with the decomposing corpse it **serves as a nullification [*gangilon*] of** the corpse’s impurity, as the dust of a decomposed corpse can impart impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance, **so too,** in the corpse’s **ultimate state** of dust, if **another matter** is mixed with it, that **serves as a nullification of** the impurity of the dust.


###### Niddah 27b:3
[Niddah 27b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:3)

מַאי הִיא? דְּתַנְיָא: אֵיזֶהוּ מֵת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ רָקָב, וְאֵיזֶהוּ מֵת שֶׁאֵין לוֹ רָקָב? נִקְבַּר עָרוֹם בְּאָרוֹן שֶׁל שַׁיִשׁ אוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי רִצְפָּה שֶׁל אֲבָנִים — זֶהוּ מֵת שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ רָקָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the source for the *halakha* that the dust of a corpse imparts impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance? The Gemara answers: **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: **Which is a corpse that has** the *halakha* of **dust,** i.e., whose dust imparts impurity; **and which is a corpse that does not have** the *halakha* of **dust?** If a corpse **was buried naked in a marble coffin or on a stone floor, that is a corpse that has** the *halakha* of **dust** that imparts impurity. Since any dust found there must have come from the corpse, it imparts impurity.


###### Niddah 27b:4
[Niddah 27b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:4)

וְאֵיזֶהוּ מֵת שֶׁאֵין לוֹ רָקָב? נִקְבַּר בִּכְסוּתוֹ, אוֹ בְּאָרוֹן שֶׁל עֵץ, אוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי רִצְפָּה שֶׁל לְבֵנִים — זֶהוּ מֵת שֶׁאֵין לוֹ רָקָב. וְלֹא אָמְרוּ רָקָב אֶלָּא לְמֵת בִּלְבַד, לְמַעוֹטֵי הָרוּג דְּלָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And what is a corpse that does not have** the *halakha* of **dust?** If a corpse **was buried in its cloak, or in a wooden coffin, or on a brick floor, that is a corpse that does not have** the *halakha* of **dust** that imparts impurity, as it is assumed that some of the dust is from particles of the clothes, wood, or bricks, and the dust from a decomposed corpse imparts impurity only if it is not mingled with the dust of any other substance. The *baraita* adds another *halakha* with regard to the impurity of the dust of a corpse: **And** the Sages **said** that the **dust** of a corpse is impure **only with regard to** the corpse of a person who **died** naturally, **excluding one who was killed, whose** dust **is not** impure.


###### Niddah 27b:5
[Niddah 27b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:5)

גּוּפָא: מְלֹא תַּרְוָד רָקָב שֶׁנָּפַל לְתוֹכוֹ עָפָר כֹּל שֶׁהוּא — טָמֵא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר. מְלֹא תַּרְוָד רָקָב שֶׁנִּתְפַּזֵּר בַּבַּיִת — הַבַּיִת טָמֵא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara returns to discuss **the** matter **itself,** i.e., the *baraita* cited above that clarifies the opinion of Rabbi Shimon: In the case of **a ladleful of dust** from a corpse **into which any amount of dirt fell,** the house **is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems** it **pure.** The *baraita* continues: In the case of **a ladleful of dust** from a corpse **that was scattered in the house, the house is impure.** Provided that there is a sufficient amount of dust in the house, the house is impure, even if the dust is scattered. **And Rabbi Shimon deems** it **pure.**


###### Niddah 27b:6
[Niddah 27b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:6)

וּצְרִיכָא, דְּאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן קַמַּיְיתָא — בְּהַהִיא קָאָמְרִי רַבָּנַן מִשּׁוּם דְּמִכְּנִיף, אֲבָל נִתְפַּזֵּר — אֵימָא מוֹדוּ לֵיהּ לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, דְּאֵין מַאֲהִיל וְחוֹזֵר וּמַאֲהִיל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **And it is necessary** for the *baraita* to state both of these *halakhot*. **As, if** the *baraita* had **taught us** only **the first** *halakha*, with regard to dust from a corpse in which dirt was mixed, one might have thought that it is specifically **in that** case that **the Rabbis say** the house is impure, **because** the dust is **concentrated** in one place; **but** if the dust **was scattered,** one might **say** that the Rabbis **concede to Rabbi Shimon that** the house is pure. The reasoning is **that** if an item **overlies** a collection of dust of a corpse that is insufficient to render it impure **and also overlies** another collection of similar size, where together these collections constitute a sufficient amount to render the item and everything under it impure, it **is not** impure.


###### Niddah 27b:7
[Niddah 27b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:7)

וְאִי אַשְׁמְעִינַן בְּהָא — בְּהָא אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן דְּאֵין מַאֲהִיל וְחוֹזֵר וּמַאֲהִיל, אֲבָל בְּהָא — אֵימָא מוֹדֶה לְהוּ לְרַבָּנַן, צְרִיכָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And if** the *baraita* had **taught us** the *halakha* only **with regard to this** second case, where the dust of the corpse was scattered, one might have thought that it is specifically **in this** case that **Rabbi Shimon says** that the house is pure, **as** an item that **overlies** an insufficient collection of the dust of a corpse **and also overlies** another collection, where together these collections constitute a sufficient amount to render the item impure, **is not** impure. **But in that** first case, where dirt was mixed with the dust of the corpse, one might **say** that Rabbi Shimon **concedes to the Rabbis** that the house is impure. Therefore, it is **necessary** for the *baraita* to teach both cases.


###### Niddah 27b:8
[Niddah 27b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:8)

תַּנְיָא אִידַּךְ: מְלֹא תַּרְוָד וְעוֹד עֲפַר בֵּית הַקְּבָרוֹת — טָמֵא, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מְטַהֵר. מַאי טַעְמַיְיהוּ דְּרַבָּנַן? לְפִי שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לִמְלֹא תַּרְוָד וְעוֹד עֲפַר בֵּית הַקְּבָרוֹת שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ מְלֹא תַּרְוָד רָקָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
There is a different dispute between Rabbi Shimon and the Rabbis that **is taught** in **another** mishna (*Oholot* 2:2): If a house contains **a ladleful of dirt from a cemetery and** slightly **more,** the house **is impure; and Rabbi Shimon deems** it **pure.** The Gemara asks: **What is the reason** for the opinion **of the Rabbis?** The Gemara answers: They deem the house impure **as it is impossible for** slightly **more than a ladleful of dirt from a cemetery not to contain a ladleful of dust** from a corpse.


###### Niddah 27b:9
[Niddah 27b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:9)

הַשְׁתָּא דְּאָמְרַתְּ טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מִשּׁוּם סוֹפוֹ כִּתְחִלָּתוֹ, גַּבֵּי שִׁלְיָא מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִשּׁוּם בִּטּוּל בְּרוֹב נָגְעוּ בָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara asks: **Now that you say** that **the reason that Rabbi Shimon** deems the house pure, in a case where it contains dust from a corpse in which dirt was mixed, is **that** in his opinion the *halakha* of a corpse in **its ultimate state** of dust **is like** the *halakha* in **its initial state** of decomposition, then **with regard to** a case where there is **an afterbirth** in the house, **what is the reason** that Rabbi Shimon deems the house pure? **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The Sages **touched upon it,** i.e., deemed the house pure, **due to** the **nullification** of the disintegrated offspring **by** the **majority** of the blood that emerged during the miscarriage, in which the afterbirth was mixed.


###### Niddah 27b:10
[Niddah 27b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:10)

וְאַזְדָּא רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְטַעְמֵיהּ, דְּאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן וְרַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אָמְרוּ דָּבָר אֶחָד. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן — הָא דַּאֲמַרַן, רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר — דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בֶּן יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר: בְּהֵמָה גַּסָּה שֶׁשָּׁפְעָה חֲרָרַת דָּם, הֲרֵי זוֹ תִּקָּבֵר, וּפְטוּרָה מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Yoḥanan follows his** line of **reasoning** in this regard, **as Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Rabbi Shimon and Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov** both **said the same thing,** i.e., they both issued rulings based on the same principle. The relevant statement of **Rabbi Shimon** is **that which we said,** i.e., that if a woman discharged an afterbirth the house is pure, as the offspring is nullified by the blood that emerged during the miscarriage. **Rabbi Eliezer** ben Ya’akov said that **which is taught** in a mishna (*Bekhorot* 21a): **Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya’akov says:** In the case of **a large animal that expelled a mass of** congealed **blood, that** mass **must be buried,** as perhaps there was a male fetus there, which was consecrated as a firstborn when it emerged, **and** the animal **is exempt from** having any future offspring being counted **a firstborn.**


###### Niddah 27b:11
[Niddah 27b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:11)

וְתָנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא עֲלַהּ: אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה לֹא בְּמַגָּע וְלֹא בְּמַשָּׂא, וּמֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה לֹא בְּמַגָּע וְלֹא בְּמַשָּׂא, אַמַּאי תִּקָּבֵר? כְּדֵי לְפַרְסְמָהּ שֶׁהִיא פְּטוּרָה מִן הַבְּכוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Rabbi Ḥiyya teaches** a *baraita* **with regard to that** *halakha*: The mass of congealed blood **does not impart ritual impurity, neither through** physical **contact nor through carrying** it. It does not have the status of an unslaughtered animal carcass, which does impart impurity in such manners. The Gemara asks: **But since** the mass **does not impart impurity, neither through contact nor through carrying,** which indicates that it is not considered a fetus, **why** must it be **buried?** The Gemara answers: It must be buried **in order to publicize that** the animal **is exempt from** having its future offspring being counted **a firstborn.**


###### Niddah 27b:12
[Niddah 27b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:12)

אַלְמָא וָלָד מְעַלְּיָא הוּא, וְאַמַּאי תָּנֵי רַבִּי חִיָּיא: אֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה לֹא בְּמַגָּע וְלֹא בְּמַשָּׂא? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִשּׁוּם בִּטּוּל בְּרוֹב נָגְעוּ בָּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: If the animal’s subsequent offspring is not counted a firstborn, **evidently** the mass **is** treated like **a full-fledged offspring. But** if so, **why does Rabbi Ḥiyya teach** that **it does not impart impurity, neither through** physical **contact nor through carrying? Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** It is **due to** the halakhic **nullification** of a foreign substance **in a majority** of permitted substances that the Sages **touched upon it,** to exclude it from impurity through contact or carrying. In other words, the fetus is considered a full-fledged offspring, but it does not impart impurity, because it is nullified by the rest of the congealed mass.


###### Niddah 27b:13
[Niddah 27b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:13)

אָמַר רַבִּי אַמֵּי, אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: וּמוֹדֶה רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן שֶׁאִמּוֹ טְמֵאָה לֵידָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The Gemara resumes its discussion of the opinion of Rabbi Shimon that if a woman discharges an afterbirth in a house, the house is pure. **Rabbi Ami says** that **Rabbi Yoḥanan says: And Rabbi Shimon concedes that its mother is impure** with the impurity of a woman after **childbirth.**


###### Niddah 27b:14
[Niddah 27b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:14)

אָמַר הָהוּא סָבָא לְרַבִּי אַמֵּי: אַסְבְּרַהּ לָךְ טַעְמָא דְּרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״אִשָּׁה כִּי תַזְרִיעַ וְיָלְדָה זָכָר וְגוֹ׳״, אֲפִילּוּ לֹא יָלְדָה אֶלָּא כְּעֵין שֶׁהִזְרִיעָה — טְמֵאָה לֵידָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**A certain elder said to Rabbi Ami: I will explain to you the reason** for the statement **of Rabbi Yoḥanan. As the verse states: “If a woman bears seed and gives birth to a male,** she shall be impure seven days, as in the days of the menstruation of her sickness she shall be impure” (Leviticus 12:2). This indicates that **even** if a woman **gives birth to** an offspring that is **similar only to the seed that she bore,** i.e., if the offspring liquefied and became similar to semen, the woman is **impure** with the impurity of a woman after **childbirth.**


###### Niddah 27b:15
[Niddah 27b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:15)

רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: שָׁפִיר שֶׁטְּרָפוּהוּ בְּמֵימָיו — נַעֲשֶׂה כְּמֵת שֶׁנִּתְבַּלְבְּלָה צוּרָתוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Reish Lakish says:** In the case of a fetus in **a gestational sac, that was mashed in its** amniotic **fluid** by being shaken violently, **it is rendered like a corpse that was deformed,** and therefore it does not impart impurity to other items that are under the same roof.


###### Niddah 27b:16
[Niddah 27b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/27b:16)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: מֵת שֶׁנִּתְבַּלְבְּלָה צוּרָתוֹ מְנָלַן דְּטָהוֹר? אִילֵּימָא מֵהָא דְּאָמַר רַבִּי שַׁבְּתַאי אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק מַגְדְּלָאָה, וְאָמְרִי לָהּ אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק מַגְדְּלָאָה אָמַר רַבִּי שַׁבְּתַאי: מֵת שֶׁנִּשְׂרַף וְשִׁלְדּוֹ קַיֶּימֶת טָמֵא, מַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה וְטִמְּאוּ לוֹ פְּתָחִים גְּדוֹלִים

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan said to Reish Lakish: From where do we** derive **that a corpse that was deformed is pure? If we say** it is derived **from that which Rabbi Shabbtai says** that **Rabbi Yitzḥak from Migdal [*Migdala’a*] says, and some say** from that which **Rabbi Yitzḥak from Migdal says** that **Rabbi Shabbtai says,** that cannot be correct. The Gemara cites the relevant statement: With regard to **a corpse that was burned but its form [*veshildo*]** still **exists,** i.e., it still has the form of a human corpse, it **is impure. There was an incident** involving such a corpse, **and** the Sages **deemed impure** all items that were under the **large openings** of the house where the corpse was located, as these openings were fit for the removal of the corpse from the house through them.