## Niddah Daf 35b

###### Niddah 35b:1
[Niddah 35b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:1)

שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה מִשְׁכָּב וּמוֹשָׁב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**as he renders** impure the **bedding** upon which he lies **and** the **seat** upon which he sits, like a primary source of ritual impurity, which is not the case for one who experienced a seminal emission.


###### Niddah 35b:2
[Niddah 35b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:2)

אֵימַת? אִילֵּימָא בִּרְאִיָּיה שְׁנִיָּה — הֵיכָא הֲוָה בִּכְלַל בַּעַל קֶרִי? אֶלָּא פְּשִׁיטָא בִּרְאִיָּיה רִאשׁוֹנָה, וְקָתָנֵי לְהָקֵל עָלָיו שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בְּאוֹנֶס!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara analyzes Rabbi Yitzḥak’s statement: **When** does this statement apply, i.e., to which sighting of *ziva* is Rabbi Yitzḥak referring? **If we say** he is referring **to** the **second sighting** this is untenable, for **where** in the verse **was** such a person **included in** the category of **one who experienced a seminal emission?** After the second sighting one is considered a full-fledged *zav*. **Rather,** it is **obvious** that he is referring **to** the **first sighting. And** yet Rabbi Yitzḥak **teaches:** The separate passage discussing a *zav* serves **to be lenient with him, as** a *zav* **is not rendered impure through** an emission that occurs **due to circumstances beyond** his **control.** This contradicts the statement of Rav Huna.


###### Niddah 35b:3
[Niddah 35b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:3)

וְתִסְבְּרָא לְהַחְמִיר עָלָיו שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה מִשְׁכָּב וּמוֹשָׁב, בִּרְאִיָּיה רִאשׁוֹנָה בַּר מִשְׁכָּב וּמוֹשָׁב הוּא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara rejects this: **And how can you understand** that Rabbi Yitzḥak is referring **to** the first sighting of *ziva*? But Rabbi Yitzḥak also says: The separate passage serves **to be stringent with him, as he renders** impure the **bedding** upon which he lies **and** the **seat** upon which he sits. **With the first sighting** of *ziva* **is** one **fit** to render impure his **bedding or** his **seat?**


###### Niddah 35b:4
[Niddah 35b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:4)

אֶלָּא הָכִי קָאָמַר, רַבִּי יִצְחָק אוֹמֵר: וַהֲלֹא זָב בִּכְלַל בַּעַל קֶרִי הָיָה בִּרְאִיָּיה רִאשׁוֹנָה, וְלָמָּה יָצָא בִּרְאִיָּיה שְׁנִיָּיה — לְהָקֵל עָלָיו וּלְהַחְמִיר עָלָיו, לְהָקֵל עָלָיו — שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא בְּאוֹנֶס, וּלְהַחְמִיר עָלָיו — שֶׁהוּא עוֹשֶׂה מִשְׁכָּב וּמוֹשָׁב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, this** is what **he is saying: Rabbi Yitzḥak says: But wasn’t a *zav* with** his **first sighting included** in the category of **one who experienced a seminal emission? Why,** then, **was he taken out** and discussed in a separate passage **with regard to** his **second sighting?** In order **to be lenient with him and to be stringent with him.** In other words, the passage serves **to be lenient with him, as he is not rendered impure** through an emission that occurs **due to circumstances beyond** his **control. And** it serves **to be stringent with him, as he renders** impure the **bedding** upon which he lies **and** the **seat** upon which he sits.


###### Niddah 35b:5
[Niddah 35b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:5)

אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: זוֹב דּוֹמֶה לְמֵי בָצֵק שֶׁל שְׂעוֹרִים. זוֹב בָּא מִבְּשַׂר הַמֵּת, שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע בָּא מִבְּשַׂר הַחַי. זוֹב — דֵּיהֶה, וְדוֹמֶה לְלוֹבֶן בֵּיצָה הַמּוּזֶרֶת, שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע קְשׁוּרָה, וְדוֹמָה לְלוֹבֶן בֵּיצָה שֶׁאֵינָהּ מוּזֶרֶת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to *ziva*, **Rav Huna says:** The discharge of ***ziva* is similar to water of barley dough.** Whereas the discharge of ***ziva* comes from dead flesh,** i.e., when one’s penis is flaccid, **semen comes from living flesh,** when one’s penis is erect. Moreover, the discharge of ***ziva* is runny, and is similar** in appearance **to the white of a unfertilized egg.** By contrast, **semen is viscous, and** it **is similar** in appearance **to the white of an egg that is not unfertilized,** i.e., a fertilized egg.


###### Niddah 35b:6
[Niddah 35b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:6)

דַּם הַיּוֹלֶדֶת שֶׁלֹּא טָבְלָה וְכוּ׳.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel disagree with regard to **the blood of a woman who gave birth** and reached the conclusion of her days of impurity, but **did not** yet **immerse** in a ritual bath. Beit Shammai say: The blood does not retain the halakhic status of menstrual blood; rather, it imparts impurity only while moist. And Beit Hillel say: Since she did not immerse in a ritual bath, her blood is considered like that of a menstruating woman, and it imparts impurity whether it is moist or dry.


###### Niddah 35b:7
[Niddah 35b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:7)

תַּנְיָא, אָמְרוּ לָהֶן בֵּית הִלֵּל לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי: אִי אַתֶּם מוֹדִים בְּנִדָּה שֶׁלֹּא טָבְלָה וְרָאֲתָה דָּם, שֶׁהִיא טְמֵאָה? אָמְרוּ לָהֶם בֵּית שַׁמַּאי: לֹא, אִם אֲמַרְתֶּם בְּנִדָּה שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ טָבְלָה וְרָאֲתָה טְמֵאָה, תֹּאמְרוּ בְּיוֹלֶדֶת שֶׁאִם טָבְלָה וְרָאֲתָה שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
With regard to this dispute, it **is taught** in a *baraita* that **Beit Hillel said to Beit Shammai: Do you not concede with regard to a menstruating woman who did not immerse** after seven days **and** thereafter **saw blood, that she is impure** as a menstruating woman in every sense? If so, a woman who failed to immerse after childbirth should likewise be impure as a menstruating woman. **Beit Shammai said to them: No,** this is not a legitimate comparison. Even **if you say** this is true **with regard to a menstruating woman,** there the *halakha* is **that even** in a case where **she immersed and** immediately **saw** blood thereafter, she is **impure. Will you say** that this *halakha* applies **with regard to a woman who gave birth,** where the *halakha* is **that if she immersed and** then **saw** blood **she is pure?** Therefore, even if a woman who gave birth neglected to immerse and experienced bleeding, she is not considered a full-fledged menstruating woman, and the blood does not impart impurity whether it is moist or dry.


###### Niddah 35b:8
[Niddah 35b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:8)

אָמְרוּ לָהֶם: יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב תּוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁאִם טָבְלָה וְרָאֲתָה לְאַחַר יְמֵי סְפִירָה — טְהוֹרָה, לֹא טָבְלָה וְרָאֲתָה — טְמֵאָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Beit Hillel **said to** Beit Shammai: The *halakha* of **a woman who gives birth as a *zava* will prove** this is in fact a legitimate comparison. A woman who gives birth as a *zava* may immerse only after experiencing seven clean days. The *halakha* is **that if she immersed** in her days of purity **and** then **saw** blood **after** the seven **days of counting** for *ziva*, she is **pure,** as she is in her days of purity. But if **she did not immerse and she saw** blood, she is **impure.** If so, the same should apply to a woman who gave birth and did not immerse at the conclusion of her days of impurity: She should be considered a full-fledged menstruating woman as long as she has not immersed.


###### Niddah 35b:9
[Niddah 35b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:9)

אָמְרוּ לָהֶם: הוּא הַדִּין, וְהִיא הַתְּשׁוּבָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Beit Shammai **said to them: The same is true and** this **is the refutation,** i.e., we maintain that even in the case of a woman who gave birth as a *zava* and failed to immerse after seven clean days, her blood imparts impurity only while moist. Accordingly, one cannot compare this case to that of a typical menstruating woman.


###### Niddah 35b:10
[Niddah 35b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:10)

לְמֵימְרָא דִּפְלִיגִי? וְהָתְנַן: וּמוֹדִים בְּיוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב שֶׁהִיא מְטַמְּאָה לַח וְיָבֵשׁ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **Is this to say that** Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel **disagree** with regard to a woman who gave birth as a *zava* and counted seven clean days but did not immerse? **But didn’t we learn** in the mishna: **And** Beit Shammai **concede** to Beit Hillel **in** the case of **a woman who gives birth as a *zava*, that** any blood **she** sees **imparts impurity** whether it is **moist or dry?**


###### Niddah 35b:11
[Niddah 35b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:11)

לָא קַשְׁיָא — כָּאן שֶׁסָּפְרָה, כָּאן שֶׁלֹּא סָפְרָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: This is **not difficult. Here,** in the *baraita*, Beit Hillel and Beit Shammai disagree with regard to a woman **who counted** seven clean days for her *ziva*. In such a case Beit Shammai maintain that any blood she sees imparts impurity only when moist. **There,** in the mishna, they agree with regard to a woman **who did not** yet **count** seven clean days for her *ziva*. In such an instance, even Beit Shammai concede that her blood imparts impurity whether it is moist or dry.


###### Niddah 35b:12
[Niddah 35b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:12)

וְהָתַנְיָא: יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב שֶׁסָּפְרָה וְלֹא טָבְלָה וְרָאֲתָה, הָלְכוּ בֵּית שַׁמַּאי לְשִׁיטָתָן, וּבֵית הִלֵּל לְשִׁיטָתָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara notes: **And it is taught** likewise in a *baraita*: With regard to **a woman who gives birth as a *zava*, who counted** seven clean days after the conclusion of her days of impurity **but did not** yet **immerse, and** she subsequently **saw** blood, **Beit Shammai follow their opinion** with regard to any woman who gave birth and concluded her days of impurity but did not yet immerse, **and Beit Hillel** likewise **follow their opinion.** In other words, according to Beit Shammai her blood imparts impurity only while moist, whereas according to Beit Hillel it imparts impurity whether moist or dry.


###### Niddah 35b:13
[Niddah 35b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:13)

אִיתְּמַר: רַב אָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא — הַתּוֹרָה טִמְּאַתּוּ וְהַתּוֹרָה טִהֲרַתּוּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ With regard to blood emitted by a woman during her days of purity after childbirth, **it was stated** that there is a dispute between the Sages. **Rav says: It is** from **one source** in a woman’s body that pure and impure blood are emitted, but **the Torah rendered impure** the blood emitted during her days of impurity **and the Torah rendered pure** the blood emitted during her days of purity.


###### Niddah 35b:14
[Niddah 35b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:14)

וְלֵוִי אָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵם — נִסְתָּם הַטָּמֵא נִפְתָּח הַטָּהוֹר, נִסְתָּם הַטָּהוֹר נִפְתָּח הַטָּמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And Levi says: There are two sources** in a woman’s body. Blood emitted during her days of impurity emerges from one source, while blood emitted during her days of purity emerges from the other, and these two sources are not active simultaneously. Rather, when **the** source of the **impure** blood **is closed,** i.e., following her days of impurity, **the** source of the **pure** blood **opens,** and when **the** source of the **pure** blood **is closed,** at the conclusion of her days of purity, either thirty-three days for a male child or sixty-six days for a female child, **the** source of the **impure** blood **is opened.**


###### Niddah 35b:15
[Niddah 35b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:15)

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אִיכָּא בֵינַיְיהוּ: שׁוֹפַעַת מִתּוֹךְ שִׁבְעָה לְאַחַר שִׁבְעָה, וּמִתּוֹךְ אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר לְאַחַר אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר, וּמִתּוֹךְ אַרְבָּעִים לְאַחַר אַרְבָּעִים, וּמִתּוֹךְ שְׁמֹנִים לְאַחַר שְׁמֹנִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the practical difference **between** the opinions of Rav and Levi? The Gemara responds: **There is** a practical difference **between them** with regard to the following cases: A woman who **continuously discharges** menstrual blood **from within seven** days of giving birth to a male until sometime **after** those **seven** days, during her days of purity; **and** likewise, a woman who continuously discharges menstrual blood **from within fourteen** days of giving birth to a female until sometime **after** those **fourteen** days, during her days of purity; **and** a woman who continuously discharges menstrual blood **from within forty** days of giving birth to a male until sometime **after** those **forty** days, i.e., after the conclusion of her days of purity; **and** a woman who continuously discharges menstrual blood **from within eighty** days of giving birth to a female until sometime **after** those **eighty** days, i.e., after the conclusion of her days of purity.


###### Niddah 35b:16
[Niddah 35b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:16)

לְרַב — רֵישָׁא לְקוּלָּא, וְסֵיפָא לְחוּמְרָא;

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara elaborates: **According to Rav,** who maintains that both pure and impure blood emerge from the same source, in the cases described in **the first clause,** i.e., if she continuously discharged menstrual blood from within her days of impurity until sometime during her days of purity, one is **to** be **lenient,** In other words, any blood emitted during her days of purity is pure, since the Torah rendered it pure. **And** in the cases described in **the latter clause,** when the discharge begins during her days of purity and continues until after the conclusion of her days of purity, one is **to** be **stringent,** as the Torah deemed impure any blood emitted after her days of purity.


###### Niddah 35b:17
[Niddah 35b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:17)

לְלֵוִי — רֵישָׁא לְחוּמְרָא, וְסֵיפָא לְקוּלָּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**According to Levi,** who says that there are two different sources in the body, in the cases described in **the first clause** one is **to** be **stringent,** as the continuous flow of blood indicates this blood is emanating from the source of the impure blood, and the Torah deemed pure only the blood that emerges from the source of the pure blood. **And** in the cases described in **the latter clause** one is **to** be **lenient,** as the continuous flow of blood indicates this blood is from the source of the pure blood.


###### Niddah 35b:18
[Niddah 35b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:18)

מֵיתִיבִי: דַּם הַיּוֹלֶדֶת שֶׁלֹּא טָבְלָה, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי אוֹמְרִים: כְּרוּקָּהּ וּכְמֵימֵי רַגְלֶיהָ, וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים: מְטַמֵּא לַח וְיָבֵשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from the mishna: With regard to **the blood of a woman who gave birth** and reached the conclusion of her days of impurity but **did not** yet **immerse, Beit Shammai say:** The blood is **like her saliva and urine,** and it imparts impurity only while moist. **And Beit Hillel say:** Her blood is considered like that of a menstruating woman, and it **imparts impurity** whether **moist or dry.**


###### Niddah 35b:19
[Niddah 35b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:19)

קָא סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ דְּפָסְקָה. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב, דְּאָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי מְטַמֵּא לַח וְיָבֵשׁ. אֶלָּא לְלֵוִי, דְּאָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵן, אַמַּאי מְטַמֵּא לַח וְיָבֵשׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It **enters your mind** to explain **that** the mishna is referring to a case where a woman’s discharge of menstrual blood **ceased** during her days of impurity, and she subsequently experienced bleeding after the conclusion of her days of impurity. If so, **granted** the mishna is clear **according to** the opinion of **Rav, who said** pure and impure blood emanate from **one source,** as it is **due to that** reason that Beit Hillel maintain that the blood **imparts impurity** whether it is **moist or dry,** since she did not yet immerse. **But according to** the opinion of **Levi, who said there are two** separate **sources, why** do Beit Hillel maintain that the blood **imparts impurity** whether it is **moist or dry?** After all, blood emitted during her days of purity comes from the source of pure blood.


###### Niddah 35b:20
[Niddah 35b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:20)

אָמַר לָךְ לֵוִי: הָכָא בְמַאי עָסְקִינַן? בְּשׁוֹפַעַת, אִי בְּשׁוֹפַעַת, מַאי טַעְמָא דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי? קָסָבְרִי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains that **Levi** could **say to you: Here we are dealing with** a woman who **continuously discharges** menstrual blood from within her days of impurity until sometime during her days of purity. Since the continuous flow of blood indicates that this blood emanates from the source of the impure blood, Beit Hillel rule that it imparts impurity whether it is moist or dry. The Gemara asks: **If** the mishna is dealing **with** a woman who **continuously discharges** menstrual blood, **what is the reason that Beit Shammai** maintain this blood imparts impurity only while moist? Isn’t it evident that it is impure menstrual blood? The Gemara responds: **Beit Shammai hold** that **it is** from **one source** that pure and impure blood emanate, and the Torah deemed pure any blood emitted during her days of purity.


###### Niddah 35b:21
[Niddah 35b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:21)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְלֵוִי, הַיְינוּ דְּאִיכָּא בֵּין בֵּית שַׁמַּאי וּבֵית הִלֵּל, אֶלָּא לְרַב מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara questions the opinion of Rav: **Granted,** the mishna is clear **according to Levi,** who maintains there are two separate sources, as **that is** how there is a practical difference **between** the opinions of **Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel.** Beit Hillel hold there are two sources, and the continuous flow of blood from her days of impurity into her days of purity indicates that the blood emanates from the source of the impure blood, whereas Beit Shammai contend that pure and impure blood emanate from one source, and the Torah deemed pure the blood of her days of purity. **But according to Rav, what is** the reason for the difference **between them?**


###### Niddah 35b:22
[Niddah 35b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:22)

אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ יוֹמֵי וּטְבִילָה, דְּבֵית שַׁמַּאי סָבְרִי: בְּיוֹמֵי תְּלָה רַחֲמָנָא, וּבֵית הִלֵּל סָבְרִי: בְּיוֹמֵי וּטְבִילָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: The difference **between them** is due to their opinions with regard to the significance of the **days and** the **immersion** at the conclusion of her days of impurity. **As, Beit Shammai hold** that **the Merciful One rendered** the purity of her blood **dependent on days,** which means that once she begins her days of purity her blood is pure regardless of whether or not she immersed. **And Beit Hillel hold** that it is dependent **on** both **days and immersion.** Accordingly, if she fails to immerse after her days of impurity, any blood she sees is impure.


###### Niddah 35b:23
[Niddah 35b:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:23)

תָּא שְׁמַע, וּמוֹדִים בְּיוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב שֶׁהִיא מְטַמְּאָה לַח וְיָבֵשׁ. סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ הָכָא נָמֵי דְּפָסְקָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** proof from the continuation of the mishna: **And** Beit Shammai **concede** to Beit Hillel **in** the case of **a woman who gives birth as a *zava*, that** any blood **she** sees **imparts impurity** whether it is **moist or dry.** It **enters your mind** to explain that **here too,** the mishna is referring to a case **where** a woman’s discharge of menstrual blood **ceased** during her days of impurity, and she then experienced bleeding during her days of purity. Since she is still a *zava* at the beginning of her days of purity, the blood imparts impurity whether it is moist or dry.


###### Niddah 35b:24
[Niddah 35b:24](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:24)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב, דְּאָמַר: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי מְטַמֵּא לַח וְיָבֵשׁ. אֶלָּא לְלֵוִי, דְּאָמַר: שְׁנֵי מַעְיָנוֹת הֵן, אַמַּאי מְטַמֵּא לַח וְיָבֵשׁ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: If so, **granted,** the mishna is clear **according to Rav, who said** that pure and impure blood emanate from **one source,** as it is **due to that** reason that the blood **imparts impurity** whether it is **moist or dry,** since she is still a *zava* and the Torah has not yet deemed her pure. **But according to Levi, who said there are two sources, why** does the blood **impart impurity** whether it is **moist or dry?** Let it be considered like the saliva or urine of a *zava*, which imparts impurity only when moist.


###### Niddah 35b:25
[Niddah 35b:25](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:25)

אָמַר לָךְ: הָכָא נָמֵי — בְּשׁוֹפַעַת. אִי בְּשׁוֹפַעַת, לְמַאי אִיצְטְרִיךְ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains that **Levi** could **say to you: Here too,** we are dealing **with** a woman who **continuously discharges** menstrual blood from within her days of impurity until her days of purity. The continuous flow of blood indicates that the blood emanates from the source of the impure blood. The Gemara asks: **If** the mishna is dealing **with** a woman who **continuously discharges** menstrual blood, **for what** purpose **was** it **necessary** for the mishna to teach this *halakha*? It is obvious that this blood is impure.


###### Niddah 35b:26
[Niddah 35b:26](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:26)

לְבֵית שַׁמַּאי אִיצְטְרִיךְ, אַף עַל גַּב דְּקָאָמְרִי בֵּית שַׁמַּאי: מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא, וּבְיוֹמֵי תְּלָה רַחֲמָנָא — הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּיוֹלֶדֶת גְּרֵידְתָּא, דִּשְׁלִימוּ לְהוּ יוֹמֵי, אֲבָל יוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב דְּבָעֵי סְפִירָה — לָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers that it **was necessary for** the opinion of **Beit Shammai.** The mishna is teaching that **even though Beit Shammai say** there **is one source, and the Merciful One rendered** the purity of her blood **dependent on days** alone, **that statement** applies only **in** the case of **a woman who only gave birth, as** her **days** of impurity **have been completed** at this point. **But** with regard to **a woman who gives birth as a *zava*, who requires** the **counting** of seven clean days from the end of her days of impurity, that statement does **not** apply, and blood emitted before she counted seven clean days imparts impurity whether moist or dry, like the blood of a menstruating woman.


###### Niddah 35b:27
[Niddah 35b:27](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:27)

תָּא שְׁמַע: ״דְּוֹתָהּ תִּטְמָא״ — לְרַבּוֹת אֶת בּוֹעֲלָהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **Come** and **hear** a *baraita*, which addresses the verse: “If a woman be delivered, and bear a male, then she shall be impure seven days; as in the days of her menstrual sickness she shall be impure” (Leviticus 12:2). The superfluous phrase **“her** menstrual **sickness she shall be impure”** serves **to include** a man **who engages in intercourse with her,** teaching that he is rendered impure like a menstruating woman and imparts impurity like her.


###### Niddah 35b:28
[Niddah 35b:28](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/35b:28)

״דְּוֹתָהּ תִּטְמָא״ — לְרַבּוֹת הַלֵּילוֹת, ״דְּוֹתָהּ תִּטְמָא״ — לְרַבּוֹת הַיּוֹלֶדֶת בְּזוֹב שֶׁצְּרִיכָה שֶׁתֵּשֵׁב שִׁבְעָה יָמִים נְקִיִּים. בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב דְּאָמַר מַעְיָן אֶחָד הוּא, מִשּׁוּם הָכִי בָּעֲיָא שִׁבְעָה יָמִים נְקִיִּים,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, the phrase **“Her** menstrual **sickness she shall be impure”** serves **to include the nights;** although the verse states: “As in the days,” she is impure during the night as well. Finally, **“her** menstrual **sickness she shall be impure”** serves **to include a woman who gives birth as a *zava*,** teaching **that she must observe seven clean days.** The Gemara analyzes this *baraita*: **Granted,** the *baraita* is clear **according to Rav, who said** there **is one source,** as it is **due to that** reason that a woman who gives birth as a *zava* **requires seven clean days.**