## Niddah Daf 55b

###### Niddah 55b:1
[Niddah 55b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:1)

כִּי אִיצְטְרִיךְ קְרָא לְמַשָּׂא. וְאֵימָא: בְּמַשָּׂא מְטַמֵּא אָדָם וּבְגָדִים, וּבְמַגָּע אָדָם מְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים לָא לְטַמֵּא, מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַמַּגַּע נְבֵלָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When the verse was necessary,** it was **to** teach that *ziva* transmits impurity by **carrying.** The Gemara asks: **And** yet one may **say** that *ziva* **transmits impurity** to **a person and** to his **garments** only **by carrying, but** as for impurity **by contact,** although *ziva* **transmits impurity** to the **person** who touches it, **it does not transmit impurity** to his **garments, just as is** the *halakha* **with regard to contact** with an unslaughtered **animal carcass.** If one touches a carcass he is rendered impure but his garments remain pure, despite the fact that if one carries a carcass his garments are also rendered impure.


###### Niddah 55b:2
[Niddah 55b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:2)

לָא סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ, דְּתַנְיָא: אֲחֵרִים אוֹמְרִים: ״הַזָּב אֶת זוֹבוֹ לַזָּכָר וְלַנְּקֵבָה״ — מַקִּישׁ זוֹבוֹ לוֹ, מָה הוּא לֹא חִלַּקְתָּ בֵּין מַגָּעוֹ לְמַשָּׂאוֹ לְטַמֵּא אָדָם וּלְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים, אַף זוֹבוֹ כֵּן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara answers: This could **not enter your mind, as it is taught** in a *baraita* that ***Aḥerim* say,** with regard to the verse: “This is the law of him that has an issue…And of her who experiences the flow of her menstrual impurity, and **of one who emits his issue [*zovo*], in the case of a male or a female”** (Leviticus 15:32–33). The verse **juxtaposes** the impurity of **the issue of the *zav* to** the impurity of the *zav* **himself: Just as** with regard to **him you did not distinguish between** impurity transmitted by **contact with him and** impurity transmitted by **carrying him, as** in both cases the *zav* **transmits impurity to a person and transmits impurity to** his **garments, so too,** with regard to **the issue of the *zav*** the *halakha* is **the same.**


###### Niddah 55b:3
[Niddah 55b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:3)

וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּנָפְקָא לַן מֵ״הַזָּב אֶת זוֹבוֹ״, ״זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא״ לְמָה לִי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And now that we have derived** the impurity of the discharge of a *zav* **from** the verse: “And **of one who emits his issue”** (Leviticus 15:33), **why do I** need the verse: “When any man has an issue out of his flesh, **his issue,** it is **impure”** (Leviticus 15:2)?


###### Niddah 55b:4
[Niddah 55b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:4)

אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה מִדִּסְקַרְתָּא: אִיצְטְרִיךְ, סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא שָׂעִיר הַמִּשְׁתַּלֵּחַ יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁגּוֹרֵם טוּמְאָה לַאֲחֵרִים וְהוּא עַצְמוֹ טָהוֹר. וְאִי מִשּׁוּם ״הַזָּב אֶת זוֹבוֹ״, לְמִנְיָינָא הוּא דַּאֲתָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rav Yehuda of Diskarta said:** This verse **was necessary,** as it might **enter your mind to say** that the case of the **scapegoat may prove** that the discharge of a *zav* is not impure, **as** the scapegoat **causes impurity to others and** yet the goat **itself is pure.** Likewise, one might conclude that although the discharge of a *zav* causes impurity to others, *ziva* itself is pure. **And if** one were to dismiss this possibility, **due to** the verse: “And **of one who emits his issue [*zovo*],** in the case of a male or a female” (Leviticus 15:33), one could reply **that** it does not indicate the impurity of *ziva*. Rather, **it comes to** teach the **number** of emissions by which one becomes impure with the impurity of a *zav*.


###### Niddah 55b:5
[Niddah 55b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:5)

״זוֹב״ — חַד, ״זוֹבוֹ״ — תַּרְתֵּי, וּבַשְּׁלִישִׁי אַקְּשֵׁיהּ רַחֲמָנָא לִנְקֵבָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Rav Yehuda of Diskarta clarifies this interpretation of the verse. The term: **An issue [*zov*],** would indicate **one** emission of *ziva*. Since the verse uses the term **“his issue [*zovo*],”** the superfluous addition indicates **two** emissions of *ziva*. With regard to these two emissions, the verse states: “In the case of a male,” indicating that the status of a male *zav* differs from the status of a female *zava* in that he is not rendered impure if the emission occurred due to an accident, which would render a female impure. **But in** the case of **the third** emission of *ziva* **the Merciful One juxtaposed** the status of a male *zav* **to** that of **a female,** as the verse states: “Or a female,” indicating that even if the third emission was due to an accident he is nevertheless obligated to bring an offering.


###### Niddah 55b:6
[Niddah 55b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:6)

כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא״. וְהַשְׁתָּא דְּאָמַר רַחֲמָנָא ״זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא הוּא״, דְּרוֹשׁ בֵּיהּ נָמֵי הַאי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Since one would not have derived the impurity of *ziva* from this verse, **the Merciful One wrote: “His issue,** it is **impure”** (Leviticus 15:2). **And now that the Merciful One states: “His issue, it is impure,”** one **may derive from** the verse “and of one who emits his issue” not only the number of emissions, but **also this** interpretation, that there is no difference between the impurity imparted by *ziva* by contact and by carrying.


###### Niddah 55b:7
[Niddah 55b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:7)

וְהָרוֹק. רוֹק מְנָלַן? דְּתַנְיָא: ״וְכִי יָרוֹק״ — יָכוֹל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָגַע? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״בַּטָּהוֹר״ — עַד שֶׁיִּגַּע בַּטָּהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: And the mucus **and the saliva** of a *zav* transmit impurity when moist but not when dry. The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive the ritual impurity of the **saliva** of a *zav*? The Gemara answers that this is derived **as it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: **“And if** one who has an issue **spits** on the pure person, then he shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and he is impure until the evening” (Leviticus 15:8). One **might** have thought that the saliva transmits impurity even if the *zav* merely spat in the direction of a pure person, **despite** the fact **that it did not** come into **contact** with him. Therefore, **the verse states:** “And if one who has an issue spits **on the pure person,”** which teaches that **unless** the saliva comes into **contact with the pure person** he is not rendered impure.


###### Niddah 55b:8
[Niddah 55b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:8)

אֵין לִי אֶלָּא רוּקּוֹ, כִּיחוֹ וְנִיעוֹ וּמֵי הָאַף שֶׁלּוֹ מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״וְכִי יָרוֹק״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **I have** derived **only** that **his saliva** is impure. **From where** is it derived that **his phlegm, his mucus, and his nasal fluids** are also impure? **The verse states: “And if** one who has an issue **spits.”** The superfluous “and” is an amplification, indicating that these substances also transmit impurity.


###### Niddah 55b:9
[Niddah 55b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:9)

אָמַר מָר: יָכוֹל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָגַע? מֵהֵיכָא תֵּיתֵי?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**The Master said** above: One **might** have thought that the saliva transmits impurity even if the *zav* merely spat in the direction of a pure person, **despite** the fact **that it did not** come into **contact** with him. The Gemara asks: **From where would this be derived?** Why would one think that a person becomes impure from saliva that did not come into contact with him, making it necessary for a verse to exclude this possibility?


###### Niddah 55b:10
[Niddah 55b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:10)

סָלְקָא דַעְתָּךְ אָמֵינָא, נֵילַף ״רוֹק״ ״רוֹק״ מִיבָמָה — מָה הָתָם, אַף עַל פִּי דְּלָא נְגַע, אַף הָכָא נָמֵי דְּלָא נְגַע, קָא מַשְׁמַע לַן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: It might **enter your mind to say** that **we should derive** a verbal analogy **from** the term **saliva** in the verse “and if one who has an issue spits,” and the term **saliva** stated in connection with **a *yevama*,** a widow whose husband died childless and who participates in *ḥalitza*, as the verse states: “His *yevama* shall approach him, before the Elders, and remove his shoe from on his foot and spit before him” (Deuteronomy 25:9). **Just as there,** with regard to *ḥalitza*, the ritual is valid **even though** the saliva **did not touch** her brother-in-law, **so too here,** with regard to the saliva of a *zav*, it transmits impurity despite the fact **that it did not** come into **contact** with the pure person. Therefore, the verse **teaches us** that the saliva of a *zav* transmits impurity only if it comes into contact with the pure person.


###### Niddah 55b:11
[Niddah 55b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:11)

וְאֵימַר: הָנֵי מִילֵּי בְּמַגָּע, אֲבָל בְּמַשָּׂא — לָא, מִידֵי דְּהָוֵה אַשֶּׁרֶץ! אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, אָמַר קְרָא: ״בַּטָּהוֹר״ — מַה שֶּׁבְּיַד טָהוֹר טִמֵּאתִי לָךְ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **And** yet one **may say** that **this statement,** that the saliva of a *zav* transmits impurity, applies only to transmitting impurity **by contact. But** with regard to transmitting impurity **by carrying** it does **not** transmit impurity, **just as is** the *halakha* **with regard to** the carcass of **a creeping animal,** which transmits impurity by contact but not by carrying. **Reish Lakish said** that **the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught** in a *baraita*: **The verse states:** “And if one who has an issue spits **on the pure person.”** The term “on the pure person” is interpreted to mean that in any case where **something** of the saliva **is in the hand of** the **pure person I deemed** him **impure for you,** even if he did not come into direct contact with the saliva but merely carried it.


###### Niddah 55b:12
[Niddah 55b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:12)

וְאֵימָא: בְּמַשָּׂא מְטַמֵּא אָדָם וּבְגָדִים, בְּמַגָּע אָדָם לְטַמֵּא בְּגָדִים לָא לְטַמֵּא, מִידֵּי דְּהָוֵה אַמַּגַּע נְבֵלָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But** one may **say** that although the saliva of a *zav* transmits impurity both by carrying and by contact, nevertheless there is the following difference between them: **By carrying** the saliva of a *zav*, **it transmits impurity** to **a person and** to his **garments,** but **by contact,** although it **transmits impurity** to the **person** who touches it, **it does not transmit impurity** to his **garments, just as is** the *halakha* **with regard to contact** with an unslaughtered **animal carcass.**


###### Niddah 55b:13
[Niddah 55b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:13)

אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ, וְכֵן תָּנָא דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: אָמַר קְרָא ״בַּטָּהוֹר״ — טׇהֳרָה שֶׁטִּהַרְתִּי לְךָ בְּמָקוֹם אַחֵר, טִמֵּאתִי לְךָ כָּאן, וְאֵיזֶה זֶה? מַגַּע נְבֵלָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Reish Lakish said, and so** too **the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught,** that **the verse states:** “And if one who has an issue spits **on the pure person.”** The term “on the pure person” teaches that a case of **purity,** i.e., that **which I deemed pure for you in a different case, I have deemed impure for you here. And which** case **is this? This is** referring to **contact** with **an animal carcass,** which renders only the one touching it impure, but not his garments, whereas the saliva of a *zav* renders them both impure.


###### Niddah 55b:14
[Niddah 55b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:14)

וְאֵימָא כְּמַשָּׂא דְּשֶׁרֶץ! אִם כֵּן נִכְתּוֹב קְרָא ״בָּאָדָם״, מַאי ״בַּטָּהוֹר״? שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ תַּרְתֵּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But** one can **say** that the case deemed pure elsewhere but deemed impure here is that **of carrying** the carcass of **a creeping animal.** Perhaps the verse is teaching that whereas a creeping animal does not transmit impurity by carrying, the saliva of a *zav* does transmit impurity by carrying. By contrast, contact with the saliva of a *zav* renders only the one touching it impure, but not his garments, as is the *halakha* with regard to an animal carcass. The Gemara responds: **If that is so, let the verse write:** If one who has an issue spits **on the person. What** is the reason the verse states specifically: **“On the pure person”? Conclude two** conclusions **from it,** both that the saliva of a *zav* transmits impurity by carrying and that contact with the saliva renders impure both the person and his garments.


###### Niddah 55b:15
[Niddah 55b:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:15)

וּמֵי הָאַף. מַאי מֵי הָאַף? אָמַר רַב: בְּנִגְרָרִין דֶּרֶךְ הַפֶּה, לְפִי שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לְמֵי הָאַף בְּלֹא צִחְצוּחֵי הָרוֹק. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: אֲפִילּוּ בְּנִגְרָרִין דֶּרֶךְ הַחוֹטֶם. אַלְמָא קָסָבַר: מַעְיָין הוּא, וְרַחֲמָנָא רַבְּיֵיהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The aforementioned *baraita* teaches: **And the nasal fluids** of a *zav* also transmit impurity. The Gemara asks: **What** are these **nasal fluids? Rav says:** This is referring to fluids **that are emitted via the mouth** of a person. They are impure **because** it is **impossible for the nasal fluids** to flow through the mouth **without** containing **traces of saliva,** which are impure. **And Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** The *baraita* is referring **even** to fluids **that are emitted via the nose. Evidently,** Rabbi Yoḥanan **maintains** that nasal fluids **are** categorized as **a flow** of bodily fluids, **and the Merciful One included it** among the impure bodily fluids of a *zav*, by the amplification: “And if one who has an issue spits.”


###### Niddah 55b:16
[Niddah 55b:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:16)

וְרַב, נַחְשׁוֹב נָמֵי דִּמְעַת עֵינוֹ! דְּאָמַר רַב: הַאי מָאן דְּבָעֵי דְּלִסְתַּמֵּיה (לְעֵינֵיהּ) — לִיכְחוֹל מִגּוֹי. וְלֵוִי אֲמַר: הַאי מָאן דְּבָעֵי דְּלֵימוּת — לִיכְחוֹל מִגּוֹי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **But** according to **Rav,** who maintains that nasal fluids are impure because they contain traces of saliva, this is difficult: **Let** the mishna **also count** among the impure bodily fluids of the *zav* **the tears of his eye, as Rav said: He who desires to blind his eye should have a gentile paint [*likhḥol*]** his eye, as the gentile is apt to add a substance that causes blindness. **And Levi said: He who desires to die should have a gentile paint** his eye, as the gentile is apt to add poison to the paint.


###### Niddah 55b:17
[Niddah 55b:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:17)

וְאָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בַּר גּוּרְיָא: מַאי טַעְמָא דְּרַב דְּלָא אָמַר הָא ״מַאן דְּבָעֵי דְּלֵימוּת״, הוֹאִיל וְיָכוֹל לְגוֹרְרָן וּלְהוֹצִיאָן דֶּרֶךְ הַפֶּה? וְרַב: נְהִי דְּזִיהֲרָא נָפֵיק, דִּמְעֲתָא גּוּפַאּ לָא נָפֵיק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara continues: **And Rav Ḥiyya bar Gurya said: What is the reasoning of Rav, that he did not say** like Levi: **He who desires to die** should have a gentile paint his eye? Rav did not say this because he maintains one can prevent the poisonous substances from killing him, **since he can suck** the poisonous substances into his mouth by inhaling **and emit them via the mouth.** This indicates that the fluids of the eye can also be emitted through the mouth, and if so, the tears of a *zav* should likewise transmit impurity. The Gemara answers: **And Rav** would say that **although the poison [*dezihara*]** placed in one’s eye can **exit** the body via the mouth, **the tears themselves do not exit** the body through the mouth.


###### Niddah 55b:18
[Niddah 55b:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:18)

תָּא שְׁמַע: תִּשְׁעָה מַשְׁקֵה הַזָּב הֵן — הַזֵּיעָה, וְהַלֵּיחָה סְרוּחָה, וְהָרֶיעִי — טְהוֹרִין מִכְּלוּם; דִּמְעַת עֵינוֹ, וְדַם מַגֵּפָתוֹ, וַחֲלֵב הָאִשָּׁה — מְטַמְּאִין טוּמְאַת מַשְׁקִין בִּרְבִיעִית; אֲבָל זוֹבוֹ, רוּקּוֹ, וּמֵימֵי רַגְלָיו — מְטַמְּאִין טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה; וְאִילּוּ ״מֵי הָאַף״ לָא קָתָנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara states: With regard to the above dispute between Rav and Rabbi Yoḥanan, **come** and **hear** a *baraita*: **There are nine** types of **fluids** of **the *zav*. The sweat, the foul secretion** from an infected wound, **and the excrement are pure from any** form of impurity. The **tears** that emerge **from his eye,** the **blood from his wound, and the milk of a woman** who is a *zava* all **transmit the ritual impurity of liquids,** i.e., they render food and liquids impure, as other impure liquids do, in a situation **where** there is at least **a quarter**-*log* of the fluid. **But his *ziva*, his saliva, and his urine** all **transmit a severe** form of **ritual impurity.** The Gemara comments: The *baraita* lists many substances, **and yet it does not teach** that **nasal fluids** are impure.


###### Niddah 55b:19
[Niddah 55b:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:19)

בִּשְׁלָמָא לְרַב, לָא קָתָנֵי דְּלָא פְּסִיקָא לֵיהּ לְמִתְנֵי, זִימְנִין דְּאָתֵי דֶּרֶךְ הַפֶּה, וְזִימְנִין דְּאָתֵי דֶּרֶךְ הַחוֹטֶם, אֶלָּא לְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן לִיתְנֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Granted, according to** the opinion of **Rav,** the *tanna* of the *baraita* **does not teach** that nasal fluids are impure, **as he could not teach it categorically,** since **sometimes** the nasal fluid **comes via the mouth,** and is impure, **and sometimes it comes via the nose,** and is not impure. **But according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Yoḥanan, let** the *tanna* **teach** that nasal fluids are impure.


###### Niddah 55b:20
[Niddah 55b:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:20)

וּלְטַעְמָיךְ, ״כִּיחוֹ וְנִיעוֹ״ מִי קָתָנֵי? אֶלָּא תְּנָא רוֹק, וְכֹל דְּאָתֵי מֵרִבּוּיָא. הָכָא נָמֵי תְּנָא רוּקּוֹ, וְכֹל דְּאָתֵי מֵרִבּוּיָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **And according to your reasoning, does** this *tanna* **teach** that **his phlegm and his mucus** are impure? **Rather, he taught** that **saliva** is impure, **and** this includes the impurity of **all** substances **that are derived from** its **amplification,** e.g., his phlegm and his mucus. **Here too,** with regard to nasal fluids, the *tanna* **taught** the *halakha* of **his saliva, and** this includes **all** substances **that are derived from** its **amplification,** including nasal fluids.


###### Niddah 55b:21
[Niddah 55b:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:21)

דִּמְעַת עֵינוֹ — דִּכְתִיב ״וַתַּשְׁקֵמוֹ בִּדְמָעוֹת שָׁלִישׁ״. וְדַם מַגֵּפָתוֹ — דִּכְתִיב ״וְדַם חֲלָלִים יִשְׁתֶּה״. מָה לִי קַטְלֵיהּ כּוּלֵּיהּ, מָה לִי קַטְלֵיהּ פַּלְגֵיהּ. חֲלֵב הָאִשָּׁה — דִּכְתִיב ״וַתִּפְתַּח אֶת נֹאוֹד הֶחָלָב וַתַּשְׁקֵהוּ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* teaches that in the case of a *zav* or *zava*, the tears of their eyes and the blood from their wounds, as well as the milk of a *zava*, all transmit the ritual impurity of liquids. The Gemara cites the source for these cases of impurity: **The tears of his eye** are classified as a liquid, **as it is written:** “You have fed them with the bread of tears, **and given them tears to drink in great measure”** (Psalms 80:6). **And** the **blood from his wound** is classified as a liquid, **as it is written: “And he shall drink the blood of the slain”** (Numbers 23:24). Although the verse is referring to the blood of a dead person, and not to the blood of a wound, **what** difference does it make **to me** if one **killed all of him,** and **what** difference does it make **to me** if one **killed part of him,** i.e., wounded him? With regard to the **milk of a woman,** it too is classified as a liquid, **as it is written: “And she opened the bottle of milk, and gave him to drink”** (Judges 4:19).


###### Niddah 55b:22
[Niddah 55b:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/55b:22)

מֵימֵי רַגְלָיו — מְנָלַן? דְּתַנְיָא: ״זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא... וְזֹאת״ — לְרַבּוֹת מֵימֵי רַגְלָיו לְטוּמְאָה. וַהֲלֹא דִּין הוּא: וּמָה רוֹק הַבָּא מִמְּקוֹם טׇהֳרָה טָמֵא, מֵימֵי רַגְלָיו הַבָּאִין

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* teaches that the urine of a *zav* transmits a severe form of ritual impurity, as do his *ziva* and his saliva. The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive that the **urine** of a *zav* is impure? **As it is taught** in a *baraita*: The verse states: “When any man has an issue out of his flesh, **his issue,** it is **impure. And this** shall be his impurity” (Leviticus 15:2–3). The term “and this” comes **to include his urine with regard to** a severe form of **ritual impurity.** The *baraita* asks: **And could this not be** derived through an *a fortiori* **inference? If saliva, which comes from a place of purity,** i.e., one’s mouth, whose secretions are not usually impure, is nevertheless **impure,** then with regard to **his urine, which comes**