## Niddah Daf 56a

###### Niddah 56a:1
[Niddah 56a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:1)

מִמָּקוֹם טָמֵא — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁיְּהוּ טְמֵאִין? דָּם הַיּוֹצֵא מִפִּי הָאַמָּה יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁבָּא מִמָּקוֹם טָמֵא וְטָהוֹר. אַף אַתָּה אַל תִּתְמַהּ עַל זֶה, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁבָּא מִמְּקוֹם טוּמְאָה יִהְיֶה טָהוֹר. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא... וְזֹאת״ — לְרַבּוֹת מֵימֵי רַגְלָיו לְטוּמְאָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**from a place of impurity,** the same place that emits *ziva*, **is it not logical that it should be impure?** The *baraita* answers: The case of **blood that issues from the opening of the penis may prove** that this inference is invalid, **as** the blood **comes from a place of impurity and** yet **it is pure. Likewise, you should not be surprised about this,** the urine of a *zav*, **that even though it comes from a place of impurity it should be pure.** Therefore, **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** the severe form of **ritual impurity.**


###### Niddah 56a:2
[Niddah 56a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:2)

דָּם הַיּוֹצֵא מִפִּי הָאַמָּה, מְנָלַן דְּטָהוֹר? דְּתַנְיָא: יָכוֹל יְהֵא דָּם הַיּוֹצֵא מִפִּיו וּמִפִּי הָאַמָּה טְמֵאִין? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״זוֹבוֹ טָמֵא הוּא״ — הוּא טָמֵא, וְאֵין דָּם הַיּוֹצֵא מִפִּיו וּמִפִּי הָאַמָּה טָמֵא, אֶלָּא טָהוֹר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive **that blood that issues from the opening of the penis is pure? As it is taught** in a *baraita* concerning a *zav*: One **might** have thought that **blood that issues from his mouth or from the opening of the penis is impure,** like his saliva and urine. Therefore, **the verse states: “His issue, it is impure”** (Leviticus 15:2). The term “it” is an exclusion, indicating that **it,** *ziva*, **is impure, but blood that issues from his mouth or from the opening of the penis is not impure; rather, it is pure.**


###### Niddah 56a:3
[Niddah 56a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:3)

וְאֵיפוֹךְ אֲנָא! אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: דּוּמְיָא דְּרוֹק, מָה רוֹק שֶׁמִּתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא, אַף כֹּל שֶׁמִּתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא. יָצָא דָּם שֶׁאֵין מִתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara suggests: **But** perhaps **I should reverse** the *halakhot*. One could derive from the amplification “and this” that blood issuing from the penis of the *zav* is impure, and from the exclusion “it” that his urine is pure. **Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai:** Urine, rather than blood, should be included among the impure fluids of the *zav*, as it is **similar to saliva: Just as saliva** is a fluid **that** first **gathers together and** then **comes out** of the mouth, **so too, all** impure fluids are those **that gather together and** then **come out** of the body. **Blood** is therefore **excluded, as** it **does not** first **gather together and** then **come out** of the body.


###### Niddah 56a:4
[Niddah 56a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:4)

וַהֲרֵי חָלָב שֶׁבָּאִשָּׁה, שֶׁמִּתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא, וְאָמַר מָר: חָלָב שֶׁבָּאִשָּׁה מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת מַשְׁקִין. טוּמְאַת מַשְׁקִין — אִין, אֲבָל לָא טוּמְאָה חֲמוּרָה!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But there is** the case of the **milk that** is emitted **from a woman, which** first **gathers together and** then **comes out** of the body, and it should therefore transmit a severe form of ritual impurity, like saliva and *ziva*. **And** yet **the Master said** in the aforementioned *baraita*: The **milk of a woman transmits the ritual impurity of liquids.** One may infer that with regard to **the ritual impurity of liquids, yes,** it transmits impurity, **but** it does **not** transmit **a severe** form of **ritual impurity.**


###### Niddah 56a:5
[Niddah 56a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:5)

אֶלָּא אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: דּוּמְיָא דְּרוֹק, מָה רוֹק מִתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא, וְחוֹזֵר וְנִבְלָע — אַף כׇּל מִתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא, וְחוֹזֵר וְנִבְלָע. יָצָא דָּם, שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא. יָצָא חָלָב שֶׁבָּאִשָּׁה, שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמִּתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא — אֵינוֹ חוֹזֵר וְנִבְלָע.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rather, Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai:** In order to transmit a severe form of impurity the fluid must be **similar to saliva: Just as saliva** first **gathers together and** then **comes out** of the mouth, **and** if it is not expectorated **it is reabsorbed, so too, all** impure fluids first **gather together and** then **come out** of the body, **and are reabsorbed** by the body if they are not emitted. **Blood** is therefore **excluded, as** it **does not** first **gather together and** then **come out** of the body. The **milk that** is emitted **from a woman** is also **excluded, as even though it gathers together and** then **comes out** of the body **it cannot be reabsorbed.**


###### Niddah 56a:6
[Niddah 56a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:6)

וְנֵילַף מִ״זּוֹבוֹ״, מָה ״זוֹבוֹ״ שֶׁאֵין מִתְעַגֵּל וְיוֹצֵא מְטַמֵּא, אַף כֹּל! אָמַר רָבָא: מִ״זּוֹבוֹ״ לֵיכָּא לְמֵילַף, שֶׁכֵּן גּוֹרֵם טוּמְאָה לַאֲחֵרִים.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara further objects: **But let us derive from** the case of ***ziva*** that both blood and breast milk transmit impurity: **Just as his *ziva* does not** first **gather together and** then **come out** of the body, and yet it **transmits impurity, so too, all** the fluids of a *zav* should transmit impurity, even if they do not gather together before they are emitted from the body. **Rava said** in explanation: **One cannot derive** the *halakha* with regard to the blood and breast milk of a *zav* or *zava* **from** the *halakha* with regard to **his *ziva*, as** the case of *ziva* is unique **in that** it **causes impurity to others,** i.e., to the one who emitted *ziva*.


###### Niddah 56a:7
[Niddah 56a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:7)

וְהַשֶּׁרֶץ. אָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: ״שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁיָּבַשׁ וְשִׁלְדּוֹ קַיֶּימֶת״ — טָמֵא. וְהָאֲנַן תְּנַן: מְטַמְּאִין לַחִין וְאֵין מְטַמְּאִין יְבֵשִׁין! אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא — בְּכוּלָּן, הָא — בְּמִקְצָתָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: **And the** carcass of **a creeping animal** transmits impurity when moist but not when dry. **Reish Lakish says:** With regard to the carcass of **a creeping animal that dried up but its skeleton is intact,** i.e., its bone structure remains in place, it **is ritually impure.** The Gemara asks: **But didn’t we learn** in the mishna that the items it lists, including the creeping animal, all **transmit impurity** when they are **moist, but they do not transmit impurity** when they are **dry? Rabbi Zeira said:** It is **not difficult. This** statement of Reish Lakish, that creeping animals transmit impurity even when dry, is referring **to** a case where **all of** the bones are intact. By contrast, **that** ruling of the mishna, that they do not transmit impurity when dry, is referring **to** a situation where only **part of** the bones are intact.


###### Niddah 56a:8
[Niddah 56a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:8)

דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי בִּיסְנָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: ״בָּהֶם״ — יָכוֹל בְּכוּלָּן, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״מֵהֶם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
This is **as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Bisna, says** that **Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says:** The verse states with regard to creeping animals: “Whoever touches **them** when they are dead shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:31). One **might** have thought that the carcasses of creeping animals transmit impurity only if one comes into contact **with all of them,** i.e., with creeping animals that are completely intact. Therefore, **the verse states:** “And upon whatever any **of them** falls when they are dead shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:32). The term “any of them” indicates that this *halakha* applies even if one comes into contact with only part of a creeping animal.


###### Niddah 56a:9
[Niddah 56a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:9)

אִי מֵהֶם — יָכוֹל בְּמִקְצָתָן, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בָּהֶם״. הָא כֵּיצַד? כָּאן — בְּלַח, כָּאן — בְּיָבֵשׁ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If** the *halakha* is derived from the term **“of them,”** one **might** have thought that even if one comes into contact **with a part of them** he is rendered impure. Therefore, **the verse states:** “Whoever touches **them,”** which indicates completely intact creeping animals. The *baraita* concludes: **How** can **these** texts be reconciled? **Here,** where the verse indicates that even part of them transmits impurity, it is referring **to a moist** creeping animal. **There,** where the verse teaches that only a complete creeping animal transmits impurity, it is speaking **of a dry** creature.


###### Niddah 56a:10
[Niddah 56a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:10)

אָמַר רָבָא: הָנֵי זְבוּגֵי דְּמָחוֹזָא, כִּי שִׁלְדָּן קַיֶּימֶת — טְמֵאִין. וְאָמַר רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ: שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁנִּשְׂרַף וְשִׁלְדּוֹ קַיֶּימֶת — טָמֵא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** With regard to **these lizards of** the city of **Meḥoza, when their skeleton is intact** they **are impure.** The dab lizard is one of the creeping animals listed in the Torah. **And Reish Lakish says:** With regard to the carcass of **a creeping animal that was burned but its skeleton is intact,** it **is ritually impure.**


###### Niddah 56a:11
[Niddah 56a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:11)

מֵיתִיבִי: נִמְצָא שֶׁרֶץ שָׂרוּף עַל גַּבֵּי הַזֵּיתִים, וְכֵן מַטְלֵית הַמְּהוּהָא — טְהוֹרִין, שֶׁכׇּל הַטְּמָאוֹת כִּשְׁעַת מְצִיאָתָן! אָמַר רַבִּי זֵירָא: לָא קַשְׁיָא — הָא בְּכוּלָּן, הָא בְּמִקְצָתָן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara **raises an objection** from a mishna that indicates a burnt carcass of a creeping animal is pure (*Teharot* 9:9): In a case where **a burnt creeping animal was found on top of** a pile of **olives, and likewise,** if the **tattered rag** of a *zav* was found on a pile of olives, the olives and the rag **are pure.** One is not concerned that the carcass of the creeping animal touched the olives or rag before it was burned, because **with regard to all** matters of **impurity,** it is assumed that when the item in question came into contact with the potential sources of impurity, the potential sources of impurity were in the same state **as** they were at **the time they were found,** and a burnt carcass does not transmit impurity. **Rabbi Zeira said:** It is **not difficult; this** statement of Reish Lakish refers **to** a case where **all of** the bones are intact, whereas **that** ruling of the mishna is referring **to** a situation where only **part of** the bones are intact.


###### Niddah 56a:12
[Niddah 56a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:12)

דְּתַנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יִצְחָק בְּרַבִּי בִּיסְנָא מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי: ״בָּהֶם״ — יָכוֹל בְּכוּלָּן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״מֵהֶם״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**As it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yitzḥak, son of Rabbi Bisna, says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai:** When the verse states: “Whoever touches **them** when they are dead shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:31), one **might** have thought that creeping animals transmit impurity only if one comes into contact **with all of them,** i.e., with creeping animals that are completely intact. Therefore, **the verse states:** “And upon whatever any **of them** falls when they are dead shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:32), indicating that even a part of them transmits impurity.


###### Niddah 56a:13
[Niddah 56a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:13)

אִי ״מֵהֶם״ — יָכוֹל בְּמִקְצָתָן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר ״בָּהֶם״. הָא כֵּיצַד? כָּאן — בְּשָׂרוּף, כָּאן — בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ שָׂרוּף.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**If** the *halakha* is derived from the term **“of them,”** one **might** have thought that even contact **with a part of them** transmits impurity. Therefore, **the verse states:** “Whoever touches **them.” How** can **these** texts be reconciled? **Here,** where the verse teaches that only the complete carcass of a creeping animal transmits impurity, it is referring **to a burnt** creeping animal. **There,** where the verse indicates that even a part of them transmits impurity, it is referring **to** the carcass of a creeping animal **that is not burnt.**


###### Niddah 56a:14
[Niddah 56a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:14)

מְטַמְּאִין לַחִין. זָב — דִּכְתִיב ״רָר בְּשָׂרוֹ״, כִּיחוֹ וְנִיעוֹ וְרוּקּוֹ — דִּכְתִיב ״כִּי יָרוֹק הַזָּב״, כְּעֵין רוֹק.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that the *ziva* of a *zav*, the mucus and saliva of a *zav*, the carcass of a creeping animal, an animal carcass, and semen all **transmit impurity** when they are **moist,** but they do not transmit impurity when they are dry. The Gemara cites the sources for these *halakhot*: The *ziva* of **a *zav*** transmits impurity only when moist, **as it is written: “His flesh runs** with his issue” (Leviticus 15:3), which is referring to a moist discharge. **His phlegm and his mucus and his saliva** likewise transmit impurity only when moist, **as it is written:** “And **if one who has an issue spits”** (Leviticus 15:8), which is referring to a substance **that is like saliva,** which is moist.


###### Niddah 56a:15
[Niddah 56a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:15)

שֶׁרֶץ — ״בְּמוֹתָם״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, כְּעֵין מִיתָה. שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע הָרְאוּיָה לְהַזְרִיעַ, נְבֵלָה — דִּכְתִיב ״כִּי יָמוּת״ — כְּעֵין מִיתָה.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The carcass of **a creeping animal** transmits impurity only when moist, as **the Merciful One states:** “Whoever touches them **when they are dead** shall be impure” (Leviticus 11:31). This indicates that they transmit impurity when they are in a state **similar to** their state at the time of **death,** when creatures are still moist. **Semen** transmits impurity only when moist, as it must be **fit to inseminate. An animal carcass** transmits impurity only when moist, **as it is written:** “And **if** any animal of which you may eat **dies,** he who touches its carcass shall be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 11:39), which teaches that the carcass transmits impurity when it is in a state **similar to** its state at the time of **death.**


###### Niddah 56a:16
[Niddah 56a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:16)

אִם יְכוֹלִין לְהִשָּׁרוֹת. בָּעֵי רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: תְּחִילָּתוֹ וְסוֹפוֹ בְּפוֹשְׁרִין, אוֹ דִלְמָא תְּחִילָּתוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין סוֹפוֹ?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **if one could soak** those dry substances in water and restore them to their previous state they would transmit impurity both when moist and when dry. The mishna further teaches that this is referring to soaking them in lukewarm water for a twenty-four-hour period. **Rabbi Yirmeya raises a dilemma:** Does the mishna mean that the soaking must be performed **in lukewarm** water from **the beginning of** the soaking until **its end, or perhaps** it is sufficient if the water is lukewarm at **the beginning of** the soaking, **even if** at **the end of** the soaking the water **is not** lukewarm?


###### Niddah 56a:17
[Niddah 56a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:17)

תָּא שְׁמַע, דְּתַנְיָא: כַּמָּה הִיא שְׁרִיָּיתָן בְּפוֹשְׁרִין? יְהוּדָה בֶּן נָקוֹסָא אוֹמֵר: מֵעֵת לְעֵת, תְּחִילָּתוֹ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין סוֹפוֹ. רַבָּן שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: צְרִיכִין שֶׁיְּהוּ פּוֹשְׁרִין מֵעֵת לְעֵת.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara explains: **Come** and **hear, as it is taught** in a *baraita*: **How much** time **is their soaking in lukewarm** water? **Yehuda ben Nekosa says:** This is referring to a twenty-four-hour **period,** and it is sufficient if the water is lukewarm at **its beginning, even if it is not** lukewarm **at its end. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says:** The water **must be lukewarm for** the entire twenty-four-hour **period.**


###### Niddah 56a:18
[Niddah 56a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:18)

רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: בְּשַׂר הַמֵּת כּוּ׳. אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: טָהוֹר מִלְּטַמֵּא בִּכְזַיִת, אֲבָל מְטַמֵּא טוּמְאַת רָקָב. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר: בְּשַׂר הַמֵּת שֶׁיָּבַשׁ וְאֵין יָכוֹל לִשְׁרוֹת וְלַחֲזוֹר כְּמוֹת שֶׁהָיָה — טָהוֹר מִלְּטַמֵּא בִּכְזַיִת, אֲבָל טָמֵא טוּמְאַת רָקָב.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches that **Rabbi Yosei says:** With regard to **the flesh of a corpse** that is dry and cannot be soaked to restore it to its previous state, it is ritually pure. **Shmuel says:** It **is pure from transmitting impurity by** the amount of **an olive-bulk, but** if there is a ladleful of the flesh it **transmits the impurity of** the **decayed** flesh of a corpse. **This is also taught** in a *baraita*: **Rabbi Yosei says:** With regard to **the flesh of a corpse that dried up and cannot be soaked and restored to** its **previous state,** it **is ritually pure from transmitting impurity by** the amount of **an olive-bulk, but it is impure** with the **impurity of** the **decayed** flesh of a corpse.


###### Niddah 56a:19
[Niddah 56a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:19)

**מַתְנִי'** הַשֶּׁרֶץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא בַּמָּבוֹי — מְטַמֵּא לְמַפְרֵעַ, עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר: ״בָּדַקְתִּי אֶת הַמָּבוֹי הַזֶּה וְלֹא הָיָה בּוֹ שֶׁרֶץ״, אוֹ עַד שְׁעַת כִּבּוּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** The carcass of **a creeping animal that was found in an alleyway renders** pure items **impure retroactively.** All items that passed through that alleyway **from** the time about which **one may state: I examined this alleyway and there was no** carcass of **a creeping animal in it, or from** the **time of** the **sweeping** of the alleyway, are impure.


###### Niddah 56a:20
[Niddah 56a:20](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:20)

וְכֵן כֶּתֶם שֶׁנִּמְצָא בֶּחָלוּק — מְטַמֵּא לְמַפְרֵעַ, עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר ״בָּדַקְתִּי אֶת הֶחָלוּק הַזֶּה וְלֹא הָיָה בּוֹ כֶּתֶם״, אוֹ עַד שְׁעַת הַכִּבּוּס.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And likewise,** a blood **stain that was discovered on** the **robe** of a woman **renders** her **impure retroactively.** Any pure items that she handled **from** the time about which **one may state: I examined this robe and there was no** blood **stain on it, or from the time of the laundering** of the robe, are impure.


###### Niddah 56a:21
[Niddah 56a:21](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:21)

וּמְטַמֵּא בֵּין לַח, בֵּין יָבֵשׁ. רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: הַיָּבֵשׁ מְטַמֵּא לְמַפְרֵעַ, וְהַלַּח אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶלָּא עַד שְׁעַת שֶׁיְּהֵא יָכוֹל לַחֲזוֹר וְלִהְיוֹת לַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And** the carcass of a creeping animal or a blood stain **renders** items **impure** retroactively **whether** they are still **moist** or are already **dried out. Rabbi Shimon says: The dry** one **renders** items **impure retroactively, but the moist** one **does not render** items **impure** from the aforementioned times, **but** only **from** such **a time that it could still be moist** from then up to the moment it was discovered.


###### Niddah 56a:22
[Niddah 56a:22](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:22)

**גְּמָ'** אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: ״עַד שְׁעַת כִּבּוּד״ — חֶזְקָתוֹ בָּדוּק, אוֹ דִלְמָא חֶזְקָתוֹ מִתְכַּבֵּד?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** With regard to the case of the carcass of a creeping animal that was found in an alleyway, **a dilemma was raised before** the Sages: The mishna teaches that any pure items that passed through that alleyway **from** the **time of** the **sweeping** of the alleyway are impure. Does this mean that once the alleyway is swept **its presumptive status** is that it has been **examined,** as it is examined during the sweeping and any impure item would have been discovered, and therefore any pure items that passed through the alleyway beforehand remain pure? **Or perhaps** the mishna means that once the alleyway is swept **its presumptive status** is that it has been entirely **swept,** and therefore any creeping animal would have been removed by the sweeping.


###### Niddah 56a:23
[Niddah 56a:23](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Niddah/r/56a:23)

וּמַאי נָפְקָא מִינַּהּ? דְּאָמַר: ״כַּבֻּיד וְלָא בְּדֻיק״. אִי אָמְרַתְּ חֶזְקָתוֹ בָּדוּק — הָא לָא בְּדִק, אִי אָמְרַתְּ חֶזְקָתוֹ מִתְכַּבֵּד — הָא מִתְכַּבֵּד.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And what is the** practical **difference** that arises from this dilemma? The Gemara answers: There is a difference in a case **where** the one who swept the alleyway **said he swept** it **but did not examine** it. **If you say** that items that were present in the alleyway before it was swept remain pure because **the presumptive status of** a swept alleyway is that it has been **examined,** in **this** case the man explicitly said that **he did not examine** it, so it does not have this presumptive status. By contrast, **if you say** that the items remain pure because **the presumptive status of** the alleyway is that it has been completely **swept,** in **this** case too it has been **swept,** and therefore the items that were present earlier remain pure.