Study Niddah folio 35B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
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.
The Talmud analyzes R' Yitzḥak’s statement: When does this statement apply, i.e., to which sighting of ziva is R' 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
The Talmud rejects this: And how can you understand that R' Yitzḥak is referring to the first sighting of ziva? But R' 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
Rather, this is what he is saying: R' 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 t
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 simila