Rashi commented: “If a woman have conceived seed, and born [a male]. This includes a case where she gave birth to [the male child as] a fleshy mass which had dissolved, so that it became liquefied and like seed, in which case his mother becomes impure because of the birth” [as if it were a normal child]. The explanation of this matter¹ is that we know that the child has been formed already in human form, and then became liquefied, for anything that does not have a human form is not considered a child, and similarly, whatever is not fit to become a creature with a soul, is not considered a child. But even if it is a fleshy dissolved mass at the time of birth, it makes the mother impure [for the prescribed number of days] provided we recognize its form, such as a foetus with its human parts fashioned, in which case the mother is certainly impure, and if not [i.e., the matter is in doubt] she is impure because of a doubt. This is what this verse comes to include according to the words of our Rabbis.² Now with regard to the implication of the verse the Rabbis have said:³, 31a. “Ishah ki thazria —⁴ if the woman emits seed first, she will bear a son.”⁵ The intent of the Rabbis was not that the child is formed from the woman’s seed, for although the woman has generative organs [i.e., ovaries] like those of the man, yet seed is not formed by them at all, or [if it is formed], that seed is not thick and does not contribute anything to the embryo. Rather, the Rabbis used the term “she emits seed” with reference to the blood of the womb, which gathers in the mother at the time of the consummation of coition, and attaches itself to the seed of the male. For in the opinion of the Rabbis the child is formed from the blood of the female and the white [semen] of the man, and both of them are called “seed.” Thus the Rabbis have said:³, 31a. “There are three partners in [the formation of] man: The male emits the white [semen], from which are formed the sinews, the bones, and the white substance in the eye. The female emits a red secretion from which are formed the skin, the flesh, the blood, the hair, and the black substance in the eye.”⁶ The opinion of doctors as to the formation [of the embryo of the child] is also the same. In the opinion of the Greek philosophers,⁷ however, the whole body of the child is formed from [the substance of] the blood of the mother, the father only contributing that generative force which is known in their language as hyly, which gives form to matter.⁸, p. 23. For there is no difference at all between the egg of a chicken which is laid because it was fructified by a male, and that laid as a result of the mother rolling herself in the dust, except that the egg [that had been fructified by a male] germinates into a young bird, while the other is not sown, nor beareth,⁹ because it is deprived of the elemental heat which is its hyly. And if so, the word tazria [in ishah ki thazria] will be like u’cheganah zeiru’eha thatzmiach (as the garden causeth the seeds that are sown in it to spring forth).¹⁰ can be understood in its simple meaning: “when the female emits her secretion” first etc. But according to the philosophers who say that the child is formed entirely from the body of the mother, and the male semen is merely a generative force which gives form to matter, then the word tazria can no longer mean “emitting,” but is like thatzmiach — “causes to spring up.” And so did Onkelos render it: “If a woman conceives.”

footnotes: ¹ Ramban is clarifying Rashi’s words and saying that Rashi did not refer to a case where the abortion was a foetus filled with water, for in that event the mother does not become impure for the days prescribed for a male or for a female child. Rather, Rashi referred to a case where the child had been formed already etc. ² Niddah 27b. ³ Ibid. ⁴ Literally: “if the woman has [an emission of] seed” first. — Then, as the verse continues, she will bear a male-child. ⁵ “And when the male is the first to emit semen, then she will bear a female-child.” ³ Ibid. ⁶ “And the Holy One, blessed be He [i.e., the third partner in the formation of the child] gives him spirit and soul, beauty of features, power of sight, power of hearing, speech and walk, and understanding and rational faculty” (Niddah 31 a). ⁷ See Vol. I, p. 76 (in Verse 18) where Ramban alludes to this controversy. ⁸ See ibid. ⁹ Deuteronomy 29:22. The thought here suggested is: “because the seed of the male was lacking, therefore it does not bear.” ¹⁰ Isaiah 61:11. — Ramban’s meaning is as follows: According to the view of the Rabbis [and the doctors] that the child is formed both by the seed of man and the secretion of woman, the expression ishah ki thazria

D’VOTHAH.’ “This is an expression for anything which flows from her body, derived from the wording¹¹ for malady [madveh] and sickness, for no woman sees an issue of blood without becoming unwell, and her head and her limbs feeling heavy on her.” This is Rashi’s language. But I do not know on the basis of which root the word d’vothah can be an expression in the Sacred Language for “anything which flows.” But it is possible that it is an expression of malady, on the basis of what the Rabbis have said,¹² “and her head and limbs are heavy on her.” So also is the opinion of Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra, who writes: “D’vothah is a noun and means sickness, for the blood which issues indicates a sickness in the woman.” Now it is true that the flow constitutes a cleansing of surpluses [of blood], and due to the fact that her head and her limbs feel heavy upon her, the flow is perhaps termed “a sickness.” The correct interpretation, however, is that d’vothah is an expression derived from the word madveh [which does not mean “sickness,” i.e., an unnatural occurrence in the body, since a woman’s menses are natural; and d’vothah is therefore like the terms] plague and pain, just as in the expressions: My heart is ‘davoi’ (faint) *within me;*¹³ for this our heart is ‘daveh’ (faint),¹⁴ and like: the plague of his heart.¹⁵ Thus menstruation is an affliction upon the woman even though it is in her nature [to experience it regularly]. A similar expression is upon the bed of ‘d’voi’ (illness].¹⁶

footnotes: ¹¹ In our text of Rashi: “Another interpretation.” ¹² Niddah 9 a. ¹³ Jeremiah 8:18. ¹⁴ Lamentations 5:17. ¹⁵ I Kings 8:38. ¹⁶ Psalms 41:4.

AND SHE SHALL THEN ‘TEISHEIV’¹⁷ (REMAIN) IN THE BLOOD OF PURIFICATION THREE AND THIRTY DAYS. “The term yeshivah [literally: sitting] signifies here ‘remaining,’ just like in the verses: ‘vateishvu’ (and ye stayed) in Kadesh;¹⁸ ‘vayeishev’ (and he dwelled) by the terebinths of Mamre.”¹⁹ This is Rashi’s language. But if so, the verse is stating: “for another thirty-three days she should still wait, touching no hallowed thing nor coming into the Sanctuary, even though they are days of purity as far as [physical relationship with] her husband,”²⁰ law which explains the verses and the text of Ramban before us. For the practical law to be observed today, see further, Note 23. this being the sense of the expression in the blood of purification. Scripture uses this expression [‘remain’ in the blood of purification, instead of saying “and she shall then be … “] in order to inform us that even though she sees no issue of blood during these [thirty-three days for a male child, or sixty-six for a female], she must still wait this entire period on account of the childbirth [before she may eat of the hallowed food or enter the Sanctuary]. It is possible that the expression teisheiv here is like in the verse, Many days ‘teishvi’ (thou shalt sit solitary) for me; thou shalt not play the harlot, and then thou shalt not be any man’s wife,²¹ for a woman who has intercourse with her husband is called yosheveth lo (sitting for him). Now since He said in regard to the seven days [after the birth of the male child], she shall be unclean seven days; as in the days of the impurity of the sickness shall she be unclean,²² meaning that she be impure to her husband and for hallowed food during all these seven days, He now said that after the seven days she may sit for her husband [i.e., she may have intercourse with him] for thirty-three days in the blood of purification, but still she may not touch hallowed things nor come into the Sanctuary, even if she sees [no issue of blood], and she may be with her husband even if she sees [an issue].²³ days, she is permitted to her husband. But if she again saw even a drop of blood as tiny as a grain of mustard, she is unclean. For although by Scriptural law it is clean blood, yet the custom has already been accepted in all Israel that no coition is permitted if there is clean blood, the law applicable thereto being in every respect like that of other [unclean] blood” (Yoreh Deah 194:1, Rama). The correct interpretation appears to me to be that a woman in the days of her menstruation is called niddah (shunned) because she was avoided by and kept distant from all people. Men and women would not approach her, and she would sit alone and not speak with them, for even her speech was considered by them impure, and they regarded the dust upon which she stepped to be impure as the dust of the decomposed bones of the dead. Our Rabbis have mentioned this.²⁴ Even her gaze was considered harmful, and I have already mentioned this in Seder Vayeitzei Ya’akov.²⁵, pp. 387-388, and Note 224 there. Thus it was the custom of menstruants to sit in a special tent, this being the intent of Rachel’s words to her father [Laban], Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise up before thee; for the manner of women is upon me,²⁶ since it was their custom that a woman in that condition should not walk, nor let the sole of her foot step upon the ground. That is why the Torah was more stringent in regard to what the menstruant sits upon or lies upon [in that both the person who touches them and his garments are rendered impure]²⁷ than with respect to touching [the menstruant herself, in which case the person himself is rendered impure, but not his garments].²⁸, Verse 19. Similarly Scripture said in regard to the leper: he shall dwell [literally: “sit”] alone; without the camp shall his dwelling be,²⁹, 13:46. and it did not say as it did in the case of the other impure persons, and he shall go out of the camp, he shall not come within the camp.³⁰ Rather, it mentioned the term “sitting,” meaning that he is to avoid walking, since his odor and breath are harmful. It is for this reason that Scripture says here that for another thirty-three days she shall ‘sit’ in the blood of purification, in the same place where she sat in the [seven] days of impurity on account of the childbirth, and further prohibited by means of a negative commandment from touching hallowed things or coming into the Sanctuary during that time. The [Rabbinical] interpretation thereof is as follows:³¹ 1:7. “She shall continue [in the blood of purification for three and thirty days]. This comes to include a woman in hard labor during the eleven days,³² concepts in order to understand the text before us: (a) Commencing with the day on which a woman first sees a menstrual issue, she is to count seven days of impurity. During these days she remains impure, and forbidden to her husband, whether or not she sees another issue in the course of them. The issue, however, having ceased before the sun has set on the seventh day, she is to immerse herself that night in a ritual pool and may enter into conjugal relations. [However, for the Rabbinic ordinance as observed today, see Note 35.] (b) After these seven days of impurity effecting the menstruant, commences “the eleven-day period” (here referred to in the text) during which she becomes subject to the law affecting the zavah (a woman suffering a flux outside her regular period). That is to say, if during this period she sees one or two issues on the same day or on two consecutive days, she only has to immerse herself in a ritual pool on the following day, and returns to her purity with the setting of the sun. A woman suffering a flux of this kind is often referred to as “a minor zavah.” If, however, during the eleven-day period she sees one or more issues on three consecutive days, she becomes “a major zavah,” being under the obligation to count seven “clean days” after the complete cessation of the flux. And if in the course of these seven “clean days,” she sees another issue, she is to commence counting seven “clean days” anew. With the completion of the counting of seven completely “clean days,” the major zavah is to immerse herself in a ritual pool, bringing on the following day the prescribed offering (further, 15:29-30). Thus it is clear that by ordinance of the Torah, the law of the menstruant is far different from that of the zavah, to which she is subject during “the eleven-day” period, or the intervening time between her regular periods. See additionally, Note 35 as to the Rabbinic ordinance. that she be pure from zivah (the law of ‘flux’).³³ days of this “eleven-day period” [during which ordinarily the laws of zivah would have applied], and she saw issues on these three consecutive days, is yet not subject to this law. But, as the text continues, if she was in hard labor during her seven days of menstruation and she saw an issue, she is impure as a menstruant. I might think that she should also be regarded as pure from [the impurity conveyed through] menstruation;³⁴ Scripture therefore says [as in the days of the impurity of her sickness] shall she be unclean.”³⁵, is under obligation to count seven completely “clean days” after the cessation of the issue last seen — irrespective of whether she has seen the last issue within the seven-day period, or at any time thereafter. She must then immerse herself in a ritual pool, whereupon she is considered purified, and may enter into conjugal relations — the conditions attaching to the eating of hallowed food no longer of course being in force in our days because of the destruction of the Sanctuary and the absence of certain other means of ritual purification.

footnotes: ¹⁷ Literally: “sit” or “dwell.” ¹⁸ Deuteronomy 1:46. ¹⁹ Genesis 13:18. ²⁰ A woman after the birth of a male child is impure for seven days like a menstruant, and is forbidden to have conjugal relations with her husband. For the next thirty-three days, even though she has an issue of blood, she is permitted to her husband, but she may not eat of the offerings nor come into the Sanctuary until the forty-first day, when she brings her prescribed offerings (Verses 6-8). For a female child the number of impure days are fourteen, and the waiting period until she may eat of the offerings etc. is sixty-six days, and she brings her offerings on the eighty-first day. — It should be pointed out that this is the Scriptural ²¹ Hosea 3:3. ²² Verse 2. ²³ This as noted above is the Scriptural law. Rabbi Moshe Isserless states the law as it is to be observed today. After commenting that in some places it is customary that during the entire forty-days period for a male-child and eighty for a female, the mother does not purify herself for her husband by immersion in a ritual pool, he states the law to be as follows: “But in those places where there is no such custom, we should not be stringent at all. Rather, immediately after she has not seen blood following the seven-days for a male-child and fourteen for a female, and after she counted a further seven clean ²⁴ Vol. I, p. 387. ²⁵ Ibid. ²⁶ Genesis 31:35. ²⁷ Further, 15:21-23. ²⁸ Ibid. ²⁹ Ibid. ³⁰ Deuteronomy 23:11. ³¹ Sifra, Tazria ³² It is important to clarify first certain basic Scriptural ³³ Thus a woman who was in protracted labor for three ³⁴ See above, Note 32 (a). ³⁵ It is important to note that by Rabbinic ordinance a woman seeing an issue at any time whatever

IN THE BLOOD OF ‘TAHORAH’ (PURIFICATION). According to Rashi this means that even though she sees [an issue of blood during this period of thirty-three days for a male child, and sixty-six for a female], she is nevertheless pure by law of the Torah.²³ days, she is permitted to her husband. But if she again saw even a drop of blood as tiny as a grain of mustard, she is unclean. For although by Scriptural law it is clean blood, yet the custom has already been accepted in all Israel that no coition is permitted if there is clean blood, the law applicable thereto being in every respect like that of other [unclean] blood” (Yoreh Deah 194:1, Rama). And so did Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra write, that the meaning of the above expression is that “it constitutes pure blood in contrast to the blood of the menstruant, and therefore does not convey impurity, G-d having decreed in the case of a male child [a forty-days period for the after-effects of the childbirth upon the mother — seven impure days and thirty-three pure days], corresponding to the number of days necessary for the form of the male child to be completed in the womb, while that of the female child is double [fourteen impure days and sixty-six pure days, corresponding to the eighty days it takes for the female child to be formed in the mother’s womb]. This is clear and tested.” But in my opinion the meaning of the word tahorah is cleanness [in a physical sense], similar in meaning to ‘zahav tahor’ (pure gold),³⁶ which means smelted and refined. A similar expression is found in the verse, And he shall sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he shall purify the sons of Levi, and purge them as gold and silver.³⁷ Thus the meaning of the expression here is as follows. Having commanded that a woman who gives birth to a male child be impure for seven days as in the days of her impurity, because then she usually sees issues of blood from the interior of the womb [from which the menses are discharged], He further commanded that she should wait for another thirty-three days, staying in her house in order to cleanse her body; for during all these days she will emit the remnants of blood and the turbid, ill-smelling secretions which come from these bloods, and then she will become cleansed from the childbirth, pregnancy and conception,³⁸ and she may come to the House of G-d. Now our Rabbis have received the tradition that during these [thirty-three days for a male child and sixty-six for a female], she is pure for her husband, because with reference to the seven impure days it says that they are as in the days of the impurity of her sickness,²² but in connection with these [thirty-three days etc.] He said that she is impure as regards [eating or touching] hallowed things and entering the Sanctuary, but not for non-holy things nor for her husband, just as the Rabbis have said,³⁹ “Her husband is not a holy object.” The reason that the time is doubled in the case of the birth of a female child [i.e., fourteen impure days and sixty-six pure days], is perhaps as Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said [as mentioned above] in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael, that the formation of a male child is completed on the forty-first day, and that of a female child on the eighty-first day. But according to the opinion of the Sages who say that both male and female are completed on the forty-first day, we must say that the reason [why the time is doubled in the case of a female child] is that the nature of the female is cold and moist, and the white [fluid] in the mother’s womb is then exceedingly abundant and cold, this being the reason why she gave birth to a female child. Hence she needs a longer time to become clean [in a physical sense], on account of the abundant moisture in her which contains the ill-smelling blood, and on account of the coldness [of her body], as is well-known that sick people who suffer from cold need a longer period to restore their vigor than those who are hot.

footnotes: ²³ This as noted above is the Scriptural law. Rabbi Moshe Isserless states the law as it is to be observed today. After commenting that in some places it is customary that during the entire forty-days period for a male-child and eighty for a female, the mother does not purify herself for her husband by immersion in a ritual pool, he states the law to be as follows: “But in those places where there is no such custom, we should not be stringent at all. Rather, immediately after she has not seen blood following the seven-days for a male-child and fourteen for a female, and after she counted a further seven clean ³⁶ Exodus 25:39. ³⁷ Malachi 3:3. ³⁸ See Hosea 9:11. ²² Verse 2. ³⁹ Chullin 31 a.

AND HE SHALL OFFER IT BEFORE THE ETERNAL, AND MAKE ATONEMENT FOR HER; AND SHE SHALL BE CLEANSED FROM THE FOUNTAIN OF HER BLOOD. Scripture is stating that she shall offer a ransom for her soul⁴⁰ before the Eternal so that she shall be cleansed from the fountain of her blood, for a woman in childbirth has a troubled fountain and a tainted spring,⁴¹ and after she has completed the number of days of becoming clean [as explained above in Verse 4], or the days of the formation of the child, male or female,⁴²) — she shall then bring etc. she shall then bring a ransom for her soul so that her fountain should be stayed, and that she should become cleansed, for G-d, praised be He, “heals all flesh and does wondrously.”⁴³ Now our Rabbis have said⁴⁴ that [the reason for these offerings is] that at the moment that she bends down to give birth she rashly swears [because of the pains of childbirth]: “I will no longer have relationships with my husband” [so as not to conceive again]. The main purport of this statement of the Rabbis is that since she only swears on account of her pain, and the oath is moreover not capable of fulfillment, because she is subject to her husband, therefore the Torah wished for her to atone for that which came into her mind [and therefore commanded her to bring these offerings]. G-d’s thoughts, blessed be He, are deep,⁴⁵ and His mercies are bountiful, for it is His desire to justify His creatures.

footnotes: ⁴⁰ See Exodus 30:12. ⁴¹ Proverbs 25:26. ⁴² This is a reference to Ibn Ezra’s explanation mentioned by Ramban (above, Verse 4). In other words, after she has completed the forty-day period for a male child and eighty days for a female — whether the reason that the Torah decreed these days is as Ramban explained it, in accordance with the opinion of the Sages, or as Ibn Ezra explained it in accordance with that of Rabbi Yishmael (ibid. ⁴³ Berachoth 60 b. ⁴⁴ Niddah 31 b. ⁴⁵ See Psalms 92:6.