1) (Vayikra 12:2) ("Speak to the children of Israel, saying: If a woman give forth seed and bear a male, she shall be unclean seven days; as the days of her menstrual flow shall she be unclean.") This applies to "the children of Israel" and not to gentiles (even if she converted within the days of uncleanliness). "the children of Israel": This tells me only of the children of Israel. Whence do I derive (for inclusion) proselytes and maidservants, whether freed or not freed? From (the generic) "a woman." Variantly: Because it is written (Vayikra 15:31): "And you shall separate the children of Israel from their uncleanliness, that they not die in their uncleanliness by defiling My sanctuary which is in their midst," I might think, whether from its midst or from its back; it is, therefore, written in respect to a yoledeth (a woman after childbirth) (Vayikra 12:4): "And into the sanctuary she shall not come." 2) I might think that a yoledeth, (whose tumah is) of lesser stringency, confers tumah (only) from its (the sanctuary's) midst, and all others who are tamei, both from its midst and from its back. It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 15:31) "the children of Israel." The children of Israel are being compared (in context) to a yoledeth. Just as a yoledeth confers tumah only from its midst, so, all (the children of Israel) confer tumah only from its midst. 3) I might think that this (exhortation against defilement of the sanctuary) applies only to grave tumah, (which comes from one's body) as (in the instance of) a yoledeth. Whence do I derive the same for lesser tumah, (which does not come directly from one's body, such as that of touching a dead body, cohabiting with a niddah, and all that confers tumah upon a man? It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 15:31) "by defiling My sanctuary which is in their midst," to include all. 4) ("Speak to the children of Israel …) if she give forth seed and bear" — to exclude (from the dictum that follows) a woman who had given birth before the "speaking." I might then think that I exclude one who had conceived before the speaking and given birth after the speaking; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 12:5): "and if she bear a female" — the criterion is "bearing" (and not "conceiving"). (Vayikra 12:2): "… if she give forth seed and bear": (She assumes birth-uncleanliness) only if the child comes forth only from the place whence it was conceived" — to exclude a Caesarian birth. R. Shimon says: A Caesarian birth is considered "born" (in respect to tumah) and entails the bringing of an offering. It is just exempt from the five sela'im of the redemption of the first-born, (it not being "the opening of the womb"). 5) ("and she bear) a male": Why state this? (i.e., it is obvious from the context that it is a male.) — Because it is written "and she shall be unclean seven days … (Vayikra 12:3) and on the eighth day he shall circumcise," I understand that if he is born alive, he confers birth-uncleanliness upon his mother. Whence do I derive the same for one who is born dead? (For this we need "a male," connoting dead or alive.) — R. Yehudah said: But I can derive this a fortiori, viz.: If one who is born live, who does not confer upon his mother and upon what comes with his mother into a tent seven days (of dead-body) uncleanliness, does confer upon his mother childbirth uncleanliness — then one who is born dead, who does confer upon his mother and upon what comes with his mother into a tent seven days (of dead-body) uncleanliness, how much more so should he confer upon his mother childbirth uncleanliness! (Why, then, is "a male" needed?) — They responded: Any a fortiori argument that is expounded — in the beginning, for stringency, and, in the end, for leniency — is no argument — If a living child cleanses his mother (from dead-body uncleanliness), should a dead child do so! It must, therefore, be written "a male," to include a dead child (as conferring childbirth uncleanliness). 6) This tells me only of a nine-month child (i.e., a full-term child). Whence do I derive the same for an eight-month, a seven-month, a six-month, a five-month child? From "and she bear a male" — whatever she bears. If "she bears," I would think (only a child) that is born. Whence would I derive for inclusion a miscarriage of a sandal (a flat abortion), or a placenta, or an articulated sac, or a (limb-) articulated discharge? From "if she give forth seed and bear" — any seed that she bears. 7) I might then think that if she miscarries what has the appearance of a beast, an animal, or a bird, not having the appearance of a human being, or what has the appearance of a fish, or of hoppers or of creeping things, (I might think) that she is unclean; it is, therefore, written "a male" — what has a human form — to exclude what does not have a human form. 8) I might think that if she miscarries an unarticulated head or an unarticulated body or two backs or two spines, since they have a human form, she becomes unclean; it is, therefore, written "she shall be unclean seven days … and on the eighth day he shall circumcise." Just as this betokens what is fit for the creation of a soul, (so there is included all of this kind) — to exclude the above, which are not fit for the creation of a soul. "and she shall be unclean": she and not the child. For (without this stipulation), it would follow otherwise, viz.: If, because of the child, which (only) contributed to her tumah, she becomes tamei, then the child itself which effected the tumah, how much more so should it be tamei! — No, this is refuted by the sent-away he-goat (of Yom Kippur), which causes tumah (viz. Vayikra 16:26), but it itself is clean. — No, this may be so with the sent-away he-goat, which is not subject to tumah in and of itself (in its lifetime). Would you say the same of the child, which is subject to tumah in and of itself? Since it is subject to tumah, it should be tamei (in birth)! It must, therefore, be written "she shall be unclean," and not the child. 9) "and she bear … and she shall be unclean seven days": (In the event of twins) she counts seven days (both for uncleanliness and cleanliness) from the (birth of the) last. (Why is the verse needed?) Does this not follow (of itself)? viz.: She becomes tamei through a dead body and she becomes tamei through a child. Just as in the first instance she counts seven only for the last (event), so, for the second instance, she counts only for the last birth. 10) Or, go in this direction: She becomes tamei through blood (i.e., niddah) and she becomes tamei through a child. Just as in the first instance, she counts seven only from the first sighting, so, in the second instance, she should count seven only from the first child. 11) Let us see what is most similar (to her situation). We derive tumah which comes from a different source (a child) from tumah which comes from a different source (a dead body), and this is not to be refuted by blood (niddah), which comes from her own body. Or, go in this direction: We derive tumah which comes from her (her child) from tumah which comes from her (niddah), and this is not to be refuted by dead-body tumah, which does not come from her. It must, therefore, be written "and she bear … and she shall be unclean seven days" — she counts seven from the last birth. 12) "seven days": I might think either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "as the days of her menstrual flow." Just as in the instance of niddah (the days are consecutive), so, in the instance of childbirth. 13) "as the days of her menstrual flow": The days of her childbirth (tumah) are compared to the days of her niddah (tumah). Just as the days of her niddah (tumah) are not subject to zivah (genital discharge tumah), and the counting of seven (clean days of zivah) does not occur within them, so, the days of her childbirth (tumah) are not subject to zivah (tumah), and the counting of seven (clean days of zivah) does not occur within them. 14) ("as the days of her menstrual) flow shall she be unclean": including (in tumah) him who cohabits with her (during that period). ("days…) of her flow shall she be unclean: including all of the nights (as in her niddah state). "… her flow shall she be unclean": including (her having three consecutive days of sightings) in her zivah state (out of eleven), and then giving birth, her not being clean until seven clean days (over and above the seven uncleanliness days for birth).
Sifra Tazria Yoledet Section 1
Tap any verse to see what it echoes — and start a chain or echo from it.