1) I might think that also for birth and for zivah (uncleanliness) she brings one offering; it is, therefore, (to negate this) written "This (is the law for the woman who bears") (to exclude zivah from that offering). "whether a male or a female": to include a miscarriage of a sandal (a flat abortion), or a placenta, or an articulated sac. (Vayikra 12:8): "And if she has not means enough for a lamb": We do not tell her to borrow and not to ply her trade. If she has enough for a lamb but not for (its accompanying) needs, whence is it derived that she brings a pauper's offering? From "enough for a lamb," (connoting all that is necessary for a lamb). 2) "then she shall take two turtle-doves or two young pigeons": She brings two and not three (i.e., and not an additional one for the lamb that she brings if she is rich). (Why is a verse necessary for this?) Does it not follow? viz.: She brings from what she can afford, and a leper brings from what he can afford. Just as a (rich) leper brings one for one (a he-lamb for a burnt-offering and a ewe-lamb for a sin-offering, and, if he cannot afford that, two turtle-doves; one for a sin-offering, the other for a burnt-offering), she, too, brings one for one. — But, perhaps go in this direction: She brings from what she can afford, and tamei mikdash (one who eats consecrated food or enters the sanctuary) brings from what he can afford. Just as tamei mikdash brings two for one, (a rich man, a ewe-lamb for a sin-offering, and a poor man two turtle doves, one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering, she, too, brings two for one. Let us see to what she is most similar. We derive one lacking atonement (a woman after childbirth) from one lacking atonement (a leper), and this is not to be refuted by tamei mikdash, who is not lacking atonement (i.e., even though he must bring an offering, he may still eat consecrated food before then) — But, perhaps go in this direction: We derive one (a woman after childbirth) whose "poor man" does not bring a beast (for a guilt-offering) from one (tamei mikdash) whose "poor man" does not bring a beast, and this is not to be refuted by a leper, whose "poor man" does bring a beast. It is, therefore, written "then she shall take two turtle-doves or two young pigeons." She brings two and not three. 3) "one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering": Wherever a sin-offering is being replaced (by a bird, as in the case of tamei mikdash), "sin-offering" precedes "burnt-offering" (viz. Vayikra 5:7), and here, where a burnt-offering is being replaced, "burnt-offering" precedes "sin-offering." Wherever it (the bird-offering) comes for a sin, (as in tamei mikdash), "sin-offering" precedes "burnt-offering." Here, where it does not come for a sin, "burnt-offering" precedes "sin-offering." Wherever two (birds) come in place of a sin-offering, (as in tamei mikdash), "sin-offering" precedes "burnt-offering." Here, where two do not come in place of a sin-offering, "burnt-offering" precedes "sin-offering." Variantly: What is the intent of "one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering" (when in the other instances "sin-offering" precedes "burnt-offering")? Because in the instances where "sin-offering" precedes "burnt-offering," if he brings the sin-offering first, he must bring the burnt-offering of the same kind (pigeon or turtle-dove) as the sin-offering — whence is it derived that if (in our instance) she brought the burnt-offering first, she must bring the sin-offering of the same kind as the burnt-offering? From "one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering." Variantly: If she brought a turtle-dove for her sin-offering and a pigeon for her burnt-offering, she "doubles" and brings a turtle-dove for her burnt-offering. If she brought a turtle-dove for her burnt-offering and a pigeon for her sin-offering, she "doubles" and brings a pigeon for her burnt-offering, (the sin-offering serving as the criterion, for it is it which effects atonement). Ben Azzai says: We follow the first (as per the first variant). "one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering and the Cohein shall make atonement for her": We are hereby taught (by the proximity of "sin-offering" to the next word "vechiper" [atonement]) that it is the sin-offering which effects atonement. "and she shall be clean": to eat of the sacrifices.
Sifra Tazria Yoledet Chapter 4
Tap any verse to see what it echoes — and start a chain or echo from it.