Midrash su Levitico 12:78

(Lev. 12:1–2:) THEN THE LORD SPOKE UNTO MOSES, SAYING: SPEAK UNTO THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL, SAYING: WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE. This text is related (to Job 29:2): O THAT I WERE AS IN THE MONTHS OF OLD, AS IN THE DAYS WHEN GOD WATCHED OVER ME! In regard to this verse, Job spoke it when the afflictions had come upon him.¹Tanh., Lev. 4:1. He said: O THAT I WERE [AS IN THE MONTHS OF OLD], and would that I had the days which I had when I was in my mother's belly! AS IN THE DAYS WHEN GOD WATCHED OVER ME! < These words > teach that the infant is watched over while it is in its mother's belly.

(Lev. 12:2:) “When a woman emits her seed and bears a male.” This text is related (to Job 29:2), “O that I were as in the months of old, [as in the days when God watched over me]!” In regard to this verse, Job spoke it when the afflictions had come upon him. He said, “’O that I were as in the months of old,’ and would that I had the days which I had when I was in my mother's belly!” “As in the days when God watched over me!” [These words] teach that the infant is watched over while it is in its mother's belly. (Job 29:3:) “When His light shone over my head […].” From here you learn that the infant has light in its mother's belly. (Job 29:4:) “When I was in the days of my youth (horef),¹Horef also means “winter.” Buber notes here that in the following simile, the infant in the womb is being protected in the womb as the winter rain protects the soil. when God's company was over my tent.” [These words teach about the infant.] Just as the rain is at work in the soil for it to become muddy, so the infant is muddy in its mother's womb. Another interpretation [of] “when God's company was over my tent”: These words teach about the infant. Just as the infant gets muddy, so is a person muddied by sins, so that misfortunes come upon him. At that time [Job] said (in Job 29:2), “’O that I were as in the months of old, as in the days when God watched over me,’ and would that I had the days which I had when I was in my mother's belly!” What does he finally say (in vs. 4)? “When I was in the days of my youth.” R. Abbahu said, “The infant comes out of the mother's belly covered with slime and covered with blood; yet everyone praises and cherishes it, especially when it is a male.”²Tanh., Lev. 8:11; PRK 9:6. Ergo (in Lev. 12:2), “When a woman emits her seed and bears a male.” (Lev. 12:2:) “When a woman emits her seed.” [This text is related to (Ps. 139:5),] “You have formed me behind and before.” The text speaks of the first Adam.³Cf. Gen. R. 8:1; 14:5; Lev. R. 14:1; M. Pss. 139:6. R. Johanan said, “It is written about him that there were two creations. There is a double y (i.e., a double yod in Gen. 2:7), ‘The Lord God formed (yytsr) the human.’ One formation is in this world, and one is for the world to come. But in the case of cattle, wild beasts, and birds, for them [only] one formation is written (without a double y in Gen. 2:19), ‘So out of the earth the Lord God formed (ytsr) all the wild beasts of the field [and all the birds of the heavens].’ It therefore says (in Ps. 139:5), ‘You have formed me behind and before.’” R. Simeon ben Laqish says, “Behind (in the sense of what comes] before the act of [his] creation. What is the reason? It is written (in Gen. 1:2), ‘and the spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters’; this spirit was the soul of the first Adam. It therefore says (in Ps. 139:5), ‘You have formed me behind and before.’” R. Eleazar ben Pedat says, “Behind [refers] to an [later] event of the sixth day, and before [refers] to an [earlier] event of the sixth day. How so? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, created six things on the sixth day. They were these: (1) the soul; (2) wild beasts; (3) cattle; (4) beasts of the earth; (5) Adam; and (6) Eve. Now Adam's soul was created first, as stated (in Gen. 1:24), ‘a living soul.’ Living soul can only be the soul of Adam, since it is stated (in Gen. 2:7), ‘and the human (Adam) became a living soul.’ Hence, before [refers] to the [first] event of the sixth day, and behind [refers] to the sixth day, since [the Holy One, blessed be He,] was occupied with him all of the sixth day. Ergo (in Ps. 139:5), ‘You have formed me behind and before.’ Behind [refers] to an event of the sixth day, and before [refers] to an event of the sixth day.” R. Samuel bar Nahman said, “What is the meaning of ‘You have formed me behind and before?’ Having two faces, male and female. Hence it says (in Ps. 139:5), ‘You have formed me behind and before.’”⁴Ber. 61a; ‘Eruv. 18a. Adam said, “After the Holy One, blessed be He, had created all the cattle and wild beasts, He created me.” So it is with the infant. Before it comes forth from its mother's belly, the Holy One, blessed be He, commands it, “Eat of this, do not eat of that, (in Lev. 11:29) ‘this shall be unclean for you.’” Then after it takes upon itself in its mother's belly all the commandments which are in the Torah, [only] after that it is born. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 12:2), “When a woman emits her seed and bears a male.”

(Numb. 33:1:) THESE ARE THE STAGES <BY WHICH> OF THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL <WENT FORTH FROM THE LAND OF EGYPT>. Let our master instruct us: When a person is being pursued by robbers and brigands,¹Gk.: lestai. is it permissible for such a one to profane the Sabbath. Thus have our masters taught: When a person is being pursued by robbers and brigands, such a one does profane the Sabbath to save his life.²Tanh., Numb. 10:1; Numb. R. 23:1; see RH 2:5; ‘Eruv 45a; Ta‘an. 14a. We therefore find in the case of David, that when Saul sought to kill him, he fled from him and was saved.³According to Men. 95b, David’s eating of the consecrated bread (I Sam. 21:7 [6]) on the day of his flight (vs. 11 [10]) took place on the Sabbath. Our masters have said: Once upon a time evil documents came from the Empire for the leading citizens of Sepphoris.⁴The traditional Tanhuma, Numb. 10:1, adds, “On the Sabbath.” <The citizens> came to R. Eliezer ben Parta <and> said to him: Evil documents have come to us from the Empire. What do you say? Shall we flee? Since he was afraid to tell them to flee on the Sabbath, he said to them: Are you asking me? Go and ask Jacob, Moses, and David. With reference to Jacob, it is written (in Hos. 12:13 [12]): THEN JACOB FLED. With reference to Moses, it is written (in Exod. 2:15): BUT MOSES FLED FROM PHARAOH. With reference to David, it is written (in I Sam. 19:18) NOW DAVID FLED AND ESCAPED. It also says (in Is. 26:20): GO, MY PEOPLE, ENTER YOUR CHAMBERS…. But where is it shown that the saving of life overrides the Sabbath? Where it is written (in Lev. 18:5): YOU SHALL KEEP MY STATUTES AND ORDINANCES, FOR IT IS THROUGH PERFORMING THEM THAT A PERSON SHALL LIVE and not die through them. It is also written, with reference to circumcision (in Lev. 12:3): AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY THE FLESH OF HIS FORESKIN SHALL BE CIRCUMCISED, even on the Sabbath. Now are not < these > words <an argument> qal wahomer? If circumcision, which concerns <but> one out of the 248 [human] members, overrides the Sabbath, how much the more in the case of the whole body. The Holy One said [to Israel]: My children, be mindful of my ordinances and keep the Torah, for how many miracles and wonders have I done for you from the day that you went forth from Egypt! I cast down those who hated you, I had you pass through the sea, I cast fear and trembling on your enemies, I destroyed the Amorites along with Sihon and Og, and during the whole forty years that you were in the wilderness I did not forsake you for a single hour. Moreover, how many snakes and scorpions did I exterminate in your presence. It is so stated (in Deut. 8:15): (GOD) WHO LED YOU THROUGH THE GREAT AND TERRIBLE WILDERNESS WITH ITS FIERY SERPENTS AND SCORPIONS. Therefore, the Holy One said to Moses: Write down the stages by which Israel journeyed in the wilderness, so that they will know how many miracles I performed for them during each and every stage. {Thus it is stated (in Numb. 33:1–2):} [Where is it shown? From what they read on the matter (in Numb. 33:1–2):] THESE ARE THE STAGES <BY WHICH> THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL <WENT FORTH FROM THE LAND OF EGYPT>…. AND MOSES WROTE DOWN THEIR STARTING POINGS, STAGE BY STAGE, ACCORDING TO THE COMMAND OF THE LORD.

Let our master instruct us: When a person is being pursued by troops and brigands,¹Gk.: lestai. is it permissible for such a one to profane the Sabbath? Thus have our masters taught: When a person is being pursued by troops and brigands, such a one does profane the Sabbath to save his life.²Numb. R. 23:1; see RH 2:5; ‘Eruv 45a; Ta‘an. 14a. We therefore find in the case of David, that when Saul sought to kill him, he fled from him and was saved.³According to Men. 95b, David’s eating of the consecrated bread (I Sam. 21:7) on the day of his flight (vs. 11) took place on the Sabbath. Our masters have said, “There is a story about a time when evil documents came from the empire for the leading citizens of SepphorIs on the Sabbath. [The citizens] came to R. Eliezer ben Parta [and] said to him, ‘Evil documents have come to us from the empire. What do you say? Shall we flee?’ Since he was afraid to tell them to flee, he said to them. ‘Are you asking me? Go and ask Jacob, Moses, and David.’” With reference to Jacob, it is written (in Hos. 12:13), “Then Jacob fled.” With reference to Moses, it is written (in Exod. 2:15), “but Moses fled from Pharaoh.” With reference to David, it is written (in I Sam. 19:18) “Now David fled and escaped.” It also says (in Is. 26:20), “Go, My people, enter your chambers […].” But where is it shown that the saving of life overrides the Sabbath? Where it is written (in Lev. 18:5), “You shall keep My statutes and ordinances, for it is through performing them that a person shall live,” and not that he die through them. It is also written, with reference to circumcision (in Lev. 12:3), “And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.” It shall be circumcised, and even on the Sabbath. Now are not [these] words [an a fortiori argument] qal wahomer? If circumcision, which concerns [but] one out of the 248 [human] members, overrides the Sabbath, how much the more in the case of the whole body. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, “My children, be mindful of My ordinances and keep the Torah, for how many miracles and wonders have I done for you from the day that you went forth from Egypt! I cast down those who hated you, I had you pass through the sea, I cast fear and trembling on your enemies, as stated (in Exod. 15:15), ‘Then were the chiefs of Edom bewildered....’ I destroyed the Amorites [along with] Sihon and Og, and during the whole forty years that you were in the wilderness I did not forsake you for even a single hour. Moreover, how many snakes and scorpions did I exterminate for your sake, as stated (in Deut. 8:15), ‘(God) who led you through the great and terrible wilderness with its fiery serpents and scorpions,’ and I did not let them hurt you.” Therefore, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses, “Write down the stages by which Israel journeyed in the wilderness, so that they will know how many miracles I performed for them during each and every stage.” Where is it shown? From what they read on the matter (in Numb. 33:1-2), “These are the stages [by which] the Children of Israel [went forth from the land of Egypt]…. And Moses wrote down their starting points, stage by stage, according to the command of the Lord.”

(Job 29:4:) WHEN I WAS IN THE DAYS OF MY YOUTH (horef),²Horef also means “winter.” Buber notes here that in the following simile, the infant in the womb is being protected in the womb as the winter rain protects the soil. [WHEN THE GOD'S COMPANY WAS OVER MY TENT. These words teach about the infant.] Just as the rain is at work in the soil for it to become muddy, so the infant is muddy in its mother's womb. {WHEN THE GOD'S COMPANY WAS OVER MY TENT. These words teach about the infant.} Moreover, just as the infant stays muddy, [so is a person muddied] by sins, so that misfortunes come upon him. At that time < Job > said (in Job 29:2): O THAT I WERE AS IN THE MONTHS OF OLD, AS IN THE DAYS WHEN GOD WATCHED OVER ME, and would that I had the days which I had when I was in my mother's belly! What does he finally say (in vs. 4)? WHEN I WAS IN THE DAYS OF MY YOUTH. R. Abbahu said: The infant comes out of the mother's belly covered with slime and covered with blood; yet everyone praises and cherishes it, especially when it is a male.³Tanh., Lev. 8:11; PRK 9:6. Ergo (in Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE.

Rabbi Pinḥas ben Yair began: “If you seek it like silver…” (Proverbs 2:4). If you seek matters of Torah like these hidden treasures, the Holy One blessed be He will not withhold your reward. This is analogous to a person, if he loses a sela or a kilarin²²This was a valuable ornament of gold inlaid with a jewel. in his house, he will kindle several lamps, several wicks, until he finds them. The matter can be inferred a fortiori; if for these, that [enhance] the temporal life of this world, a person kindles several lamps and several wicks until he discovers them and finds them, matters of Torah, that [are essential for] life in this world and in the World to Come, do you not need to search for them like these hidden treasures? That is: “If you seek it like silver….” Rabbi Elazar said: In all my days, no one preceded me to the study hall and I did not leave a person there and exit. One time I awoke early and I found the collectors of manure and collectors of straw,²³These individuals would arise very early to collect straw and manure from public thoroughfares in order to sell them as fertilizer. They had begun their work before Rabbi Elazar had gone to the study hall. and I said: “If you seek it like silver and search for it like for hidden treasures, then you will understand fear of the Lord” (Proverbs 2:4–5). We are not even like the collectors of manure and collectors of straw. Thus we have learned that Rabbi Pinḥas ben Yair used to say: Alacrity leads to cleanliness. Cleanliness leads to purity. Purity leads to sanctity. Sanctity leads to humility. Humility leads to fear of sin. Fear of sin leads to piety. Piety leads to the Divine Spirit. The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead. The resurrection of the dead leads to Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory.
Alacrity leads to cleanliness, as it is stated: “He shall complete atoning²⁴The term kapara means atonement as well as cleanliness. This verse, which is about the service of the High Priest in the Temple on Yom Kippur, indicates that it is the completion of a service, which is accomplished through alacrity, that leads to atonement, or cleanliness. for the Sanctuary” (Leviticus 16:20). Cleanliness leads to purity, as it is stated: “The priest shall atone for her and she will be purified” (Leviticus 12:8). Purity leads to sanctity, as it is stated: “He shall purify it and he shall sanctify it” (Leviticus 16:19). Sanctity leads to humility, as it is stated: “For so said the Exalted and Most High, who abides forever and whose name is holy: Exalted and holy I will dwell and I will be with the downtrodden and lowly” (Isaiah 57:15). Humility leads to fear of sin, as it is stated: “In the wake of humility is fear of the Lord…” (Proverbs 22:4). Fear of sin leads to piety, as it is stated: “Then you spoke in a vision to your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20).²⁵Some suggest that the text here should read: “The mercy [ḥesed] of the Lord is forever and ever upon those who fear Him” (Psalms 103:17), in accordance with the parallel text of the Jerusalem Talmud (Shekalim 3:3). The term ḥesed, translated in the verse as mercy, is related to the term ḥasidut, piety (see Etz Yosef). Piety leads to the Divine Spirit, as it is stated: “Then you spoke in a vision to your pious ones” (Psalms 89:20). The Divine Spirit leads to the resurrection of the dead, as it is stated: “I will place My spirit in you, and you will live” (Ezekiel 37:14). The resurrection of the dead leads to Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory, as it is stated: “Behold, I am sending Elijah the prophet to you [before the coming of the great and terrible day of the Lord]” (Malachi 3:23).²⁶“The great and terrible day of the Lord” is understood as a reference to the resurrection of the dead. Elijah will come before the resurrection of the dead, but it is the need to perform the resurrection of the dead that leads to his coming (Etz Yosef).
Rabbi Matna said: What wisdom made as a crown on its head, humility made as a sandal on its heel. What wisdom made a crown on its head [roshah], as it is stated: “The beginning of wisdom is fear of the Lord” (Psalms 111:10), humility made a sandal on its heel [akevah], as it is stated: “In the wake of [ekev] humility is fear of the Lord…” (Proverbs 22:4).
The resurrection of the dead is by means of Elijah the prophet, of blessed memory. That is what is written: “Then you will understand fear of the Lord, and you will find knowledge of ” (Proverbs 2:5), this is the Divine Spirit.²⁷Commentaries struggle to understand this line, which does not prove that resurrection of the dead is by means of Elijah. Some suggest that it be deleted (Etz Yosef). Others suggest that this is a proof that alacrity eventually leads to understanding via the Divine Spirit, as indicated above. This is because the verse that precedes the one cited here relates to alacrity (Midrash HaMevoar).
Rabbi Simon [said] in the name of Rabbi Ḥalafta: [This is analogous] to a royal adviser who grew prominent in the king’s palace. The king said to him: ‘Make a request; what shall I give you?’ The adviser said: If I request silver and gold, he will give them to me; gems and pearls, he will give them to me. He said: I will request the king’s daughter, and everything will be included. So too, “In Givon, the Lord appeared to Solomon in a dream at night; God said: Request; what shall I give you?” (I Kings 3:5). Solomon said: If I request silver, gold, gems and pearls, he will give them to me. But I will request wisdom and everything will be included. That is what is written: “Give Your servant an attentive heart” (I Kings 3:9). The Holy One blessed be He said to him: ‘Solomon, you requested wisdom and you did not request wealth and property and the lives of your enemies. By your life, wisdom is granted you, and thereby, I will give you wealth and property.’ Immediately, “Solomon awakened and behold, a dream” (I Kings 3:15). Rabbi Yitzḥak said: The dream was fulfilled; a donkey brayed and he knew what it was braying, a bird tweeted and he knew what it was tweeting. Immediately, “he came to Jerusalem and stood before the Ark of the Covenant of the Lord. He sacrificed burnt offerings, he performed peace offerings, and he made a feast for all his servants” (I Kings 3:15). Rabbi Elazar said: From here it is derived that one makes a feast upon completion of the Torah. Rabbi Yudan said: It is to teach you that anyone who teaches Torah in public is privileged to have the Divine Spirit rest upon him, as so Solomon did. He taught and the Divine Spirit rested upon him and he composed three books: Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, and Song of Songs.

Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel: Beit Shammai said the heavens were created first and after that the earth was created. And Beit Hillel said the earth was created first and afterwards the heavens. From one point of view the former had reason for their words, and from another point of view the latter had reason for their words. According to the view of Beit Shammai in that they said the heavens were created first and the earth later, was the parable of a king who made a throne for himself, and then he made his footstool, as the Holy One, blessed be He said "The heavens are my throne and the earth is the footstool of my feet" (Isaiah 46:1). According to the view of Beit Hillel in that they said the earth was created first and the heavens created afterwards, was the parable of a king who built a palace; after he built the lower portions then he built the upper portions, thus "In the day that the Hashem God made earth and heaven" (Genesis 2:4). Rabbi Judah bar Ilai said "this verse supports Beit Hillel "before you founded the earth" (Psalms 120:26) and [the verse supporting] afterwards "and the heavens are the work of your hands" (Psalms 120:26)". Rabbi Chanin said "from the text that was cited supporting Beit Shammai, from there Beit Hillel refute them: "and the earth was" (Genesis 1:2), the earth was already extant". Rabbi Yochanan in the name of the sages said "regarding the creation the heavens were first, and regarding completion the earth was first". Rabbi Tanchuma said "I will tell the reasons for this; regarding creation the heavens were first, as it is said "In the beginning God created" (Genesis 1:1), and regarding completion the earth was first, as it is said "In the day that the Hashem God made earth and heaven" (Genesis 2:4)". Rabbi Shimon son of Yochai said "I am amazed at how the fathers of the world, Beit Shammai and Beit Hillel, were divided on the creation of the heavens and the earth, I would say to both of them that they were not created, but were like a stew pot and like its lid, as it is said "I call unto them, they stood up together" (Isaiah 48: 13)"". Said Rabbi Eliezer the son of Rabbi Shimon "if it is according to the opinion of my father, why in one place does the earth precede the heavens and in the other place the heavens precede the earth? This teaches that they both have weight on either side (are equal). In every place Abraham precedes Isaac and Jacob, and in one place it says "and I will remember my covenant with Jacob" (Leviticus 26:42); this teaches that they both have weight on either side (are equal). In every place Moses precedes Aaron, and it one place it says "That is Aaron and Moses" (Exodus 6:26); this teaches that they both have weight on either side (are equal). In every place Joshua precedes Caleb, and in one place it says "except for Caleb the son of Jephuneh the Kenizzite, and Joshua the son of Nun" (Numbers 14:30); this teaches that they both have weight on either side (are equal). In every place the turtle-dove precedes the young pigeons and in one place, it says "and a young pigeon, or a turtle-dove for a sin offering" (Leviticus 12:6); this teaches that they both have weight on either side (are equal). And in every place the respect for a father precedes that of a mother, and in one place it says "You shall fear every man his mother, and his father" (Leviticus 19:3); this teaches that they both have weight on either side (are equal)." But the sages said: "the father precedes the mother because he and his mother are obliged to honor his father." In every place the creation of the heaven precedes the earth, and in one place it says "In the day that the Hashem God made earth and heaven" (Genesis 2:4); this tells us that they both have weight on either side (are equal).

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."

1) ("And on the eighth day he shall circumcise the flesh of his foreskin.") I might think either in the daytime or at night; it is, therefore, written "the day" — the day and not the night. This tells me (only) that one circumcised on the eighth day must be circumcised in the daytime. Whence do I derive the same for one who is circumcised on the ninth day or the tenth day or the eleventh day or on any other day? From "and on the day."

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."

1) (Vayikra 12:5) "And if a female she shall bear": This tells me only of (a child that is clearly) a female. Whence do I derive the same for one whose sex is in doubt and for a hermaphrodite? From "she shall bear." The criterion (for what follows) is the bearing (And since the sex here is in doubt, we assign her the days of cleanliness for a male, and the days of uncleanliness for a female.) "then she shall be unclean shvuayim": two weeks, fourteen days.

1) (Vayikra 12:6) ("And when the days of her purification are fulfilled (melos), for a son or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb in its first year for a burnt-offering, and a young pigeon or a turtle-dove for a sin-offering, to the door of the tent of meeting, to the Cohein.") "when they are fulfilled": She does not bring it in the midst of melos; if she does, she has not fulfilled her obligation. I might think that she may not bring it in the midst of melos (for this birth, even) for (the unfulfilled obligations for) previous births; it is, therefore, written "she shall bring." "for a son": she is liable for each son. "for a daughter": she is liable for each daughter. "or for a daughter": to include a woman who miscarried on the eve of the eighty-first day (of melos for a girl) as being liable for an offering, in accordance with the view of Beth Hillel. For Beth Shammai exempt her from an offering (for the miscarriage, even though it took place after melos [the end of the eightieth day]. For since an offering cannot be offered at night, it is considered as if it took place in the midst of melos). Beth Hillel queried Beth Shammai: How is the night preceding the eighty-first day different from the eighty-first day itself? (Furthermore,) if the former is equivalent to the latter for purposes of tumah (i.e., niddah), why should it not be so for purposes of an offering? Beth Shammai responded: No, if this is true of the eighty-first day, it is because she arrived at a time that she could bring an offering (for her first birth). Would you say the same for the night preceding the eighty-first day, when she has not arrived at a time that she can bring an offering? Beth Hillel: But this is refuted by the instance of a woman's miscarrying on the eighty-first day that falls on a Sabbath, in which instance she is liable for an offering even though that day (Sabbath) is not fit for an offering! Beth Shammai: No, for in that instance, even though it is not fit for an individual offering, it is fit for a communal offering, as opposed to the instance of a woman's miscarrying on the night preceding the eighty-first day, the night being fit neither for an individual offering nor for a communal offering.

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).

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).

Another interpretation (of Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED. This text is related (to Ps. 139:5): YOU HAVE FORMED ME BEHIND AND BEFORE, < AND YOU HAVE LAID YOUR HAND UPON ME >. The text speaks of the first Adam.⁴Tanh., Lev. 4:1; cf. Gen. R. 8:1; 14:5; Lev. R. 14:1; M. Pss. 139:6. [R. Johanan] said: It is written about him that there were two creations. There is a double Y (i.e., a double yod in Gen. 2:7): THE LORD GOD FORMED (YYTsR) THE HUMAN. One formation is in this world, and one is for the world to come. But in the case of cattle, wild beasts, and birds, for them < only > one formation is written (without a double Y in Gen. 2:19): SO OUT OF THE EARTH THE LORD GOD FORMED (YTsR) ALL THE WILD BEASTS OF THE FIELD < AND ALL THE BIRDS OF THE HEAVENS >. It therefore says (in Ps. 139:5): YOU HAVE FORMED ME BEHIND AND BEFORE. R. Simeon ben Laqish says: BEHIND (in the sense of what comes afterwards) < refers > to an event of the sixth day, and BEFORE < refers > to an event of the first day. What is the reason? {Resh Laqish said} [Thus has R. Simeon ben Laqish said] (in Gen. 1:2): AND THE SPIRIT OF GOD WAS HOVERING OVER THE FACE OF THE WATERS. This SPIRIT was the soul of the first Adam. It therefore says (in Ps. 139:5): YOU HAVE FORMED ME BEHIND AND BEFORE. BEHIND < refers > to an event of the sixth day, and BEFORE < refers > to an event of the first day. R. Eleazar ben Pedat says: BEHIND < refers > to an event of the sixth day, and BEFORE < refers > to an event of the sixth day. How so? Because the Holy One created six things on the sixth day. They were these: (1) The soul, (2) wild beasts, (3) cattle, (4) creeping things, (5) beasts of the earth, and (6) Adam and Eve. Now Adam's soul was created first, as stated (in Gen. 1:24): LET THE EARTH BRING FORTH A LIVING SOUL. LIVING SOUL can only be the soul of Adam, since it is stated (in Gen. 2:7): AND THE HUMAN (adam) BECAME A LIVING SOUL. Hence, BEFORE < refers > to the < first > event of the sixth day, and BEHIND < refers > to the sixth day, since < the Holy One > was occupied with him all of the sixth day. Ergo (in Ps. 139:5): YOU HAVE FORMED ME BEHIND AND BEFORE. BEHIND < refers > to an event of the sixth day, and BEFORE < refers > to an event of the sixth day. R. Samuel bar Nahman said: What is the meaning of BEHIND AND BEFORE? Having two faces, male and female. Hence it says (in Ps. 139:5): YOU HAVE FORMED ME BEHIND AND BEFORE.⁵Ber. 61a; ‘Eruv. 18a. Adam said: After the Holy One had created all the cattle and wild beasts, he created me. So it is with the infant. Before it comes forth from its mother's belly, the Holy One commands it: Eat of this, do not eat of that, (in Lev. 11:29:) THIS SHALL BE UNCLEAN FOR YOU. Then after it takes upon itself in its mother's belly all the commandments which are in the Torah, < only > after that it is born. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE.

Another interpretation (of Lev. 12:2), “and bears a male”: This text is related (to I Sam. 2:2), “There is no holy one like the Lord, for there is none beside You.” What is the meaning of “for there is none beside You (bltk, traditionally voweled as biltekha)?” A king of flesh and blood builds a palace,⁵Gk.: palatinos; Lat.: palatium. and his building outlasts (rt.: blh) him; but the Holy One, blessed be He, is outlasting the world, as it were, “for there is none outlasting you (reading bltk, voweled as ballotekha).”⁶Meg. 14a. (I Sam. 2:2, cont.:) “And there is no rock (tswr) like our God.” How so? Flesh and blood fashions (rt.: tswr) an image (rt.: tswr) upon the wall, but is he able to fashion (tswr) it upon the water? The Holy One, blessed be He, fashions (rt.: tswr) the embryo in its mother's belly in the middle of water. Ergo (in I Sam. 2:2), “and there is no rock (tswr) like our God.” Another interpretation (of I Sam. 2:2), “and there is no rock (tswr) like our God: Flesh and blood fashions (rt.: tswr) an image (rt.: tswr) upon the wall, but is he able to fashion (tswr) a spirit and a soul into it? The Holy One, blessed be He, fashions (rt.: tswr) the embryo in its mother's belly and places a spirit and soul into it. Ergo (in I Sam. 2:2), “and there is no rock (tswr) like our God.” Another interpretation (of I Sam. 2:2), “and there is no rock (tswr) like our God”: When flesh and blood fashions (rt.: tswr) an image (rt.: tswr), he (the fashioner) speaks, but his image does not speak. [Still, he] praises his image. In the case of the Holy One, blessed be He, however, His image stands up and praises Him. When flesh and blood wants to fashion an image, how many ingredients must he bring before he fashions it? But the Holy One, blessed be He, fashions an image out of a single drop (of seminal fluid). Come and see the peacock⁷Gk.: taos. in which there are three hundred sixty-six kinds of colors; yet it is created from a single drop of white stuff. Now you should not [only] speak about a bird, but also about a human being, who is fashioned from a single drop of white stuff. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 12:2), “When a woman emits her seed and bears a male.” Ergo (in I Sam. 2:2), “and there is no rock (tswr) like our God.” When a king of flesh and blood fashions an image, his image does not make [another] image; but when the Holy One, blessed be He, fashions an image, His image does make [another] image, for it fashions the woman, and the woman bears an image like it.

“Distribute a portion to seven, and also to eight, as you do not know what evil will be upon the earth” (Ecclesiastes 11:2).
“Distribute a portion to seven, and also to eight” – Rabbi Eliezer and Rabbi Yehoshua: Rabbi Eliezer says: “Distribute a portion to seven” – these are the seven days of the week, as it is stated: “It was on the seventh” (I Kings 18:44), on the day of Shabbat. “And also to eight” – these are the eight days of circumcision, as it is stated: “He put his face between his knees…” (I Kings 18:42).¹⁰These verses describe the prophet Elijah praying for an end to a protracted drought in the Land of Israel. Why between his knees? He said before the Holy One blessed be He: ‘Master of the universe, even if your descendants have only these two mitzvot to their credit, Shabbat and circumcision, it is fitting that You should have mercy on them.’
Rabbi Yehoshua says: “Distribute a portion to seven” – these are the seven days of Passover; “and also to eight” – these are the eight days of the festival.¹¹Sukkot From where do I derive to include Shavuot, Rosh Hashanah, and Yom Kippur? The verse states: “Also” – “and also” [and these are two] inclusions.¹²The term “also” is considered an inclusionary term, and the “and” preceding “also” is superfluous and therefore implies an additional inclusion. Therefore, the verse is understood to be adding Shavuot and the Days of Awe, i.e., Rosh HaShana and Yom Kippur. These days too are considered festivals, and the blessing of Sheheḥeyanu is recited, as on other festivals (Rabbi David Luria).
Rabbi Azarya says: “Distribute a portion to seven” – this is the generation that Moses circumcised after seven;¹³Seven generations after Abraham circumcised the members of his household. “and also to eight” – this is the generation that Joshua circumcised after eight, as it is written: “At that time, the Lord said to Joshua…circumcise the children of Israel a second time.” (Joshua 5:2). By inference, [this indicates] that [Moses] had circumcised them in the first instance. “Joshua made [flint knives] for himself [and circumcised the children of Israel at the Hill of the Foreskins]” (Joshua 5:3) – [the name of this place indicates] that they made it a hill with [all their] foreskins.
Rabbi Neḥemya interpreted the verse regarding the princes: “Distribute a portion to seven” – as it is written: “On the seventh day the prince of the children of Ephraim” (Numbers 7:48). “And also to eight” – as it is written: “On the eighth day the prince of the children of Manasseh (Numbers 7:54).¹⁴The reference is to the offerings of the princes of the tribes during the days of the inauguration of the Tabernacle. Rabbi Neḥemya is interpreting the verse as an allusion to the fact that Ephraim and Manasseh were counted as separate tribes and that their princes donated their offerings on separate days, despite the fact that they were both from Joseph (Etz Yosef).
Rabbi Yehuda interpreted the verse regarding the inauguration. “Distribute a portion to seven” – these are the seven days of inauguration, as it is stated: “For seven days He will inaugurate you” (Leviticus 8:33). “And also to eight” – as it is written: “It was on the eighth day (Leviticus 9:1).¹⁵The reference is thus to the special offerings that were given on the seven days of inauguration, as well as to the special offerings of the eighth day, when the Tabernacle began to function with its full level of sanctity. Both sets of offerings brought Israel atonement (Midrash HaMevo’ar).
Rabbi Huna said: “Distribute a portion to seven” – these are the seven days of menstruation;¹⁶See Leviticus 15:19. “and also to eight” – these are the eight days of circumcision, as it is stated: “And on the eighth day [the flesh of his foreskin] shall be circumcised” (Leviticus 12:3).¹⁷The connection between these two sets of laws is that if a couple observes the laws concerning the impurity imparted by menstruation they will merit to have children and fulfill the mitzva of circumcision (Etz Yosef).
Rabbi Levi said: “Distribute a portion to seven” – these are the seven days of the booth;¹⁸The mitzva to dwell in a booth [sukka] for the seven days of Sukkot. “and also to eight” – as it is stated: “On the eighth day [you shall have] an assembly” (Numbers 29:35).
Rabbi Elazar ben Rabbi Shimon grew weak and his arm was uncovered. His wife saw him, and she smiled, cried, and said: ‘Happy am I with what was my lot in this world. Happy am I that I cleaved to the body of this righteous one.’ She cried and said: ‘Woe is me that the body of this righteous one is going into the ground.’ As he was dying, he said to her: ‘I am dying; however, maggots will have no power over me, other than one worm that is destined to bore a hole behind my ear, for one time I was entering [a place] and I heard the voice of a certain person who was cursing,¹⁹He was demeaning Torah scholars. and although I had the ability to punish him, I did not do so.’ When he died he was buried in Gush Ḥalav. Rabbi Shimon would appear to the residents of Meron,²⁰In a dream and he would say to them: ‘One right eye that I had,²¹My son, who was as dear to me as my right eye. and you do not bury him alongside me?’ The residents of Meron would go and seek to bring him, and the residents of Gush Ḥalav would emerge against them with clubs and spears. One time, with the approach of the great fast,²²Yom Kippur [the residents of Meron] said: This time we will bring him, while they are preoccupied.²³While they are preoccupied with preparations for Yom Kippur. They went and sought to bring him, and two snakes of fire emerged and went before them. They said: ‘This is the time that we will bring him.’²⁴They interpreted the appearance of the fiery snakes as a sign that they would receive divine assistance. Once they reached the cave, the two snakes stood to the side. They said: ‘Who will enter and bring him?’ She²⁵Rabbi Elazar’s wife said: ‘I will enter and bring him, as I know an distinguishing mark in him.’ She entered and found that worm that was sitting and boring a hole behind his ear. She sought to remove it. She heard a Divine Voice saying: ‘Leave the creditor to collect its debt.’ They brought him and placed him alongside his father. From that moment on, Rabbi Shimon did not appear to the residents of Meron.
When Rabbi Elazar ben Rabbi Shimon would enter the study hall, the face of Rabbi [Yehuda HaNasi] would become gloomy.²⁶This was because Rabbi Elazar would prevail over Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi in their halakhic disputes. His father²⁷Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel would say to him: ‘My son, it is proper [that he prevails], as he is a lion, son of a lion, and you are a lion, son of a fox.’ When he died, he sent and proposed to his wife.²⁸After Rabbi Elazar died, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi proposed marriage to Rabbi Elazar’s wife, who was a righteous woman in her own right. She sent and said to him: ‘Shall a vessel that was used by the sacred be used by the profane?’ He said to her: ‘What did he do that I do not do like him?’ She said to him: ‘When he would sit and devote himself to Torah study, he would completely devote himself. He would say: May all the suffering of Israel come upon me, and it would come [upon him]. But when it came time to engage [in Torah study], he would say: Each and every one should go to its place.’²⁹He demanded that the suffering leave him so that he could study Torah with a clear mind. He said to her: ‘I, too, will do so.’ He called upon them to come, and they came. He sought for them to leave, but they did not leave. Some say, for thirteen years to the day he suffered from toothaches. He sent and told her.³⁰Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi sent a message to Rabbi Elazar’s widow that since he had now experienced so much suffering, she should marry him. She said to him: ‘I have heard that one elevates in matters of sanctity and one does not downgrade.’³¹Therefore, she would not marry him. “And also to eight” – as it is stated: “On the eighth day [you shall have] an assembly.”³²This implies that one is meant to always elevate in matters of sanctity, just as the seven days of Sukkot are followed by the Day of Assembly, Shemini Atzeret.

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.

2) A certain disciple said before R. Akiva: ("and on the day") must be stated (for a different reason, and cannot be used for the above derivation). For if it were written "and she shall be tamei seven days and on the eighth he shall circumcise," I might think (that there is a combination here of) seven (for tumah) and eight (for circumcision), so that circumcision takes place on the fifteenth day. It must, therefore, be written "and on the day" (i.e., on the day after the seventh day). R. Akiva responded: "You have dived into mighty waters and come up with a shard!" Is it not already written (Bereshith 17:12): "And at eight days old there shall be circumcised unto you every male throughout your generations!"

2) R. Yehudah b. Roetz was asked by his disciples: We hear "shivim" ("seventy," for we follow the written form [without a vav after the beth]). Is it possible that she is unclean for seventy days? He answered: "Tumah" and "taharah" (cleanliness) are mentioned both in respect to a male and in respect to a female. Just as the days of her taharah (sixty-six) are double those for a male, so the days of her tumah (fourteen) are double those for a male. After they left, he went after them and said to them: What I told you was not really necessary, for we follow the spoken form (and not the written), but this is the reasoning behind it: "Tumah" and "taharah" are mentioned both in respect to a male and in respect to a female. Just as the days of her taharah are double those for a male, so the days of her tumah are double those for a male. — But perhaps go in this direction: A male, whose days of taharah are few (thirty-three), its days of tumah are few (seven). A female, whose days of taharah are many (sixty-six), how much more so should its days of tumah be few! It is, therefore, (to negate this) written: "then she shall be unclean shvuayim" (the spoken form), two weeks, fourteen days.

2) And blood (i.e., your argument from tumah) is no refutation, for if a woman miscarries in the midst of melos, her blood is tamei and yet she is exempt from an offering (so that there is no necessary correction between the two). Beth Hillel said to them: "or for a daughter": to include a woman who miscarried on the eve of the eighty-first day (of melos for a girl) as being liable for an offering.

2) This tells me (as not imparting tumah by carrying) only of the lesser forms of tumah (such as that of a sheretz (a creeping thing) or of carrion, which do not make a man tamei). Whence do I derive the same for graver forms of tumah, such as dead-body tumah, and that of cohabiting with a niddah, and all (forms of tumah) which make a man tamei? From "anything that is tamei" (imparts tumah to consecrated flesh) — even one who is lacking atonement (viz. Vayikra 12:7). R. Yossi said: Whence is it derived that fourth-degree tumah invalidates consecrated offerings, and that it follows a fortiori? (From the following:) If one lacking atonement, who is permitted to eat terumah, invalidates consecrated offerings, then third-degree tumah, which does invalidate terumah, does it not follow that it should invalidate offerings (in rendering it fourth-degree tumah)? We derive, then, (the invalidation of) third-degree tumah from the verse ("and the flesh that shall touch, etc."), and of fourth-degree tumah from the argument a fortiori.

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.

[(Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE.] This text is related (to I Sam. 2:2): THERE IS NO HOLY ONE LIKE THE LORD, FOR THERE IS NONE BESIDE YOU. What is the meaning of FOR THERE IS NONE BESIDE YOU (BLTK, traditionally voweled as biltekha).⁶Tanh., Lev. 4:2. Simply this: A king of flesh and blood builds a palace,⁷Gk.: palatinos; Lat.: palatium. and his building outlasts (rt.: BLH) him; but the Holy One is outlasting the world, as it were, FOR THERE IS NONE OUTLASTING YOU (reading BLTK, voweled as ballotekha).⁸Meg. 14a. (I Sam. 2:2, cont.:) AND THERE IS NO ROCK (TsWR) LIKE OUR GOD. How so? Flesh and blood fashions (rt.: TsWR) an image (rt.: TsWR) upon the wall, but is he able to fashion (TsWR) it upon the water? The Holy One fashions (rt.: TsWR) the embryo in its mother's belly in the middle of water. Ergo (in I Sam. 2:2): AND THERE IS NO ROCK (TsWR) LIKE OUR GOD.

Another interpretation (of Lev. 12:2), “When a woman emits her seed [and bears a male]”: If the woman comes first, she bears a male; if the man comes first, [she bears] a female.⁸Ber. 60a; Nid. 31ab; see above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 8:18; cf. Sifra to Lev. 22:1-9, (217: Emor, Parashah 4). R. Abbin the Levite said, “The text has given you a clue (in vs. 5), ‘If she bears a female’ (with no mention of her giving her seed). If the man comes first, a female is produced; [if] the woman comes first, a male is produced. Thus it is stated (in vs. 2), ‘When a woman emits her seed and bears a male.’” R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “Therefore, the male is dependent (for his procreation) upon the woman; and the female, upon the man. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 22:20-23), ‘Behold Milcah, she also has borne sons to your brother Nahor, Uz his first-born and Buz his brother…. And Bethuel brought forth Rebekah.’ It also says (in I Chron. 2:48-49), ‘Maacah, the concubine of Caleb bore [Sheber] and Tirhanah. She also bore Shaaph the father of Madmannah, Sheva the father of Machbenah and the father of Gibea. And the daughter of Caleb] was Achsah.’ Thus females are dependent (for procreation) upon the man; and the males, upon the woman. It is therefore stated (in Lev. 12:2), ‘When a woman emits her seed.’” R. Ayyevu said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, performs a miraculous act with a person. When a person is put in a hot water for [only] a single day, is not his life struggling [to survive] because of it? But when an infant is put in its mother's belly for nine months,⁹According to Lev. R. 14:3, a woman’s womb is at boiling temperature. the Holy One, blessed be He, protects it.” Our masters have said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, has performed a miraculous act with this person. When the person is put in a bath tub¹⁰Gk.: embate. for one day, does not his life fail because of it? But when the infant is put in its mother's womb for nine months, its life does not fail because of it. Why? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, is performing a miraculous act with it (i.e., with the infant).” Job said (in Job 36:3), “I will fetch (‘S’) my knowledge from afar.” Now Job saw people, with a woman ('shh) giving birth to a man,¹¹‘ShH and ‘S’ are more alike in Hebrew than the transliterations show. In the unpointed text S (sin) and Sh (shin) are the same letter. Also a final H (he) sounds so much like a final ‘(alef) that Rabbinic Hebrew sometimes conflates the two. Thus the midrash understands Job 36:3 to mean that the WOMAN in Lev. 12:2 was Job’s KNOWLEDGE FROM AFAR. and also the ship (of Prov. 31:14) sails in the midst of the waters inch by inch.¹²The image suggests Prov. 31:14, according to which the heroic wife is LIKE MERCHANT SHIPS; SHE BRINGS HER FOOD FROM AFAR. So Enoch Zundel in his commentary, ‘Ets Yosef, here on Tanh., Lev. 4:3. Now he was surprised over these things and said (in Job 36:3), “I (like the woman of Prov. 31:14) will fetch my knowledge from afar.” R. Judah [bar Simon] said, “A woman's two haunches become like two haunches of stone, in order that she may have strength when she gives birth. As thus it is stated (in Exod. 1:16), ‘look at the birthstool (literally, the pair of stones).’” R. Meir said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, performs a miraculous act with the infant. How? Before the woman bears, she retains blood; after she gives birth, the blood departs to the breasts and becomes milk. Then the infant nurses on them.” R. Abba bar Kahana said, “The Holy One, blessed be He, performs a miraculous act with the infant. How? When the funda (i.e., pouch)¹³The Latin word means “moneybag”. is full with its mouth down, the coins are scattered; but the woman has her funda [with its opening] down, and the fetus is retained.” Another interpretation: An animal walks about with the fetus in the midst of its belly; but a woman walks about erect with the fetus in the midst of her belly, and the Holy One, blessed be He, preserves it.

Another interpretation (of I Sam. 2:2): AND THERE IS NO ROCK (TsWR) LIKE OUR GOD. When flesh and blood fashions (rt.: TsWR) an image (rt.: TsWR), he (the fashioner) speaks, but his image does not speak. [Still, he] praises his image. In the case of the Holy One, however, his image stands up and praises him. [Another interpretation (of I Sam. 2:2:) THERE IS NO ROCK (TsWR) LIKE OUR GOD.] When flesh and blood wants to fashion an image, how many ingredients must he bring before he fashions it? But the Holy One fashions an image out of a single drop (of seminal fluid). Come and see the peacock⁹Gk.: taos. in which there are three hundred sixty[-five] kinds of colors; yet it is created from a single drop of white stuff. Now you should not < only > speak about a bird, but also about a human being, who is fashioned from a single drop of white stuff. Thus it is stated (in Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE. [Ergo (in I Sam. 2:2): AND THERE IS NO ROCK (TsWR) LIKE OUR GOD. Another interpretation: When a king of flesh and blood fashions a image, his image does not make < another > image; but when the Holy One fashions an image, his image does make < another > image, for it fashions the woman, and the woman bears an image like it. (Lev. 2:12:) WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED.]

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.

3) "and on the day": We are hereby taught that all of the day is valid for circumcision, but "the zealous are quick to do mitzvoth, as it is written (Bereshith 22:3): "And Abraham rose early in the morning" (for the binding of Isaac) "and he (himself) saddled his ass." "on the eighth day he shall circumcise," even on the Sabbath. And how am I to fulfill (Shemoth 31:14): "Those who desecrate it shall die"? With all of the other labors, other than that of circumcision. — But perhaps I am to fulfill "Those who desecrate it shall die" even with circumcision. And how am I to fulfill "on the eighth day he shall circumcise"? Except on the Sabbath. It is, therefore, written (to negate this) "and on the day," (to connote) even on the Sabbath.

3) (Vayikra 12:5) "and sixty days, etc.": I might think, either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "sixty day" (lit.) — Just as one day is consecutive, so are sixty. I might think that the sixty are consecutive, but the six may be either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "and sixty days and six days." — Just as the sixty are consecutive, so the six are consecutive. Why need "sixty-six days" be written? (I would know that it is double the thirty-three of a male.) (For I would reason:) If for a male, for which the days of uncleanliness are few (seven), the days of cleanliness are few (thirty-three), then for a female, for which the days of uncleanliness are many (fourteen), how much more so should the days of cleanliness be few. It is, therefore, written "and sixty-six days she shall abide."

3) "she shall bring a lamb in its first year for a burnt-offering": its first year, and not a calendar year. "and a young pigeon or a turtle-dove for a sin-offering": either one, (but not a beast at all). "for a sin-offering": and not a beast for a sin-offering. For does it not follow (that he should be able to bring a beast as a sin-offering), viz.: If in a place (e.g., a rich leper, a clean Nazirite or a high-priest on Yom Kippur) where a bird sin-offering with a beast burnt-offering are not kasher, a beast sin-offering with a beast burnt-offering are kasher, here, where a bird sin-offering with a beast burnt-offering are kasher, how much more so should a beast sin-offering with a beast burnt-offering be kasher; it is, therefore, written "and a pigeon or a turtle-dove for a sin-offering" — either one, (but not a beast at all). "to the door of the tent of meeting to the Cohein": We are hereby taught she tends to them and brings them to the door of the tent of meeting to the Cohein.

3) I might think any color of flow is tamei; it is, therefore, written "blood." If "blood," I would think one color of blood (i.e., red), (but) ("and she shall be cleansed from the source of her) bloods" (Vayikra 12:7) teaches us that many bloods are tamei in her: red, black, bright-colored crocus, (and the color of) earth-water, and mixed wine. Beth Shammai say: Even like that of fenugrec and roast flesh extract. Beth Hillel rule the latter to be tahor.

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.

3) (Vayikra 5:7) "one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering": (The dedication of) the sin-offering must precede (the dedication of) the burnt-offering. Alternately: that the burnt-offering be of the same species as the sin-offering (turtle-dove or young pigeon, respectively) (and that) if he separated his sin-offering and died, his heirs bring his burnt-offering. Alternately: What is the intent of "one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering?" I might think that since two (birds) are brought in place of a (lamb) sin-offering, they should both be sin-offerings, it is, therefore, written "one for a sin-offering" — and not two; "one for a burnt-offering" — and not two.

(Lev. 27:1-2:) “Then the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, ‘Speak unto the Children of Israel [and say unto them], “When anyone explicitly vows to the Lord [the value (rt.: 'rk) of human beings (npshwt)].”’” This text is related (to Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “Whoever performs deeds like Mine shall be [considered] like Me.” R. Levi said, “[The matter] is comparable to a king who built a city and lit two lanterns¹³Gk.: phanoi, also panoi. within it, and [so] all of those multitudes [in the city] called him, Augustus.¹⁴Agustah, from the Lat.: Augusta. The king said, ‘When anyone builds a city like this and lights two lanterns in it, call him Augustus and I will not be jealous of him.’ Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, created the heavens and set in them [two lanterns, to give light to the world], the sun and the moon, as stated (in Gen. 1:17), ‘And God set them in the firmament of the heavens to give light upon the earth.’ The Holy One, blessed be He, said, ‘Whoever makes [lights] like these shall be equal to Me.’ Thus it is stated (in Ps. 89:7), ‘For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?’ These words can only be words [referring to] light, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:4), ‘He shall set (rt.: 'rk) up [the lamps] upon the unalloyed lampstand.’ Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), ‘For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord?’” That is what is written (in Is. 40:25), “’Then unto whom will you liken Me that I should be equal,’ says the Holy [One].” Do not read it as “says [the Holy],” but as “holy, will be said” (meaning, the term holy is applied to him just as holy is applied to Me); in the same way that it is written (Isaiah 17:7), “to the holy.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arok) to the Lord”; R. Eebon the Levite said, “Who like You enlightens the eyes of those in the dark, as it is stated (in Lev. 24:4), ‘He shall set (ya'arok) up [the lamps] upon the unalloyed lampstand…?’”¹⁵Above, 8:20. Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arok) to the Lord”: R. Eebon the Levite said, “Who like You clothes the naked”…. Another interpretation: “Who like you feeds the hungry?” “Is comparable (rt.: 'rk)” can only refer to the hungry, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8-9), “[He shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) it (i.e., the shewbread) before the Lord regularly] on every Sabbath day […] And it shall belong to Aaron and his children, who shall eat it.” Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord” (in feeding the hungry)? Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord”: When the Holy One, blessed be He, created the world and wanted to create Adam, the ministering angels said to Him, (in Ps. 8:5), “’What is a human that You are mindful of him, and a person that You should think of him?’ What do You want from this human?” The Holy One, blessed be He, said to them, “Who is to fulfill my Torah and My commandments?” They said to Him, “We will fulfill Your Torah.” He said to them, “It is written in [the Torah] (in Numb. 19:14), ‘This is the Torah: When a person dies in a tent,’ but there are none among you who die. It is written in [the Torah] (in Lev. 12:2), ‘When a woman emits her seed and bears a male,’ but there are none among you who bear [children]. It is written in [the Torah] (in Lev. 11:21), ‘these you may eat,’ (and in Lev 11:4) ‘these you may not eat,’ but in your case there is no eating among you. Ergo, the Torah is not going forth to you,” as stated (in Job 28:13), “nor is it found in the land of the living.” [Rather] when the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel that they should make a tabernacle and an altar of burnt offering, they began to sacrifice within it. [Then] the Holy One, blessed be He, began to give them several commandments. These commands concerned every single thing, and they carried them out. The Holy One, blessed be He, began to say to the ministering angels, “’Who among you would prepare (rt.: 'rk)’ [everything] for Me just as Israel prepares (rt.: 'rk) for Me, that you were saying to Me (in Ps. 8:5), ‘What is a human that You are mindful of him…?’ They prepare (rt.: 'rk) sacrifices for Me, just as stated (in Lev. 1:12), ‘and the priest shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) them,’ (in Lev. 4:10), ‘upon the altar of burnt offering.’ They set (rt.: 'rk) tables for Me, just as stated (in Lev. 24:8), ‘He shall arrange (rt.: 'rk) it (i.e., the shewbread) before the Lord regularly on every Sabbath day.’ Or is there anyone among you that evaluates the value of human beings, as stated (in Lev. 27:2), ‘When anyone explicitly vows to the Lord the value (rt.: 'rk) of human beings (npshwt).’” Ergo (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies?”

[Another interpretation (of Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE.] If the woman comes first, she bears a male; if the man comes first, {he sires} [she bears] a female.¹⁰Tanh., Lev. 3:3; Ber. 60a; Nid. 31ab; see above, Tanh. (Buber), Gen. 8:18; cf. Sifra to Lev. 22:1–9, (217: Emor, parashah 4). R. Abbin [Berabbi] the Levite said: The text has given you a clue (in vs. 5): IF SHE BEARS A FEMALE (with no mention of her giving her seed). If the man comes first, a female is produced; < if > the woman comes first, a male is produced. Thus it is stated (in vs. 2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE. R. Hiyya bar Abba said: Therefore, the male is dependent (for his procreation) upon the woman; and the female, upon the man. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 22:20–23): BEHOLD MILCAH, SHE ALSO HAS BORNE SONS TO YOUR BROTHER NAHOR: UZ HIS FIRST-BORN AND BUZ HIS BROTHER,… AND BETHUEL BROUGHT FORTH REBEKAH. It also says (in I Chron. 2:48–49): [MAACAH], THE CONCUBINE OF CALEB BORE¹¹Buber’s Oxford MS recorded this verb in the feminine, but Buber emended it to the grammatically incorrect masculine of the Masoretic text. {SACAR} [SHEBER] AND TIRHANAH. SHE ALSO BORE {SHATSAPH} [SHAAPH] THE FATHER OF MADMANNAH, SHEVA THE FATHER OF MACHBENAH AND THE FATHER OF {GIBEAH} [GIBEA]. AND THE DAUGHTER [OF CALEB] WAS ACHSAH. Thus females are dependent (for procreation) upon the man; and the males, upon the woman. It is therefore stated (in Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED. R. Ayyevu said: The Holy One performs a miraculous act with a person. When a person is put in a furnace room¹²Gk.: kaminos (“oven”). Here the word refers to the furnace room of a bathhouse. for < only > a single day, is not his life struggling < to survive > because of it? But when an infant is put in its mother's belly for nine months,¹³According to Lev. R. 14:3, a woman’s womb is at boiling temperature. the Holy One protects it. Our masters have said: The Holy One has performed a miraculous act with this person. When the person is put in a bath tub¹⁴Gk.: embate. for one day, does not his life fail because of it? But when the infant is put in its mother's womb for nine months, its life does not fail because of it. [Why? Because the Holy One is performing a miraculous act with it (i.e., with the infant).] Job said (in Job 36:3): I WILL FETCH ('S') MY KNOWLEDGE FROM AFAR. Now Job saw the children of Adam with a woman ('ShH) giving birth to a man.¹⁵‘ShH and ‘S’ are more alike in Hebrew than the transliterations show. In the unpointed text S (sin) and Sh (shin) are the same letter. Also a final H (he) sounds so much like a final ‘(alef) that Rabbinic Hebrew sometimes confuses the two. Thus the midrash understands Job 36:3 to mean that the WOMAN in Lev. 12:2 was Job’s KNOWLEDGE FROM AFAR. Also the ship (of Prov. 31:14) sails in the midst of the waters inch by inch.¹⁶The image suggests Prov. 31:14, according to which the heroic wife is LIKE MERCHANT SHIPS; SHE BRINGS HER FOOD FROM AFAR. So Enoch Zundel in his commentary, ‘Ets Yosef, on the parallel in Tanh., Lev. 4:3. Now he was surprised over these things and said (in Job 36:3): I (like the woman of Prov. 31:14) WILL FETCH MY KNOWLEDGE FROM AFAR.

(Lev. 12:6:) “And when the days of her purification are fulfilled [for either a son or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb in its first year for a burnt offering….]” Why does she bring an offering? Our masters have said, “She screams a hundred times when she sits on the birthing chair, as stated (Is. 41:24), ‘Behold you are like nothing, and your actions are less than zero.’ What is [the meaning of] ‘less than zero (me’effa)?’ There are one hundred screams (meah puot), ninety-nine for death and one for life.¹⁴Exod. R. 46:2; Lev. R. 27:7; Tanh., Lev. 8:11; PRK 9:6.h And when the pangs arrive for her, she vows that she will never favor her husband [with sexual intercourse] again. She therefore brings an offering,¹⁵Because of the impetuous oath. So Nid. 31:b. as stated (ibid.), ‘she shall bring a lamb in its first year.’”

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").

4) "he shall circumcise the flesh of his foreskin": though there be a leprous lesion upon it. How, then, am I to fulfill" (Devarim 24:8): "Be heedful of the plague-spot of leprosy"? Except in the instance of circumcision. — But perhaps I am to fulfill "Be heedful of the plague-spot of leprosy" even with circumcision. And how am I to fulfill "he shall circumcise the flesh of his foreskin"? When there is no leprous lesion. It is, therefore, written (to negate this) "the flesh," even if there is a leprous lesion upon it.

4) And there are those who see blood (without kishui) a hundred days and yet are not in a state of zivah because of them: two out of her niddah time, seven of her niddah time, two after her niddah time, and eighty days after the birth of a female (viz. Vayikra 12:5), seven of her niddah time and two after her niddah time.

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").

4) "she shall abide in the blood of cleanliness": to include one who travails (and bleeds) in the midst of the eighty (days) for a female, (where a child remains in the womb two and a half months after the birth of another, one being fully formed in the middle of the seventh month and the other at the end of the ninth) — All the blood that she sees (during that two and a half month period) is clean, until the child is born, (at which time she assumes birth uncleanliness). R. Eliezer rules that it is unclean. They said to R. Eliezer: If in a place where we are stringent, (ruling tamei [zivah tumah]), with a relaxed blood flow — before the birth — we are lenient, (ruling tahor) with a relaxed blood flow — after the birth (in the days of cleanliness) — then, in a place where we are lenient, with a constricted blood flow — before the birth — (if she were in her zivah period and she bled because of the child) — how much more so should we be lenient with a constricted blood flow after the birth! He responded: "It is sufficient that what is derived a fortiori (constricted bleeding within the "fulfillment" [melos] period) be like that which it is derived from" (constricted bleeding before the birth). In what respect were they lenient with her? In respect to the tumah of zivah; but she remains tamei with the tumah of niddah. They responded: We will answer you with different terminology, (which is not open to your objection), viz.: If in a place, where we are stringent with a relaxed blood flow — before the birth — we are more lenient with a constricted blood flow than with a relaxed one, then, in a place where we are lenient with a relaxed blood flow — after the birth — how much more so should we be lenient with a constricted one! He responded: Even if you answer me the whole day, "It is sufficient that what is derived a fortiori be like that which it is derived from." Just as in the instance of the first constriction, she sustains the tumah of niddah, so, in the instance of the second constriction, she sustains the tumah of niddah. "in the blood of cleanliness": Even if she sees (blood), she is clean.

4) (Vayikra 12:7) ("And he shall offer it before the L–rd and make atonement for her, and she shall be cleansed from the source of her blood. This is the law for her who bears, whether a male or a female.") "And he shall offer it": What is the intent of this? I might think that since two are required both are indispensable (for her purification); it is, therefore, written "And he shall offer it" — one is indispensable; the other, not. Still, I would not know which. "And he shall make atonement" tells me that just as we find in all instances that atonement is effected through the sin-offering; here, too, atonement is effected through the sin-offering.

[Another interpretation (of Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED.] R. Judah [bar Simon] said: A woman's two haunches become like two haunches of stone, in order that she may have strength when she gives birth.¹⁷Tanh., Lev. 4:3; Exod. R. 1:14. Thus it is stated (in Exod. 1:16:) LOOK AT THE BIRTHSTOOL (literally: THE PAIR OF STONES).¹⁸In the context of Exodus, the midwives were to be looking for male children. Therefore they must have been looking for the child to emerge from the mother’s haunches and not at the birthstool. R. [Meir] said: The Holy One performs a miraculous act with the infant.¹⁹Lev. R. 14:3. How? Before the woman bears, she retains blood; after she gives birth, the blood departs to the breasts and becomes milk. Then the infant nurses on them. R. Abba bar Kahana said: The Holy One performs a miraculous act with the infant. How? When the funda {i.e., pouch}²⁰The Latin word means “moneybag”. is full with its mouth down, the coins are scattered; but the woman has her funda < with its opening > down, and the fetus is retained. Another interpretation: An animal walks about with the fetus in the midst of its belly; but a woman walks about erect with the fetus in the midst of her belly, and the Holy One preserves it.

(Lev. 12:3:) “And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.” It is not written here that one lays out expenses over circumcision. See how much Israel loves the commandments, how many expenses they lay out in order to observe them! The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “You make the commandments joyful; I am increasing your joy, as stated (in Is. 29:19), ‘Then the humble shall increase their joy in the Lord.’” Beloved is circumcision, such that the Holy One, blessed be He, swore to Avraham that anyone who is circumcised will not descend to Geihinnom, as stated (Genesis 15:18), “On that day, the Lord made a covenant with Avram, saying.” And who does descend there? See what is written below (Gen. 15:19), “The Kenite, the Kenizzite ….” And so did Ezekiel see, as stated (Ezekiel 32:18-30), “Son of man, wail upon the masses of Egypt and make it descend, and the daughters of mighty nations, to the lowest lands and those that fall in the pit. Who do you surpass in pleasantness, go down and lay with the uncircumcised…. Assyria is there with all of her congregation, its graves are around it…. Meshech and Tubal and all their masses are there, its graves are surrounding it, they are all uncircumcised…. The princes of the North are there….” And so does Isaiah says (Isaiah 5:14), “And so does the pit widen itself and opened wide its mouth without measure (chok),” to he that doesn't have a statute [the words — "without measure" — can also be rendered "to he that doesn't have a statute"]. And where [do we see that] it (the commandment to circumcise) is called a statue? As it says (Ps. 105:10) "And He established it unto Jacob for a statute, to Israel for an everlasting covenant," because the Holy One, blessed be He, placed His name with Israel. And what is the name and the seal that He placed in them? It is Shaddai, the shin is placed on the nose, the dalet on the hand, and the yud on the circumcision. Therefore when he goes to his eternal home, there is an angel appointed in the Garden of Eden who takes him and brings him into the Garden of Eden. And regarding the heretics and sinners, The Holy One, “blessed be He, commands the angel to pull his foreskin (i.e. reverse his circumcision), as it says (Ps. 55:21) "He hath put forth his hands against them that were at peace with him; he has profaned his covenant." It happened that Tyrannus Rufus the wicked asked R. Aqiva, “Which works are the more beautiful? Those of the Holy One, blessed be He, or those of flesh and blood?” He said to him, “Those of flesh and blood are the more beautiful.” Tyrannus Rufus the wicked said to him, “Look at the heavens and the earth. Are you able to make anything like them?” R. Aqiva said to him, “Do not talk to me about something which is high above mortals, things over which they have no control, but about things which are usual among people.” He said to him, “Why do you circumcise?” He said to him, “I also knew that you were going to say this to me. I therefore anticipated [your question] when I said to you, ‘A work of flesh and blood is more beautiful than one of the Holy One, blessed be He.’ Bring me wheat spikes and white bread.”¹⁶Qeluska’ot, from the Gk.: kollikes (“long rolls of coarse bread”) or kollikia (the diminutive of kollikes). He said to him, “The former is the work of the Holy One, blessed be He, and the latter is the work of flesh and blood. Is not the latter more beautiful?” Tyrannus Rufus said to him, “Inasmuch as He finds pleasure in circumcision, why does no one emerge from his mother's belly circumcised?” R. Aqiva said to him, “And why does his umbilical cord come out on him? Does not his mother cut his umbilical cord? So why does he not come out circumcised? Because the Holy One, blessed be He, only gave Israel the commandments in order to purify them. Therefore, David said (in II Sam. 22:31 = Ps. 18:31), ‘the word of the Lord is pure.’”

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).

5) "his foreskin": Only when it is clearly (a mitzvah to circumcise) does circumcision countermand the Sabbath, and not when (its being a mitzvah) is in doubt. "his foreskin": Only when it is clearly (a mitzvah to circumcise) does circumcision countermand the Sabbath, and not when the child is a hermaphrodite. R. Yehudah says: A hermaphrodite countermands the Sabbath, and not circumcising (a hermaphrodite) is subject to kareth. "his foreskin": Only when it is clearly (a mitzvah to circumcise) does circumcision countermand the Sabbath, and not when the child was born at twilight (of the Sabbath, it being possible that the birth was on Friday.) "his foreskin": Only when it is clearly (a mitzvah to circumcise) does circumcision countermand the Sabbath, and not when the child is born circumcised. For Beth Shammai say: It is necessary to cause the blood of the covenant to drip from him, and Beth Hillel say: It is not necessary.

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).

5) "and she shall be cleansed": to eat of the sacrifices. "from the source": We are hereby taught that all the blood that she sees (which makes her tamei) comes only from the source (i.e., the womb). "her blood(s)": Numerous bloods are tamei in her: red, black, bright colored crocus, the color of earth-water, and the color of wine diluted with water. Beth Shammai says: Also the color of fenugrec water and of the water of roast meat. Beth Hillel rules these tahor. "the law for her who bears": We are hereby taught that she brings one offering for numerous deliveries (within the counting period of the first). How so? If a woman gave birth and then miscarried within the eighty days for a girl, and she again miscarried within the eighty days for a girl, and, likewise, if one miscarried twins (at different intervals), she brings (only) one offering, (for the second). R. Yehudah says: she brings for the first, but not for the second; for the third, but not for the fourth. I might think even after the melos; it is, therefore, (to negate this) written "This" (is the law for her who bears").

May it please our master to teach us: If one of two sons is born to a man on Friday and the other on the Sabbath,⁸Either half-brother born of two different wives or twins born of one mother. and he mistakenly circumcises the son born on Friday on the Sabbath, or the one born on the Sabbath on Friday, is he guilty of violating the Sabbath? Thus do our masters teach us: If one child is born on Friday and the other on the Sabbath, and he mistakenly circumcises the one born on Friday on the Sabbath or vice versa, he is considered culpable. Why? Because he profaned the Sabbath. It is written: And in the eighth day, the flesh of his foreskin should be circumcised (Lev. 12:3). As a result, he has transgressed a decree of the Torah by violating the Sabbath.

(Ps. 36:7:) “Your righteousness (rt.: tsdq) is like the mighty mountains; [Your judgments are like the great deep].” R. Judah bar Simon said, “The charity (rt.: tsdq) which You did with Noah in the ark was like the mighty mountains.³³Lev. R. 27:1. [Thus it is stated (in Gen. 8:4),] ‘And the ark came to rest in the seventh month on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.’ And the judgments are those which You rendered with [his] generation and carried out strictly with them as far as the great deep. Thus it is stated (in Gen. 7:11), ‘on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth.’ Moreover, when You remembered him, You did not remember him alone, as stated (in Gen. 8:1), ‘Then God remembered Noah, all the beasts, and all the cattle […].’” When R. Joshua ben Levi went away to Rome, he saw there two marble columns covered with bedding³⁴Gk.: koitai (“beds”). so that they would neither be cracked in the burning heat nor frozen in the cold.³⁵Above, Gen. 2:8; Gen. R. 33:1; PRK 9:1. He [also] saw there a certain pauper with a reed mat under him and a reed mat over him. With reference to the columns, he read (Ps. 36:7), “Your righteousness (i.e., your charity) is like the mighty mountains.” Indeed, when You give, You bestow abundantly. But with reference to the pauper, he read (ibid., cont.), “and Your judgments are like the great deep.” [Indeed,] when You are striking, you deal strictly. What is the meaning of (Ps. 36:7, cont.), “You save man and beast, O Lord.” Alexander of Macedon went off to the king of Qatsia beyond the mountains of darkness.³⁶Lev. R. 27:1; PRK 9:1; Tamid 32ab. He arrived at the province named Carthage, which was entirely [inhabited by] women. They came out to meet him. They said to him, “If you wage war with us and are victorious against us, your name will go forth in the world as one who destroyed [a province of] women; and if we wage war with you and conquer you, your name will go forth in the world for having women wage war with you and conquer you. Then you will never again stand up to [another] kingdom.” When he went away, he wrote over the entrance³⁷Gk.: pylai. gate, “I, King Alexander of Macedon, was a fool until I came to the province of Carthage and learned [to take] counsel from women.” He went to another province named Africa. They came out to meet him with golden apples, with golden pomegranates and with golden bread. He said to them, “Is gold eaten in your land?” They said to him, “Was it not like this for you in your own country, why did you come to us?”³⁸Cf. Tamid 32b: “If you wanted [regular] bread, did you have no bread in your own place to eat that you should have taken [to the road] and come here?” He said to them, “I have not come to see your wealth. Rather I have come to see your laws.” While they were sitting [there], two men came before the king for judgment. One said, “Your majesty, I bought a deserted building from this man; and when I cleaned it out, I found a treasure in it. So I said to him, ‘Take your treasure, because I [only] bought a deserted building. I did not buy a treasure.’” But the other said, “Just as you are afraid of a punishment for robbery, so likewise am I afraid of punishment for robbery; for when I sold you the deserted building, I [also] sold you whatever was in it.” The king summoned one of them. He said to him, “Do you have a son?” He said, “Yes.” He called the other one. He said to him, “Do you have a daughter?” He told him, “Yes.” [The king] said to them, “Let them go and marry one another. Then both of them will use up the treasure.” Now Alexander began to be amazed. The king said to him, “What reason do you have to be amazed? For did I not judge well?” He told him, “Yes.” He said to him, “If this case had arisen in your land, what would you have done about it?” He said to him, “We would have taken the head off of this one and off the other one. Then the treasure would go to the house of the king.” He said to him, “But does the sun shine upon you?” He told him, “Yes.” “And does the rain come down upon you?” He told him, “Yes.” “Are there perhaps [some] sheep and goats in your land?” He told him, “Yes.” He said to him, “[Woe to] that man! It is for the sake of the sheep and the goats that the sun shines for you and that the rain comes down upon you. So it for the sake of the [flocks] that you are saved.” Thus it is written (in Ps. 36:7, cont.), “You save human and beast, O Lord.” For the sake of the beast does the Lord save man. Israel said, “Master of the world, we are like man; [but] save us like beasts,³⁹Unlike humans, cattle are not responsible for what they do wrong. since we are drawn after You like beasts, as stated (in Cant. 1:4), “Draw me after you […].” Where are we drawn after You? To the Garden of Eden, as stated (in Ps. 36:9), “They feast on the abundance of Your house, and You have them drink at the river of Your Edens.” R. Eleazar bar Menahem said, “’Your Eden’ (in the singular) is not written here, but ‘Your Edens,’ because each and every righteous person has an Eden for himself.” (Ps. 36:7, cont.:) “You save human and beast, O Lord.” R. Isaac said, “The ordinance for humanity and the ordinance for the beast are one. An ordinance for humanity is (Lev. 12:3), ‘And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised.’ And an ordinance for the beast is (Lev. 22:27), ‘and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable.’”

(Lev. 12:6): AND WHEN THE DAYS OF HER PURIFICATION ARE FULFILLED, FOR EITHER A SON OR FOR A DAUGHTER, SHE SHALL BRING A LAMB IN ITS FIRST YEAR FOR A BURNT OFFERING…. Why does she bring an offering?²¹Tanh., Lev. 4:4. Our masters have said: She screams a hundred times when she sits on the birthing chair, < since there are > ninety-nine < chances > for death and one for life.²²Exod. R. 46:2; Lev. R. 27:7; Tanh., Lev. 8:11; PRK 9:6. And when the pangs arrive for her, she vows that she will never favor her husband < with sexual intercourse > again. She therefore brings an offering,²³Because of the impetuous oath. So Nid. 31:b. as stated (ibid.): SHE SHALL BRING A LAMB IN ITS FIRST YEAR….

Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE TO THE LORD? When the Holy One wanted to create Adam, the ministering angels said to the Holy One (in Ps. 8:5 [4]): WHAT IS A HUMAN THAT YOU ARE MINDFUL OF HIM, AND A CHILD OF ADAM THAT YOU SHOULD THINK OF HIM? What do you want from this human? The Holy One said to them: Who is to fulfill my Torah and my commandments? They said to him: We will fulfill your Torah. He said to them: You are unable. They²⁶Although the Buber text reads “he” here, the context certainly requires the plural, “they.” said to him: Why? He said to them: It is written in < Torah > (in Numb. 19:14): < THIS IS THE TORAH: > WHEN A PERSON DIES IN HIS TENT, but there are none among you who die. It is written in < Torah > (in Lev. 12:2): WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED AND BEARS A MALE, but there are none among you who bear < children >. It is written in < Torah > (in Lev. 11:21): THESE YOU MAY EAT, but in your case there is no eating among you. Ergo, the Torah is not going forth to you, as stated (in Job 28:13): NOR IS < WISDOM > FOUND IN THE LAND OF THE LIVING. Rather when the Holy One said to Israel that they should make a tabernacle for him and < when > they had made it, they began to build the altar of burnt offering, the altar of incense, and to offer sacrifice within it. < Then > the Holy One began to give them several commandments. These commands concerned every single thing, and they carried them out. The Holy One began to say to the ministering Angels: Who among you would prepare (rt.: 'RK) < everything > for me just as Israel prepares (rt.: 'RK) for me? Now you were saying to me (in Ps. 8:5 [4]): WHAT IS A HUMAN THAT YOU ARE MINDFUL OF HIM…? They prepare (rt.: 'RK) sacrifices for me, just as stated (in Lev. 1:12): AND THE PRIEST SHALL ARRANGE (rt.: 'RK) THEM. They set (rt.: 'RK) tables for me, just as stated (in Lev. 24:8): HE SHALL ARRANGE (rt.: 'RK) IT (i.e., the shewbread) BEFORE THE LORD REGULARLY ON EVERY SABBATH DAY. They prepare (rt.: 'RK) human beings for me, just as stated (in Lev. 27:2): WHEN ANYONE EXPLICITLY VOWS TO THE LORD THE VALUE (rt.: 'RK) OF HUMAN BEINGS (NPShWT). Ergo (in Ps. 89:7 [6]): FOR WHO IN THE SKIES IS COMPARABLE (rt.: 'RK) TO THE LORD (i.e., is capable of making preparations for the Lord)?]

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.

6) R. Shimon b. Elazar says: Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel do not differ on the necessity of causing the blood of the covenant to drip from one who is born circumcised, it being possible that his foreskin is "sunken." Where do they differ? In the instance of one who was proselytized circumcised. Beth Shammai say: It is necessary to cause the blood of the covenant to drip from him, and Beth Hillel say: It is not necessary.

6) A woman who has upon her a safek (a doubt) of five births (as when she miscarried and it is not known what) or a safek of five zivoth (as when she saw three days but does not know whether in her niddah days or in her zivah days), she brings one offering and eats of the sacrifices, and the others are not binding upon her). (If she has upon her) five definite births or five definite zivoth, she brings one offering and eats of the sacrifices, and the others are binding upon her. It once happened that bird-couples rose in Jerusalem to (the price of) a golden dinar, at which R. Shimon b. Gamliel said: ("I swear by) this Temple that they will be (sold) for silver dinars," whereupon he entered beth-din and taught: A woman who has upon her five definite births or five definite zivoth brings one offering and eats of the sacrifices, and the others are binding upon her — whereupon the price fell on that day to (two) bird couples for two revi'ith (of a silver dinar for one).

(Lev. 12:3): AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY THE FLESH OF HIS FORESKIN SHALL BE CIRCUMCISED. It is not written here that one lays out expenses < over circumcision >.²⁴The added words are from the parallel in Tanh., Lev. 4:5. See how much Israel loves the commandments, how many expenses they lay out in order to observe them! The Holy One said: You make the commandments joyful; I am increasing your joy, as stated (in Is. 29:19): THEN THE HUMBLE SHALL INCREASE THEIR JOY IN THE LORD. Tyrannus Rufus the Wicked asked R. Aqiva: Which works are the more beautiful? Those of the Holy One or those of flesh and blood? He said to him: Those of flesh and blood are the more beautiful. Tyrannus Rufus the Wicked said to him: Look at the heavens and the earth. Are you able to make anything like them? R. Aqiva said to him: Do not talk to me about something which is high above mortals, things over which they have no control, but about things which are usual among the children of Adam. He said to him: Why do you circumcise? He said to him: I also knew that you were going to say this to me. I therefore anticipated < your question > when I said to you: A work of flesh and blood is more beautiful than one of the Holy One? Bring me wheat spikes and white bread.²⁵Qeluska’ot, from the Gk.: kollikes (“long rolls of coarse bread”) or kollikia (the diminutive of kollikes). [He said to him: The former is the work of the Holy One, and the latter is the work of flesh and blood. Is not the latter more beautiful. Bring me] bundles of flax and garments of Beth-shean. He said to him: The former are the work of the Holy One, and the latter are the work of flesh and blood. Are not the latter more beautiful? Tyrannus Rufus said to him: Inasmuch as he finds pleasure in circumcision, why does no one emerge from his mother's belly circumcised? R. Aqiva said to him: And why does his umbilical cord come out on him? Does not his mother cut his umbilical cord? So why does he not come out circumcised? Because the Holy One only gave Israel the commandments in order to purify them. Therefore, David said (in II Sam. 22:31 = Ps. 18:31 [30]): {EVERY} WORD OF {GOD} [THE LORD] IS PURE….

R. Hunya said: It is written: And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised (Lev. 12:3). This indicates that a man should even go into debt in order to make the circumcision a day of rejoicing. Hence it says: And will praise Thee, yet more and more (Ps. 71:14). The rabbis maintained that this verse speaks of Abraham. He said to the Holy One, blessed be He: “You told me: For in Isaac shall seed be called unto thee (Gen. 21:12). You have multiplied Your blessings upon me, and I have borne many sons.” Hence it is said: And Abraham took another wife.

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.

7) "And thirty days (and three days shall she abide in the blood of cleanliness"): I might think, either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "thirty day" (lit.) — Just as one day is consecutive, so are thirty. I might then think that the thirty are consecutive, but the three may be either consecutive or scattered; it is, therefore, written "and thirty days and three days" — Just as the thirty are consecutive, so the three are consecutive. Why need "thirty-three days" be written? (i.e., Since we find that the cleanliness days for a female are doubled, those for a female being sixty-six (viz. Devarim 12:5), we understand that those for a male must be thirty-three.) I might reason: If for a female, for which the days of uncleanliness are many (fourteen), the days of cleanliness are many (sixty-six), than for a male, for which the days of uncleanliness are few (seven), how much more so should the days of cleanliness be many! It is, therefore, written "thirty-three days." "she shall abide": to include a woman who experienced labor pains (and bleeding) in the midst of the eleven days (separating her niddah times) as being clean of zivah uncleanliness, (the assumption being that the bleeding was caused by the contractions and not by the zivah). I might think that she would likewise be clean if she experienced this in the midst of her niddah time; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 12:2) "(any blood that she sees) in (the time of) her niddah flow, she shall be unclean." ("And thirty-three days she shall abide in) the blood of cleanliness": Even if she sees blood (in that period) she is clean.

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.

8) (Vayikra 12:4) "All that is holy she shall not touch": I might think even (second-) tithe, (which is called "holy" [viz. Vayikra 27:30]); it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 12:4)" and into the sanctuary she shall not come." Just as (entering the sanctuary in a state of tumah) is liable to "taking of the soul" (kareth), so (eating) "holy" (terumah, in a state of tumah) is liable to "taking of the soul" (death at the hands of Heaven, viz. Vayikra 22:9), to exclude the tithe. — But perhaps: Just as one who enters the sanctuary in a state of tumah is liable to kareth, so one who eats "holy" in a state of tumah is liable to kareth, to exclude terumah, (which is liable to death at the hands of Heaven.) It is, therefore, written "All that is holy," to include terumah. — But perhaps: Just as (eating) "holy" involves touching, so (entering) the sanctuary must involve touching (it). Whence is it derived (that he is liable for entering it even) if he does not touch it, (as when he enters in a box)? From "and into the sanctuary she shall not come" (— in any event). "until the fulfillment of the days of her purification": to include a woman who bears a female (in the prohibitions against entering the sanctuary and eating consecrated food).

8) R. Shimon says: Lambs precede goats in most places (in Scripture). I might think that this is because they are preferred; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 4:32) "And if a lamb he brings as his offering for a sin-offering" (after 4:28 "a kid of the goats"), to teach that both are equal. Turtle-doves precede pigeons in most places. I might think that this is because they are preferred; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 12:6) "and a young pigeon or a turtle-dove for a sin-offering," to teach that both are equal.

Israel said: Sovereign of the World, we are human, but you shall save us as cattle,⁴⁷Unlike humans cattle are not responsible for what they do wrong. because we are drawn after you like cattle, as stated (in Cant. 1:4): DRAW ME AFTER YOU. Where are we drawn after you? To the Garden of Eden, as stated (in Ps. 36:9 [8]): THEY FEAST ON THE ABUNDANCE OF YOUR HOUSE, AND YOU HAVE THEM DRINK AT THE RIVER OF YOUR EDENS. R. Eleazar bar Menahem said: "Your Eden" (in the singular) is not written here, but YOUR EDENS, because each and every righteous person has a section in Eden for himself. (Ps. 36:7 [6]:) HUMAN AND CATTLE YOU SAVE, O LORD. R. Isaac said: An ordinance for humanity and an ordinance for cattle [are on a par].⁴⁸Below, 8:17. An ordinance for humanity is (Lev. 12:3): AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY THE FLESH OF HIS FORESKIN SHALL BE CIRCUMCISED. And an ordinance for cattle is (Lev. 22:27): AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY ON IT SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE….

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.

10) "Turtle-doves" precede "young pigeons" in all other places. I might think this is so because they are preferred to them. It is, therefore, written (Vayikra 12:6): "and a young pigeon or a turtle-dove as a sin-offering," to teach that they are equivalent. "father" precedes "mother" in all places. I might think this is so because the honor of one's father is above that of his mother; it is, therefore, written (Vayikra 19:3): "A man, his mother and his father, you shall fear," to teach that they are equivalent (in this regard). But the sages have said: The father takes precedence to the mother in all instances, for both he and his mother are obliged to honor his father.

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.

The bull was due to the merit of Abraham of whom it is stated (in Gen. 18:7), “Then Abraham ran unto the herd [...] (for a calf to feed his heavenly visitors).”⁵⁹Lev. R. 17:9; PRK 9:9. The sheep was due to the merit of Isaac, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 22:13), “And Abraham lifted his eyes and he saw, and behold there was a ram [...] (to replace an obedient Isaac as a sacrifice).” The goat was due to the merit of Jacob, of whom it is stated (in Gen. 27:9), “Please go unto the flock, and bring me two good kids of the goats from there.” What is the meaning of “good” (in reference to the two kids)? R. Berekhyah said in the name of R. Helbo, “[They are] good for you and good for your children.⁶⁰Gen. R. 65:14; PR 47:4. [They are] good for you, because through them you are to receive the blessings;⁶¹When Jacob brought the meat from the goats to his father, he received a blessing. and they are good for your children, because through them atonement is granted to your children on the Day of Atonement.” (Lev. 22:27, cont.:) “It shall remain seven days with its mother.” R. Joshua of Sikhnin says in the name of R. Levi, “[The situation] is similar to a king who entered a province⁶²Lev. R. 27:10; PRK 9:10. where he issued a proclamation and said, ‘Let no strangers⁶³Gk.: xenoi. who are here see my face before they first see the face of [my] matron.’⁶⁴Lat.: matrona. Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel, ‘My children shall not approach me with an offering until the Sabbath [queen] has passed over it. For there are no seven [days] without a Sabbath, and there is no circumcision without [the passing of] a Sabbath.’” R. Isaac said, “An ordinance for humanity and an ordinance for beasts [are on a par].⁶⁵Above, 8:9. An ordinance for humanity is (Lev. 12:3), ‘And on the eighth day [the flesh of his foreskin] shall be circumcised.’ And an ordinance for beasts is (Lev. 22:27), ‘and from the eighth day on, it shall be acceptable [for an offering by fire to the Lord].’”

Another interpretation of az (spelled with the two Hebrew letters alef and zayin). Alef is one and zayin is seven for a total of eight. Moses said: By the merit of circumcision, which was ordained for <day> eight (Lev. 12:3), the sea was rent asunder. So let us praise him with an az. R. Levi cited (Ps. 136:13): TO HIM WHO RENT THE REED SEA IN PIECES (gezarim), because in the Aramaic language they call those who are circumcised clipped (gezurim).³³Note that the midrash has substituted the Hebrew equivalent for the Aramaic gezirin. By the merit of circumcision (milah) the sea was rent asunder.

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.

"A woman when she gives seed (conceives)" [Leviticus 12:2]: That's what is written, "You have created me behind and before." [Psalms 139:5] Said Rabbi Yochanan: If man merits, he inherits two worlds, this one and the coming one, that's what is written: "You have created me behind and before (front)." And if not, he comes to give reckoning, as it says, "And You laid your hand (kapcha) on me." [ibid], as it is written, [Job 13:21] "Withdraw your hand (kapcha) far from me." Said Rav Shmuel bar Nachman: When the Holy One, blessed be He, created the first man, he created him as an androgynous being. Reish Lakish: When it was created, dual faces [together] were created, and it was cut, and two were made. [One] back was male, [one] back was female. They challenged him: [Genesis 2:21] "And He took one of his ribs (tzela)"!? He said to them, it is of his sides, as it is written, "and to the side (tzela) of the Tabernacle" [Exodus 26:20]. Said Rabbi Berachiya and Rabbi Chelbo and Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman: When God created the first man, from one end of the world to the other end, He created him to fill the entire world. How do we know from east to west? As it says, "You created me back to east (kedem)." How do we know from north to south? As it says, [Deuteronomy 4:32] "From the ends of the heavens to the ends of the heavens." How do we know that it was the expanse of the world? As it says, "And You laid your hand on me." Said Rabbi Elazar: "Behind" - that's the first day [of creation]. "Before" - that's the last day. For the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, there is the verse, [Genesis 1:24]: "Let the earth bring forth the living soul (nefesh chaya) to its kind." "Living soul" - that's the spirit of the first man. Said Reish Lakish: "Behind" - that's the last day. "Before" - that's the first day. For the opinion of Reish Lakish, there is the verse: [Genesis 1:2] "And the spirit of God wavered upon the water" - that is the spirit of the king messiah. If man merits, we say to him: "You were created before all of creation." If not, we say to him, "The mosquito preceded you." Said Rabbi Yishmale b'Rabbi Tanchum: "Behind" on all creation, "before" (first) in all punishments. Said Rabbi Yochanan: Even man's praise only comes last, as it says [Psalms 148:110]: "Beasts and all cattle creeping things and flying fowl". And afterwards, [Psalms 148:11]: "Kings of the earth and all peoples." Said Rabbi Simlai: "Just like man's formation was after beast, cattle, and bird, so too his laws are after beast, cattle, and bird, and that's what is written, "This is the law of cattle" [Leviticus 11:46], and afterwards, "A woman when she gives seed..."

"A woman when she gives seed (conceives)" [Leviticus 12:2]: That's what is written, "You have created me behind and before." [Psalms 139:5] Said Rabbi Yochanan: If man merits, he inherits two worlds, this one and the coming one, that's what is written: "You have created me behind and before (front)." And if not, he comes to give reckoning, as it says, "And You laid your hand (kapcha) on me." [ibid], as it is written, [Job 13:21] "Withdraw your hand (kapcha) far from me." Said Rav Shmuel bar Nachman: When the Holy One, blessed be He, created the first man, he created him as an androgynous being. Reish Lakish: When it was created, dual faces [together] were created, and it was cut, and two were made. [One] back was male, [one] back was female. They challenged him: [Genesis 2:21] "And He took one of his ribs (tzela)"!? He said to them, it is of his sides, as it is written, "and to the side (tzela) of the Tabernacle" [Exodus 26:20]. Said Rabbi Berachiya and Rabbi Chelbo and Rabbi Shmuel bar Nachman: When God created the first man, from one end of the world to the other end, He created him to fill the entire world. How do we know from east to west? As it says, "You created me back to east (kedem)." How do we know from north to south? As it says, [Deuteronomy 4:32] "From the ends of the heavens to the ends of the heavens." How do we know that it was the expanse of the world? As it says, "And You laid your hand on me." Said Rabbi Elazar: "Behind" - that's the first day [of creation]. "Before" - that's the last day. For the opinion of Rabbi Elazar, there is the verse, [Genesis 1:24]: "Let the earth bring forth the living soul (nefesh chaya) to its kind." "Living soul" - that's the spirit of the first man. Said Reish Lakish: "Behind" - that's the last day. "Before" - that's the first day. For the opinion of Reish Lakish, there is the verse: [Genesis 1:2] "And the spirit of God wavered upon the water" - that is the spirit of the king messiah. If man merits, we say to him: "You were created before all of creation." If not, we say to him, "The mosquito preceded you." Said Rabbi Yishmale b'Rabbi Tanchum: "Behind" on all creation, "before" (first) in all punishments. Said Rabbi Yochanan: Even man's praise only comes last, as it says [Psalms 148:110]: "Beasts and all cattle creeping things and flying fowl". And afterwards, [Psalms 148:11]: "Kings of the earth and all peoples." Said Rabbi Simlai: "Just like man's formation was after beast, cattle, and bird, so too his laws are after beast, cattle, and bird, and that's what is written, "This is the law of cattle" [Leviticus 11:46], and afterwards, "A woman when she gives seed..."

... Another possibility: "When a woman conceives and gives birth to a male" [Leviticus 12:2] Thus when it is written "Life and lovingkindness you have given me, Your care has guarded my spirit" [Job 10:12] Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said three [things]: In the way of the world if a person takes a purse of money and places the opening downward, does not the money scatter?! A fetus that rests in the womb of his mother, The Holy Blessed One guards him so he does not fall and die, is this not praiseworthy?! Thus - "Life and lovingkindness you have given me." Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said also: It is the way of the world that an animals breasts are in the place of the womb and the newborn nurses in a shameful place. But a woman, her breasts are in a beautiful place, and the newborn nurses in a place of honor. Is this not "life and lovingkindness?" Thus - "Life and lovingkindness you have given me." Rabbi Elazar said, if a person tarries in a hot place for one hour, does he not die? Yet the womb of the woman boils, and the fetus which is placed inside the womb, The Holy Blessed One protects it, it is not aborted in the shape of a bag, it is not aborted as the placenta, nor aborted in the shape of a sandal - is this not "life and lovingkindess?" Thus - "Life and lovingkindness you have given me." Rabbi Tachalifa of Cesaerea If a person eats one portion of food after another portion of food, does not the second portion expel the first? But no matter how much food a woman eats or how much liquid she drinks, the fetus is not expelled - is this not "life and lovingkindness?" Rabbi Simon said, the womb of a woman is made with many cavities, many coils, and many bands. At the moment that a woman sits on the birth chair, (the baby) does not get cast out all at once. There is a saying, "If one band is loosened, two bands are loosened". Rabbi Meir said: All nine months that a woman does not see blood, she really should have seen it. What did The Holy Blessed One do? He removed (the blood) upward to her breasts and made it milk, so that when the baby was born there would be food for him to eat. Even more if it was a male child, as it says: "When a woman conceives and gives birth to a male."

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).

(Lev. 22:27), “And from the eighth day on [it shall be acceptable for an offering by fire to the Lord].” So that your [evil] drive not lead you astray by saying that there is eating and drinking in front of Him. Who sacrificed to Him before Israel arose? David said (in Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord?” [This is to mean], who offered sacrifices to Him? R. Abbin the Levite said, “[This verse means,] who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in sustaining orphans and feeding the hungry? After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word concerning sustenance, since it is stated (in Lev. 24:8), ‘On [every] Sabbath day he shall [regularly] arrange (ya'arokh) it (i.e., the bread).’” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in bringing light to the eyes of those in the dark?⁷⁵Below, 10:6. After all, this word (ya'arokh) can only be a word denoting light, since it is stated (Lev. 24:4), “He shall set up (ya'arokh) the lamps upon the unalloyed lampstand.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable (rt.: 'rk) to the Lord”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in clothing the naked? After all, this word (rt.: 'rk) can only be a word denoting a garment, since it is stated (in Jud. 17:10), “a suit (rt.: 'rk) of clothes and [your] maintenance.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies [is comparable (ya'arokh) to the Lord]”: Who is like unto the Holy One, blessed be He, in waging war for Israel? After all, the word, ya'arokh, can only be a word denoting war, since it is stated (in Gen. 14:8), “and they marshalled (ya'arokh in the plural) for battle with them.” Another interpretation (of Ps. 89:7), “For who in the skies is comparable to the Lord”: The Holy One, blessed be He, said, “If your [evil] drive comes and says to you, ‘Who sacrificed to (fed) the Holy One, blessed be He, before the world was created,’⁷⁶See PR 48:3. say to him, ‘Consider that Moses ascended to the sky and spent a hundred and twenty days there. Let him tell you whether they were sacrificing to the Holy One, blessed be He. And in addition he was accustomed to eat; but when he ascended to Me, he saw that there is no eating and drinking in front of Me, and so he also did not eat, as stated (in Exod. 34:28), “And he was there with the Lord [forty days and forty nights; he neither ate bread nor drank water].”’” R. Simeon ben Laqish said, “If your [evil] drive comes to say to you, ‘If there were no eating and drinking before Him, He would not have told me to sacrifice and offer libations to Him’; [then ponder] what is written (in Numb. 28:6), ‘The continual burnt offering instituted at Mount Sinai’: Did they offer sacrifices on Mount Sinai? [No.] Rather observe that it was Moses who went up onto Mount Sinai. Let him tell you whether there were food and drink before Me. And so why did I trouble you and tell you to bring a daily sacrifice? In order to benefit you.” R. Hiyya bar Abba said, “When a mighty man who is walking on the road is thirsty and goes to drink water, how much does he drink with his hands? Ten handfuls? Six handfuls? Four handfuls? Less than two he does not drink. Now all the water that is in the world would be a filling for the hollow of the Holy One, blessed be He's, hand, as stated (in Is. 40:12), ‘Who has measured the waters in the hollow of His hand?’ [It is so written] in order to make known that for Him there is no eating or drinking. [Then] why did He tell me to offer a sacrifice? In order to benefit you.” Ergo (in Lev. 22:27), “When a bull or a sheep or a goat [is born… and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable for an offering by fire to the Lord].” (Lev. 22:27), “And from the eighth day.” This text is related (to Eccl. 3:19), “As for the fate of humans and the fate of beasts, [they have the same fate; as the one dies, so does the other die. They all have the same lifebreath, but the superiority of the human over the beast is nil ('yn)].”⁷⁷This is the translation required by the latter part of this section. A more traditional translation would be AND THE HUMAN IS NO BETTER THAN THE BEAST. It is written concerning the human (in Deut. 22:11), “You shall not wear interwoven stuff, wool and flax together.” It is also written concerning the beast (ibid., vs. 10), “You shall not plough with an ox and an ass together.” (Eccl. 3:19:) “[They] all have the same fate.” Just as the human contracts uncleanness, the beast also contracts uncleanness. It is written concerning the human (in Numb. 19:11), “One who touches the corpse of any human being shall be unclean.” Also concerning the beast (in Lev. 11:39), “whoever touches its carcass shall be unclean [...].” (Eccl. 3:19:) “As the one dies, so does the other die.” Concerning the human (in Lev. 20:16), “you shall kill the woman”; and concerning the beast (in vs. 15), “and you shall kill the beast.” (Eccl. 3:21:) “Who knows the lifebreath of a human that rises upward and the lifebreath of a beast that goes down into the earth?”⁷⁸This translation is required by the midrash. A more traditional translation in the biblical context would be this: WHO KNOWS WHETHER IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD, WHILE IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH? Because the lifebreath of the human is given from above, concerning it, a rising up is written. And because the beast is given from below, concerning it, a going down is written. (Eccl. 3:19, cont.:) “But the superiority of the human over the beast is 'yn (i.e., nil).” What is the meaning of 'yn?⁷⁹Eccl. R. 3:19(1). That [the human] speaks, but [the beast] does not ('yn) speak. And moreover, while there is knowledge in the human, in the beast there is no ('yn) knowledge. And moreover, while the human knows the difference between good and evil, the beast does not ('yn) know the difference between good and evil. And moreover, the human gets a reward for his works, but the beast does not ('yn) get a reward for its work. And moreover, when the human dies they care for him and he is buried, while the beast is not ('yn) buried. Ergo (in Eccl. 3:19), “but the superiority of the human over the beast is 'yn.” What is written concerning the human (in Lev. 12:2-3)? “When a woman emits her seed…. And on the eighth day [the flesh of his foreskin] shall be circumcised.” But about the beasts it is written (in Lev. 22:27), “When a bull or a sheep or a goat… and from the eighth day on it shall be acceptable [for an offering by fire to the Lord].”

R. Yosé stated: See how beloved is the precept concerning circumcision, that it supersedes even the Sabbath, as it is written: And on the eighth day, the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised (Lev. 12:3), even on the Sabbath. Since circumcision endangers life, one is permitted to heal it on the Sabbath.

(Lev. 22:27, cont.:) IT SHALL REMAIN SEVEN DAYS WITH ITS MOTHER. R. Joshua of Sikhnin < said > in the name of R. Levi. < The situation > is similar to a king who entered a province,⁷¹Tanh., Lev. 8:12; Lev. R. 27:10; PRK 9:10. [where he issued a proclamation] and said: Let no strangers⁷²Gk.: xenoi. who are here see my face before they first see the face of < my > matron.⁷³Lat.: matrona. Similarly, the Holy One said to Israel: My children shall not approach me with an offering until the Sabbath < Queen > has passed over it; for there are no seven < days > without a Sabbath, and there is no circumcision without < the passing of > a Sabbath. R. Isaac said: An ordinance for humanity and an ordinance for cattle < are on a par >.⁷⁴Above, 8:9. [An ordinance for] humanity is (Lev. 12:3): AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY < THE FLESH OF HIS FORESKIN > SHALL BE CIRCUMCISED. [And an ordinance for] cattle is (Lev. 22:27): < IT SHALL REMAIN SEVEN DAYS WITH ITS MOTHER, > AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY ON IT SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE < FOR AN OFFERING BY FIRE TO THE LORD >.

“For the fate of the sons of man and the fate of the animal, there is one fate for them; like the death of this one, so is the death of that one, and there is one spirit for all. The superiority of man over animal is non-existent, as everything is vanity” (Ecclesiastes 3:19).
“For the fate of the sons of man and the fate of the animal” – is it not just like the fate of man, so is the fate of the animal? The Holy One blessed be He said: Is it not so that just as I decreed and said regarding man: “On the eighth day, you shall circumcise the flesh of his foreskin” (Leviticus 12:3), I decreed so regarding the animal, as it is stated: “From the eighth day onward it shall be accepted as a fire offering to the Lord” (Leviticus 22:27)?
“The superiority of man over animal is non-existent [ayin], as everything is vanity.” What is ayin? Rav Naḥman ben Rabbi Yitzḥak said: He made an embellishment for his [man’s] bottom,⁸²The flesh is shaped such that the anal opening is not visible. so that he would not be debased like an animal. Rabbi Yannai and Rabbi Yudan, one said: He made for him a lock and a stool on it so he would not be debased like an animal.⁸³The references to a lock and stool refer to two functions of the buttocks: They obscure the anal opening and allow a person to sit comfortably. And one said: He made padding for his bottom so he would not experience discomfort while sitting.
Rabbi Levi and Rabbi Ami, one said: He arranged burial for him, and one said: He arranged a coffin for him, and one said: He arranged a coffin and a shroud for him.⁸⁴God arranged for people to think to bury others in a respectable manner, which differentiates them from animals. In Bereshit Rabba (17:6) the text is: “One said: He arranged burial for him, and one said: He arranged a shroud for him.” This text better reflects the fact that only two Sages are cited (Etz Yosef).

[Another interpretation] (of Lev. 22:27): AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY. This text is related (to Eccl. 3:19): AS FOR THE FATE OF HUMANS [AND THE FATE OF BEASTS, THEY HAVE THE SAME < FATE >: AS THE ONE DIES, SO DOES THE OTHER DIE. THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME LIFEBREATH, BUT THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HUMAN OVER THE BEAST IS NIL ('YN)].⁸⁷This is the translation required by the latter part of this section. A more traditional translation would be AND THE HUMAN IS NO BETTER THAN THE BEAST. It is written concerning the human (in Deut. 22:11): YOU SHALL NOT WEAR INTERWOVEN STUFF, WOOL AND FLAX TOGETHER. It is also written concerning the beast (ibid., vs. 10): YOU SHALL NOT PLOUGH WITH AN OX AND AN ASS TOGETHER. (Eccl. 3:19): {ALL} [THEY] HAVE THE SAME FATE. Just as the human contracts uncleanness, the beast also contracts uncleanness. It is written concerning the human (in Numb. 19:11): ONE WHO TOUCHES {A CORPSE SHALL BE UNCLEAN} [THE CORPSE OF ANY HUMAN BEING SHALL BE UNCLEAN FOR SEVEN DAYS]. Also concerning the beast (in Lev. 11:39): WHOEVER TOUCHES ITS CARCASS SHALL BE UNCLEAN. (Eccl. 3:19:) AS THE ONE DIES, SO DOES THE OTHER DIE. Concerning the human (in Lev. 20:16): YOU SHALL KILL THE WOMAN; and concerning the beast (in vs. 15): AND YOU SHALL KILL THE BEAST. (Eccl. 3:21:) {AND} WHO KNOWS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD AND THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH?⁸⁸This translation is required by the midrash. A more traditional translation in the biblical context would be this: WHO KNOWS WHETHER IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD, WHILE IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH? Because the lifebreath of the human is given from above, concerning it a rising up is written. And because the beast is given from below, concerning it a going down is written. (Eccl. 3:19, cont.:) BUT THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HUMAN OVER THE BEAST IS 'YN (i.e., NIL). What is the meaning of 'YN?⁸⁹Eccl. R. 3:19(1). That < the human > speaks, but < the beast > does not ('YN) speak. And moreover, while there is knowledge in the human, in the beast there is no ('YN) knowledge. And moreover, while the human knows the difference between good and evil, the beast does not ('YN) know the difference between good and evil. And moreover, the human gets a reward for his works, but the beast does not ('YN) get a reward for its work. And moreover, when the human dies they care for him and he is buried, while the beast is not ('YN) buried. Ergo (in Eccl. 3:19): BUT THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HUMAN OVER THE BEAST IS 'YN. What is written concerning the human (in Lev. 12:2–3)? WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED…. AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY < THE FLESH OF HIS FORESKIN > SHALL BE CIRCUMCISED. But about the beasts it is written (in Lev. 22:27): WHEN A BULL OR A SHEEP OR A GOAT IS BORN, [….AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY ON IT SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE] < FOR AN OFFERING BY FIRE TO THE LORD >.

[Another interpretation] (of Lev. 22:27): AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY. This text is related (to Eccl. 3:19): AS FOR THE FATE OF HUMANS [AND THE FATE OF BEASTS, THEY HAVE THE SAME < FATE >: AS THE ONE DIES, SO DOES THE OTHER DIE. THEY ALL HAVE THE SAME LIFEBREATH, BUT THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HUMAN OVER THE BEAST IS NIL ('YN)].⁸⁷This is the translation required by the latter part of this section. A more traditional translation would be AND THE HUMAN IS NO BETTER THAN THE BEAST. It is written concerning the human (in Deut. 22:11): YOU SHALL NOT WEAR INTERWOVEN STUFF, WOOL AND FLAX TOGETHER. It is also written concerning the beast (ibid., vs. 10): YOU SHALL NOT PLOUGH WITH AN OX AND AN ASS TOGETHER. (Eccl. 3:19): {ALL} [THEY] HAVE THE SAME FATE. Just as the human contracts uncleanness, the beast also contracts uncleanness. It is written concerning the human (in Numb. 19:11): ONE WHO TOUCHES {A CORPSE SHALL BE UNCLEAN} [THE CORPSE OF ANY HUMAN BEING SHALL BE UNCLEAN FOR SEVEN DAYS]. Also concerning the beast (in Lev. 11:39): WHOEVER TOUCHES ITS CARCASS SHALL BE UNCLEAN. (Eccl. 3:19:) AS THE ONE DIES, SO DOES THE OTHER DIE. Concerning the human (in Lev. 20:16): YOU SHALL KILL THE WOMAN; and concerning the beast (in vs. 15): AND YOU SHALL KILL THE BEAST. (Eccl. 3:21:) {AND} WHO KNOWS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD AND THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH?⁸⁸This translation is required by the midrash. A more traditional translation in the biblical context would be this: WHO KNOWS WHETHER IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A HUMAN THAT RISES UPWARD, WHILE IT IS THE LIFEBREATH OF A BEAST THAT GOES DOWN INTO THE EARTH? Because the lifebreath of the human is given from above, concerning it a rising up is written. And because the beast is given from below, concerning it a going down is written. (Eccl. 3:19, cont.:) BUT THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HUMAN OVER THE BEAST IS 'YN (i.e., NIL). What is the meaning of 'YN?⁸⁹Eccl. R. 3:19(1). That < the human > speaks, but < the beast > does not ('YN) speak. And moreover, while there is knowledge in the human, in the beast there is no ('YN) knowledge. And moreover, while the human knows the difference between good and evil, the beast does not ('YN) know the difference between good and evil. And moreover, the human gets a reward for his works, but the beast does not ('YN) get a reward for its work. And moreover, when the human dies they care for him and he is buried, while the beast is not ('YN) buried. Ergo (in Eccl. 3:19): BUT THE SUPERIORITY OF THE HUMAN OVER THE BEAST IS 'YN. What is written concerning the human (in Lev. 12:2–3)? WHEN A WOMAN EMITS HER SEED…. AND ON THE EIGHTH DAY < THE FLESH OF HIS FORESKIN > SHALL BE CIRCUMCISED. But about the beasts it is written (in Lev. 22:27): WHEN A BULL OR A SHEEP OR A GOAT IS BORN, [….AND FROM THE EIGHTH DAY ON IT SHALL BE ACCEPTABLE] < FOR AN OFFERING BY FIRE TO THE LORD >.

Another comment on early in the morning: Righteous men are always anxious to fulfill their religious duties as early as possible. For example, though Scripture states; And on the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised (Lev. 21:3), thereby indicating that the entire day is appropriate for circumcision, a righteous man will fulfill the precept of circumcision as early in the day as possible.

Vayikra Rabbah 27:5

(Bamidbar 6:11) "And the Cohein shall make one a sin-offering and one a burnt-offering": The Cohein shall designate them; one for a sin-offering and one for a burnt-offering. This tells me of designation by the Cohein. Whence do I derive designation by the owner? Do you ask? It follows a fortiori, viz.: If one (the Cohein), who is not permitted to dedicate it (as an offering), is permitted to designate it, then one (the owner), who is permitted to dedicate it, how much more so is he permitted to designate it! And thus, (that designation is by the owner) is it written in respect to a woman who has given birth (Vayikra 12:8) "Then she shall take two turtle-doves or two young pigeons, one for a burnt-offering and one for a sin-offering" — whence we find that there is designation by the Cohein and designation by the owner — whence we find that there is an unqualified ken (the couple of sacrificial birds, [in the instance of the Nazirite, where the Cohein designates them]) and a qualified ken, (in the instance of the child-bearing woman, where she herself designates them, one as a sin-offering and one as a burnt-offering.) "and he shall atone for him for having sinned against the soul": Now against which soul did he sin that he needs atonement? (His sin is) that he deprived himself of wine. Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If one who deprives himself of wine needs atonement, how much more so, one who deprives himself of everything (by fasting)! R. Yishmael says: Scripture speaks of a Nazirite who made himself tamei (by a dead body), it being written "and he shall atone for him by having sinned (i.e., for having defiled himself) by the soul" — a dead soul. "and he shall make holy his head on that day": On the day of his shaving. These are the words of Rebbi. R. Yossi b. Yehudah says: On the day of the bringing of his offerings.