Called Impure
Sichos In English | May 01, 2025
Print This Article
View Original PDF

Called Impure

Sichos In English | June 27, 2025

CALLED IMPURE

But now we need to look at it from the other side: If Rashi indeed holds that the impurity generated by giving birth was removed, then how does his wording “(this implies that up to this point she is) called impure” fit? Rashi should have instead written (as Rambam does) “this implies that until this point her purification was incomplete” (or something similar)!

This is problematic from whichever way you look at it: If Rashi looks at her obligation to bring a sacrifice as something that prevents her purification (meaning, it prevents her from actually being considered pure), then not only is she “called impure,” she is actually impure! And if we say the opposite — that her impurity has been removed, and she is not allowed to eat holy foods because of a (tangential) prohibition — then this doesn’t fall under the category of being “called impure,” but is instead a prohibition that prevents her from eating sacrificial foods until she brings a sacrifice.

These difficulties suggest that, according to pshat, someone requiring atonement falls under a third category: The impurity because of birth is indeed removed immediately upon the passing of seven complete days (and the remaining days are “her days of purity”), and we therefore cannot say that “she is impure.” Yet, on the other hand, she is forbidden from eating sacrificial foods until she brings a sacrifice, not because she requires the purification that bringing a sacrifice effects, but rather because of a unique rule that applies to a woman who has given birth. This rule is that even after her impurity is removed, the name of impurity remains, “she is called impure,” until she brings her atonement.

And this is Rashi’s intent by changing the wording and emphasizing: “and she will thus be rid of this impurity — This implies that up to this point she is called impure” — unlike the Gemara that states, “this implies that she is impure”: (a) She is merely “called impure,” (b) but this status is a continuation of her preceding ritual status {namely} “up to this point — (she) is called impure.”

CALLED IMPURE

But now we need to look at it from the other side: If Rashi indeed holds that the impurity generated by giving birth was removed, then how does his wording “(this implies that up to this point she is) called impure” fit? Rashi should have instead written (as Rambam does) “this implies that until this point her purification was incomplete” (or something similar)!

This is problematic from whichever way you look at it: If Rashi looks at her obligation to bring a sacrifice as something that prevents her purification (meaning, it prevents her from actually being considered pure), then not only is she “called impure,” she is actually impure! And if we say the opposite — that her impurity has been removed, and she is not allowed to eat holy foods because of a (tangential) prohibition — then this doesn’t fall under the category of being “called impure,” but is instead a prohibition that prevents her from eating sacrificial foods until she brings a sacrifice.

These difficulties suggest that, according to pshat, someone requiring atonement falls under a third category: The impurity because of birth is indeed removed immediately upon the passing of seven complete days (and the remaining days are “her days of purity”), and we therefore cannot say that “she is impure.” Yet, on the other hand, she is forbidden from eating sacrificial foods until she brings a sacrifice, not because she requires the purification that bringing a sacrifice effects, but rather because of a unique rule that applies to a woman who has given birth. This rule is that even after her impurity is removed, the name of impurity remains, “she is called impure,” until she brings her atonement.

And this is Rashi’s intent by changing the wording and emphasizing: “and she will thus be rid of this impurity — This implies that up to this point she is called impure” — unlike the Gemara that states, “this implies that she is impure”: (a) She is merely “called impure,” (b) but this status is a continuation of her preceding ritual status {namely} “up to this point — (she) is called impure.”

PDF Preview