Leviticuschapter 12
8 verses · Moses, by tradition · 15th to 13th century BC · The Law
And when the days of her purifying are fulfilled, for a son, or for a daughter, she shall bring a lamb of the first year for a burnt offering, and a young pigeon, or a turtledove, for a sin offering, unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, unto the priest:
Introduction
Moses, by tradition, The Law, Leviticus Overview.
Moses gave this short law to a camp where children were born in tents and every birth was a household event. It follows the food law and carries the same concern into the home on the day a child arrives. The first hearers needed to know when a new mother could again come near holy things and what she should bring when that day came. Listen for the two periods of waiting and the difference between them. Notice the offering the law allows a poor family, since the mother of Jesus brought that offering at Luke 2:24.
Context
- Who
- Women bearing children in a camp, and the households that had to know when the mother could handle sacred things again
- What
- A purity law for a mother after childbirth, setting the days of her waiting and the offering that ends them.
- Where
- A household in the camp, and then the entrance to the Tent of Meeting.
- When
- The second year after the Exodus, about 1445 BC on the traditional dating.
- Why
- To keep the flow of birth apart from the sanctuary and then to restore the mother to the worship of the LORD.
Historical context
The speech is given to Moses alone, unlike chapter 11 before it and chapter 13 after it, both of which are addressed to Moses and Aaron together.
Show the rest of the historical context, 5 more paragraphs
Childbirth in this world happened at home, attended by women, with no physician involved. The forty or eighty days the chapter counts are therefore a household matter, and the only public act in it is the offering at the end.
A first hearer knew that verse 2 was measuring by a rule he already had, the seven days of a woman's period, which Leviticus 15:19 states. The chapter takes that measure as known and does not repeat it.
He also knew what the restriction at verse 4 cost. Not touching anything sacred and not entering the sanctuary meant that for more than a month a mother stood outside the one place where the nation met God, at exactly the moment she had most reason to give thanks.
The offering at verse 6 names a real price. A year-old lamb was a substantial animal for a household, and verse 8 exists because the law was written with families who could not produce one in view.
Circumcision on the eighth day at verse 3 was already the household's practice, set for Abraham at Genesis 17:12, and this is the only place in Leviticus that commands it.
Significance
The chapter told a family exactly when ordinary life resumed and when the mother could come back to the sanctuary, which in a camp organised around a tent was a practical question rather than a ceremonial one.
Show the rest of the significance, 2 more paragraphs
The sin offering at verse 6 was required and no sin was named, which taught a first hearer that uncleanness and guilt were separate categories. Nothing in bearing a child was treated as a fault.
Verse 8 made the end of the waiting reachable for everyone. A woman who could bring two birds was cleansed on the same terms as a woman who could bring a lamb.
This chapter in Jewish lifeWhat this chapter is in Jewish life and reading.
What is done
This chapter sets a mother's days apart after a birth and the offering that closed them. The tradition holds that the uncleanness of a birth follows the rules already given for a woman's monthly separation. It begins with the opening of the womb, even where no blood is seen (Rashi on Leviticus 12:2:3). Rashi is quoted from the Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary translated by M. Rosenbaum and A. M. Silbermann, 1929 to 1934, which the corpus marks public domain. Through the longer count that follows, blood seen by the mother left her clean (Rashi on Leviticus 12:4:2). The two offerings at the end were brought in the order the tradition fixes rather than the order the verse lists, with the sin offering first and the burnt offering after (Rashi on Leviticus 12:8:1). It is the sin offering that completed her cleansing and let her eat holy food again (Rashi on Leviticus 12:7:1). Those offerings have not been brought since the Temple fell in AD 70, a break this site records on its feasts layer (src/lib/hebraic/feasts.ts).
How it is read
The tradition begins by asking why this chapter follows the chapter on clean and unclean animals. Rashi carries the answer of Rabbi Simlai from Leviticus Rabbah 14:1. Man was formed after the cattle, the beasts and the birds, so the law for man is set out after the law for them (Rashi on Leviticus 12:2:1). The chapter's own wording is then read closely. The verb for conceiving is held to cover a birth that came out as a mass rather than a child, so that the mother's days are counted in that case too (Rashi on Leviticus 12:2:2). The word for her separation is read in two ways. It is taken as anything that flows from the body, and also as sickness, because the tradition holds that a woman's issue leaves her head and limbs heavy (Rashi on Leviticus 12:2:4).
The doubled days after the birth of a daughter are the point a reader asks about. Sforno is quoted here from the Sefaria Community Translation, which the corpus marks CC0. His answer is one line, that the excesses increase in the birth of a female (Sforno on Leviticus 12:5:1). The site reports that as his reading rather than as the sense of the text.
The rest is grammar and its consequences. The verb in the fourth verse is read as remaining rather than sitting, and Rashi proves it from Deuteronomy and Genesis (Rashi on Leviticus 12:4:1). He separates two spellings of the word for purity in the same verse, one an uninflected noun and one the possessive (Rashi on Leviticus 12:4:3 and 12:4:4). On the last verse he notes that a woman is called unclean until she has brought her offering, although her days are already done (Rashi on Leviticus 12:7:2).
The corpus is thin on the third verse, which commands circumcision on the eighth day. Ibn Ezra stands there three times and Sforno once (Ibn Ezra on Leviticus 12:3:1, 12:3:2 and 12:3:3, and Sforno on Leviticus 12:3:1). The corpus keeps the text of neither, because the licences Sefaria reports do not permit it. Ibn Ezra stands eight times in the chapter in all, with five more notes on the sixth, seventh and eighth verses. Malbim stands three times, and Sefaria holds no English version of any of them (Malbim on Leviticus, Tazria 1:1, 18:1 and 21:1).
What the rabbis say
The corpus carries forty Midrash and Talmud locators on this chapter and the text of none of them. Each is cited here rather than quoted, and what each teaches is reported as the teaching of the rabbis.
Thirty of them are Talmudic. The Jerusalem Talmud carries fourteen, three of them in Niddah, the tractate on this subject, at 1:3:4, 1:6:1 and 2:6:2. Three stand on the third verse and the eighth day, at Beitzah 1:3:4, Kiddushin 1:7:2 and Makkot 2:6:11. The other eight stand at Avodah Zarah 2:8:7, Berakhot 3:4:12, Chagigah 1:1:20, Horayot 2:5:3, Pesachim 9:4:3, Beitzah 3:5:2, Orlah 3:1:8 and Shabbat 20:1:1. Sixteen Babylonian locators run beside them. Keritot carries three, at 10a:13, 10b:2 and 9b:19. Arakhin, Bekhorot, Chullin and Berakhot carry two each, at 18b:8 and 21a:10, at 47b:15 and 27b:6, at 71a:10 and 71a:11, and at 4a:9 and 60a:14. The last five stand at Bava Kamma 11a:14, Bava Batra 127a:2, Nedarim 35b:5, Eruvin 32a:7 and Avodah Zarah 51a:22.
Ten midrashic locators close it. Ein Yaakov carries three, at Shevuot 2:4 in the Glick Edition, at Niddah 3:9 and at Yoma 3:1. Bereshit Rabbah stands twice, at 46:11 on the circumcision and at 20:7. Bamidbar Rabbah stands twice, at 10:15 and 14:11. The last three are Aggadat Bereshit 41:4, Midrash Lekach Tov, Leviticus 12:7:1, and Bereshit Rabbati, Parashat Bereshit 59.
Sources: Rashi, Rashi on Leviticus 12:2:1 to 12:8:1, the Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary translated by M. Rosenbaum and A. M. Silbermann, 1929 to 1934, public domain; Sforno, Sforno on Leviticus 12:5:1, the Sefaria Community Translation, CC0; Ibn Ezra, Ibn Ezra on Leviticus 12:3:1 to 12:8:2, eight notes cited by ref because the licence Sefaria reports does not permit the text; Malbim, Malbim on Leviticus, Tazria 1:1, 18:1 and 21:1, cited by ref because Sefaria holds no English version; MannaFest, the feasts layer, src/lib/hebraic/feasts.ts, on the Temple's fall in AD 70; The Sefaria corpus, scripts/data/sources/sefaria/leviticus/12.json, the 40 Midrash and Talmud locators of this chapter.
The heads below are this chapter's scenes. The numbered points under each are its verses.
Days of purifying after a birth
Leviticus 12:1-4
Chapter 11 was spoken to Moses and Aaron together, and this one to Moses alone. The mother's seven days of uncleanness and her thirty-three days of purification make forty in total. John Gill ties the circumcision of verse 3 to the morning after her seven days end, and Luke 2:21 records the eighth day kept for Jesus.
Leviticus 12:1
“And the Lord spake unto Moses,.... The laws in the preceding chapter were delivered both to Moses and Aaron, but what follows in this only to Moses; but inasmuch as the priest had a concern in it, it being his business to offer the sacrifices required by the following law, it was no doubt given to Moses, to be delivered to Aaron, as well as to the people. R.”
1 more voice on this verseWhat preachers and commentators have said about this verse, in their own words.
Leviticus 12:1
“This chapter would more naturally follow the 15th chapter of Leviticus. See the note to Lev 15:1.”
The first week is measured by the rule for a woman's monthly flow, which Leviticus 15:19 sets at seven days. Matthew Henry notes that she was kept apart from her husband and friends in that week, and those who tended her shared her uncleanness. John Wesley read it as a sign of corruption from birth.
Leviticus 12:2
“Seven days - Not for any filthiness which was either in the conception, or in bringing forth, but to signify the universal and deep pollution of man's nature, even from the birth, and from the conception. Seven days or thereabouts, nature is employed in the purgation of most women.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
Circumcision on the eighth day goes back to the command given Abraham at Genesis 17:12, which John Gill cites here, and Leviticus sets it inside the mother's law of birth. Adam Clarke thought an infant too weak for it sooner. Augustine read the eighth day as the first day of a new week, the day of the resurrection.
Leviticus 12:3
“And in the eighth day the flesh of his foreskin shall be circumcised. Or the foreskin of his flesh, that is, of the man child born according to the law, Gen 17:12 and this seems to furnish out a reason why a male child was not circumcised before the eighth day, and why it was then, because before that its mother was in her separation and uncleanness, and then was freed from it; and so the Targum of Jonathan.”
After the first week the verse names only two limits, holy things and the sanctuary. John Wesley explains her bleeding as a cleansing that happens by degrees over those thirty-three days. Albert Barnes adds that none of it fell on the child.
Leviticus 12:4
“In the blood of her purifying - In her polluted and separated estate; for the word blood or bloods signifies both guilt, and uncleanness, as here and elsewhere. And it is called the blood of her purifying, because by the expulsion or purgation of that blood, which is done by degrees, she is purified.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
1 more voice on this verse
Leviticus 12:4
“Why the time of both those was double for a female to what it was for a male I can assign no reason but the will of the Law-maker; in Christ Jesus no difference is made of male and female, Gal. iii. But this ceremonial uncleanness which the law laid women in child-bed under was to signify the pollution of sin which we are all conceived and born in, Ps. li.”
Matthew Henry · Commentary on the Whole Bible (1707-1721)puritan
Leviticus 12:5-7
Every number doubles for a daughter, two weeks against one and sixty-six days against thirty-three, and the text gives no reason. Matthew Henry could assign no reason but the will of the Law-maker, and Adam Clarke called the difference difficult to account for. The offering at verse 6 is the same either way, and a sin offering is required though no sin is named.
Leviticus 12:5
“Threescore and six days - The time in both particulars is double to the former, not so much from natural causes, as to put an honour upon the sacrament of circumcision, which being administered to the males, did put an end to that pollution sooner than otherwise had been.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
1 more voice on this verse
Leviticus 12:5
“Some have thought that this doubling of each of the two periods was intended to remind the people of the fact that woman represents the lower side of human nature, and was the first to fall into temptation. 1Ti 2:13-15; 1Pe 3:7. The ancients had a notion that the mother suffers for a longer time after the birth of a girl than after the birth of a boy. The period required for the restoration of her health in the one case was thirty days, and in the other, it was 40 or 42 days.”
A lamb: or two birds if she is poor
The Hebrew behind year-old is a son of his year, which Albert Barnes takes to mean a lamb still inside its first year. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown note that a birth was a glad occasion, yet the law asks for a burnt offering and a sin offering with no peace offering. John Wesley adds that the cleansing was for the mother herself.
Leviticus 12:6
“For a son or a daughter - For the birth of a son, or of a daughter: but the purification was for herself, as appears from the following verses. A sin-offering - Because of her ceremonial uncleanness, which required a ceremonial expiation.”
John Wesley · Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament (1765)evangelical
The atonement here is tied to her flow of blood. The closing formula, This is the law, matches the one that ends the food laws at 11:46, and verse 8 follows as an added provision for the poor. Jamieson, Fausset and Brown read the sacrifices as a reminder to the parents of where sin began.
The last verse lowers the price: two turtledoves or two young pigeons, one bird doing the work the lamb would have done. Luke 2:22-24 has Mary and Joseph bringing exactly that pair, which places the household of Jesus on the lower line of this verse. Adam Clarke put it plainly, that the heir to the throne of David could not afford a lamb.
Leviticus 12:8
“And if she be not able to bring a lamb, then she shall bring two turtles, or two young pigeons - As the Virgin Mary brought only the latter, hence it is evident that she was not able, i. e., she was not rich enough to provide the former; for such a holy woman would not have brought the less offering had she been capable of bringing the greater. How astonishing is this! The only heir to the throne of David was not able to bring a lamb to offer in sacrifice to God!”
Adam Clarke · Commentary on the Bible (1810-1826)evangelical
Cross references
Leviticus 12:8
- Quoted inLuke 2:24and to offer the sacrifice specified in the Law of the Lord: “A pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons.”
'A pair of turtledoves', purification offering
How this psalm is built
The form: Ritual instruction, the shortest chapter in the book, standing inside the section on the clean and the unclean, as Wenham classes it.
The patterns in this chapter
| Device | What it does | Where to see it |
|---|---|---|
| The numbers doubled for a daughter | Seven days become two weeks and thirty-three days become sixty-six, so every figure in the chapter doubles when the child is a girl. The offering asked at verse 6 stays the same either way, a year-old lamb and a bird, which puts the whole of the difference on the waiting rather than on the sacrifice. The chapter gives no reason for it.Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible, 1710, on Leviticus 12:5. | Leviticus 12:2, Leviticus 12:4, Leviticus 12:5 |
| The eighth day, set inside another count | Verse 3 is the one instruction in the chapter addressed to anyone other than the mother, and it is the circumcision of her son on the eighth day. John Gill ties that day to the morning after her first seven end, so the one act commanded of the household falls at the seam of her two periods.John Gill, Exposition of the Old Testament, 1748 to 1763, on Leviticus 12:3. | Leviticus 12:3 |
| The price lowered in the last verse | Verse 6 asks a year-old lamb for the burnt offering and a bird for the sin offering. Verse 8 allows two turtledoves or two young pigeons where a woman cannot afford the lamb, so one bird does the work the lamb would have done and the atonement is made on the same terms.Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible, 1831, on Leviticus 12:8. | Leviticus 12:6, Leviticus 12:8 |
The chapter sits between the food laws of chapter 11 and the skin conditions of chapter 13, and it is the only one of the purity chapters whose subject is an event rather than a condition. Childbirth is not an illness and carries no fault in the text, and the chapter still measures it in days and closes it with an offering, which is a useful correction to a reader who takes uncleanness in Leviticus to mean sin.
10 more paragraphs on the patterns
The historical value
The chapter records a practice with a fixed price, and the price is the historical detail that matters most. A year-old lamb was a substantial animal for a household, and the concession at verse 8 shows that the law was written with families who could not produce one in view.
Verse 3 is the only place in Leviticus that commands circumcision, and it dates it to the eighth day, which is the day Genesis 17:12 had already set for Abraham's household. Luke 2:21 records that eighth day kept for Jesus.
The New Testament's use
Luke 2:22 to 24 takes the whole chapter up in three verses. Mary and Joseph come to the temple when the days of purification are complete and bring a pair of turtledoves or two young pigeons, which is exactly the offering of verse 8. The Gospel therefore places the household Jesus was born into on the lower line of this chapter, and Adam Clarke says it plainly, that the heir to the throne of David was not able to bring a lamb.
The debated point
Why the periods double for a daughter is argued and no position has carried the field. Matthew Henry wrote that he could assign no reason but the will of the Law-maker. Adam Clarke called the difference difficult to account for. Readings offered since have included a longer period of a mother's recovery, a symbolic doubling that carries no medical claim, and a reflection of the daughter's own future under the same law, and none of them is stated in the text. The strongest objection to every reading is the same: the chapter gives the numbers and stops, and the offering it asks does not change with them.
A second question is why a sin offering is required where no sin is named. Matthew Henry offers two readings and settles on neither, and the chapter leaves the term standing without explanation.
Where to go deeper
The lamb the chapter asks for and then waives is set out at the lamb, and the covenant sign that verse 3 dates to the eighth day is set out at the Abrahamic covenant. The wider category the chapter works in belongs to the owed page on the clean and the unclean.
Keep studying
Sources for this chapter
The summary
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory; John Calvin, Commentaries; John Wesley, Notes on the Old Testament and Matthew Henry, Complete Commentary.
The form and classifications
Gordon Wenham, The Book of Leviticus, New International Commentary on the Old Testament, 1979, the partition this site's Leviticus dossier carries as proposed under his name, which runs the purity section from 11:1 to 15:33 and Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch, 1864 to 1870, on Leviticus 12:2.
The exposition
Adam Clarke, Commentary on the Bible; Albert Barnes, Notes, Explanatory and Practical, on the Old and New Testaments (1832-1869); Augustine of Hippo, SERMON 169.3; Jamieson, Fausset & Brown, Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible; John Gill; John Wesley, Explanatory Notes upon the Old Testament; Keil and Delitzsch, Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament: The Pentateuch and Matthew Henry, Commentary on the Whole Bible.