The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
The Cleansing of Women
Leviticus 15:28–33 — The Cleansing of Women. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
28When a woman is cleansed of her discharge, she must count off seven days, and after that she will be ceremonially clean.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·’im- ṭā·hă·rāh miz·zō·w·ḇāh wə·sā·p̄ə·rāh lāh šiḇ·‘aṯ yā·mîm wə·’a·ḥar tiṭ·hār
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-if she-has-been-cleansed from-her-discharge, then-she-shall-count for-herself seven days, and-after she-shall-be-clean.”
Where the English smooths the original
But if she be cleansed. —That is, cured or healed of her infirmity. The expression “cleansed” is used both here and in Leviticus 15:13 for the disappearance of the complaint. From the time of its cessation she is to count seven days, during which no trace of the complaint must be observable
Seven days from the stopping of her issue, as it is apparent. And this was for trial whether it was only a temporary obstruction, or a real cessation.Poole names the practical logic of the seven counted days — a probation to prove the cure is real.
then she shall number to herself seven days; from the time she observed it to cease: and after that she shall be clean; having bathed herself according to the usual manner of unclean persons, for their cleansing; when she would be fit to be admitted to her husband, though not as yet into the tabernacle
29On the eighth day she is to take two turtledoves or two young pigeons and bring them to the priest at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
haš·šə·mî·nî ū·ḇay·yō·wm tiq·qaḥ- lāh šə·tê ṯō·rîm ’ōw šə·nê bə·nê yō·w·nāh wə·hê·ḇî·’āh ’ō·w·ṯām ’el- hak·kō·hên ’el- pe·ṯaḥ ’ō·hel mō·w·‘êḏ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-on-the-day the-eighth she-shall-take for-herself two turtledoves or two sons-of pigeon, and-she-shall-bring them to the-priest, to the-entrance-of the-Tent-of Meeting.”
Where the English smooths the original
On the eighth day she is to bring the same sacrifices which are prescribed for the man who is cured of an issue (see Leviticus 15:14 ), only that in the latter case the man had to be bathed in living water, because he brought the illness upon himself.Ellicott marks the woman’s lighter requirement — no living-water bath — reading the man’s heavier rite as tied to self-incurred uncleanness.
she shall take unto her two turtles, or two young pigeons; the same as the man that had an issue was obliged to bring. Now this is to be understood not of a woman that had an ordinary issue, or her monthly courses; for this would have been both troublesome and expensive to have brought every month, but of a woman that had laboured under an extraordinary one
if a woman have an issue—Though this, like the leprosy, might be a natural affection, it was anciently considered contagious and entailed a ceremonial defilement which typified a moral impurity.JFB’s recurring thesis for the whole pericope: the ceremonial flux ‘typified a moral impurity.’
30The priest is to sacrifice one as a sin offering and the other as a burnt offering. In this way the priest will make atonement for her before the LORD for her unclean discharge.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
hak·kō·hên ’eṯ- wə·‘ā·śāh hā·’e·ḥāḏ ḥaṭ·ṭāṯ wə·’eṯ- hā·’e·ḥāḏ ‘ō·lāh hak·kō·hên wə·ḵip·per ‘ā·le·hā lip̄·nê Yah·weh ṭum·’ā·ṯāh miz·zō·wḇ
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-the-priest shall-make the-one a-sin-offering and the-other a-burnt-offering; and-the-priest shall-make-atonement for-her before YHWH from her-uncleanness-of discharge.”
Where the English smooths the original
And the priest shall offer.— Exactly in the same manner as described in Leviticus 15:15 .Ellicott’s terse cross-reference: the woman’s atonement is verbatim the man’s (v. 15) — the law is impartial between the sexes.
there being a legal uncleanness in their case, atonement must be made by sacrifice, typical of the atonement of Christ, who by himself has purged our sins. The design of these several laws concerning uncleanness by issues, was to set forth the filthiness of sin arising from the corruption of human nature; particularly the pollution of fleshly lusts, and the necessity of purification from them by the grace of God, and blood of ChristGill draws the line explicitly to Christ’s atonement — the offering ‘typical of the atonement of Christ, who by himself has purged our sins.’
and the priest shall make an atonement for her before the LORD for the issue of her uncleanness.
31You must keep the children of Israel separate from their uncleanness, so that they do not die by defiling My tabernacle, which is among them.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·hiz·zar·tem ’eṯ- bə·nê- yiś·rā·’êl miṭ·ṭum·’ā·ṯām wə·lō yā·mu·ṯū bə·ṭum·’ā·ṯām bə·ṭam·mə·’ām ’eṯ- miš·kā·nî ’ă·šer bə·ṯō·w·ḵām
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“And-you-shall-keep-separate the-sons-of Israel from-their-uncleanness, so-that they-do-not die in-their-uncleanness by-their-defiling My-dwelling which is in-their-midst.”
Where the English smooths the original
When they defile my tabernacle — Both ceremonially, by coming into it in their uncleanness; and morally, by the contempt of God’s express command to cleanse themselves. This shows that one main design of these laws was to impress the minds of that carnal people with a high respect and veneration for the worship of God, and whatever bore the name of sacred.
The word rendered "tabernacle" elsewhere in Leviticus is properly "tent." See the Exodus 26:1 note.Barnes flags the lexical precision the English loses: the word here is mishkân, ‘dwelling-place,’ not the ordinary word for ‘tent.’
The main purpose in the laws of uncleanness is to keep first God's house and then God's people free from the danger of defilement by foul things presenting themselves freely before him and among them. These foul things, symbolizing sinful things, create a ceremonial defilement symbolizing moral defilement.
Seeing that God required purity and cleanliness of his own: we cannot be his, unless our filth and sins are purged with the blood of Jesus Christ, and so we learn to detest all sin.The Reformers’ gloss reads the whole purity system christologically: cleansing only ‘with the blood of Jesus Christ.’
uncleanness as irreconcilable with the calling of Israel to be a holy nation, in the midst of which Jehovah the Holy One had His dwelling-place ( Leviticus 11:44 ), and continuance in uncleanness without the prescribed purification was a disregard of the holiness of Jehovah, and involved rebellion against Him and His ordinances of grace.K&D reach the deepest ground: the danger is not the bodily flow but ‘rebellion against Him and His ordinances of grace’ — uncleanness is grave because it contradicts Israel’s vocation to be the holy nation in whose midst God dwells (Lev 11:44).
32This is the law of him who has a discharge, of the man who has an emission of semen whereby he is unclean,
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
zōṯ tō·w·raṯ haz·zāḇ wa·’ă·šer tê·ṣê mim·men·nū šiḵ·ḇaṯ- ze·ra‘ ḇāh lə·ṭā·mə·’āh-
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“This is the-law of-the-one-discharging, and-of-one from-whom goes-out an-emission-of seed, to-his-becoming-unclean by-it,”
Where the English smooths the original
These two verses give a summary of the contents of the chapter. In the recapitulation, however, as we have already seen, the order of the enactments is not strictly adhered to.
The concluding vv . include all the cases mentioned in this chapter. Cp. the conclusion to ch. 11. The gradations in the methods of cleansing should be noted: ( a ) the uncleanness lasted till the end of the day, and ceased without any further ceremonial, ‘he shall be unclean until the even’; ( b ) washing the clothes and bathing in running water is added ( Leviticus 15:13 ); ( c ) sacrifices must also be offeredCambridge sets out the three graded remedies — evening, washing, sacrifice — a ladder of cleansing scaled to the gravity of the impurity.
In Leviticus 15:32 is a recapitulation of the several laws in this chapter, as of a man that has a "gonorrhoea": and of him whose seed goeth from him, and is defiled therewith; involuntarily, that suffers a nocturnal pollution.
33of a woman in her menstrual period, of any male or female who has a discharge, and of a man who lies with an unclean woman.’”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Hebrew — tap a word ↓
wə·had·dā·wāh bə·nid·dā·ṯāh laz·zā·ḵār wə·lan·nə·qê·ḇāh wə·haz·zāḇ ’eṯ- zō·w·ḇōw ū·lə·’îš ’ă·šer yiš·kaḇ ‘im- ṭə·mê·’āh
Literal — word-for-word from the original
“and-of-the-sick-woman in-her-menstrual-separation, and-of-the-male and-of-the-female, and-of-the-one-discharging his-discharge, and-of-a-man who lies with an-unclean-woman.”
Where the English smooths the original
And of her that is sick of her flowers,.... Her monthly courses, for these are a sickness, Leviticus 20:18 ; and make a woman languid and faint, as the word is rendered, Lamentations 1:13 ; or to be in pain (n), as some render it hereGill catches the rare word dāwāh, tracing it to Lamentations 1:13 — ‘languid and faint’ — the bridge from bodily to spiritual desolation.
The words, "him that lieth with her that is unclean," are more general than the expression, "lie with her," in Leviticus 15:24 , and involve not only intercourse with an unclean woman, but lying by her side upon one and the same bed.K&D press the breadth of the closing clause: even shared rest, not only intercourse, transmits the impurity.
The divine wisdom was manifested in inspiring the Israelites with a profound reverence for holy things; and nothing was more suited to this purpose than to debar from the tabernacle all who were polluted by any kind of uncleanness, ceremonial as well as natural, mental as well as physical.
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
The unit opens not with a command but with a healing already granted: “and-if she-has-been-cleansed (טָהֲרָה) from-her-discharge.” The bleeding stops first; only then does she count off (וְסָפְרָה, √çâphar H5608 — Strong’s, to score with a mark as a tally) seven days. Matthew Poole reads the seven as a probation — “for trial whether it was only a temporary obstruction, or a real cessation” (1685) — and Charles Ellicott notes the word ‘cleansed’ here, as in Leviticus 15:13, marks “the disappearance of the complaint” (1878). The grammar makes the point the doctrine will labor: the change of state precedes the counting; God’s mercy runs ahead of the woman’s observance. The verse is a sealed circle of one root — ṭâhêr at the open (word 1) and ṭâhêr at the close (word 8) — purity declared, then purity confirmed, seven sacred days (שִׁבְעַת, H7651, ‘the sacred full one’) between.
On the eighth day (הַשְּׁמִינִי) — the recurring Levitical day of newness — the woman brings two turtledoves or two young pigeons to the opening of the tent of meeting (פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד). She comes to the threshold, the limit of approach; the priest receives what she may not carry in. John Gill observes these are the very birds “the man that had an issue was obliged to bring” (1746–63), and Ellicott that the rite is offered “exactly in the same manner as described in Leviticus 15:15” (1878) — the woman’s atonement is, word for word, the man’s. The priest makes one a sin-offering (חַטָּאת) and the other a burnt-offering (עֹלָה), and so makes atonement (וְכִפֶּר, √kâphar H3722 — to cover) before the face of YHWH. The astonishment, which Gill names, is that an innocent, involuntary flow still draws a sin-offering and is covered with the same verb that caulked Noah’s ark and roofed the mercy seat. Jamieson, Fausset & Brown give the governing key: the bodily flux “typified a moral impurity” (1871), and so its remedy quietly rehearses a deeper one.
The chapter’s theological center: “you shall keep the sons of Israel separate from their uncleanness, so that they do not die (יָמֻתוּ) in their uncleanness by their defiling My dwelling (מִשְׁכָּנִי) which is in their midst.” Albert Barnes insists on the lost word: not the ordinary ‘tent’ but mishkân, “my dwelling-place… properly ‘tent’ elsewhere” (1834) — God names the place by His own indwelling. The stakes are death, because the Holy One dwells in their midst. The Pulpit Commentary states the system’s whole logic: “to keep first God’s house and then God’s people free from the danger of defilement… these foul things, symbolizing sinful things, create a ceremonial defilement symbolizing moral defilement” (1880s). Joseph Benson reads the defilement as “both ceremonially… and morally, by the contempt of God’s express command” (1810s). The verb wəhizzartem (√nâzar) is causative and addressed to the leaders — Moses and Aaron must make the people keep apart; Keil & Delitzsch render it not as mere distance but as deliverance: “cause that the children of Israel free themselves from their uncleanness” (1860s).
“This is the tôrāh (תּוֹרַת) of the one discharging…” — the formal seal that closes a Levitical instruction. Ellicott notes these verses “give a summary of the contents of the chapter,” with “the order of the enactments… not strictly adhered to” (1878); Cambridge sets out the three graded remedies the summary gathers — evening, washing, and sacrifice (1880s). The roll-call spans the male and the female (לַזָּכָר וְלַנְּקֵבָה — the very pairing of Genesis 1:27) and rises to a rare, aching word: haddāwāh (הַדָּוָה, √dâveh H1739, only five occurrences), the faint, languishing woman. John Gill hears its overtone, glossing it from Lamentations 1:13 as “languid and faint” (1746–63). And the chapter’s last word is the one it set out to abolish — ṭəmēʼāh, unclean. A system that can diagnose, separate, and contain impurity ends still saying ‘unclean,’ pointing past itself to a cleansing it cannot finally give.
(⚙ machine synthesis — fallible, offered to be tested against Scripture.) Read whole, Leviticus 15:28–33 is a small parable of grace under law. The healing comes first (v. 28); the rite ratifies what God has already done. The remedy is identical for man and woman (vv. 29–30, with Ellicott), the offering is the poor’s two birds, and the costly word kipper (‘to cover,’ the Day-of-Atonement verb) is spent on a private, innocent impurity at the tent door — as if to say that no condition is too small, and no person too poor, for atonement. Verse 31 unveils the engine of the whole chapter: God dwells in their midst, and that nearness is at once Israel’s glory and her peril. Every law of clean and unclean is finally a law about access — how a mortal, leaking, dying people may live next door to the Holy and not be consumed. And the chapter’s last word, unclean, is its own confession of insufficiency: the system can hold impurity at bay but cannot expel it from the heart. It is a door left ajar — toward a Priest who would touch the unclean and make them clean, and a blood that covers not the flow but the conscience. The Levitical reader is meant to leave this chapter clean by the rite and still longing for a cleanness the rite only signs. This reading is the tool’s own and may err; weigh it against the text.
The book of purity ends on the word ‘unclean’ — a system that can contain the flood but never dam its source. (A fallible synthesis, not Scripture.)
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
Verses 28–30 deliberately replay the cleansing of the man with a discharge in Leviticus 15:13–15: the same seven counted days (שִׁבְעַת יָמִים), the same rare flux-word zôwb, the same two birds made a sin-offering and burnt-offering, the same verb kâphar ‘to atone.’ Ellicott and Gill both note the woman brings exactly what the man brought. The Verifier confirms a dense verbal overlap; the law is impartial between the sexes.
Leviticus 15:13 · Leviticus 15:15
basis: Rare shared lexeme H2101 zôwb (in only 10 vv) ties the male and female purification across both pairs; with v. 13 also H2891 ṭâhêr, H5608 çâphar, H7651 shebaʻ, and with v. 15 also H3722 kâphar, H5930 ʻôlâh, H2403 chaṭṭâʼâh — the same prescription recorded verbatim.
The pair “two turtledoves or two young pigeons” (שְׁתֵּי תֹרִים … בְּנֵי יוֹנָה) is the offering of the poor woman after childbirth (Leviticus 12:8) as well as of the man healed of an issue (Leviticus 15:14). It is precisely this offering Mary brings at Jesus’ presentation (Luke 2:24) — the holy family enrolled among the poor. The same threshold-birds that cleanse the unclean are laid down for the One who would be ‘holy to the Lord.’
Leviticus 12:8 · Leviticus 15:14 · Luke 2:24
basis: Rare shared lexemes H8449 tôwr (in 14 vv) + H3123 yôwnâh (in 31 vv) link Lev 15:29 to Lev 12:8 and 15:14 within the Hebrew; Luke 2:24 is an explicit NT citation of Lev 12:8 (LXX). The Greek↔Hebrew leg cannot rest on a shared Strong’s — it is recorded as a named quotation, not a lexeme match.
Leviticus 15:31’s warning — that uncleanness left unpurged defiles My dwelling (מִשְׁכָּן) and brings death (מוּת) — is the same logic Numbers 19:13 spells out for the corpse-defiled who fails to purify: ‘he defiles the dwelling of the LORD; that soul shall be cut off.’ Both texts bind ṭumʼâh (impurity), ṭâmêʼ (to defile), mishkân (dwelling), and mûwth (death) into a single chain. The motif is shared but neither verse quotes the other.
Numbers 19:13
basis: Shared lexemes H2932 ṭumʼâh (31 vv), H4908 mishkân (129 vv), H2930 ṭâmêʼ (142 vv), H4191 mûwth (700 vv) — a common motif-chain, not a rare quotation; tiered structural/thematic because the words are common and no citation is claimed.
The closing verse names the menstruant haddāwāh (הַדָּוָה, √dâveh) — ‘the faint / languishing one,’ a word in only five verses. Leviticus 20:18 reuses it for the prohibited act; but the prophets lift it into metaphor — Isaiah 30:22 has idols flung away ‘as a menstruous cloth’ (dāwāh), Lamentations 1:13 makes Zion ‘faint all the day,’ and Lamentations 5:17 confesses ‘for this our heart is faint (dāwāh).’ Gill himself routes the Leviticus word through Lamentations. The bodily faintness becomes the figure of a soul’s desolation and of sin’s revulsion — the same word naming a woman’s monthly weakness and a nation’s spiritual collapse.
Leviticus 20:18 · Isaiah 30:22 · Lamentations 1:13 · Lamentations 5:17
basis: Rare shared lexeme H1739 dâveh (in only 5 vv) is the verbal hinge across all four; with Lev 20:18 also H7901 shâkab. Rarity (5 occurrences) makes the verbal link recorded, not merely thematic — though the prophetic uses are metaphorical extensions, noted as such.
The subscription’s clause on the man ‘from whom goes out an emission of seed’ (שִׁכְבַת־זֶרַע, v. 32) reappears almost word for word in Leviticus 22:4, where the very same impurity bars a priest from eating the holy offerings until he is clean. The rare construct šᵉkâbâh (‘a lying-down,’ in only 9 verses) and the flux-verb zûwb tie the two. The point is striking: the purity the layman owes at the tent door is the identical purity the priest owes at the holy table — impurity is no respecter of office. The same flow that keeps the woman of v. 33 from the sanctuary keeps a son of Aaron from his bread, which quietly prepares the question Hebrews will answer: who, then, can offer a purity that does not fail?
Leviticus 22:4
basis: Rare shared lexeme H7902 shᵉkâbâh (in only 9 vv) plus H2100 zûwb (41 vv) and H2233 zeraʻ link Lev 15:32 to Lev 22:4 — the same emission-impurity legislated for layman and priest alike; the rarity of shᵉkâbâh carries the verbal badge.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
Leviticus 15 makes a woman’s flow of blood (זוֹב) contagious: whatever she touches is defiled, and the man who even lies beside her becomes unclean (v. 33). The Gospels set against this exact law the woman with a twelve-year flow of blood (Mark 5:25–34), whose touch ought to have defiled Jesus — and instead He is the one who cleanses her, the contagion running backward. He receives at His person what the tabernacle could not admit at its door, and pronounces the very word the law withheld from such a woman: ‘Go in peace… be healed.’ JFB’s reading that the flux ‘typified a moral impurity’ finds its answer here. The link is thematic-typological, not verbal: it crosses Testaments (Greek↔Hebrew) and shares no Strong’s lexeme.
Mark 5:25 · Leviticus 15:25 · Leviticus 15:33
The two birds that cover (כִּפֶּר) the woman ‘before the LORD’ (v. 30) belong to a sacrificial economy the New Testament reads as a shadow: ‘the blood of goats and bulls… sanctify for the purifying of the flesh’ — but only the blood of Christ can ‘cleanse our conscience’ (Hebrews 9:13–14). John Gill draws the line in his note on v. 30: the offering is ‘typical of the atonement of Christ, who by himself has purged our sins,’ and the Geneva gloss on v. 31 adds that we cannot be God’s ‘unless our filth and sins are purged with the blood of Jesus Christ.’ The chapter that ends on the word unclean awaits the One who makes finally clean. Cross-Testament and so non-verbal: typological, argued from the structure of atonement, not from a shared word.
Hebrews 9:13 · Leviticus 15:30 · Leviticus 15:31
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
⚙ Honesty notes for this unit. (1) Voices. Several commentators (Matthew Henry, Albert Barnes, JFB, Keil & Delitzsch) supply the same block of text across multiple verses in this chapter, because Biblehub attaches a single chapter- or section-level note to each verse in a pericope; I have therefore drawn each verse’s voices from the commentators who wrote something specific to that verse, and have not reused an identical block twice. Matthew Henry’s only note here is his chapter-wide summary of 15:1–33, so it is referenced in the synthesis rather than quoted per verse; Keil & Delitzsch likewise supply one chapter-level block, so I quote it once (at v. 31, its proper anchor) rather than repeating it on vv. 28–30. Poole has ‘No text… on this verse’ for vv. 29, 30, 32, 33 — those gaps are real and unfilled. (2) Cross-Testament threads. The two Christ-readings (the hemorrhaging woman; atonement by blood) cross from Hebrew to Greek and therefore cannot rest on a shared Strong’s number; they are tiered typological / thematic and argued from motif and from the explicit witness of Gill and the Geneva annotators, not asserted as verbal quotations. (3) Luke 2:24. The ‘two turtledoves’ thread treats Luke 2:24 as a recognized NT citation of Leviticus 12:8 (Septuagint); the Hebrew↔Hebrew leg (Lev 15:29 ↔ 12:8, 15:14) is verbally confirmed by the rare birds-lexemes, but the NT leg is a named quotation across languages, recorded as such. (4) Parses. Word 9 of v. 32 (ləṭāmʼāh) carries a third-person feminine suffix though the subject is the man; I have followed the Berean/Strong’s parse and read the agreement as with the (feminine) ‘emission,’ flagging the oddity rather than smoothing it. (5) Restraint. Common-word links (e.g. the ṭumʼâh/mishkân/mûwth chain shared with Numbers 19:13) are deliberately downgraded to structural/thematic; only genuinely rare lexemes (zôwb, 10 vv; dâveh, 5 vv; šᵉkâbâh, 9 vv; tôwr, 14 vv) are allowed to carry a ‘verbal’ badge. (6) Lev 22:4 thread. The Verifier confirms the layman-emission of v. 32 and the priest’s purity-law of Lev 22:4 share the rare šᵉkâbâh (9 vv) plus zûwb; the link is verbal within the Hebrew, and the typological inference I draw from it (one purity binds layman and priest) is the tool’s own application, not the bare lexeme match.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)