The Menstruant Is Dangerous: Nahmanides’ Science and Mysticism

When Laban is searching Rachel’s tent for the teraphim^[1]that she has stolen and concealed under her seat, she offers an excuse for not standing up to greet Laban:

^{בראשׁית לא:לה} וַתֹּאמֶר אֶל אָבִיהָ אַל יִחַר בְּעֵינֵי אֲדֹנִי כִּי לוֹא אוּכַל לָקוּם מִפָּנֶיךָ כִּי דֶרֶךְ נָשִׁים לִי וַיְחַפֵּשׂ וְלֹא מָצָא אֶת הַתְּרָפִים.

^{Gen 31:35} And she said to her father, “Let not my lord be angry that I cannot rise before you, for the way of women is upon me.” So he searched, but did not find the household gods.^[2]

Laban does not object, and gives up his search for the stolen idols. The commentator Moses Nahmanides (born in Girona, 1194-1270) wonders why Laban accepts this excuse:

^{רמב"ן בראשׁית לא:לה} לא הבינותי מה התנצלות זה, וכי הנשים אשר להם האורח לא יקומו ולא יעמודו?

^{Nahmanides Gen 31:35} I do not understand what kind of an apology this is. Do women in that condition not rise or stand?…^[3]

To explain both the excuse and the fact that Laban accepted it, Nahmanides first suggests a practical reason (perhaps Rachel simply felt unwell) and then goes on to develop another theory. He begins by explaining the meaning of the term niddah, menstruant, likely assuming an etymology from the root נ.ד.ד; “to flee” or “to distance oneself:”

והנכון בעיני כי היו הנדות בימי הקדמונים מרוחקות מאד, כי כן שמן מעולם "נדות" לריחוקן, כי לא יתקרבו אל אדם ולא ידברו בו

The correct interpretation appears to me to be that in ancient days menstruants kept very isolated for they were ever referred to as niddoth on account of their isolation, since they did not approach people and did not speak with them.

He goes on to explain this practice of isolation based on the Greco-Arabic medical theories of his day (more on this later):

כי ידעו הקדמונים בחכמתם שהבלן מזיק, גם מבטן מוליד גנאי ועושה רושם רע כאשר בארו הפילוסופים

For the ancients in their wisdom knew that their breath is harmful, their gaze is detrimental and makes a bad impression, as the philosophers have explained.

Nahmanides then cites an obscure text known as the Baraita d’Masechet Niddah:

והיו יושבות בדד באהל לא יכנס בו אדם, וכמו שהזכירו רבותינו בברייתא של מסכת נדה, תלמיד אסור לשאול בשלמה של נדה, רבי נחמיה אומר אפילו הדבור היוצא מפיה הוא טמא

And the menstruants dwelled isolated in tents where no one entered, just as our Rabbis have mentioned in the Baraita of Masechet Niddah: “A learned man is forbidden to greet a menstruant. Rabbi Nechemyah says, ‘Even the utterance of her mouth is impure.”^[4]

אמר רבי יוחנן אסור לאדם להלך אחר הנדה ולדרוס את עפרה שהוא טמא כמת כך עפרה של נדה טמא, ואסור ליהנות ממעשה ידיה

Said Rabbi Yochanan: “One is forbidden to walk after a menstruant and tread upon her footsteps, which are as impure as a corpse; so is the dust upon which the menstruant stepped impure, and it is forbidden to derive any benefit from her work.”

He argues that this scrupulous avoidance of not just physical contact, but also proximity or speech with a menstruant is the key to understanding the interaction between Rachel and Laban:

ולכך אמרה רחל ראויה הייתי לקום מפני אדוני לנשק ידיו, אבל דרך נשים לי ולא אוכל להתקרב אליך, וגם לא ללכת באהל כלל שלא תדרוך אתה עפר רגלי, והוא החריש ממנה ולא ענה אותה כי לא היו מספרים עמהן כלל מפני שדבורה טמא

Therefore Rachel said, “It would be proper for me to rise before my lord to kiss his hands, but the way of women is upon me, and I cannot come near you nor walk at all in the tent so that you should not tread upon the dust of my feet.” And Laban kept silent and did not answer her, as it was customary not to converse with [menstruants] at all because the speech of a menstruant was impure.

The claim that the speech of menstruants is itself impure is not attested in the Bible. A few passages in the Talmud do suggest that the physical proximity of a menstruant could be dangerous,^[5] but it is hardly the normative assumption in rabbinic sources. What is the source of these startling ideas about the breath, gaze, footsteps, and speech of a menstruant?

Baraita d’Masechet Niddah

The work Nahmanides cites here as the Baraita d’Masechet Niddah (BdN) is obscure. Sefardic sources do not cite it before Nahmanides’ time, and they cite it after him only rarely.^[6] It seems to have developed in parallel with the proto-Kabbalistic mystical texts known as Hekhalot literature, likely between the sixth and seventh centuries CE, and could have been brought to Northern Spain by scholars who studied in French yeshivot. ^[7] (For more on how Nahmanides may have come to know of this text, see the Appendix below.)

Nahmanides may have chosen to cite BdN because it supports the prevailing medieval belief that a menstruant was a source of danger: It attributes these ideas pseudepigraphically to ancient Tannaitic figures such as R. Nechemya and R. Yochanan.^[8] According to Yedidya Dinari (1930-2007), the concept of the menstruant as a source of danger was the underpinning for stringent extra-halakhic practices in both the Ashkenazic and Sefardic communities in the Middle Ages.^[9]

Medieval Science: Humoral balance, Poisonous blood

Another influence shaping Nahmanides’ thinking about niddah is the medical science popular in medieval Europe. Medieval Greco-Arabic medical knowledge was widely available in Hebrew translation in Nahmanides’ time,^[10] and he used it throughout his commentary to explain issues related to menstruation.^[11] For example, why is a woman ritually impure for twice the amount of time following the birth of a girl as for a boy^[12]?

^{רמב"ן ויקרא יב:ד} וטעם הכפל בנקבה… בעבור כי טבע הנקבה קר ולח, והלבנה ברחם האם רבה מאד וקרה, ועל כן ילדה נקבה, ועל כן צריכה נקיון גדול מפני רבוי הלחות והדם המעופש שבהן ומפני קרירות, כידוע כי החוליים הקרים צריכין בנקיותם אריכות זמן יותר מן החמים

^{Nahmanides Lev 12:4} According to the opinion of the Sages…we must say that the reason [why the time is doubled in the case of a female child] is that the nature of the female is cold and moist, and the white^[13] [fluid] in the mother’s womb is then exceedingly abundant and cold, this being the reason why she gave birth to a female child. Hence she needs a longer time to become clean [in a physical sense], on account of the abundant moisture in her which contains the ill-smelling blood, and on account of the coldness [of her body], as is well-known that sick people who suffer from cold need a longer period to restore their vigor than those who are hot.

This explanation draws on the medical theories of the 2^nd century CE physician Galen,^[14] which was the dominant medical theory in medieval Europe. According to Galen, optimum health is achieved via a balance of the four humors of the body: blood, phlegm, black bile, and yellow bile.^[15] He believed that a man’s humor was warm and dry, whereas a woman’s was cold and wet.^[16] Since men are warm, they are more vigorous and better able to purge excess fluid from their bodies by means such as perspiration; however, because women are “cold,” they require menstruation to “excrete excess fluid and maintain their humoral balance.”^[17] In order to conceive a girl there must be a cold and damp environment in the womb, which in turn requires a longer purge since it is more difficult to rid the body of cold and damp.

Nahmanides again invokes prevailing medical theories to explain the prohibition against sexual intercourse with a menstruant, which appears a few chapters later in Leviticus:

^{ויקרא יח:יט} וְאֶל אִשָּׁה בְּנִדַּת טֻמְאָתָהּ לֹא תִקְרַב לְגַלּוֹת עֶרְוָתָהּ.

^{Lev 18:19} You shall not approach a woman to uncover her nakedness while she is in her menstrual uncleanness.^[18]

He explains this prohibition based on the premise that intercourse is only permissible for the purpose of reproduction, and that it is impossible to conceive during menstruation:

^{רמב"ן ויקרא יח:יט} אסר הכתוב הנדה מפני טעם שהזכרתי, שלא התירה התורה המשכב רק לקיום הזרע. והנה הולד נוצר מדם האשה כולו או רובו כאשר הזכרתי כבר, ומדם הנדות לא יהיה נוצר כלל

^{Nahmanides Lev 18:19} Scripture prohibited [having intercourse with] a menstruant woman for the reason I have mentioned,^[19] that the Torah permitted sexual intercourse only for the sake of raising children, and since the whole child or the greater part thereof is created out of the woman’s blood, as I have already mentioned,^[20] and from the blood of menstruation it is not created at all.

This assumes a Greco-Arabic medical belief that menstrual blood is poisonous:

ואיך יעשה ממנו ולד, והוא סם המות ימית כל בעל חיים שישתה אותו או יאכלנו.

Indeed, how could a child be formed out of this blood, since it is deadly poisonous, capable of causing the death of any creature that drinks or eats it?

והנה בהיות ברחם דם נדה הרבה, לא תתעבר ממנו, כי לא יוצר כלל, ואף אם תתעבר מדם אחר ויהיה נזון מזה הוא ימיתנו.

Now when the womb contains a large amount of this blood of menstruation, the woman cannot become pregnant, as this blood is not endowed at all with the capacity for forming [a child]. Even if she were to become pregnant from other blood, and then derive nourishment from this blood, the child would die.

However, contrary to the Greco-Arabic beliefs that Nahmanides has just cited, the Rabbis believed that menstrual blood in utero was not necessarily incompatible with gestation. Rather, its presence would cause the fetus to have leprosy or boils.^[21] Nahmanides strikes a compromise between these theories: If there is a majority of menstrual blood in the womb, the fetus would not live; if there is only a small amount, the fetus might survive but be affected by maladies:^[22]

וכבר הזכירו הרופאים עוד, שאם יהיה נזון מדם משובח וכל מזונו מדם טוב אלא שנשתקע בתוכו מדם הנדות יחמיץ אותו ויוליד בולד שחין ואבעבועות למיניהם, ועל דעת רבותינו (תנחומא מצורע א) אם ישאר ממנו בגופו קצת יהיה הולד מצורע

Physicians have also mentioned already that if the foetus derives nourishment from the best of blood, and all its nutriment be of the best quality, but some of this blood of menstruation is mixed with it, it will cause it to go bad, and produce in the child inflammatory swellings and sores of all kinds. And in the opinion of our Rabbis,^[23] even if a small part of this [blood of menstruation] remains in the foetus, the child will be a leper.

ומכל הפנים האלו ראוי שתרחיק התורה משכב הנדה

By virtue, then, of all these reasons it was fitting that the Torah prohibit intercourse with a menstruant.

Looks that kill

However, Nahmanides offers an additional explanation for why the menstruant is listed as one of the forbidden sexual relations:

ועוד הגידו בו נסיון אמיתי, והוא מנפלאות תמים דעים בתולדה, כי הנדה בתחילת זובה אם תביט במראה של ברזל הבהיר ותאריך לראות בה יראו במראה טיפות אדומות כטיפות דם,

The doctors have also told us in connection with it, a true experience, which is one of the wondrous works of Him Who is perfect in knowledge ^[24] in creation, that if a menstruant woman at the beginning of her issue were to concentrate her gaze for some time upon a polished iron mirror, there would appear in the mirror red spots resembling drops of blood,

כי הטבע הרע המזיק שבה תוליד גנאי, ורוע האויר ידבק במראה. והנה היא כאפעה הממית בהבטתו

for the bad part therein [i.e., in the issue] that is by its nature harmful, causes a certain odium, and the unhealthy condition of the air attaches to the mirror, just as a viper^[25] kills with its gaze.

Hannah Davidson (Ono Academic College) argues that Nahmanides’ idea of the danger of the niddah is an amalgamation of two major sources: Aristotle’s On Dreams, which asserts that red spots will appear on a polished metal surface if a menstruant gazes at it, in conjunction with the Arabic concept of the dangers of menstrual blood and its adverse effect on a woman’s mind and body.^[26]

The 10^th-11^th century Islamic philosopher and physician Ibn Sina wrote that the state of the soul can cause a change in the body by way of thought; for example, fear causes the body to grow cold, whereas anger causes warmth. Furthermore, the unique nature of man’s soul enables it to change the physical matter outside the body and can even impact the bodies of others.

Perhaps influenced by such ideas, Nahmanides is concerned about the transfer of bodily and mental states between partners:

והנה היא כאפעה הממית בהבטתו, וכל שכן שתזיק לשוכב עמה אשר תדבק גופה ומחשבתה בו ובמחשבתו

And surely it is harmful to have intercourse with her then, since physically and mentally she is attached to the man’s body and mind.

Apparently, based on these medical theories, Nahmanides suggests two physiological concerns related to intercourse with a menstruant: the potential harm to a fetus affected by menstrual blood in the womb, and the influence of the dangerous gaze or other transferable qualities of the menstruant’s physical state to her partner.

At the Crossroads of Sefarad and Ashkenaz

Nahmanides is famous for his eclecticism. He inherited the Andalusian tradition of engagement with Greco-Arabic philosophy and medicine, yet had significant ties to Provence and Northern France. He was a physician who appreciated philosophy, yet was also a kabbalist, and was influenced by the mystical traditions of Ashkenaz. Like Rashi (and unlike Ibn Ezra and other Spanish biblical exegetes), he was both a Talmudist and a biblical commentator par excellence. It is not surprising, then, that his explanations for laws and practices concerning menstrual and postpartum ritual impurity draw on such a wide range of sources.

Appendix

Baraita d’Masechet Niddah: From German Pietists to Spain

In another comment on ritual purity laws related to menstruation, Nahmanides refers again to the interaction of Rachel and Laban, and the tradition from the Baraita d’Masechet Niddah:

^{רמב"ן ויקרא יב:יט} והנכון בעיני, כי האשה בימי ראייתה תקרא נדה בעבור שינדוה וירחיקוה כל בני אדם, והאנשים והנשים ירחקו ממנה, ויושבת בדד לא תספר עם בני אדם כלל, כי גם דיבורה טמא אצלם, והעפר אשר תדרוך טמא להם כעפר רקב עצמות המת, והזכירו זה גם רבותינו, ואף מבט שלה מוליד היזק, וכבר הזכרתי זה בסדר ויצא יעקב. והיה משפט הנדות לשבת באהל מיוחד. והוא מאמר רחל לאביה

^{Nahmanides Lev 12:19} The correct interpretation appears to me to be that a woman in the days of her menstruation is called niddah (shunned) because she was avoided by and kept distant from all people.… Men and women would not approach her, and she would sit alone and not speak with them, for even her speech was considered by them impure, and they regarded the dust upon which she stepped to be impure as the dust of the decomposed bones of the dead. Our Rabbis have mentioned this [in BdN]. Even her gaze was considered harmful, and I have already mentioned this in Seder Vayeitzei Ya’akov.^[27] Thus it was the custom of menstruants to sit in a special tent, this being the intent of Rachel’s words to her father…

How did Nahmanides come to know of this text, which had not previously been cited by Sefardic scholarship?

The German Pietists, a pietistic sect in Germany in the 13th century, preserved and transmitted a number of Geonic works, such as Sefer ha-Miktzu’ot and Ma’aseh Geonim, both of which incorporated parts of the Baraita d’Masechet Niddah.^[28] These texts, along with original Pietist texts such as Sefer Hasidim, travelled to Northern France where they were studied at some French yeshivot, such as the Academy of Evreux. Rabbenu Yonah of Gerondi, Nahmanides’ cousin, studied in the yeshiva of Evreaux, from which he brought pietist texts and ideas to Northern Spain.^[29] Thismay explain how Nahmanides encountered these traditions.

In addition to his cousin, Nahmanides had direct connections with other Tosafists who had links to the Pietists, Pietism, and the Jewish esotericism of medieval Ashkenaz;^[30] namely, his teacher R. Judah b. Yakar. R. Judah, born in Provence, was, in addition to being a disciple of R. Isaac of Dampierre, a Kabbalist who received Pietist esoteric traditions.^[31] If he is indeed the R. Judah referred to by Nahmanides as his teacher, then he filled a vital role in the spread of Tosafist teachings and methodology to Nahmanides and his students.^[32]

The thirteenth century saw a cross-pollination of not only literature, but literary genres and methodologies, between the Ashkenazic and Sefardic communities.^[33] According to Bernard Septimus, thirteenth century Gerona, where Nahmanides grew up and studied, was “as close to the Jewish culture of northern Europe as any community in Spain had ever been.”^[34] Indeed, according to Haviva Pedaya, Nahmanides’ kabbalah can only be understood in the context of his exposure to Torat ha-Sod;^[35] hence Northern France, in addition to Sefarad, was both an intellectual and spiritual locus for Nahmanides.^[36] Pedaya asserts that the influence of rabbinic teachings from Northern France are evident in Nahmanides’ Torah Commentary, which he completed in Acre, the same city to which several Tosafists had earlier emigrated.^[37]

Nahmanides’ discussion of the niddah in his Commentary on the Torah is a textual tapestry that illustrates Nahmanides’ eclecticism: Tosafist mysticism, Greco-Arabic medicine, and the Talmudic tradition. The fact that Nahmanides quotes from BdN in his Commentary to the Torah demonstrates that Nahmanides received, and accepted, Tosafist mysticism as an authentic tradition to be used in tandem with medieval Greco-Arabic medicine and Rabbinic sources in the pursuit of ta’amei ha-mitzvot, the logic behind the commandments.