• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Holy Water, Holy Cow, Holy Crap.

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The term "holy water" is a hapax legomenon (one time occurrence) in the Tanakh. Nevertheless, on the authority of Mishnah Parah we have cause to suspect that either there's a case of water being "holy" outside of the sotah passage (Numbers chapter 5 where the singular use of the word is found) or else the water associated with parah adumah (the "red cow") is merely another parabolic manifestation of the same water found in the sotah passage at Numbers chapter 5?

As fate would have it, very little exegesis is required in order to establish the fact that indeed the "waters of niddah," associated with parah adumah (Numbers chapter 19) are speaking of the same thing as the "holy water" associated with the sotah in Numbers chapter 5.

It's not merely a play on words, or a verbal flourish, to speak of "holy water," a "holy cow," and "holy crap," since in the parah adumah passage, Numbers chapter 19, the manufacture of the holy water ("waters of niddah") contains details omitted in both Numbers chapter 5, the sotah water passage, as well as Exodus 32 where Moses manufactures holy water by making colloidal gold out of the golden-calf.

In the parah adumah passage, we're given a key piece of the puzzle needed to make heads or tails of all three parallel passages: we're told that the "crap" or "dung" of the red cow is included in the manufacture of the "waters of niddah" that separate a Jewish man or woman from their sins: i.e., holy water (able to wash away sin). According to Mishnah Parah, the fluid manufactured as the "waters of niddah" must be more pure than the water used in a mikveh. The waters of niddah represent the highest purity obtainable: a purity beyond the purity attained through immersion in the mikveh.



John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The term "holy water" is a hapax legomenon (one time occurrence) in the Tanakh. Nevertheless, on the authority of Mishnah Parah we have cause to suspect that either there's a case of water being "holy" outside of the sotah passage (Numbers chapter 5 where the singular use of the word is found) or else the water associated with parah adumah (the "red cow") is merely another parabolic manifestation of the same water found in the sotah passage at Numbers chapter 5?

As fate would have it, very little exegesis is required in order to establish the fact that indeed the "waters of niddah," associated with parah adumah (Numbers chapter 19) are speaking of the same thing as the "holy water" associated with the sotah in Numbers chapter 5.

It's not merely a play on words, or a verbal flourish, to speak of "holy water," a "holy cow," and "holy crap," since in the parah adumah passage, Numbers chapter 19, the manufacture of the holy water ("waters of niddah") contains details omitted in both Numbers chapter 5, the sotah water passage, as well as Exodus 32 where Moses manufactures holy water by making colloidal gold out of the golden-calf.

In the parah adumah passage, we're given a key piece of the puzzle needed to make heads or tails of all three parallel passages: we're told that the "crap" or "dung" of the red cow is included in the manufacture of the "waters of niddah" that separate a Jewish man or woman from their sins: i.e., holy water (able to wash away sin). According to Mishnah Parah, the fluid manufactured as the "waters of niddah" must be more pure than the water used in a mikveh. The waters of niddah represent the highest purity obtainable: a purity beyond the purity attained through immersion in the mikveh.



John

Whereas menstrual blood (blood of a niddah) represents death itself, on the other hand sanctified menstrual blood, as represented by the "waters of separation" water of niddah, represents the opposite of natural menstrual blood. The waters of niddah represent menstrual blood that sanctifies from death rather than blood that associates one with the soul of a corpse.

The mitzvah of circumcision is placed in the middle of the laws of uncleanness, breaking their continuity. This indicates that circumcision is deeply connected with these laws.

Hirsch Chumash, Vayikra, 12:3.
Rabbi Hirsch is responding to the oddity that right in the midst of laying out the laws of purity for a mother Leviticus chapter 12 states that the male child shall be circumcised on the eighth day? Understanding the strangeness of this imposition on the topic at hand, Rabbi Hirsch points out that the reason for the imposition here is because circumcision is directly associated with the laws of cleanness and uncleanness, and more importantly the reality that these law represent for some, and mask for others.

In a nutshell, the blood of circumcision is sanctified menstrual blood. Circumcision removes the taint of menstrual blood (so to say). Circumcision blood makes the death associated with menstrual blood impossible, ritually, symbolically, and in reality. In this sense, circumcision blood sanctifies menstrual blood. The blood that once made unclean, now makes clean.

In the same sense that no sacrifice is possible without parah adumah, no mikveh is possible without the waters of niddah, the waters of separation, associated with parah adumah. The waters of niddah, of separation, are the true mikveh, even as parah adumah is the the true sacrifice upon which all others depend.


John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Whereas menstrual blood (blood of a niddah) represents death itself, on the other hand sanctified menstrual blood, as represented by the "waters of separation" water of niddah, represents the opposite of natural menstrual blood. The waters of niddah represent menstrual blood that sanctifies from death rather than blood that associates one with the soul of a corpse.

The mitzvah of circumcision is placed in the middle of the laws of uncleanness, breaking their continuity. This indicates that circumcision is deeply connected with these laws.

Hirsch Chumash, Vayikra, 12:3.
Rabbi Hirsch is responding to the oddity that right in the midst of laying out the laws of purity for a mother Leviticus chapter 12 states that the male child shall be circumcised on the eighth day? Understanding the strangeness of this imposition on the topic at hand, Rabbi Hirsch points out that the reason for the imposition here is because circumcision is directly associated with the laws of cleanness and uncleanness, and more importantly the reality that these law represent for some, and mask for others.

In a nutshell, the blood of circumcision is sanctified menstrual blood. Circumcision removes the taint of menstrual blood (so to say). Circumcision blood makes the death associated with menstrual blood impossible, ritually, symbolically, and in reality. In this sense, circumcision blood sanctifies menstrual blood. The blood that once made unclean, now makes clean.

In the same sense that no sacrifice is possible without parah adumah, no mikveh is possible without the waters of niddah, the waters of separation, associated with parah adumah. The waters of niddah, of separation, are the true mikveh, even as parah adumah is the the true sacrifice upon which all others depend.


John

Maximum tumah (uncleanness) ---represented by contact with a corpse ---is only a ritual construct and not reality. Rabbi Hirsch is frighteningly clear on this. He teaches that a corpse, far from representing a dead man, actually represents all men who are subject to death. The corpse represents death-itself and not the dead body of the particular individual (see the Hirsch Chumash at Numbers 19:13).

With this one clarification Rabbi Hirsch opens up the symbolism of the waters of niddah to meaningful exegesis. The corpse represents death itself, and every man subject to it, and not some real uncleanness that can be cleansed by a ritual immersion. Like the corpse itself, the ritual immersion is symbolic, and not the thing in itself.


John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Maximum tumah (uncleanness) ---represented by contact with a corpse ---is only a ritual construct and not reality. Rabbi Hirsch is frighteningly clear on this. He teaches that a corpse, far from representing a dead man, actually represents all men who are subject to death. The corpse represents death-itself and not the dead body of the particular individual (see the Hirsch Chumash at Numbers 19:13).

With this one clarification Rabbi Hirsch opens up the symbolism of the waters of niddah to meaningful exegesis. The corpse represents death itself, and every man subject to it, and not some real uncleanness that can be cleansed by a ritual immersion. Like the corpse itself, the ritual immersion is symbolic, and not the thing in itself.


John

Dozens of Jewish texts claim the sotah water is associated with Moses making colloidal gold at the golden calf fiasco. These two water events are parallel in the minds of the Jewish sages. It wouldn't be difficult to quote numerous authoritative Jewish authors pointing out that these two water events are considered to have parallel meaning and symbolism in considerable Jewish thought.

But this is the pièces de résistance. The parah adumah. It's part of the triune nature of "holy water." You need to connect the dots among the three to see what they're getting on about:

Why are all the sacrifices male and this one [parah adumah] female? R. Aibu explained: This may be illustrated by a parable. A handmaiden's boy polluted a king's palace. The king said: "Let the mother come and clear away the filth." In the same way the Holy One, blessed be He, said: "Let the Heifer come and atone for the incident of the Calf!

Midrash Rabbah, Numbers, 19:8.​

Numerous Jewish text make the red heifer the mother of the golden-calf. Perhaps they forget, perhaps not? But the red heifer is a virgin (never been mounted). If she's the mother of the golden-calf, then the golden-calf, worshiped as God, is the firstborn son of a virgin mother.

When Moses cruci-fries this firstborn son of a virgin mother, and sprinkles the dust in the holy water, and has Israel drink the red brew, though unbeknownst to all but a relative few, he's presaging John 6:52.


John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Dozens of Jewish texts claim the sotah water is associated with Moses making colloidal gold at the golden calf fiasco. These two water events are parallel in the minds of the Jewish sages. It wouldn't be difficult to quote numerous authoritative Jewish authors pointing out that these two water events are considered to have parallel meaning and symbolism in considerable Jewish thought.

But this is the pièces de résistance. The parah adumah. It's part of the triune nature of "holy water." You need to connect the dots among the three to see what they're getting on about:

Why are all the sacrifices male and this one [parah adumah] female? R. Aibu explained: This may be illustrated by a parable. A handmaiden's boy polluted a king's palace. The king said: "Let the mother come and clear away the filth." In the same way the Holy One, blessed be He, said: "Let the Heifer come and atone for the incident of the Calf!

Midrash Rabbah, Numbers, 19:8.​

Numerous Jewish text make the red heifer the mother of the golden-calf. Perhaps they forget, perhaps not? But the red heifer is a virgin (never been mounted). If she's the mother of the golden-calf, then the golden-calf, worshiped as God, is the firstborn son of a virgin mother.

When Moses cruci-fries this firstborn son of a virgin mother, and sprinkles the dust in the holy water, and has Israel drink the red brew, though unbeknownst to all but a relative few, he's presaging John 6:52.


John

. . . the primary meaning of blood דם is "image" [". . . for in the image of God he made man." (Gen. 9:6)]. . . But your blood, which belongs to your souls, is Mine, not yours. . . The special meaning of דרש is to demand one's property that was entrusted with someone . . . Man's duty---as implied by his name אדם ---is to be God's representative . . . the Divine soul [resides] within every man.

Hirsch Chumash, Bereshis, 9:6.
At Genesis 9:6, Rabbi Hirsch makes nothing so clear as the fact that man is the temple where God's blood resides (Rabbi Hirsch says, point blank, that God's "soul" is his "blood"). Adam becomes the Godman when God puts his own blood (nefesh), his very soul, into the earthen vessel that's Adam's body. Even Adam's name makes this clear, as pointed out in Midrash Rabbah, Numbers, 19:3, which echos almost word for word, Midrash Tanchuma Chukas 6 (both of which I've quoted too many times to count).

The word "alef" (which is the name of the first letter in Adam's name) means a bull, cow, or calf. Adam's name means he's the "blood" דם of the bull, cow, or calf, "alef" א. His name is alef--dalet-mem: א––דם.

We know from Numbers chapter 19 that Adam is the "blood" of God (represented by the alef, the cow) such that in type, he's the parah adumah, the red cow. The red cow represents the incarnation of God in Adam.

The Jewish sages have surmised that the golden-calf represents the firstborn Son of the parah adumah. And since they also point out that the parah adumah is virgin, has never been mounted, the Son of the parah adumah is a virgin-born firstborn of a perfectly red (Adam-ah) cow.

Knowing just that, anyone concerned can make perfect sense of the triune relationship between the red cow (parah adumah), the sotah water (holy water of Numbers chapter 5), and Moses manufacture of colloidal gold, gold-water, representing God's blood. God's blood is manufactured from the sacrifice of the Son of the parah adumah, the red cow (her virgin Son). ----Knowing just this, John 6:52-53 comes into perfect view in relationship to the whole panorama of the Tanakh.


John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
. . . the primary meaning of blood דם is "image" [". . . for in the image of God he made man." (Gen. 9:6)]. . . But your blood, which belongs to your souls, is Mine, not yours. . . The special meaning of דרש is to demand one's property that was entrusted with someone . . . Man's duty---as implied by his name אדם ---is to be God's representative . . . the Divine soul [resides] within every man.

Hirsch Chumash, Bereshis, 9:6.
At Genesis 9:6, Rabbi Hirsch makes nothing so clear as the fact that man is the temple where God's blood resides (Rabbi Hirsch says, point blank, that God's "soul" is his "blood"). Adam becomes the Godman when God puts his own blood (nefesh), his very soul, into the earthen vessel that's Adam's body. Even Adam's name makes this clear, as pointed out in Midrash Rabbah, Numbers, 19:3, which echos almost word for word, Midrash Tanchuma Chukas 6 (both of which I've quoted too many times to count).

The word "alef" (which is the name of the first letter in Adam's name) means a bull, cow, or calf. Adam's name means he's the "blood" דם of the bull, cow, or calf, "alef" א. His name is alef--dalet-mem: א––דם.

We know from Numbers chapter 19 that Adam is the "blood" of God (represented by the alef, the cow) such that in type, he's the parah adumah, the red cow. The red cow represents the incarnation of God in Adam.

The Jewish sages have surmised that the golden-calf represents the firstborn Son of the parah adumah. And since they also point out that the parah adumah is virgin, has never been mounted, the Son of the parah adumah is a virgin-born firstborn of a perfectly red (Adam-ah) cow.

Knowing just that, anyone concerned can make perfect sense of the triune relationship between the red cow (parah adumah), the sotah water (holy water of Numbers chapter 5), and Moses manufacture of colloidal gold, gold-water, representing God's blood. God's blood is manufactured from the sacrifice of the Son of the parah adumah, the red cow (her virgin Son). ----Knowing just this, John 6:52-53 comes into perfect view in relationship to the whole panorama of the Tanakh.


John

The red cow is "without blemish," clean and virgin. It's perfect. There can't be two black hairs on the entire cow --- signifying perfection.

So the offspring (the golden-calf according to the sages), which is a Son of this blameless virgin mother, is equally blameless. Even its feces is blameless. Every part of it must be blameless, and perfect, such that even if ----as some have proposed ----Moses is making Israel eat it as feces, still, they are eating the feces of a perfect, virgin born, God. The sages literally say the feces of a higher being is kosher food for lesser beings. The feces of a divine cow is kosher eating. The feces of the red cow is commanded to be included in the holy water that washes away sin.

In the Numbers recollection of the gold-water episode (first related in Exodus 32), the author makes it a point to point out that the gold is made extremely fine, even like powder. In other words, it's not enough for the author to say Moses grinds the gold and spreads it over the water. For some reason the author thinks it's important to point out how small Moses had to get the powder for the effect he was seeking (colloidal gold).

Anyone who appreciates the rules of exegeting the word of God knows that the emphasis on "fine as powder" isn't a redundancy of the narrative, just a verbal flourish, but is a fundamental aspect of the story. Just prior to telling us Moses grinds the gold into a colloidal solution, we're told that Moses' anger burns hot. Earlier we find that when God's anger burns hot against the Egyptians, Moses reaches out and guess what, turns their drinking water to blood. Here, again, God and Moses' anger burns hot. And guess what, Moses and God turn the Israelite's water to blood (colloidal gold).

The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

John 6:52-58.​



John
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
. . . the primary meaning of blood דם is "image" [". . . for in the image of God he made man." (Gen. 9:6)]. . . But your blood, which belongs to your souls, is Mine, not yours. . . The special meaning of דרש is to demand one's property that was entrusted with someone . . . Man's duty---as implied by his name אדם ---is to be God's representative . . . the Divine soul [resides] within every man.

Hirsch Chumash, Bereshis, 9:6.
At Genesis 9:6, Rabbi Hirsch makes nothing so clear as the fact that man is the temple where God's blood resides (Rabbi Hirsch says, point blank, that God's "soul" is his "blood"). Adam becomes the Godman when God puts his own blood (nefesh), his very soul, into the earthen vessel that's Adam's body. Even Adam's name makes this clear, as pointed out in Midrash Rabbah, Numbers, 19:3, which echos almost word for word, Midrash Tanchuma Chukas 6 (both of which I've quoted too many times to count).

The word "alef" (which is the name of the first letter in Adam's name) means a bull, cow, or calf. Adam's name means he's the "blood" דם of the bull, cow, or calf, "alef" א. His name is alef--dalet-mem: א––דם.

We know from Numbers chapter 19 that Adam is the "blood" of God (represented by the alef, the cow) such that in type, he's the parah adumah, the red cow. The red cow represents the incarnation of God in Adam.

The Jewish sages have surmised that the golden-calf represents the firstborn Son of the parah adumah. And since they also point out that the parah adumah is virgin, has never been mounted, the Son of the parah adumah is a virgin-born firstborn of a perfectly red (Adam-ah) cow.

Knowing just that, anyone concerned can make perfect sense of the triune relationship between the red cow (parah adumah), the sotah water (holy water of Numbers chapter 5), and Moses manufacture of colloidal gold, gold-water, representing God's blood. God's blood is manufactured from the sacrifice of the Son of the parah adumah, the red cow (her virgin Son). ----Knowing just this, John 6:52-53 comes into perfect view in relationship to the whole panorama of the Tanakh.


John

FYI, Even though the foregoing appears to be your own work, because it first appeared elsewhere, proper form is to cite that original source.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
The red cow is "without blemish," clean and virgin. It's perfect. There can't be two black hairs on the entire cow --- signifying perfection.

So the offspring (the golden-calf according to the sages), which is a Son of this blameless virgin mother, is equally blameless. Even its feces is blameless. Every part of it must be blameless, and perfect, such that even if ----as some have proposed ----Moses is making Israel eat it as feces, still, they are eating the feces of a perfect, virgin born, God. The sages literally say the feces of a higher being is kosher food for lesser beings. The feces of a divine cow is kosher eating. The feces of the red cow is commanded to be included in the holy water that washes away sin.

In the Numbers recollection of the gold-water episode (first related in Exodus 32), the author makes it a point to point out that the gold is made extremely fine, even like powder. In other words, it's not enough for the author to say Moses grinds the gold and spreads it over the water. For some reason the author thinks it's important to point out how small Moses had to get the powder for the effect he was seeking (colloidal gold).

Anyone who appreciates the rules of exegeting the word of God knows that the emphasis on "fine as powder" isn't a redundancy of the narrative, just a verbal flourish, but is a fundamental aspect of the story. Just prior to telling us Moses grinds the gold into a colloidal solution, we're told that Moses' anger burns hot. Earlier we find that when God's anger burns hot against the Egyptians, Moses reaches out and guess what, turns their drinking water to blood. Here, again, God and Moses' anger burns hot. And guess what, Moses and God turn the Israelite's water to blood (colloidal gold).

The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.

For my flesh is meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I live by the Father: so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me.

John 6:52-58.​



John

Since the waters of the mikveh are, as Rabbi Aryeh Kaplan shows in detail, representing a purified womb (where a sanctified rebirth occurs), how on earth could the "waters of niddah" which, like the mikveh, represent menstrual blood, be even cleaner than the waters of a sanctified womb (a mikveh)?

In his intro to the Horeb, Rabbi Hirsch claimed, and I believe him, that he was willing to subject every one of his spiritual beliefs, all his exegesis, to a rational and logical scalpel. Every righteous exegete must. There's no strictly mystical or magical concept in the Bible. The only reason they seem mystical or magical is because the puzzle that hides the meaning is still puzzling us.

Using a reasonable, rational, and logical scalpel, we find three cases of menstrual blood in the Tanakh. Not three full cases per se, but three case studies.

The first case of menstrual blood represents the blood contaminated with the sin being expunged from the unfertilized ovum during meiosis and polar body. This process throws off half of the chromosomes of the ovum such that through "cross-over" the contamination associated with Adam's original sin is put onto the half of the chromosomes removed through meiosis and polar body such that the remaining ovum is the only cell in the human body not contaminated with Adam's sin nature or the evil inclination (until recontaminated at conception).

Because the contaminated chromosomes are in the blood of menstruation, the scripture considers this blood the most unclean blood in existence. The Sages go so far as to remark that this blood is contaminated by what Eve did to Adam in the Garden. -----In every way this menstrual blood is colored by, and contaminated with, the Fall in the Garden, the original sin, and the evil inclination. . . This blood is the poster-child for the Fall in the Garden.

The next case of menstrual blood is the mikveh. This blood is clean, and thus cleansing. Unlike the first case of menstrual blood, this blood has none of the taint of the Fall in the Garden, none of Adam's sin, the evil inclination, nor the suggestion that Eve murdered Adam.

Ironically, as has been pointed out in other essays, this blood is cleansed by the blood of circumcision, which, circumcision blood, represents male menstruation (Professor Eric Kline Silverman). Male menstruation, if it occurs (brit milah), cleanses female menstruation, thus transforming the "filthy rags" into sacerdotal ornaments.

How, logically speaking, does circumcision blood cleanse menstrual blood? ---------The same way it is itself clean.

As can easily be pointed out through an examination of Jewish symbolism (and this has been pointed out many times recently in the writings of Jewish Sages and Professors), ritual "uncleanness" in its most fundamental sense comes from a corpse, and represents "death." -----All ritual uncleanness represents death. Since death is a result of uncleaness. Death is unclean, and those who are unclean die.

Since the phallus is the emblem of death, the very source of the original sin that caused the first death, it can be pointed out that ritually speaking, the death of the phallus is the death of death itself; since the phallus is the alef and the tav of death (the vav in the middle symbolizing the phallus in the "sign" of the death of death: brit milah).

Since brit milah represents the death of the phallus, cutting down the tree illegally grafted onto a formerly perfect body, the blood of the phallus, as the blood of death, represents, in Jewish symbolism (where "blood" symbolizes "death"), the "death of death."

If the phallus is the emblem of death, and blood is the symbol of death, then the blood of the emblem of death represents the death of death itself; such that if death is unclean, so that the phallus is unclean, then the blood of the phallus, which is associated with the death of death, is, thus, clean. It's clean since it represents the very removal of the corpse's power to spread its uncleanness to the next generation.

This is not just the power to undo the uncleanness associated with contact with a particular corpse. This is the power to remove the very death a particular corpse only represents (see the Hirsch Chumash at Numbers 19:13).

In brit milah, ritual circumcision, the circumcised phallus represents the final corpse in the entire system of ritual cleanness and uncleanliness.

The exact same logic applies to menstrual blood after circumcision since if the phallus is not there as a corpse ready to make the ovum unclean (after its been purified through meiosis and polar body), then the sin contained in the menstrual blood (contaminated with sin come originally from the phallus), represents the last hoorah for sin and death since there's no phallus to recontaminate the ovum purified after meiosis and polar body.

In this sense female menstrual blood is the blood of the mikveh, i.e., clean blood, so long as the bride from whom it comes has a bridegroom who crushed the sapkah under the chuppah. If circumcision blood, by representing the death of death, the corpse of the generator of "uncleanness," becomes the elixir of a cleanness beyond the final corpse (the death of uncleanness itself), then post-circumcision menstrual blood represents the same thing, the final symbol of death, i.e.,. the death of death, and thus the instantiation of cleanness beyond the quintessential, and final, corpse of death.

The death of death is everlasting life; the death of the source of death is life eternal. The gestalt-shift associated with this making of the symbol of death, blood, into the elixir of life, life eternal, colors every iota of what is to follow.

If pre-circumcision menstrual blood is unclean, and post-circumcision menstrual blood is clean, then what of the "waters of niddah" which, according to Mishnah Parah, are cleaner than the mikveh ----which represents post-circumcision menstrual blood?

The Jewish Sages teach that this last menstrual blood (waters of niddah) are cleaner than the mikveh. . . . . How can that be? How can any water be cleaner than the blood of circumcision or the menstrual blood of the bride whose groom guaranteed that her menstruation is death's final hoorah by slaying the delivery mechanism through which death and its evil inclinations passes?

What possible mechanism could there be to purify menstrual blood beyond the elimination of the corpse? --- What's Mishnah Parah implying?


John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
FYI, Even though the foregoing appears to be your own work, because it first appeared elsewhere, proper form is to cite that original source.

Since it was originally posted in another forum, I thought it's generally frowned on to point that out?

Everything I've posted is merely background for some things I want to add to all the foregoing. I've now posted everything that isn't improvisational and exclusive to this thread in this forum. . . From here out everything is new to this thread and will be exclusive to this forum.

. . . This is to say I'm not trying to unload stuff here. I'm trying to give some background to ideas that haven't been discussed before . . . that will be improvisational and new.


John
 

Skwim

Veteran Member
Since it was originally posted in another forum, I thought it's generally frowned on to point that out?
Not at all.

Everything I've posted is merely background for some things I want to add to all the foregoing. I've now posted everything that isn't improvisational and exclusive to this thread in this forum. . . From here out everything is new to this thread and will be exclusive to this forum.

. . . This is to say I'm not trying to unload stuff here. I'm trying to give some background to ideas that haven't been discussed before . . . that will be improvisational and new.
John
Just to be clear, when I said "proper form" it was in no way meant to be any kind of directive---I don't have that kind of power around here. It's only a suggestion. Being a published author and having had some of my work misappropriated I'm a bit sensitive to plagiarism and proper attribution. One of my sore spots.

.


.
 

outlawState

Deism is dead
The term "holy water" is a hapax legomenon (one time occurrence) in the Tanakh. Nevertheless, on the authority of Mishnah Parah we have cause to suspect that either there's a case of water being "holy" outside of the sotah passage (Numbers chapter 5 where the singular use of the word is found) or else the water associated with parah adumah (the "red cow") is merely another parabolic manifestation of the same water found in the sotah passage at Numbers chapter 5?

As fate would have it, very little exegesis is required in order to establish the fact that indeed the "waters of niddah," associated with parah adumah (Numbers chapter 19) are speaking of the same thing as the "holy water" associated with the sotah in Numbers chapter 5.

It's not merely a play on words, or a verbal flourish, to speak of "holy water," a "holy cow," and "holy crap," since in the parah adumah passage, Numbers chapter 19, the manufacture of the holy water ("waters of niddah") contains details omitted in both Numbers chapter 5, the sotah water passage, as well as Exodus 32 where Moses manufactures holy water by making colloidal gold out of the golden-calf.

In the parah adumah passage, we're given a key piece of the puzzle needed to make heads or tails of all three parallel passages: we're told that the "crap" or "dung" of the red cow is included in the manufacture of the "waters of niddah" that separate a Jewish man or woman from their sins: i.e., holy water (able to wash away sin). According to Mishnah Parah, the fluid manufactured as the "waters of niddah" must be more pure than the water used in a mikveh. The waters of niddah represent the highest purity obtainable: a purity beyond the purity attained through immersion in the mikveh.
John
"sotah" is Mishnaic Hebrew, not scriptural Hebrew, where the word used is "satah." Numbers 5 refers to "bitter water" ("mar mayim"), not holy water. I do not see what point you are making by contrasting Numbers 5 with Numbers 19?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Since it was originally posted in another forum, I thought it's generally frowned on to point that out?
It's considered far, far worse to not cite your sources and acknowledge credit where credit is due. Plagiarism is perhaps the greatest "crime" one can commit when writing, and it's serious enough that for some it has the potential to end their career.
 

Tumah

Veteran Member
"sotah" is Mishnaic Hebrew, not scriptural Hebrew, where the word used is "satah.
Its true that the word Sotah is used by the Mishnah. But the word is just put into its noun form, while in Num. 5 its in the verb form. "Satah" is the root which is actually not found in Num. 5. A casual glance shows that all instances of the word are in various verb forms. What I'm trying to say is that its not Mishnaic Hebrew, just a different grammatical form of the same Scriptural word.

As to the whatever this OP writes. I think its all garbage and I don't even read it.
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
"sotah" is Mishnaic Hebrew, not scriptural Hebrew, where the word used is "satah." Numbers 5 refers to "bitter water" ("mar mayim"), not holy water. I do not see what point you are making by contrasting Numbers 5 with Numbers 19?

If I'm not mistaken, the message you're referring to noted that "holy water" is a hapax legomenon; it only occurs once in the entire Tanakh: at Numbers 5:16 קדשים מים. -----Those who study the word of God should not only be astounded that this particular word only occurs once, but should accordingly accord this particular verse particular attention.


John
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
"sotah" is Mishnaic Hebrew, not scriptural Hebrew, where the word used is "satah." Numbers 5 refers to "bitter water" ("mar mayim"), not holy water. I do not see what point you are making by contrasting Numbers 5 with Numbers 19?

. . . As I think the thread points out, there are three places where the water or fluid is clearly "holy" (sanctified or sanctifying). Numbers 5 explicitly calls the water "holy water," while Moses uses "gold" (which signifies holiness) to mix with water creating a second case of potentially "holy water," the colloidal gold he has Israel drink (Exodus 32), leaving Numbers 19 as the third place a sanctified and sanctifying brew is produced.

The "waters of niddah" produced in Numbers 19 is so holy it can wash away sins.


John
 

outlawState

Deism is dead
If I'm not mistaken, the message you're referring to noted that "holy water" is a hapax legomenon; it only occurs once in the entire Tanakh: at Numbers 5:16 קדשים מים. -----Those who study the word of God should not only be astounded that this particular word only occurs once, but should accordingly accord this particular verse particular attention.


John
Deu 23:14 talks about a holy camp, free from human filth (machaneh qadowsh). I suggest therefore there is nothing in the meaning of holy water (qadowsh mayim) in Num 5:17 apart from "pure water." Holiness simply means pure. It is entirely free of magical inferences.

In Num 19, the waters of separation are a different thing altogether, for ritual purification after becoming unclean. The adulteress was not cleansed in any way by what she drank. It was only a test to establish guilt or innocence. Num 5 insisted that there was nothing in the water that might otherwise harm the woman. Thus it was required to be pure water (before being made bitter).

Ex 32:20 is also a case of (very) bitter water, not water for purification. It did not cleanse the Israelites from any sin. Their cleansing was by the sword of the Levites. Gold dust is poisonous, at least by analogy with lead dust which is poisonous. As gold is also a heavy metal, I think it would be harmful to drink such water. Lead is deposited in the bones where it cannot escape the body. Lots of heavy metals are potentially poisonous.
 
Last edited:

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Deu 23:14 talks about a holy camp, free from human filth (machaneh qadowsh). I suggest therefore there is nothing in the meaning of holy water (qadowsh mayim) in Num 5:17 apart from "pure water." Holiness simply means pure. It is entirely free of magical inferences.

. . . I don't think there was any reference to "magical" meanings in the thread? And if it simply means "pure" water why is the phrase "holy water" used only once in the entire Bible? The Bible speaks of water many times. It speaks of water cleansing things many times. But only one time does it speak of "holy water"?


John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
In Num 19, the waters of separation are a different thing altogether, for ritual purification after becoming unclean. The adulteress was not cleansed in any way by what she drank. It was only a test to establish guilt or innocence. Num 5 insisted that there was nothing in the water that might otherwise harm the woman. Thus it was required to be pure water (before being made bitter).

. . . If the woman isn't guilty of being unfaithful to God, or her husband, the water makes her pregnant. She becomes pregnant from the water. Something about the unique status of "holy water" means it has the power to make a woman pregnant.

Come to think of it, a guess that does imply the water has quasi-magical qualities.


John
 

John D. Brey

Well-Known Member
Ex 32:20 is also a case of (very) bitter water, not water for purification. It did not cleanse the Israelites from any sin. Their cleansing was by the sword of the Levites. Gold dust is poisonous, at least by analogy with lead dust which is poisonous. As gold is also a heavy metal, I think it would be harmful to drink such water. Lead is deposited in the bones where it cannot escape the body. Lots of heavy metals are potentially poisonous.

. . . Apparently you're unaware you can buy colloidal gold as a medicinal drink quite easily.


John
 

outlawState

Deism is dead
. . . I don't think there was any reference to "magical" meanings in the thread? And if it simply means "pure" water why is the phrase "holy water" used only once in the entire Bible? The Bible speaks of water many times. It speaks of water cleansing things many times. But only one time does it speak of "holy water"?


John
It must have been the case that frequently it was strongly suspected in advance that the woman was guilty. The temptation would therefore have been to give her poisoned water, or filthy water, so that her guilt would be inevitable. So the passage makes clear that the ritual is to entail water that is initially pure, in all cases.
 
Top