Leviticus 15:18 - On the noun אִשָּׁה

וְאִשָּׁ֕ה אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁכַּ֥ב אִ֛ישׁ אֹתָ֖הּ שִׁכְבַת־זָ֑רַע וְרָחֲצ֣וּ בַמַּ֔יִם וְטָמְא֖וּ עַד־הָעָֽרֶב׃ {פ}

And involving a woman: when a man has carnal relations with her, both shall bathe in water and remain impure until evening.

(The above rendering comes from the RJPS translation—an adaptation of the NJPS translation—including a correction in April 2024. Before accounting for this rendering, I will analyze the plain sense of the Hebrew term אִשָּׁה, the feminine form of the situating noun אִישׁ, by employing a situation-oriented construal as outlined in this introduction, pp. 11–16.)


Often in Leviticus, as here, the noun אִישׁ or אִשָּׁה introduces a new situation of interest by focusing on its key participant, and then the discourse builds its depiction of the situation around that participant. Yet this verse’s Hebrew syntax is unusual, although it creates a smooth transition between the case in vv. 16–17, which begins וְאִישׁ, and v. 19, which likewise begins וְאִשָּׁה.

In the present case, although the Hebrew wording clearly portrays the man as the active partner of the two (which is the standard frame in the Bible for sexual relations), the formulation marks the woman as the essential participant for grasping the situation as it is depicted. She is efficiently introduced as the factor that distinguishes this case from the previous one. (Meanwhile, it is the man’s discharge of semen that continues as a topic from the previous case.)

Compare וְאִשָּׁה in 18:23 and contrast וְאִישׁ in 19:20.


As for rendering into English, the NJPS “And if a man has carnal relations with a woman, they shall bathe…” prompted one member of its translation committee, Bernard Bamberger, to later explain: “The English phraseology is an attempt to make passable prose out of a somewhat unusual Hebrew sentence” (The Torah: A Modern Commentary, Volume 3 [1979], ad loc.). Yet such a recasting of the sentence seems to unduly downplay the Hebrew text’s emphasis on the woman’s essential participation in the depicted situation. Unusual syntax in the Hebrew can warrant unusual syntax in translation, as well. The revised rendering thereby reflects the discourse function of אִשָּׁה more closely.