Sotah 14

גסטרא של בית פעור הראנו היכן משה קבור עמדו למעלה נדמה להם למטה למטה נדמה להם למעלה נחלקו לשתי כיתות אותן שעומדים למעלה נדמה להן למטה למטה נדמה להן למעלה לקיים מה שנאמר ולא ידע איש את קברתו

the garrison [gastera] of Beth Peor and said to them: Show us where Moses is buried. As the men stood above on the upper section of the mountain, it appeared to them as if the grave was below in the lower section. As they stood below, it appeared to them to be above. They divided into two groups, one above and one below. To those who were standing above, the grave appeared to them to be below; to those who were standing below, the grave appeared to them to be above, to fulfill that which is stated: “And no man knows of his grave to this day” (Deuteronomy 34:6).

רבי חמא ברבי חנינא אמר אף משה רבינו אינו יודע היכן קבור כתיב הכא ולא ידע איש את קברתו וכתיב התם וזאת הברכה אשר ברך משה איש האלהים ואמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא מפני מה נקבר משה אצל בית פעור כדי לכפר על מעשה פעור

Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: Even Moses our teacher himself does not know where he is buried. It is written here: “And no man knows of his grave,” and it is written there: “And this is the blessing wherewith Moses the man of God blessed the children of Israel before his death” (Deuteronomy 33:1). In other words, even Moses, as he is referred to by the term “man,” does not know his burial place. And Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: For what reason was Moses buried near Beth Peor? In order to atone for the incident that transpired at Beth Peor (Numbers, chapter 25).

ואמר רבי חמא ברבי חנינא מאי דכתיב אחרי ה׳ אלהיכם תלכו וכי אפשר לו לאדם להלך אחר שכינה והלא כבר נאמר כי ה׳ אלהיך אש אוכלה הוא

And Rabbi Ḥama, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, says: What is the meaning of that which is written: “After the Lord your God shall you walk, and Him shall you fear, and His commandments shall you keep, and unto His voice shall you hearken, and Him shall you serve, and unto Him shall you cleave” (Deuteronomy 13:5)? But is it actually possible for a person to follow the Divine Presence? But hasn’t it already been stated: “For the Lord your God is a devouring fire, a jealous God” (Deuteronomy 4:24), and one cannot approach fire.

אלא להלך אחר מדותיו של הקדוש ברוך הוא מה הוא מלביש ערומים דכתיב ויעש ה׳ אלהים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור וילבשם אף אתה הלבש ערומים הקדוש ברוך הוא ביקר חולים דכתיב וירא אליו ה׳ באלני ממרא אף אתה בקר חולים הקדוש ברוך הוא ניחם אבלים דכתיב ויהי אחרי מות אברהם ויברך אלהים את יצחק בנו אף אתה נחם אבלים הקדוש ברוך הוא קבר מתים דכתיב ויקבר אותו בגי אף אתה קבר מתים

He explains: Rather, the meaning is that one should follow the attributes of the Holy One, Blessed be He. He provides several examples. Just as He clothes the naked, as it is written: “And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21), so too, should you clothe the naked. Just as the Holy One, Blessed be He, visits the sick, as it is written with regard to God’s appearing to Abraham following his circumcision: “And the Lord appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre” (Genesis 18:1), so too, should you visit the sick. Just as the Holy One, Blessed be He, consoles mourners, as it is written: “And it came to pass after the death of Abraham, that God blessed Isaac his son” (Genesis 25:11), so too, should you console mourners. Just as the Holy One, Blessed be He, buried the dead, as it is written: “And he was buried in the valley in the land of Moab” (Deuteronomy 34:6), so too, should you bury the dead.

כתנות עור רב ושמואל חד אמר דבר הבא מן העור וחד אמר דבר שהעור נהנה ממנו

The Gemara discusses the verse: “And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). Rav and Shmuel disagree as to the meaning of the term “garments of skin.” One says that these garments were made of something that comes from the skin, and one says that these garments were something from which the skin benefits.

דרש רבי שמלאי תורה תחלתה גמילות חסדים וסופה גמילות חסדים תחילתה גמילות חסדים דכתיב ויעש ה׳ אלהים לאדם ולאשתו כתנות עור וילבשם וסופה גמילות חסדים דכתיב ויקבר אותו בגי

Rabbi Samlai taught: With regard to the Torah, its beginning is an act of kindness and its end is an act of kindness. Its beginning is an act of kindness, as it is written: “And the Lord God made for Adam and for his wife garments of skin, and clothed them” (Genesis 3:21). And its end is an act of kindness, as it is written: “And he was buried in the valley in the land of Moab” (Deuteronomy 34:6).

דרש רבי שמלאי מפני מה נתאוה משה רבינו ליכנס לארץ ישראל וכי לאכול מפריה הוא צריך או לשבוע מטובה הוא צריך אלא כך אמר משה הרבה מצות נצטוו ישראל ואין מתקיימין אלא בארץ ישראל אכנס אני לארץ כדי שיתקיימו כולן על ידי

Rabbi Samlai taught: For what reason did Moses our teacher greatly desire to enter Eretz Yisrael? Did he need to eat of its produce, or did he need to satisfy himself from its goodness? Rather, this is what Moses said: Many mitzvot were commanded to the Jewish people, and some of them can be fulfilled only in Eretz Yisrael, so I will enter the land in order that they can all be fulfilled by me.

אמר לו הקדוש ברוך הוא כלום אתה מבקש אלא לקבל שכר מעלה אני עליך כאילו עשיתם שנאמר לכן אחלק לו ברבים ואת עצומים יחלק שלל תחת אשר הערה למות נפשו ואת פושעים נמנה והוא חטא רבים נשא ולפשעים יפגיע

The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to him: Do you seek to enter the land to perform these mitzvot for any reason other than to receive a reward? I will ascribe you credit as if you had performed them and you will receive your reward, as it is stated: “Therefore will I divide him a portion among the great, and he shall divide the spoil with the mighty; because he bared his soul unto death, and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and made intercession for the transgressors” (Isaiah 53:12).

לכן אחלק לו ברבים יכול כאחרונים ולא כראשונים תלמוד לומר ואת עצומים יחלק שלל כאברהם יצחק ויעקב שהן עצומים בתורה ובמצות תחת אשר הערה למות נפשו שמסר עצמו למיתה שנאמר ואם אין מחני נא וגו׳

Rabbi Samlai proceeds to expound the verse “Therefore will I divide him a portion among the great” to mean that he will receive reward. One might have thought that he will receive reward like the later ones and not like the earlier ones, so the verse states: “And he shall divide the spoil with the mighty,” meaning like Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, who were mighty in Torah and in mitzvot. “Because he bared his soul unto death,” meaning he gave himself over to death on behalf of the Jewish people, as it is stated: “Yet now, if You will forgive their sin; and if not, blot me, I pray You, out of Your book that You have written” (Exodus 32:32).

ואת פושעים נמנה שנמנה עם מתי מדבר והוא חטא רבים נשא שכיפר על מעשה העגל ולפשעים יפגיע שביקש רחמים על פושעי ישראל שיחזרו בתשובה ואין פגיעה אלא תפלה שנאמר ואתה אל תתפלל בעד העם הזה ואל תשא בעדם רנה ותפלה ואל תפגע בי:

“And was numbered with the transgressors,” meaning that he was counted among those who died in the desert, for, just like them, he did not enter Eretz Yisrael. “Yet he bore the sin of many,” as he atoned for the incident of the Golden Calf. “And made intercession [yafgia] for the transgressors,” as he requested mercy for the sinners of Israel so that they should engage in repentance. And the word pegia means nothing other than prayer, as it is stated: “Therefore pray not you for this people, neither lift up cry nor prayer for them, neither make intercession [tifga] to Me; for I will not hear you” (Jeremiah 7:16).

הדרן עלך המקנא לאשתו

היה מביא את מנחתה בתוך כפיפה מצרית ונותנה על ידיה כדי ליגעה

MISHNA: The husband of the sota would bring his wife’s meal-offering to the priest in an Egyptian wicker basket made of palm branches, and he would place the meal-offering in her hands for her to hold throughout the ritual in order to fatigue her. This might lead her to confess her guilt and not drink the water of a sota unnecessarily.

כל המנחות תחילתן וסופן בכלי שרת וזו תחלתה בכפיפה מצרית וסופה בכלי שרת

The mishna lists differences between this meal-offering and other meal-offerings. Generally, all meal-offerings, from their beginnings, i.e., the moment they are consecrated, and until their ends, i.e., the moment they are sacrificed, must be in a service vessel. But in the case of this one, its beginning is in a wicker basket and only at its end, immediately before it is offered, is it placed in a service vessel.

כל המנחות טעונות שמן ולבונה וזו אינה טעונה לא שמן ולא לבונה כל המנחות באות מן החטין וזו באה מן השעורין מנחת העומר אף על פי שבאה מן השעורין היא היתה באה גרש וזו באה קמח רבן גמליאל אומר כשם שמעשיה מעשה בהמה כך קרבנה מאכל בהמה:

All other meal-offerings require oil and frankincense, and this one requires neither oil nor frankincense. Furthermore, all other meal-offerings are brought from wheat, and this one is brought from barley. Although in fact the omer meal-offering is also brought from barley, it is still different in that it was brought as groats, i.e., high-quality meal. The meal-offering of the sota, however, is brought as unsifted barley flour. Rabban Gamliel says: This hints that just as her actions of seclusion with another man were the actions of an animal, so too her offering is animal food, i.e., barley and not wheat.

גמ׳ תניא אבא חנין אומר משום רבי אליעזר [וכל כך למה] כדי ליגעה כדי שתחזור בה אם ככה חסה תורה על עוברי רצונו קל וחומר על עושי רצונו

GEMARA: It is taught in a baraita that Abba Ḥanin says in the name of Rabbi Eliezer: And why is so much done to her? It is in order to fatigue her, so that she will retract and confess her guilt and be spared death. And if the Torah is so protective of those who transgress His will, i.e., the sota, who secluded herself with the man she was warned against, then by a fortiori inference He is protective of those who do His will.

וממאי משום דחסה הוא דילמא כי היכי דלא תימחק מגילה קסבר

The Gemara asks: And from where is it derived that they attempt to induce her to confess because the Torah is protective of the sota? Perhaps it is in order that the scroll of the sota, containing the name of God, will not be erased. The Gemara responds: Rabbi Eliezer holds

משקה ואחר כך מקריב את מנחתה דאי משום מגילה הא אימחיקא לה:

that the priest would first give her the water of the sota to drink, and only afterward would he sacrifice her meal-offering. Therefore, if the concern were due to the scroll, it would no longer be applicable, as it was already erased in the water of the sota before the meal-offering was brought. The efforts to fatigue her by making her hold the meal-offering must indicate that the Torah is protective of her.

כל המנחות וכו׳: ורמינהו סדר מנחות כיצד אדם מביא מנחה מתוך ביתו בקלתות של כסף ושל זהב ונותנה לתוך כלי שרת ומקדשה בכלי שרת ונותן עליה שמנה ולבונתה ומוליכה אצל כהן וכהן מוליכה אצל מזבח ומגישה בקרן דרומית מערבית כנגד חודה של קרן ודיו

It was taught in the mishna: All meal-offerings, from their beginning until their end, are placed in service vessels and remain there. The Gemara raises a contradiction from the Tosefta (Menaḥot 1:16): What is the procedure for meal-offerings? A person brings his meal-offering from his property in baskets [kelatot] of silver and of gold, and when he reaches the Temple he places it in a service vessel and sanctifies it in the service vessel, and he puts its oil and frankincense on it, and he carries it to the priest. And the priest then carries it to the altar and brings it near to the southwest horn of the altar, opposite the corner of the horn of the altar. And this is sufficient.

ומסלק את הלבונה לצד אחד וקומץ ממקום שנתרבה שמנה ונותנו לתוך כלי שרת ומקדשו בכלי שרת ומלקט את לבונתה ונותנה על גביו ומעלה אותו לגבי מזבח ומעלהו ומקטירו בכלי שרת ומולחו ונותנו על גבי האישים

The baraita continues: And the priest then removes the frankincense to one side, and he removes a handful from the place where its oil has accumulated and mixed with the flour, and he puts the handful into a service vessel and consecrates it in the service vessel. And he then gathers its frankincense and puts it on top of the handful and brings it up onto the altar. And he brings it up and burns it in the service vessel; and he salts it and places it upon the fires.

קרב הקומץ שיריה נאכלין ורשאין הכהנים ליתן לתוכה יין ושמן ודבש ואין אסורין אלא מלחמץ

The baraita continues: After the handful is sacrificed, the remainders of the meal-offering are eaten. And the priests are permitted to put wine and oil and honey in it, even though it is prohibited to offer honey on the altar. And they are prohibited only from allowing the meal-offering to become leavened.

קתני מיהא בקלתות של כסף ובקלתות של זהב אמר רב פפא אימא בכלים הראויין לכלי שרת

The Gemara asks: In any event, the baraita teaches that the meal-offering is first placed in baskets of silver and baskets of gold brought from one’s home. This seems to contradict the mishna’s statement that all other meal-offerings are initially in service vessels. Rav Pappa said: The mishna means to say that meal-offerings are placed in vessels of silver and gold, as these are suitable to be service vessels if consecrated.

מכלל דכפיפה מצרית לא חזיא כמאן דלא כרבי יוסי ברבי יהודה דתניא כלי שרת שעשאן של עץ רבי פוסל ורבי יוסי ברבי יהודה מכשיר

The Gemara notes: Since the mishna distinguishes in this regard between the meal-offering of the sota and all other meal-offerings, one may learn by inference that an Egyptian wicker basket is not suitable to be a service vessel even if it is consecrated. In accordance with whose opinion is this the case? It is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, as it is taught in a baraita: With regard to service vessels that were made of wood, Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi deems them unfit, and Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, deems them fit.

אפילו תימא רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה אימר דאמר רבי יוסי ברבי יהודה בחשובין בפחותין מי אמר לית ליה לרבי יוסי ברבי יהודה הקריבהו נא לפחתך:

The Gemara responds: You can even say that the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda. Say that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, says that wooden vessels are deemed fit with regard to those of superior quality; but does he say likewise with regard to vessels of lesser quality, e.g., a basket made of palm branches? Doesn’t Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, hold to the principle articulated in the verse: “And when you offer the blind for a sacrifice, is it not evil! …If you would present it now unto your governor, will he be pleased with you or show you favor?” (Malachi 1:8)? Nothing that is unfit for presentation to a ruler may be brought to the Temple. Therefore, even Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Yehuda, must agree that a basket made of palm branches cannot be a service vessel.

ונותנה לכלי שרת ומקדשה בכלי שרת: שמעת מינה כלי שרת אין מקדשין אלא מדעת אימא נותנה בכלי שרת לקדשה בכלי שרת:

§ The baraita states: He places it in a service vessel and sanctifies it in the service vessel. The Gemara asks: Can one learn from the unnecessary repetition of the term service vessel, that service vessels can sanctify their contents only with intention? Must one place the meal-offering in the service vessel with express intent to sanctify it? The Gemara answers: Say: He simply places it in the service vessel in order to sanctify it in the service vessel. He need not intend to sanctify it.

ונותן עליה שמנה ולבונתה: שנאמר ויצק עליה שמן ונתן עליה לבנה:

§ The baraita teaches: The owner of the meal-offering puts its oil and frankincense on it. The Gemara cites the source of this halakha: As it is stated: “And when anyone brings a meal-offering unto the Lord, his offering shall be of fine flour; and he shall pour oil upon it, and put frankincense thereon” (Leviticus 2:1).

ומוליכה אצל כהן: דכתיב והביאה אל בני אהרן וגו׳:

The baraita states: And he carries it to the priest. The Gemara cites the source: As it is written: “And he shall bring it to Aaron’s sons, the priests” (Leviticus 2:2).

וכהן מוליכה אצל מזבח: דכתיב והגישה אצל המזבח:

The baraita states: And the priest then carries it to the altar. The Gemara cites the source: As it is written: “And you shall bring the meal-offering that is made of these things unto the Lord; and it shall be presented unto the priest, and he shall bring it unto the altar” (Leviticus 2:8).

מגישה בקרן דרומית מערבית כנגד חודה של קרן ודיו: מנלן

The baraita states: The priest brings it near to the southwest horn of the altar, opposite the corner of the horn. And this is sufficient. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this?

דכתיב וזאת תורת המנחה הקרב אותה בני אהרן לפני ה׳ אל פני המזבח ותניא לפני ה׳ יכול במערב תלמוד לומר אל פני המזבח אי אל פני המזבח יכול בדרום תלמוד לומר לפני ה׳ הא כיצד מגישה בקרן דרומית מערבית כנגד חודה של קרן ודיו

The Gemara responds: As it is written: “And this is the law of the meal-offering: The sons of Aaron shall offer it before the Lord in front of the altar” (Leviticus 6:7). And it is taught in a baraita: When the verse states: “Before the Lord,” one might have understood this to mean on the western side of the altar, opposite the Holy of Holies. Therefore, the verse states: “In front of the altar.” This must be the south of the altar, where the ramp is located. If the verse had stated only: In front of the altar, one might have understood it to mean specifically on the southern side. Therefore, the verse states: “Before the Lord,” indicating the western side. How can these texts be reconciled? The priest brings it near to the southwest corner of the altar, opposite the corner of the horn. And this is sufficient.

רבי אלעזר אומר יכול יגישנה במערבה של קרן או לדרומה של קרן אמרת כל מקום שאתה מוצא שני מקראות אחד מקיים עצמו ומקיים דברי חבירו ואחד מקיים עצמו ומבטל דברי חבירו מניחין את שמקיים עצמו ומבטל חבירו ותופסין את שמקיים עצמו ומקיים חבירו כשאתה אומר לפני ה׳ במערב בטלתה אל פני המזבח בדרום וכשאתה אומר אל פני המזבח בדרום קיימתה לפני ה׳ במערב הא כיצד מגישה לדרומה של קרן

Rabbi Elazar says another interpretation: One might have thought that he offers it up on the western side of the corner or on the southern side of the corner. Say: Anywhere you find two verses, one of which fulfills itself and fulfills the statement of the other, and one of which fulfills itself and nullifies the statement of the other, leave the verse that fulfills itself and nullifies the other, and seize the one that fulfills itself and fulfills the other. The principle is applied as follows: When you say: “Before the Lord,” on the western side, you have nullified the other part of the verse: “In front of the altar,” on the southern side. But when you say: “In front of the altar,” on the southern side, you have also fulfilled: “Before the Lord,” on the western side. How so? He brings it near to the southern side of the corner.

והיכן קיימתה אמר רב אשי קסבר האי תנא כוליה מזבח בצפון קאי

The Gemara asks: But where have you fulfilled the phrase “before the Lord”? Rav Ashi said: This tanna holds that the entire altar stands in the north of the Temple courtyard. Therefore, the entire southern side of the altar stood opposite the Holy of Holies in the west, and it can therefore be called: Before the Lord.

מאי ודיו אמר רב אשי איצטריך סלקא דעתך אמינא תיבעי הגשת מנחה גופה קמשמע לן

The Gemara asks: What is taught by the phrase: And this is sufficient? Rav Ashi said: This phrase was necessary, as otherwise it might enter your mind to say: Require the priest to bring the meal-offering itself near to the corner of the altar without the use of a vessel. The baraita teaches us that this is not so, and one can bring it to the altar in its service vessel.

ואימא הכי נמי אמר קרא והקריבה אל הכהן וגו׳ והגישה אל המזבח מה הקרבה אצל כהן בכלי אף הגשה אצל מזבח בכלי:

The Gemara asks: And why not say that this is indeed so? The Gemara responds: The verse states: “And you shall bring the meal-offering that is made of these things unto the Lord; and it shall be presented unto the priest, and he shall bring it unto the altar” (Leviticus 2:8); just as presentation to the priest is in a vessel, so too bringing it to the altar must be in a vessel.

ומסלק את לבונתה לצד אחד: כי היכי דלא תקמוץ בהדי מנחה כדתנן קמץ ועלה בידו צרור או גרגר מלח או קורט לבונה פסול:

The baraita states: And he removes its frankincense to one side. The Gemara explains: This is done in order that the frankincense not be removed along with the meal-offering when the priest removes a handful. As we learned in a mishna (Menaḥot 6a): If he removed the handful and a pebble, or a grain of salt, or a crumb [koret] of frankincense came out in his hand, it is invalid. The handful must be entirely fine flour.

וקומץ ממקום שנתרבה שמנה: מנלן דכתיב מסלתה ומשמנה מגרשה ומשמנה:

The baraita continues: And he removes a handful from the place where its oil has accumulated. The Gemara asks: From where do we derive this? As it is written: “And he shall take from there his handful of the fine flour thereof, and of the oil thereof” (Leviticus 2:2). The Torah also states: “And the priest shall make the memorial part of it smoke, even of the groats thereof, and of the oil thereof” (Leviticus 2:16). The handful should be taken from the area where there is an abundance of oil.

ונותנו לתוך כלי שרת ומקדשו בכלי שרת: למה לי הא קדשה חדא זימנא מידי דהוה אדם דם אף על גב דקדישתיה סכין בצואר בהמה הדר מקדיש ליה בכלי שרת הכא נמי לא שנא:

The baraita continues: And he puts the handful into a service vessel and sanctifies it in the service vessel. The Gemara asks: Why do I need this sanctification? He has already sanctified it once, when he initially brought it to the Temple. The Gemara responds: The sanctification here is just as with the blood of the offerings. Although the knife sanctifies blood by contact with the neck of the animal, since the knife itself is a service vessel, the priest sanctifies it again when he collects it in the service vessel. Here too, it is not different; the meal-offering must be sanctified twice.

ומלקט את לבונתה ונותנה על גביו: דכתיב ואת כל הלבונה אשר על המנחה:

The baraita continues: And he gathers its frankincense and puts it on top of the handful. The Gemara cites the source: As it is written: “And he shall take up from his handful, of the fine flour of the meal-offering, and of the oil thereof, and all the frankincense which is upon the meal-offering” (Leviticus 6:8).

ומעלהו

The baraita continues: And he then brings it up