Another contradiction is noted between the two braitot that quote Rabbi Akiva’s opinion. A woman who refuses to drink the water from a position of strength is generally viewed as admitting she is guilty and does not drink the water. But what if she changes her mind, do we then believe that she was not previously admitting her guilt and was just scared, or not? Something bitter is added to the water as is derived from a verse. What is done with the scroll and the meal offering if the woman refuses to drink before the scroll was erased? What if she admits she is guilty after the scroll is erased? If she refuses to drink after the scroll is erased, she is forced to drink. If her face turns green after drinking and her eyes start bulging, she is immediately removed from the Temple so as not to cause impurity. If she has merits, then she can live up to three years, depending upon what merits she has. Ben Azai says that one should teach his daughter Torah specifically because of this so that she won’t mistakenly think that the sotah waters don’t work. Rabbi Eliezer disagrees and says that one who teaches his daughter Torah teaches her tiflut. Rabbi Meir was a scribe and would add copper sulfate to his ink when he would write a sefer Torah to make sure it wouldn’t be erased. There are different versions regarding who was his teacher at first who didn’t complain about this practice and which was his second teacher who was against this practice as the scroll of the sotah needs to be with ink that could be erased. In one version Rabbi Akiva is the first teacher and Rabbi Yishmael is the second and in the other, it is the reverse. Can the contradictions between the two versions be resolved? Two tannaim disagree about whether Rabbi Meir held one could add copper sulfate to the ink for writing a Torah, just not for the section about the sotah, or is the issue only for a scroll written for the sotah ceremony. The debate is really about whether or not one can take a section written for a Torah and use it for the sotah ceremony. Is this based on another tannaitic debate about whether the sotah scroll needs to be written lishma, for a particular woman? This suggestion is rejected in two ways. When the Mishna said they need to immediately remove the woman from the Temple after drinking the water, according to whose opinion was this stated? Initially, they suggest Rabbi Shimon who held the meal offering is sacrificed before the drinking of the water, but the part about the merits delaying her death is not Rabbi Shimon as he doesn’t hold that merits can push off her death. They conclude the Mishna is like Rabbi Akiva who agreed with Rabbi Shimon about the first point and disagreed about the second. What impurity are they concerned about when they remove her from the Temple? It is not an impurity of death, since she is outside the azara and dead people are allowed to be in other areas of the Temple outside the azara. They conclude that it must be out of concern that the shock to the body may cause her to menstruate. The section in the Mishna about the merits delaying her death for up to three years doesn’t seem to match any of the tannaitic opinions about this, as some say three months, some say nine months and others say twelve months, but none hold up to three years.
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Fred Hochstadter, Ephraim ben Kayla veBaruch on his 18th yahrzeit on ח׳ אלול. “We continue to be inspired by his dedication to daily learning, from the Daf and beyond, to its surrounding philosophical, historical and legal nuances. We miss him greatly and can only strive to emulate his wise, kind and elegant ways.”
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
Today’s daily daf tools:
This month’s learning is sponsored by Adam, Carolyn, Michal, Josh, Benny, Izzy, Gali, Shim, Zoe, Zachy and Yehuda in loving memory of Fred Hochstadter, Ephraim ben Kayla veBaruch on his 18th yahrzeit on ח׳ אלול. “We continue to be inspired by his dedication to daily learning, from the Daf and beyond, to its surrounding philosophical, historical and legal nuances. We miss him greatly and can only strive to emulate his wise, kind and elegant ways.”
Sotah 20
קַשְׁיָא דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אַדְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא: הָתָם אָמַר מְחִיקָה מְעַכְּבָא, וְהָכָא אָמַר קוֹמֶץ מְעַכֵּב!
The Gemara asks: The statement of Rabbi Akiva is difficult, as it is contradicted by another statement of Rabbi Akiva: There, in the first baraita, he said that erasure prevents the authorities from compelling the woman to drink the water if she retracted her decision to drink, and here he says that the sacrifice of the handful prevents the authorities from compelling the woman to drink the water. In other words, according to the first baraita the woman can retract her decision to drink until the scroll is erased, whereas according to the second baraita she can retract her decision until the handful is sacrificed.
תְּרֵי תַּנָּאֵי וְאַלִּיבָּא דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא.
The Gemara responds: There is a dispute between two tanna’im, and they disagree with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. They disagree with regard to what point in time, according to Rabbi Akiva, is the final moment at which a woman can refuse to drink the bitter water without being forced to do so.
אִיבַּעְיָא לְהוּ: אָמְרָה אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה מֵחֲמַת בְּרִיּוּתָא, וְחָזְרָה וְאָמְרָה שׁוֹתָה אֲנִי, מַהוּ? כֵּיוָן דְּאָמְרָה אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה — טְמֵאָה אֲנִי קָאָמְרָה, וְכֵיוָן דְּאַחְזִיק נַפְשַׁהּ בְּטוּמְאָה, לָא מָצְיָא הָדְרָה בַּהּ. אוֹ דִילְמָא כֵּיוָן דְּאָמְרָה שׁוֹתָה אֲנִי — גַּלִּיָא דַּעְתַּהּ דְּמֵחֲמַת בִּיעֲתוּתָא הוּא דְּאָמְרָה. תֵּיקוּ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If she initially said: I will not drink, while in a state of good health, and then she retracted her statement and said: I will drink, what is the halakha? Does one say that when she said: I will not drink, it is as if she confessed and said: I am defiled, and since she established herself as defiled she cannot retract her statement? Or perhaps when she said: I will drink, she revealed her thoughts that it was only due to fear that she said she will not drink? The Gemara concludes that the dilemma shall stand unresolved.
אָמַר אֲבוּהּ דִּשְׁמוּאֵל: צָרִיךְ שֶׁיִּתֵּן מַר לְתוֹךְ הַמַּיִם. מַאי טַעְמָא — דְּאָמַר קְרָא: ״מֵי הַמָּרִים״, שֶׁמָּרִים כְּבָר.
Shmuel’s father says: It is necessary for one to put a bitter substance into the water that the sota drinks. What is the reason for this? It is as the verse states: “And he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness” (Numbers 5:23), indicating that they are already bitter before the scroll is erased.
מַתְנִי׳ עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה אָמְרָה ״אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה״ — מְגִילָּתָהּ נִגְנֶזֶת, וּמִנְחָתָהּ מִתְפַּזֶּרֶת עַל הַדֶּשֶׁן, וְאֵין מְגִילָּתָהּ כְּשֵׁרָה לְהַשְׁקוֹת בָּהּ סוֹטָה אַחֶרֶת. נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה וְאָמְרָה ״טְמֵאָה אֲנִי״ — הַמַּיִם נִשְׁפָּכִין, וּמִנְחָתָהּ מִתְפַּזֶּרֶת עַל בֵּית הַדֶּשֶׁן. נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה וְאָמְרָה ״אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה״ — מְעַרְעֲרִין אוֹתָהּ, וּמַשְׁקִין אוֹתָהּ בְּעַל כׇּרְחָהּ.
MISHNA: If before the scroll was erased she said: I will not drink, the scroll that was written for her is sequestered, and her meal-offering is burned and scattered over the place of the ashes, and her scroll is not fit to give to another sota to drink. If the scroll was erased and afterward she said: I am defiled, the water is poured out, and her meal-offering is scattered in the place of the ashes. If the scroll was already erased and she said: I will not drink, she is forced to drink against her will.
אֵינָהּ מַסְפֶּקֶת לִשְׁתּוֹת עַד שֶׁפָּנֶיהָ מוֹרִיקוֹת, וְעֵינֶיהָ בּוֹלְטוֹת, וְהִיא מִתְמַלֵּאת גִּידִין. וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים: הוֹצִיאוּהָ [הוֹצִיאוּהָ] שֶׁלֹּא תְּטַמֵּא הָעֲזָרָה.
When a guilty woman drinks she does not manage to finish drinking before her face turns green and her eyes bulge, and her skin becomes full of protruding veins, and the people standing in the Temple say: Remove her, so that she does not render the Temple courtyard impure by dying there.
אִם יֵשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת — הָיְתָה תּוֹלָה לָהּ. יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁנָה אַחַת, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, יֵשׁ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה שָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים. מִכָּאן אוֹמֵר בֶּן עַזַּאי: חַיָּיב אָדָם לְלַמֵּד אֶת בִּתּוֹ תּוֹרָה, שֶׁאִם תִּשְׁתֶּה תֵּדַע שֶׁהַזְּכוּת תּוֹלָה לָהּ. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: כׇּל הַמְלַמֵּד בִּתּוֹ תּוֹרָה — (כְּאִילּוּ) לוֹמְּדָהּ תִּפְלוּת.
The mishna limits the scope of the previous statement: If she has merit, it delays punishment for her and she does not die immediately. There is a merit that delays punishment for one year, there is a larger merit that delays punishment for two years, and there is a merit that delays punishment for three years. From here Ben Azzai states: A person is obligated to teach his daughter Torah, so that if she drinks and does not die immediately, she will know that some merit she has delayed punishment for her. Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who teaches his daughter Torah is teaching her promiscuity [tiflut].
רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר: רוֹצָה אִשָּׁה בְּקַב וְתִפְלוּת, מִתִּשְׁעָה קַבִּין וּפְרִישׁוּת. הוּא הָיָה אוֹמֵר: חָסִיד שׁוֹטֶה, וְרָשָׁע עָרוּם, וְאִשָּׁה פְּרוּשָׁה, וּמַכּוֹת פְּרוּשִׁין — הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְבַלֵּי עוֹלָם.
Rabbi Yehoshua says: A woman desires to receive the amount of a kav of food and a sexual relationship [tiflut] rather than to receive nine kav of food and abstinence. He would say: A foolish man of piety, and a conniving wicked person, and an abstinent woman [perusha], and those who injure themselves out of false abstinence; all these are people who erode the world.
גְּמָ׳ אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי מֵאִיר: כְּשֶׁהָיִיתִי לָמֵד תּוֹרָה אֵצֶל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, הָיִיתִי מֵטִיל קַנְקַנְתּוֹם לְתוֹךְ הַדְּיוֹ, וְלֹא אָמַר לִי דָּבָר. כְּשֶׁבָּאתִי אֵצֶל רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, אָמַר לִי: בְּנִי מָה מְלַאכְתֶּךָ? אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: לַבְלָר אֲנִי. אָמַר לִי: בְּנִי, הֱוֵי זָהִיר, שֶׁמְּלַאכְתְּךָ מְלֶאכֶת שָׁמַיִם הִיא, שֶׁמָּא תַּחְסִיר אוֹת אַחַת אוֹ תֹּתִיר אוֹת אַחַת, נִמְצֵאתָ אַתָּה מַחְרִיב אֶת כָּל הָעוֹלָם כֻּלּוֹ.
GEMARA: Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says in the name of Rabbi Meir: When I was studying Torah before Rabbi Akiva, as his disciple, I used to put iron sulfate into the ink with which I wrote Torah scrolls, and he did not say anything to me in protest. Afterward, when I came to learn Torah before Rabbi Yishmael, he said to me: My son, what is your vocation? I said to him: I am a scribe [lavlar] who writes Torah scrolls. He said to me: My son, be careful in your work, as your work is the work of Heaven, lest you omit a single letter from the Torah scroll or add a single letter, and in this you are found to be destroying the entire world if the mistake alters the meaning of the verse and results in blasphemy.
אָמַרְתִּי לוֹ: דָּבָר אֶחָד יֵשׁ לִי שֶׁאֲנִי מֵטִיל לְתוֹךְ הַדְּיוֹ, וְקַנְקַנְתּוֹם שְׁמוֹ. אָמַר לִי: וְכִי מְטִילִין קַנְקַנְתּוֹם לְתוֹךְ הַדְּיוֹ? הַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה ״וּמָחָה״, כְּתָב שֶׁיּוּכַל לִמְחוֹת!
Rabbi Meir continues: I said to Rabbi Yishmael: I have one substance that I put into the ink, and it is called iron sulfate, which prevents the writing from being erased. He said to me: And may iron sulfate be put into the ink? The Torah clearly said with regard to the scroll of the sota: “And the priest shall write these curses in a scroll, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness” (Numbers 5:23). This indicates that the Torah requires writing that can be blotted out.
מַאי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ וּמַאי קָא מַהְדַּר לֵיהּ?
Since Rabbi Meir’s remark about iron sulfate seems unrelated to Rabbi Yishmael’s previous statement, the Gemara asks: What is Rabbi Yishmael saying to Rabbi Meir, and what is Rabbi Meir replying to Rabbi Yishmael?
הָכִי קָאָמַר לֵיהּ: לָא מִבַּעְיָא בַּחֲסֵירוֹת וִיתֵירוֹת דְּבָקִי אֲנָא, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ לְמֵיחַשׁ לִזְבוּב דְּדִילְמָא אָתֵי וְיָתֵיב אַתָּגֵיהּ דְּדָלֶית וּמָחֵיק לֵיהּ וּמְשַׁוֵּי לֵיהּ רֵישׁ — דָּבָר אֶחָד יֵשׁ לִי שֶׁאֲנִי מֵטִיל לְתוֹךְ הַדְּיוֹ וְקַנְקַנְתּוֹם שְׁמוֹ.
The Gemara explains: This is what Rabbi Meir is saying to him: It is not necessary to say that I do not err in omissions and additions, as I am an expert. Rather, there is not even any reason for concern with regard to a fly lest it come and sit on the protrusion of the letter dalet and erase it, thereby rendering it the letter reish, which could be a critical error. There is no concern of this erasure occurring, since I have a certain substance that I put into the ink and that prevents the writing from being erased, and it is called iron sulfate.
אִינִי? וְהָא תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי מֵאִיר: כְּשֶׁהָיִיתִי לָמֵד תּוֹרָה אֵצֶל רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל הָיִיתִי מֵטִיל קַנְקַנְתּוֹם לְתוֹךְ הַדְּיוֹ, וְלֹא אָמַר לִי דָּבָר. כְּשֶׁבָּאתִי אֵצֶל רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אֲסָרָהּ עָלַי!
The Gemara questions the initial part of Rabbi Meir’s statement: Is that so? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: When I was studying Torah before Rabbi Yishmael, I used to put iron sulfate into the ink with which I wrote Torah scrolls, and he did not say anything to me. Afterward, when I came to learn Torah with Rabbi Akiva, he prohibited me from doing so.
קַשְׁיָא שִׁמּוּשׁ אַשִּׁמּוּשׁ. קַשְׁיָא אֲסָרָהּ אַאֲסָרָהּ!
The Gemara points out that there are two separate contradictions between the two statements: Rav Yehuda’s statement with regard to Rabbi Meir first serving Rabbi Akiva as a disciple is difficult, as it is contradicted by the statement of the baraita with regard to his first serving Rabbi Yishmael. Furthermore, Rav Yehuda’s statement is difficult, since he states that it was Rabbi Yishmael who prohibited the addition of iron sulfate, and this is contradicted by the statement of the baraita that it was Rabbi Akiva who prohibited it.
בִּשְׁלָמָא שִׁמּוּשׁ אַשִּׁמּוּשׁ לָא קַשְׁיָא: מֵעִיקָּרָא אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. כֵּיוָן דְּלָא מָצֵי (קָם) [לְמֵיקַם] אַלִּיבֵּיהּ, אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל, וּגְמַר גְּמָרָא. הֲדַר אֲתָא לְקַמֵּיהּ דְּרַבִּי עֲקִיבָא סָבַר סְבָרָא.
The Gemara answers: Granted, the apparent contradiction between Rav Yehuda’s statement with regard to Rabbi Meir’s serving Rabbi Akiva first, and the statement of the baraita with regard to serving Rabbi Yishmael first, poses no difficulty. Initially, he came before Rabbi Akiva to study, but since he could not comprehend his extremely complicated method of learning, he came before Rabbi Yishmael and learned the oral tradition from him. Afterward, he returned and came before Rabbi Akiva and studied his method of logical reasoning in order to understand the reasons behind the halakhot he had already learned.
אֶלָּא אֲסָרָהּ אַאֲסָרָהּ קַשְׁיָא! קַשְׁיָא.
However, the contradiction between Rav Yehuda’s statement that it was Rabbi Yishmael who prohibited the addition of iron sulfate and the statement of the baraita that it was Rabbi Akiva who prohibited it still poses a difficulty. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, the matter is difficult.
תַּנְיָא, רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אוֹמֵר הָיָה רַבִּי מֵאִיר: לַכֹּל מְטִילִין קַנְקַנְתּוֹם לְתוֹךְ הַדְּיוֹ,
It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says that Rabbi Meir would say: Iron sulfate may be put into the ink that is used for all sacred writings, i.e., Torah scrolls, phylacteries, and mezuzot,
חוּץ מִפָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה בִּלְבַד. רַבִּי יַעֲקֹב אוֹמֵר מִשְּׁמוֹ: חוּץ מִפָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה שֶׁל מִקְדָּשׁ. מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? אָמַר רַבִּי יִרְמְיָה: לִמְחוֹק לָהּ מִן הַתּוֹרָה אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ.
except for the ink used to write the Torah passage about the sota, even when written in a Torah scroll. Rabbi Ya’akov says in the name of Rabbi Meir: It is except for the ink used to write the scroll with the sota passage used in the Temple. The Gemara asks: What is the difference between these two opinions? The Gemara replies: Rabbi Yirmeya says that there is a difference between them with regard to whether it is permitted to erase the passage for the sota from a Torah scroll. According to Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Meir holds that this is permitted, and therefore the passage in the Torah scroll must be written with ink that does not contain iron sulfate, so that it can be erased. By contrast, according to Rabbi Ya’akov, Rabbi Meir holds that it is prohibited to erase the passage from a Torah scroll, and therefore the passage may be written with ink containing iron sulfate.
וְהָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי כִי הָנֵי תַּנָּאֵי. דְּתַנְיָא: אֵין מְגִילָּתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה לְהַשְׁקוֹת בָּהּ סוֹטָה אַחֶרֶת. רַבִּי אַחַי בַּר יֹאשִׁיָּה אוֹמֵר: מְגִילָּתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה לְהַשְׁקוֹת בָּהּ סוֹטָה אַחֶרֶת.
The Gemara assumes that according to Rabbi Ya’akov it is prohibited to erase the passage from a Torah scroll, since he holds that the scroll must be written for the sake of the sota, whereas Rabbi Yehuda, who permits this, holds that the scroll need not be written for the sake of the sota. And therefore, the opinions of these tanna’im are parallel to the opinions of those tanna’im, as it is taught in a baraita: The scroll of one sota is not fit to be used in the preparation of the water to give to another sota to drink, as it was not written for the sake of the other sota. Rabbi Aḥai bar Yoshiya says: Her scroll is fit to be used in the preparation of the water to give to another sota to drink, since it does not need to be written for the sake of the sota.
אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא, דִּילְמָא לָא הִיא: עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר תַּנָּא קַמָּא הָתָם, אֶלָּא כֵּיוָן דְּאִינְּתִיק לְשׁוּם רָחֵל — לָא הָדְרָא מִינַּתְקָא לְשׁוּם לֵאָה, אֲבָל תּוֹרָה, דִּסְתָמָא כְּתִיבָה — הָכִי נָמֵי דְּמָחֲקִינַן.
Rav Pappa said: Perhaps that is not so, and the two disputes are not comparable. It is possible that the first tanna of the baraita states that the scroll may not be used for another sota only there, in the case if a scroll written for a specific woman; since it was originally designated in the name of one woman, e.g., Rachel, it cannot again be designated in the name of another woman, e.g., Leah. However, in the case of a Torah scroll, which is written without specifying anyone, indeed we may erase the passage to prepare the water for a sota even though it was not written for her sake.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: דִּילְמָא לָא הִיא, עַד כָּאן לָא קָאָמַר רַבִּי אַחַי בַּר יֹאשִׁיָּה הָתָם אֶלָּא בִּמְגִילָּה, דְּאִיכְּתוּב לְשׁוּם אָלוֹת בָּעוֹלָם. אֲבָל תּוֹרָה, דִּלְהִתְלַמֵּד כְּתִיבָה, הָכִי נָמֵי דְּלָא מָחֲקִינַן.
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said that the comparison between the two disputes can be refuted for a different reason: Perhaps that is not so. It is possible that Rabbi Aḥai bar Yoshiya states that the scroll may be used for another sota only there, with regard to the scroll written for a specific sota, as it was written for the purpose of the curses of a sota in general. However, in the case of a Torah scroll, which is written to be learned from, indeed we may not erase it for a sota, as it was not written for the sake of a sota at all.
וְרַבִּי אַחַי בַּר יֹאשִׁיָּה לֵית לֵיהּ כָּתַב לְגָרֵשׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ וְנִמְלַךְ, מְצָאוֹ בֶּן עִירוֹ וְאָמַר לוֹ: שְׁמִי כְּשִׁמְךָ, וְשֵׁם אִשְׁתִּי כְּשֵׁם אִשְׁתְּךָ — פָּסוּל לְגָרֵשׁ בּוֹ?
The Gemara asks: And doesn’t Rabbi Aḥai bar Yoshiya hold in accordance with that which is taught in a mishna (Gittin 24a): With regard to one who wrote a bill of divorce with which to divorce his wife but later reconsidered and did not divorce her, if a resident of his city found him and said to him: My name is the same as your name, and my wife’s name is the same as your wife’s name; give me the bill of divorce, and I will use it to divorce my wife, it is unfit to divorce the other woman with it. The reason for this is that it was written for the sake of another woman. Seemingly, the same principle should apply with regard to the scroll of a sota.
אָמְרִי: הָתָם ״וְכָתַב לָהּ״ אָמַר רַחֲמָנָא, בָּעִינַן כְּתִיבָה לִשְׁמָהּ: הָכָא נָמֵי ״וְעָשָׂה לָהּ״! מַאי עֲשִׂיָּיה — מְחִיקָה.
The Sages say in response: There, with regard to a bill of divorce, the Merciful One states: “And he shall write for her a bill of divorce” (Deuteronomy 24:1). This teaches that we require the writing to be performed for the sake of the specific woman. However, no similar requirement is mentioned with regard to a sota. The Gemara asks: Here, too, with regard to the sota, the verse states: “And the priest shall perform with her all of this law” (Numbers 5:30), indicating that the ritual must be performed for the sake of the specific woman. The Gemara answers: What is the performance referred to in the verse? It is referring to the erasure, whereas the writing need not be done for the sake of a specific woman.
אֵינָהּ מַסְפֶּקֶת לִשְׁתּוֹת עַד שֶׁפָּנֶיהָ [כּוּ׳]. מַנִּי — רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן הִיא, דְּאָמַר: מַקְרִיב אֶת מִנְחָתָהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁקָהּ. דְּכַמָּה דְּלָא קָרְבָה מִנְחָתַהּ — לָא בָּדְקִי לַהּ מַיָּא, דִּכְתִיב: ״מִנְחַת זִכָּרוֹן מַזְכֶּרֶת עָוֹן״,
§ The mishna states: When a guilty woman drinks she does not manage to finish drinking before her face turns green and her eyes bulge, and her skin becomes full of protruding veins. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna, which indicates that the water evaluates her while she is still drinking? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who says: The priest sacrifices her meal-offering and afterward forces her to drink, because according to the opinion of the Rabbis the meal-offering is sacrificed only after she drinks, and as long as her meal-offering has not been sacrificed the water does not evaluate her, as it is written: “And he shall bring her offering for her…for it is a meal-offering of jealousy, a meal-offering of remembrance, a reminder of iniquity” (Numbers 5:15).
אֵימָא סֵיפָא: יֵשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת הָיְתָה תּוֹלָה לָהּ, אֲתָאן לְרַבָּנַן, דְּאִי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, הָאָמַר: אֵין זְכוּת תּוֹלָה בַּמַּיִם הַמָּרִים!
The Gemara asks: Say the latter clause of the mishna: If she has merit, it delays her punishment for her. We arrive at the opinion of the Rabbis, as, if this statement were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, didn’t he say: Merit does not delay punishment in the case of the bitter water of a sota?
אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: הָא מַנִּי — רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא הִיא, דְּאָמַר: מַקְרִיב אֶת מִנְחָתָהּ וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁקָהּ, וּבִזְכוּת סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבָּנַן.
Rav Ḥisda said: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who says: The priest sacrifices her meal-offering and afterward forces her to drink. With regard to the order of the ritual he holds in accordance with Rabbi Shimon, and with regard to the matter of merit delaying punishment, he holds in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis.
וְהֵם אוֹמְרִים הוֹצִיאוּהָ וְכוּ׳. מַאי טַעְמָא — דְּדִילְמָא מֵתָה. לְמֵימְרָא דְּמֵת אָסוּר בְּמַחֲנֵה לְוִיָּה?
§ The mishna states: And the people standing in the Temple say: Remove her, so that she does not render the Temple courtyard impure. The Gemara explains: What is the reason for this? It is lest she die there immediately and render the women’s courtyard, where she drinks the water, impure. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that a corpse is prohibited from being in the women’s courtyard, which has the same status as the Levite camp in the desert?
וְהָתַנְיָא: טְמֵא מֵת מוּתָּר לִיכָּנֵס לְמַחֲנֵה לְוִיָּה. וְלֹא טְמֵא מֵת בִּלְבַד אָמְרוּ, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ מֵת עַצְמוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיִּקַּח מֹשֶׁה אֶת עַצְמוֹת יוֹסֵף עִמּוֹ״, עִמּוֹ בִּמְחִיצָתוֹ!
But isn’t it taught in a baraita: One who is ritually impure with impurity imparted by a corpse is permitted to enter the Levite camp. And the Sages said this not only with regard to one who is ritually impure with impurity imparted by a corpse; rather, even a corpse itself may be brought into the Levite camp, as it is stated: “And Moses took the bones of Joseph with him” (Exodus 13:19), which is interpreted to mean: With him, in his vicinity, even though Moses was in the Levite camp.
אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: שֶׁמָּא תִּפְרוֹס נִדָּה. לְמֵימְרָא דְּבִיעֲתוּתָא מְרַפְּיָא? אִין, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַתִּתְחַלְחַל הַמַּלְכָּה מְאֹד״, וְאָמַר רַב: שֶׁפֵּירְסָה נִדָּה. וְהָא אֲנַן תְּנַן: חֲרָדָה מְסַלֶּקֶת דָּמִים! פַּחְדָּא צָמֵית, בִּיעֲתוּתָא מְרַפְּיָא.
Abaye said: The woman is removed not due to a concern that she will die there but lest the fear of the water cause her to begin to menstruate, and it is prohibited for a menstruating woman to enter the Levite camp. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that fear causes muscular relaxation and menstrual bleeding? The Gemara responds: Yes, as it is written: “And the Queen was exceedingly pained” (Esther 4:4), and Rav says: This means that she began to menstruate. The Gemara asks: But didn’t we learn in a mishna (Nidda 39a) that trepidation eliminates the flow of menstrual blood? Presumably, the sota experiences trepidation. The Gemara answers: Trepidation generated by extended worry contracts the muscles and prevents the blood from flowing, but sudden fear relaxes the muscles and causes the blood to flow.
יֵשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת הָיְתָה וְכוּ׳. מַנִּי מַתְנִיתִין? לָא אַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן חָנָן, וְלָא רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן יִצְחָק אִישׁ כְּפַר דָּרוֹם, וְלֹא רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל.
§ The mishna states: If she has merit, it delays punishment…for one year…for two years…for three years. The Gemara asks: Whose opinion is expressed in the mishna? It is not the opinion of Abba Yosei ben Ḥanan, and not the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben Yitzḥak of Kefar Darom, and not the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael.
דְּתַנְיָא: אִם יֵשׁ לָהּ זְכוּת תּוֹלָה לָהּ שְׁלֹשָׁה חֳדָשִׁים, כְּדֵי הַכָּרַת הָעוּבָּר, דִּבְרֵי אַבָּא יוֹסֵי בֶּן חָנָן. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן יִצְחָק אִישׁ כְּפַר דָּרוֹם אוֹמֵר: תִּשְׁעָה חֳדָשִׁים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְנִקְּתָה וְנִזְרְעָה זָרַע״, וּלְהַלָּן הוּא אוֹמֵר: ״זֶרַע יַעַבְדֶנּוּ יְסֻפַּר״, זֶרַע הָרָאוּי לְסַפֵּר.
This is as it is taught in a baraita: If she has merit, it delays punishment for her for three months, equivalent to the time necessary to recognize the fetus; this is the statement of Abba Yosei ben Ḥanan. Rabbi Elazar ben Yitzḥak of Kefar Darom says: Merit delays punishment for nine months, as it is stated: “Then she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed” (Numbers 5:28). It is possible to infer from this that if she has merit she will be cleared temporarily, for the length of time required to conceive a child, and there, in Psalms, it says: “A seed shall serve him; it shall be told of the Lord unto the next generation” (Psalms 22:31). This indicates that the seed must be fit to tell of the Lord once it matures, and a child can live only if it is born after the culmination of nine months in the womb.
רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר: שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין רְאָיָה לַדָּבָר — זֵכֶר לַדָּבָר, דִּכְתִיב: ״לָהֵן מַלְכָּא מִלְכִּי יִשְׁפַּר עֲלָיךְ וַחֲטָיָךְ בְּצִדְקָה פְרֻק וַעֲוָיָתָךְ בְּמִחַן עֲנָיִן
Rabbi Yishmael says: Merit delays punishment for twelve months. And although there is no explicit proof for the concept of merit delaying punishment for twelve months, there is an allusion to the concept, as it is written that Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar after interpreting Nebuchadnezzar’s dream concerning the evil which would befall him: “Therefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you, and redeem your sins with charity, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor;
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
After enthusing to my friend Ruth Kahan about how much I had enjoyed remote Jewish learning during the earlier part of the pandemic, she challenged me to join her in learning the daf yomi cycle. I had always wanted to do daf yomi but now had no excuse. The beginning was particularly hard as I had never studied Talmud but has become easier, as I have gained some familiarity with it.
Brookline, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .
Kfar Saba, Israel
I began learning the daf in January 2022. I initially “flew under the radar,” sharing my journey with my husband and a few close friends. I was apprehensive – who, me? Gemara? Now, 2 years in, I feel changed. The rigor of a daily commitment frames my days. The intellectual engagement enhances my knowledge. And the virtual community of learners has become a new family, weaving a glorious tapestry.
Far Rockaway, United States
When I began the previous cycle, I promised myself that if I stuck with it, I would reward myself with a trip to Israel. Little did I know that the trip would involve attending the first ever women’s siyum and being inspired by so many learners. I am now over 2 years into my second cycle and being part of this large, diverse, fascinating learning family has enhanced my learning exponentially.
Minnesota, United States
It’s hard to believe it has been over two years. Daf yomi has changed my life in so many ways and has been sustaining during this global sea change. Each day means learning something new, digging a little deeper, adding another lens, seeing worlds with new eyes. Daf has also fostered new friendships and deepened childhood connections, as long time friends have unexpectedly become havruta.
Northwest Washington, United States
I started at the beginning of this cycle. No 1 reason, but here’s 5.
In 2019 I read about the upcoming siyum hashas.
There was a sermon at shul about how anyone can learn Talmud.
Talmud references come up when I am studying. I wanted to know more.
Yentl was on telly. Not a great movie but it’s about studying Talmud.
I went to the Hadran website: A new cycle is starting. I’m gonna do this
Cambridge, United Kingdom
I started my journey on the day I realized that the Siyum was happening in Yerushalayim and I was missing out. What? I told myself. How could I have not known about this? How can I have missed out on this opportunity? I decided that moment, I would start Daf Yomi and Nach Yomi the very next day. I am so grateful to Hadran. I am changed forever because I learn Gemara with women. Thank you.
Mitspe, Israel
Phoenix, AZ, United States
תמיד רציתי. למדתי גמרא בבית ספר בטורונטו קנדה. עליתי ארצה ולמדתי שזה לא מקובל. הופתעתי.
יצאתי לגימלאות לפני שנתיים וזה מאפשר את המחוייבות לדף יומי.
עבורי ההתמדה בלימוד מעגן אותי בקשר שלי ליהדות. אני תמיד מחפשת ותמיד. מוצאת מקור לקשר. ללימוד חדש ומחדש. קשר עם נשים לומדות מעמיק את החוויה ומשמעותית מאוד.
מיתר, ישראל
תמיד רציתי. למדתי גמרא בבית ספר בטורונטו קנדה. עליתי ארצה ולמדתי שזה לא מקובל. הופתעתי.
יצאתי לגימלאות לפני שנתיים וזה מאפשר את המחוייבות לדף יומי.
עבורי ההתמדה בלימוד מעגן אותי בקשר שלי ליהדות. אני תמיד מחפשת ותמיד. מוצאת מקור לקשר. ללימוד חדש ומחדש. קשר עם נשים לומדות מעמיק את החוויה ומשמעותית מאוד.
מיתר, ישראל
Studying has changed my life view on הלכה and יהדות and time. It has taught me bonudaries of the human nature and honesty of our sages in their discourse to try and build a nation of caring people .
Kfar Saba, Israel
In July, 2012 I wrote for Tablet about the first all women’s siyum at Matan in Jerusalem, with 100 women. At the time, I thought, I would like to start with the next cycle – listening to a podcast at different times of day makes it possible. It is incredible that after 10 years, so many women are so engaged!
Pittsburgh, United States
Since I started in January of 2020, Daf Yomi has changed my life. It connects me to Jews all over the world, especially learned women. It makes cooking, gardening, and folding laundry into acts of Torah study. Daf Yomi enables me to participate in a conversation with and about our heritage that has been going on for more than 2000 years.
Skokie, IL, United States
Minneapolis, MN, United States
I attended the Siyum so that I could tell my granddaughter that I had been there. Then I decided to listen on Spotify and after the siyum of Brachot, Covid and zoom began. It gave structure to my day. I learn with people from all over the world who are now my friends – yet most of us have never met. I can’t imagine life without it. Thank you Rabbanit Michelle.
Raanana, Israel
Margo
I started my Talmud journey in 7th grade at Akiba Jewish Day School in Chicago. I started my Daf Yomi journey after hearing Erica Brown speak at the Hadran Siyum about marking the passage of time through Daf Yomi.
Carolyn
I started my Talmud journey post-college in NY with a few classes. I started my Daf Yomi journey after the Hadran Siyum, which inspired both my son and myself.
Merion Station, USA
Beit Shemesh, Israel
I went to day school in Toronto but really began to learn when I attended Brovenders back in the early 1980’s. Last year after talking to my sister who was learning Daf Yomi, inspired, I looked on the computer and the Hadran site came up. I have been listening to each days shiur in the morning as I work. I emphasis listening since I am not sitting with a Gamara. I listen while I work in my studio.
Tekoa, Israel
I decided to give daf yomi a try when I heard about the siyum hashas in 2020. Once the pandemic hit, the daily commitment gave my days some much-needed structure. There have been times when I’ve felt like quitting- especially when encountering very technical details in the text. But then I tell myself, “Look how much you’ve done. You can’t stop now!” So I keep going & my Koren bookshelf grows…
Huntington, United States
Richmond, CA, United States
Sotah 20
Χ§Φ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ§ΧΦΉΧΦΆΧ₯ ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ!
The Gemara asks: The statement of Rabbi Akiva is difficult, as it is contradicted by another statement of Rabbi Akiva: There, in the first baraita, he said that erasure prevents the authorities from compelling the woman to drink the water if she retracted her decision to drink, and here he says that the sacrifice of the handful prevents the authorities from compelling the woman to drink the water. In other words, according to the first baraita the woman can retract her decision to drink until the scroll is erased, whereas according to the second baraita she can retract her decision until the handful is sacrificed.
ΧͺΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ΅Χ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ ΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ.
The Gemara responds: There is a dispute between two tannaβim, and they disagree with regard to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva. They disagree with regard to what point in time, according to Rabbi Akiva, is the final moment at which a woman can refuse to drink the bitter water without being forced to do so.
ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌ: ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΧ Φ΄Χ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ Φ΄Χ, ΧΦ·ΧΧΦΌ? ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΧ Φ΄Χ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ β ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ Φ΄Χ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ§ Χ Φ·Χ€Φ°Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌ. ΧΧΦΉ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ Φ΄Χ β ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧ’Φ²ΧͺΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ. ΧͺΦΌΦ΅ΧΧ§ΧΦΌ.
A dilemma was raised before the Sages: If she initially said: I will not drink, while in a state of good health, and then she retracted her statement and said: I will drink, what is the halakha? Does one say that when she said: I will not drink, it is as if she confessed and said: I am defiled, and since she established herself as defiled she cannot retract her statement? Or perhaps when she said: I will drink, she revealed her thoughts that it was only due to fear that she said she will not drink? The Gemara concludes that the dilemma shall stand unresolved.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ²ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦ΅Χ: Χ¦ΦΈΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧΦ° Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦ΄ΧͺΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ. ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦΈΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ§Φ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ: Χ΄ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧΧ΄, Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ¨.
Shmuelβs father says: It is necessary for one to put a bitter substance into the water that the sota drinks. What is the reason for this? It is as the verse states: βAnd he shall blot them out into the water of bitternessβ (Numbers 5:23), indicating that they are already bitter before the scroll is erased.
ΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧ³ Χ’Φ·Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΉΧ Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ²Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ Χ΄ΧΦ΅ΧΧ Φ΄Χ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧΧ΄ β ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°Χ ΦΆΧΦΆΧͺ, ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦ°Χ€ΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦΆΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΆΧ©ΧΦΆΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°Χ§ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΌ Χ‘ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΆΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ. Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ²Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ Χ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ Φ΄ΧΧ΄ β ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ Χ Φ΄Χ©ΧΦ°Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΧΦ΄Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦ°Χ€ΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦΆΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΆΧ©ΧΦΆΧ. Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ²Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ Χ΄ΧΦ΅ΧΧ Φ΄Χ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧΧ΄ β ΧΦ°Χ’Φ·Χ¨Φ°Χ’Φ²Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦΌΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°Χ§Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΧΧ¨Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦΌ.
MISHNA: If before the scroll was erased she said: I will not drink, the scroll that was written for her is sequestered, and her meal-offering is burned and scattered over the place of the ashes, and her scroll is not fit to give to another sota to drink. If the scroll was erased and afterward she said: I am defiled, the water is poured out, and her meal-offering is scattered in the place of the ashes. If the scroll was already erased and she said: I will not drink, she is forced to drink against her will.
ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ·Χ‘Φ°Χ€ΦΌΦΆΧ§ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ Χ’Φ·Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ€ΦΌΦΈΧ ΦΆΧΧΦΈ ΧΧΦΉΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ§ΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ°Χ’Φ΅ΧΧ ΦΆΧΧΦΈ ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧͺ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ. ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ: ΧΧΦΉΧ¦Φ΄ΧΧΧΦΌΧΦΈ [ΧΧΦΉΧ¦Φ΄ΧΧΧΦΌΧΦΈ] Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΉΧ ΧͺΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧ’Φ²ΧΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧ.
When a guilty woman drinks she does not manage to finish drinking before her face turns green and her eyes bulge, and her skin becomes full of protruding veins, and the people standing in the Temple say: Remove her, so that she does not render the Temple courtyard impure by dying there.
ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ β ΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ. ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ, ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΅Χ Χ©ΧΦΈΧ Φ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦΉΧ©Χ Χ©ΧΦΈΧ Φ΄ΧΧ. ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ Χ’Φ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΧ: ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ, Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ΄Χ ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦΆΧ ΧͺΦΌΦ΅ΧΦ·Χ’ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ. Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ±ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’ΦΆΧΦΆΧ¨ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦΌΧΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ β (ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ) ΧΧΦΉΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ€Φ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ.
The mishna limits the scope of the previous statement: If she has merit, it delays punishment for her and she does not die immediately. There is a merit that delays punishment for one year, there is a larger merit that delays punishment for two years, and there is a merit that delays punishment for three years. From here Ben Azzai states: A person is obligated to teach his daughter Torah, so that if she drinks and does not die immediately, she will know that some merit she has delayed punishment for her. Rabbi Eliezer says: Anyone who teaches his daughter Torah is teaching her promiscuity [tiflut].
Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦ»Χ’Φ· ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: Χ¨ΧΦΉΧ¦ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ§Φ·Χ ΧΦ°ΧͺΦ΄Χ€Φ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ, ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ Χ§Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΌΧ€Φ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ©ΧΧΦΌΧͺ. ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦΈΧ‘Φ΄ΧΧ Χ©ΧΧΦΉΧΦΆΧ, ΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ©ΧΦΈΧ’ Χ’ΦΈΧ¨ΧΦΌΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΦΈΧ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧ©ΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΧΦ·ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ Χ€ΦΌΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ β ΧΦ²Χ¨Φ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ Χ’ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ.
Rabbi Yehoshua says: A woman desires to receive the amount of a kav of food and a sexual relationship [tiflut] rather than to receive nine kav of food and abstinence. He would say: A foolish man of piety, and a conniving wicked person, and an abstinent woman [perusha], and those who injure themselves out of false abstinence; all these are people who erode the world.
ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ³ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΧΦΌΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ¨: ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ¦ΦΆΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨. ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧΧͺΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅Χ¦ΦΆΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ: ΧΦΌΦ°Χ Φ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦΆΧΦΈ? ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨Φ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΧΦΉ: ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦ²Χ Φ΄Χ. ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ: ΧΦΌΦ°Χ Φ΄Χ, ΧΦ±ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ¨, Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈ ΧΦ°ΧΦΆΧΧΦΆΧͺ Χ©ΧΦΈΧΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°Χ‘Φ΄ΧΧ¨ ΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΧΦΉ ΧͺΦΌΦΉΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ¨ ΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χͺ, Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°Χ¦Φ΅ΧΧͺΦΈ ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ’ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ»ΧΦΌΧΦΉ.
GEMARA: Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says in the name of Rabbi Meir: When I was studying Torah before Rabbi Akiva, as his disciple, I used to put iron sulfate into the ink with which I wrote Torah scrolls, and he did not say anything to me in protest. Afterward, when I came to learn Torah before Rabbi Yishmael, he said to me: My son, what is your vocation? I said to him: I am a scribe [lavlar] who writes Torah scrolls. He said to me: My son, be careful in your work, as your work is the work of Heaven, lest you omit a single letter from the Torah scroll or add a single letter, and in this you are found to be destroying the entire world if the mistake alters the meaning of the verse and results in blasphemy.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨Φ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΧΦΉ: ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦ΄Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ²Χ Φ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉ, ΧΦ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉ. ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ: ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉ? ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ Χ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΧ΄, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΧΦΌΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧͺ!
Rabbi Meir continues: I said to Rabbi Yishmael: I have one substance that I put into the ink, and it is called iron sulfate, which prevents the writing from being erased. He said to me: And may iron sulfate be put into the ink? The Torah clearly said with regard to the scroll of the sota: βAnd the priest shall write these curses in a scroll, and he shall blot them out into the water of bitternessβ (Numbers 5:23). This indicates that the Torah requires writing that can be blotted out.
ΧΦ·ΧΧ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΧΦ·ΧΧ Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΌΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ?
Since Rabbi Meirβs remark about iron sulfate seems unrelated to Rabbi Yishmaelβs previous statement, the Gemara asks: What is Rabbi Yishmael saying to Rabbi Meir, and what is Rabbi Meir replying to Rabbi Yishmael?
ΧΦΈΧΦ΄Χ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ: ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ²Χ‘Φ΅ΧΧ¨ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ΅ΧΧ¨ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ§Φ΄Χ ΧΦ²Χ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ€Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ·Χ©Χ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧͺΦ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΆΧΧͺ ΧΦΌΧΦΈΧΦ΅ΧΧ§ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ Χ¨Φ΅ΧΧ©Χ β ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦ΄Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ²Χ Φ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉ.
The Gemara explains: This is what Rabbi Meir is saying to him: It is not necessary to say that I do not err in omissions and additions, as I am an expert. Rather, there is not even any reason for concern with regard to a fly lest it come and sit on the protrusion of the letter dalet and erase it, thereby rendering it the letter reish, which could be a critical error. There is no concern of this erasure occurring, since I have a certain substance that I put into the ink and that prevents the writing from being erased, and it is called iron sulfate.
ΧΦ΄ΧΧ Φ΄Χ? ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ¨: ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅Χ¦ΦΆΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧͺΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨. ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧΧͺΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅Χ¦ΦΆΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ‘ΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ Χ’ΦΈΧΦ·Χ!
The Gemara questions the initial part of Rabbi Meirβs statement: Is that so? But isnβt it taught in a baraita that Rabbi Meir said: When I was studying Torah before Rabbi Yishmael, I used to put iron sulfate into the ink with which I wrote Torah scrolls, and he did not say anything to me. Afterward, when I came to learn Torah with Rabbi Akiva, he prohibited me from doing so.
Χ§Φ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ©Χ ΧΦ·Χ©ΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ©Χ. Χ§Φ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ‘ΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ·ΧΦ²Χ‘ΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ!
The Gemara points out that there are two separate contradictions between the two statements: Rav Yehudaβs statement with regard to Rabbi Meir first serving Rabbi Akiva as a disciple is difficult, as it is contradicted by the statement of the baraita with regard to his first serving Rabbi Yishmael. Furthermore, Rav Yehudaβs statement is difficult, since he states that it was Rabbi Yishmael who prohibited the addition of iron sulfate, and this is contradicted by the statement of the baraita that it was Rabbi Akiva who prohibited it.
ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ©Χ ΧΦ·Χ©ΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ©Χ ΧΦΈΧ Χ§Φ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΅Χ’Φ΄ΧΧ§ΦΌΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ§Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ. ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ¦Φ΅Χ (Χ§ΦΈΧ) [ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧ§Φ·Χ] ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ, ΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ§Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧ. ΧΦ²ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ§Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ‘ΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ‘Φ°ΧΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧ.
The Gemara answers: Granted, the apparent contradiction between Rav Yehudaβs statement with regard to Rabbi Meirβs serving Rabbi Akiva first, and the statement of the baraita with regard to serving Rabbi Yishmael first, poses no difficulty. Initially, he came before Rabbi Akiva to study, but since he could not comprehend his extremely complicated method of learning, he came before Rabbi Yishmael and learned the oral tradition from him. Afterward, he returned and came before Rabbi Akiva and studied his method of logical reasoning in order to understand the reasons behind the halakhot he had already learned.
ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ‘ΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ·ΧΦ²Χ‘ΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΦΌ Χ§Φ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ! Χ§Φ·Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ.
However, the contradiction between Rav Yehudaβs statement that it was Rabbi Yishmael who prohibited the addition of iron sulfate and the statement of the baraita that it was Rabbi Akiva who prohibited it still poses a difficulty. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, the matter is difficult.
ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ, Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨, ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨ ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅ΧΦ΄ΧΧ¨: ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ΄ΧΧ Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°Χ§Φ·Χ Φ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧͺΧΦΉΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΧΦΉ,
It is taught in a baraita: Rabbi Yehuda says that Rabbi Meir would say: Iron sulfate may be put into the ink that is used for all sacred writings, i.e., Torah scrolls, phylacteries, and mezuzot,
ΧΧΦΌΧ₯ ΧΦ΄Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧ©ΧΦ·Χͺ Χ‘ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ. Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ²Χ§ΦΉΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΦΌΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉ: ΧΧΦΌΧ₯ ΧΦ΄Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧ©ΧΦ·Χͺ Χ‘ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΦ΄Χ§Φ°ΧΦΌΦΈΧ©Χ. ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧ Φ·ΧΦ°ΧΧΧΦΌ? ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ¨Φ°ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΉΧ§ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧ Φ·ΧΦ°ΧΧΧΦΌ.
except for the ink used to write the Torah passage about the sota, even when written in a Torah scroll. Rabbi Yaβakov says in the name of Rabbi Meir: It is except for the ink used to write the scroll with the sota passage used in the Temple. The Gemara asks: What is the difference between these two opinions? The Gemara replies: Rabbi Yirmeya says that there is a difference between them with regard to whether it is permitted to erase the passage for the sota from a Torah scroll. According to Rabbi Yehuda, Rabbi Meir holds that this is permitted, and therefore the passage in the Torah scroll must be written with ink that does not contain iron sulfate, so that it can be erased. By contrast, according to Rabbi Yaβakov, Rabbi Meir holds that it is prohibited to erase the passage from a Torah scroll, and therefore the passage may be written with ink containing iron sulfate.
ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ Φ΅Χ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ ΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΈΧ Φ΅Χ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ ΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅Χ. ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°Χ§ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΌ Χ‘ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΆΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ. Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦΉΧΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅ΧΧ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°Χ§ΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΌ Χ‘ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΆΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ.
The Gemara assumes that according to Rabbi Yaβakov it is prohibited to erase the passage from a Torah scroll, since he holds that the scroll must be written for the sake of the sota, whereas Rabbi Yehuda, who permits this, holds that the scroll need not be written for the sake of the sota. And therefore, the opinions of these tannaβim are parallel to the opinions of those tannaβim, as it is taught in a baraita: The scroll of one sota is not fit to be used in the preparation of the water to give to another sota to drink, as it was not written for the sake of the other sota. Rabbi AαΈ₯ai bar Yoshiya says: Her scroll is fit to be used in the preparation of the water to give to another sota to drink, since it does not need to be written for the sake of the sota.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ€ΦΌΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ: Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΧ ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧͺΦΌΦ·Χ ΦΌΦΈΧ Χ§Φ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ, ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ§ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΧΦΌΧ Χ¨ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ β ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ ΦΌΦ·ΧͺΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ‘Φ°ΧͺΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ β ΧΦΈΧΦ΄Χ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧ Φ·Χ.
Rav Pappa said: Perhaps that is not so, and the two disputes are not comparable. It is possible that the first tanna of the baraita states that the scroll may not be used for another sota only there, in the case if a scroll written for a specific woman; since it was originally designated in the name of one woman, e.g., Rachel, it cannot again be designated in the name of another woman, e.g., Leah. However, in the case of a Torah scroll, which is written without specifying anyone, indeed we may erase the passage to prepare the water for a sota even though it was not written for her sake.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ Χ Φ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ§: ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, Χ’Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΧ ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦΉΧΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦΈΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ’ΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ. ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧ¨ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧͺΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦ΄Χ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧ Φ·Χ.
Rav NaαΈ₯man bar YitzαΈ₯ak said that the comparison between the two disputes can be refuted for a different reason: Perhaps that is not so. It is possible that Rabbi AαΈ₯ai bar Yoshiya states that the scroll may be used for another sota only there, with regard to the scroll written for a specific sota, as it was written for the purpose of the curses of a sota in general. However, in the case of a Torah scroll, which is written to be learned from, indeed we may not erase it for a sota, as it was not written for the sake of a sota at all.
ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦΉΧΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦΈΧͺΦ·Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ¨Φ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°, ΧΦ°Χ¦ΦΈΧΧΦΉ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ Χ’Φ΄ΧΧ¨ΧΦΉ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΧΦΉ: Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦΈ, ΧΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ©ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈ β Χ€ΦΌΦΈΧ‘ΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ¨Φ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦΌΧΦΉ?
The Gemara asks: And doesnβt Rabbi AαΈ₯ai bar Yoshiya hold in accordance with that which is taught in a mishna (Gittin 24a): With regard to one who wrote a bill of divorce with which to divorce his wife but later reconsidered and did not divorce her, if a resident of his city found him and said to him: My name is the same as your name, and my wifeβs name is the same as your wifeβs name; give me the bill of divorce, and I will use it to divorce my wife, it is unfit to divorce the other woman with it. The reason for this is that it was written for the sake of another woman. Seemingly, the same principle should apply with regard to the scroll of a sota.
ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄Χ: ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧ Χ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦ·Χ ΧΦΈΧΦΌΧ΄ ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦΈΧ’Φ΄ΧΧ Φ·Χ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦΌ: ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ Χ ΦΈΧΦ΅Χ Χ΄ΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ©ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌΧ΄! ΧΦ·ΧΧ Χ’Φ²Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧΧ β ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ§ΦΈΧ.
The Sages say in response: There, with regard to a bill of divorce, the Merciful One states: βAnd he shall write for her a bill of divorceβ (Deuteronomy 24:1). This teaches that we require the writing to be performed for the sake of the specific woman. However, no similar requirement is mentioned with regard to a sota. The Gemara asks: Here, too, with regard to the sota, the verse states: βAnd the priest shall perform with her all of this lawβ (Numbers 5:30), indicating that the ritual must be performed for the sake of the specific woman. The Gemara answers: What is the performance referred to in the verse? It is referring to the erasure, whereas the writing need not be done for the sake of a specific woman.
ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ·Χ‘Φ°Χ€ΦΌΦΆΧ§ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧͺ Χ’Φ·Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧ€ΦΌΦΈΧ ΦΆΧΧΦΈ [ΧΦΌΧΦΌΧ³]. ΧΦ·Χ ΦΌΦ΄Χ β Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦ·Χ§Φ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧΦΌ. ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ Χ§ΦΈΧ¨Φ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦ·ΧΦΌ β ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ°Χ§Φ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ: Χ΄ΧΦ΄Χ Φ°ΧΦ·Χͺ ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΌΦΆΧ¨ΦΆΧͺ Χ’ΦΈΧΦΉΧΧ΄,
Β§ The mishna states: When a guilty woman drinks she does not manage to finish drinking before her face turns green and her eyes bulge, and her skin becomes full of protruding veins. The Gemara asks: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna, which indicates that the water evaluates her while she is still drinking? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, who says: The priest sacrifices her meal-offering and afterward forces her to drink, because according to the opinion of the Rabbis the meal-offering is sacrificed only after she drinks, and as long as her meal-offering has not been sacrificed the water does not evaluate her, as it is written: βAnd he shall bring her offering for herβ¦for it is a meal-offering of jealousy, a meal-offering of remembrance, a reminder of iniquityβ (Numbers 5:15).
ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦΈΧ Χ‘Φ΅ΧΧ€ΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦ²ΧͺΦΈΧΧ ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ Φ·Χ, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄Χ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ©ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ’ΧΦΉΧ, ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦ΅ΧΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨Φ΄ΧΧ!
The Gemara asks: Say the latter clause of the mishna: If she has merit, it delays her punishment for her. We arrive at the opinion of the Rabbis, as, if this statement were in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon, didnβt he say: Merit does not delay punishment in the case of the bitter water of a sota?
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ ΧΦ΄Χ‘Φ°ΧΦΌΦΈΧ: ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·Χ ΦΌΦ΄Χ β Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ’Φ²Χ§Φ΄ΧΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨: ΧΦ·Χ§Φ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΦΆΧͺ ΧΦ΄Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦ·Χ©ΧΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧΦΌ, ΧΦΌΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ Χ‘ΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ Φ·Χ.
Rav αΈ€isda said: In accordance with whose opinion is this mishna? It is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Akiva, who says: The priest sacrifices her meal-offering and afterward forces her to drink. With regard to the order of the ritual he holds in accordance with Rabbi Shimon, and with regard to the matter of merit delaying punishment, he holds in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis.
ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΄ΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ¦Φ΄ΧΧΧΦΌΧΦΈ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ³. ΧΦ·ΧΧ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ°ΧΦΈΧ β ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ΅ΧͺΦΈΧ. ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΅Χͺ ΧΦΈΧ‘ΧΦΌΧ¨ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ²Χ Φ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ?
Β§ The mishna states: And the people standing in the Temple say: Remove her, so that she does not render the Temple courtyard impure. The Gemara explains: What is the reason for this? It is lest she die there immediately and render the womenβs courtyard, where she drinks the water, impure. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that a corpse is prohibited from being in the womenβs courtyard, which has the same status as the Levite camp in the desert?
ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧͺΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΅Χͺ ΧΧΦΌΧͺΦΌΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦ΄ΧΧΦΌΦΈΧ Φ΅Χ‘ ΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ²Χ Φ΅Χ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ. ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ΅Χͺ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦΈΧΦ°Χ¨ΧΦΌ, ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ€Φ΄ΧΧΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ΅Χͺ Χ’Φ·Χ¦Φ°ΧΧΦΉ, Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΦΌΦΆΧΦ±ΧΦ·Χ¨: Χ΄ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ§ΦΌΦ·Χ ΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦΆΧ ΧΦΆΧͺ Χ’Φ·Χ¦Φ°ΧΧΦΉΧͺ ΧΧΦΉΧ‘Φ΅Χ£ Χ’Φ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΉΧ΄, Χ’Φ΄ΧΦΌΧΦΉ ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ¦ΦΈΧͺΧΦΉ!
But isnβt it taught in a baraita: One who is ritually impure with impurity imparted by a corpse is permitted to enter the Levite camp. And the Sages said this not only with regard to one who is ritually impure with impurity imparted by a corpse; rather, even a corpse itself may be brought into the Levite camp, as it is stated: βAnd Moses took the bones of Joseph with himβ (Exodus 13:19), which is interpreted to mean: With him, in his vicinity, even though Moses was in the Levite camp.
ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ΅Χ: Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ€Φ°Χ¨ΧΦΉΧ‘ Χ Φ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ. ΧΦ°ΧΦ΅ΧΧΦ°Χ¨ΦΈΧ ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΧ’Φ²ΧͺΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·Χ€ΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ? ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ: Χ΄ΧΦ·ΧͺΦΌΦ΄ΧͺΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧΧ΄, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧΦ·Χ¨ Χ¨Φ·Χ: Χ©ΧΦΆΧ€ΦΌΦ΅ΧΧ¨Φ°Χ‘ΦΈΧ Χ Φ΄ΧΦΌΦΈΧ. ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ²Χ Φ·Χ ΧͺΦΌΦ°Χ Φ·Χ: ΧΦ²Χ¨ΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ‘Φ·ΧΦΌΦΆΧ§ΦΆΧͺ ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦ΄ΧΧ! Χ€ΦΌΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΌΦΈΧ Χ¦ΦΈΧΦ΅ΧΧͺ, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΧ’Φ²ΧͺΧΦΌΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ·Χ€ΦΌΦ°ΧΦΈΧ.
Abaye said: The woman is removed not due to a concern that she will die there but lest the fear of the water cause her to begin to menstruate, and it is prohibited for a menstruating woman to enter the Levite camp. The Gemara asks: Is this to say that fear causes muscular relaxation and menstrual bleeding? The Gemara responds: Yes, as it is written: βAnd the Queen was exceedingly painedβ (Esther 4:4), and Rav says: This means that she began to menstruate. The Gemara asks: But didnβt we learn in a mishna (Nidda 39a) that trepidation eliminates the flow of menstrual blood? Presumably, the sota experiences trepidation. The Gemara answers: Trepidation generated by extended worry contracts the muscles and prevents the blood from flowing, but sudden fear relaxes the muscles and causes the blood to flow.
ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧΦΈΧΦ°ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧ³. ΧΦ·Χ ΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ·ΧͺΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ? ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ‘Φ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ ΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦΆΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ§ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ©Χ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ€Φ·Χ¨ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨ΧΦΉΧ, ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ.
Β§ The mishna states: If she has merit, it delays punishmentβ¦for one yearβ¦for two yearsβ¦for three years. The Gemara asks: Whose opinion is expressed in the mishna? It is not the opinion of Abba Yosei ben αΈ€anan, and not the opinion of Rabbi Elazar ben YitzαΈ₯ak of Kefar Darom, and not the opinion of Rabbi Yishmael.
ΧΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦ·Χ Φ°ΧΦΈΧ: ΧΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΅Χ©Χ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ ΧΦ°ΧΧΦΌΧͺ ΧͺΦΌΧΦΉΧΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧΦΌ Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΉΧ©ΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ³ΧΦΈΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨Φ·Χͺ ΧΦΈΧ’ΧΦΌΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ΅Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΉΧ‘Φ΅Χ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ ΧΦΈΧ ΦΈΧ. Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦΆΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦΌΦΆΧ ΧΦ΄Χ¦Φ°ΧΦΈΧ§ ΧΦ΄ΧΧ©Χ ΧΦΌΦ°Χ€Φ·Χ¨ ΧΦΌΦΈΧ¨ΧΦΉΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: ΧͺΦΌΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°Χ’ΦΈΧ ΧΦ³ΧΦΈΧ©ΧΦ΄ΧΧ, Χ©ΧΦΆΧ ΦΌΦΆΧΦ±ΧΦ·Χ¨: Χ΄ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄Χ§ΦΌΦ°ΧͺΦΈΧ ΧΦ°Χ Φ΄ΧΦ°Χ¨Φ°Χ’ΦΈΧ ΧΦΈΧ¨Φ·Χ’Χ΄, ΧΦΌΧΦ°ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: Χ΄ΧΦΆΧ¨Φ·Χ’ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΆΧ ΦΌΧΦΌ ΧΦ°Χ‘Φ»Χ€ΦΌΦ·Χ¨Χ΄, ΧΦΆΧ¨Φ·Χ’ ΧΦΈΧ¨ΦΈΧΧΦΌΧ ΧΦ°Χ‘Φ·Χ€ΦΌΦ΅Χ¨.
This is as it is taught in a baraita: If she has merit, it delays punishment for her for three months, equivalent to the time necessary to recognize the fetus; this is the statement of Abba Yosei ben αΈ€anan. Rabbi Elazar ben YitzαΈ₯ak of Kefar Darom says: Merit delays punishment for nine months, as it is stated: βThen she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seedβ (Numbers 5:28). It is possible to infer from this that if she has merit she will be cleared temporarily, for the length of time required to conceive a child, and there, in Psalms, it says: βA seed shall serve him; it shall be told of the Lord unto the next generationβ (Psalms 22:31). This indicates that the seed must be fit to tell of the Lord once it matures, and a child can live only if it is born after the culmination of nine months in the womb.
Χ¨Φ·ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°ΧΦΈΧ’Φ΅ΧΧ ΧΧΦΉΧΦ΅Χ¨: Χ©ΧΦ°Χ Φ΅ΧΧ Χ’ΦΈΧ©ΧΦΈΧ¨ ΧΦΉΧΦΆΧ©Χ. ΧΦ°ΧΦ·Χ£ Χ’Φ·Χ Χ€ΦΌΦ΄Χ Χ©ΧΦΆΧΦ΅ΧΧ Χ¨Φ°ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨ β ΧΦ΅ΧΦΆΧ¨ ΧΦ·ΧΦΌΦΈΧΦΈΧ¨, ΧΦΌΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧͺΦ΄ΧΧ: Χ΄ΧΦΈΧΦ΅Χ ΧΦ·ΧΦ°ΧΦΌΦΈΧ ΧΦ΄ΧΦ°ΧΦΌΦ΄Χ ΧΦ΄Χ©ΧΦ°Χ€ΦΌΦ·Χ¨ Χ’Φ²ΧΦΈΧΧΦ° ΧΦ·ΧΦ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦΌΦ°Χ¦Φ΄ΧΦ°Χ§ΦΈΧ Χ€Φ°Χ¨Φ»Χ§ ΧΦ·Χ’Φ²ΧΦΈΧΦΈΧͺΦΈΧΦ° ΧΦΌΦ°ΧΦ΄ΧΦ·Χ Χ’Φ²Χ ΦΈΧΦ΄Χ
Rabbi Yishmael says: Merit delays punishment for twelve months. And although there is no explicit proof for the concept of merit delaying punishment for twelve months, there is an allusion to the concept, as it is written that Daniel said to Nebuchadnezzar after interpreting Nebuchadnezzarβs dream concerning the evil which would befall him: βTherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable to you, and redeem your sins with charity, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the poor;
