Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

November 2, 2015 | 讻壮 讘诪专讞砖讜谉 转砖注状讜

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Sotah 7

讬砖 诇讛 注讚讬诐 讘诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐

the case where there are witnesses for her in a country overseas who can testify that she engaged in sexual intercourse, when the bitter water will not evaluate her faithfulness. Therefore, Rabbi Shimon should be concerned that such a dispensation will result in the defamation of the untainted women who drank and were unaffected, as people will view them as guilty women who were not affected because there were witnesses overseas.

诇讗 砖讻讬讞讗

The Gemara answers: The case of witnesses in a country overseas is not common, and therefore no one will assume that that is the reason why the woman was not affected. By contrast, a woman having merit is common.

诪转谞讬壮 讻讬爪讚 注讜砖讛 诇讛 诪讜诇讬讻讛 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 砖讘讗讜转讜 诪拽讜诐 讜诪讜住专讬谉 诇讜 砖谞讬 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 砖诪讗 讬讘讗 注诇讬讛 讘讚专讱 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛

MISHNA: The mishna details the procedure for administering the drinking of the bitter water of a sota. What does her husband do with her after she secluded herself with the man about whom she had been warned? He brings her to the court that is found in that location, and the court provides him with two Torah scholars to accompany him, lest he engage in sexual intercourse with her on the way to the Temple, which is not only prohibited but will also prevent the bitter water from evaluating her. Rabbi Yehuda says: Her husband is trusted with regard to her, so there is no need to provide scholars to accompany him.

讙诪壮 转专讬 讜讗讬讛讜 讛讗 转诇转讗 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讘注讬专 讗讘诇 讘讚专讱 注讚 讚讗讬讻讗 砖诇砖讛 砖诪讗 讬爪讟专讱 讗讞讚 诪讛谉 诇谞拽讘讬讜 讜谞诪爪讗 讗讞讚 诪讛谉 诪转讬讬讞讚 注诐 讛注专讜讛

GEMARA: The Gemara assumes that the requirement for there to be two Torah scholars is to avoid the prohibition against a woman being alone with a man. The Gemara notes: Two additional men and he, the husband, are three people altogether. Let us say that this mishna supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: When they taught that it is permitted for a woman to be secluded with two men, they taught that this is permitted only in the town (see Kiddushin 80b). But on the way, when traveling, this is not permitted unless there are three men with the woman. The reason for this stringency is that if there are only two men with her, perhaps one will need to relieve himself and will seek privacy, and it will be found that one of them is in seclusion with a woman forbidden to him.

诇讗 讛讻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讬讛讜讜 注诇讬讛 住讛讚讬

The Gemara refutes this assumption: No, here, in the case of a sota, this is the reason why there is a requirement for two scholars, so that there are two witnesses with regard to her, i.e., there will be two witnesses to testify in the event that the husband engages in sexual intercourse with her on the way to the Temple. The reason is not to avoid the prohibition against her being alone with a man, as one scholar would suffice for that.

转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讬谉 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇讗讬讚讱 讚专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讻砖专讬谉 讗讘诇 驻专讜爪讬谉 讗驻讬诇讜 注砖专讛 谞诪讬 诇讗 诪注砖讛 讛讬讛 讜讛讜爪讬讗讜讛 注砖专讛 讘诪讟讛

The mishna teaches that the husband is provided with Torah scholars. The Gemara further comments: Torah scholars, yes; anyone else, no. It is specifically Torah scholars who are provided to accompany the husband and wife. Let us say that this mishna supports another statement of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: When they taught that it is permitted for a woman to be secluded with two men, they taught that this is permitted only with regard to men of fit morals. But with regard to those of loose morals, she may not be secluded even with ten men. The Gemara adds: There was an incident and ten men carried out a woman on a bier, as if she were dead, and engaged in sexual intercourse with her.

诇讗 讛讻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讚讬讚注讬 诇讗转专讜讬讬 讘讬讛

The Gemara refutes this assumption: No, here, in the case of a sota, this is the reason why there is a requirement for two scholars, that they know how to properly warn him not to engage in sexual intercourse with her. Therefore, this mishna does not support the opinion of Rav.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 讜讻讜壮 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 诪拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讜诪讛 谞讚讛 砖讛讬讗 讘讻专转 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛 住讜讟讛 砖讛讬讗 讘诇讗讜 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉

搂 The Gemara now discusses Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 statement in the mishna. Rabbi Yehuda says: Her husband is trusted with regard to her. It is taught in a baraita in the Tosefta (1:2): Rabbi Yehuda says: Her husband is trusted due to an a fortiori inference: And just as in the case of a menstruating woman, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband by penalty of karet, her husband is nevertheless trusted with regard to her, as he is permitted to seclude himself with her, so too, with regard to a sota, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband only by penalty of a prohibition, is it not all the more so that he should be trusted?

讜专讘谞谉 讛讬讗 讛谞讜转谞转 谞讚讛 讚讻专转 讞诪讬专讗 诇讬讛 讜诪讛讬诪谉 住讜讟讛 讚诇讗讜 诇讗 讞诪讬专讗 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诪讛讬诪谉

And the Rabbis say: That provides support for the contrary opinion, as these considerations lead to the opposite conclusion. A menstruating woman is forbidden by penalty of karet. This is a stringent prohibition for him, and this is why he is trusted not to engage in sexual intercourse with her. By contrast, a sota is forbidden to him only by a prohibition. This is not a stringent prohibition to him, and he is therefore not trusted with her.

讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诪讬讬转讬 诇讛 讜讛讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪拽专讗讬 诪讬讬转讬 诇讛 讚转谞讬讗 讜讛讘讬讗 讛讗讬砖 讗转 讗砖转讜 讗诇 讛讻讛谉 诪谉 讛转讜专讛 讛讗讬砖 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讗砖转讜 讗讘诇 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 诪讜住专讬谉 诇讜 砖谞讬 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 砖诪讗 讬讘讗 注诇讬讛 讘讚专讱

The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Yehuda in fact derive this halakha from an a fortiori inference? But Rabbi Yehuda derives it from a verse, as it is taught in a baraita: The verse: 鈥淭hen shall the man bring his wife to the priest鈥 (Numbers 5:15), teaches that by Torah law the man alone brings his wife to the Temple, but the Sages said: The court provides him with two Torah scholars to accompany him, lest he engage in sexual intercourse with her on the way to the Temple.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛 诪拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讜诪讛 谞讚讛 砖讛讬讗 讘讻专转 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛 住讜讟讛 砖讛讬讗 讘诇讗讜 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉

The baraita records a second opinion. Rabbi Yosei says: Her husband is trusted with regard to her based on an a fortiori inference: And just as a menstruating woman, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband by penalty of karet, and her husband is nevertheless trusted with regard to her, then with regard to a sota, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband by penalty of only a prohibition, should he not all the more so be trusted?

讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇讗 讗诐 讗诪专转 讘谞讚讛 砖讻谉 讬砖 诇讛 讛讬转专 转讗诪专 讘住讜讟讛 砖讗讬谉 诇讛 讛讬转专 讜讗讜诪专 诪讬诐 讙谞讜讘讬诐 讬诪转拽讜 讜讙讜壮

The Sages said to him: No, if you say that this is true with regard to a menstruating woman, the reason he is trusted is not due to the severity of the prohibition. Rather, he is trusted because she has the ability to become permitted to her husband after her menstrual flow has ceased and she has immersed in a ritual bath. Shall you also say that this is the case with regard to a sota, who potentially does not have the ability to become permitted to her husband due to her suspected adultery? And proof to the notion that people will more readily commit illicit acts that are permanently prohibited comes from the verse that states: 鈥淪tolen waters are sweet and bread eaten in secret is pleasing鈥 (Proverbs 9:17). Consequently, there is a concern that the husband will engage in sexual intercourse with his sota wife if not accompanied by scholars.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪谉 讛转讜专讛 讛讗讬砖 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讗砖转讜 讗诇 讛讻讛谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜讛讘讬讗 讛讗讬砖 讗转 讗砖转讜

The baraita quotes a third opinion. Rabbi Yehuda says: By Torah law, the man alone brings his wife to the Temple, as is stated: 鈥淭hen shall the man bring his wife to the priest.鈥 This baraita states explicitly that Rabbi Yehuda derives this halakha from the verse itself, not from an a fortiori inference.

讗诪专 诇讛讜 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讘专讬砖讗 讜驻专讻讜讛 讜讛讚专 讗诪专 诇讛讜 拽专讗

The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda first said to them the a fortiori inference, and they refuted it as mentioned above, and he then said to them the derivation from the verse.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讬讬谞讜 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讘诇 讗诪专讜

The Gemara clarifies: Apparently, the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda is the same as that of the first tanna in the baraita, who also cites the verse as proof that by Torah law the husband alone brings his wife to the priest. The Gemara explains: The difference between them concerns the following clause: But the Sages said that the court provides him with two Torah scholars to accompany him. The first tanna holds that the Sages require two scholars to accompany the husband and wife, while Rabbi Yehuda holds that they do not.

诪转谞讬壮 讛讬讜 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 讛讙讚讜诇 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 讻讚专讱 砖诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇 注讚讬 谞驻砖讜转

MISHNA: The mishna details the next stage of the process. They would bring her up to the Sanhedrin that was in Jerusalem, and the judges would threaten her in order that she admit her sin. And this was done in the manner that they would threaten witnesses testifying in cases of capital law. In those cases, the judges would explain to the witnesses the gravity of their testimony by stressing the value of human life. Here too, the judges would attempt to convince the woman to admit her sin, to avoid the loss of her life.

讜讗讜诪专 诇讛 讘转讬 讛专讘讛 讬讬谉 注讜砖讛 讛专讘讛 砖讞讜拽 注讜砖讛 讛专讘讛 讬诇讚讜转 注讜砖讛 讛专讘讛 砖讻谞讬诐 讛专注讬诐 注讜砖讬谉

And additionally, the judge would say to her: My daughter, wine causes a great deal of immoral behavior, levity causes a great deal of immoral behavior, immaturity causes a great deal of immoral behavior, and bad neighbors cause a great deal of immoral behavior. The judge encouraged her to admit her sin by explaining to her that he understands that there may have been mitigating factors.

注砖讬 诇砖诪讜 讛讙讚讜诇 砖谞讻转讘 讘拽讚讜砖讛 砖诇讗 讬诪讞讛 注诇 讛诪讬诐 讜讗讜诪专 诇驻谞讬讛 讚讘专讬诐 砖讗讬谞诐 讻讚讬 诇砖讜诪注谉 讛讬讗 讜讻诇 诪砖驻讞转 讘讬转 讗讘讬讛

The judge then continues: Act for the sake of His great name, so that God鈥檚 name, which is written in sanctity, shall not be erased on the water. If the woman admits to having committed adultery, the scroll upon which the name of God is written will not be erased. And additionally, the judge says in her presence matters that are not worthy of being heard by her and all her father鈥檚 family, in order to encourage her to admit her sin, as the Gemara will explain.

讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟诪讗讛 讗谞讬 砖讜讘专转 讻转讜讘转讛 讜讬讜爪讗转

If after the judge鈥檚 warning she says: I am defiled, she writes a receipt for her marriage contract. That is, she writes a receipt indicating that she has no claims on her husband with regard to the sum written in her marriage contract, as a woman who admits to adultery forfeits her right to this payment. And she is then divorced from her husband.

讜讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟讛讜专讛 讗谞讬 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇砖注专 讛诪讝专讞 砖注诇 驻转讞 砖注专 谞拽谞讜专 砖砖诐 诪砖拽讬谉 讗转 讛住讜讟讜转 讜诪讟讛专讬谉 讗转 讛讬讜诇讚讜转 讜诪讟讛专讬谉 讗转 讛诪爪讜专注讬谉

But if after the warning she maintains her innocence and says: I am pure, they bring her up to the Eastern Gate, which is at the opening of the Gate of Nicanor, because three rites were performed there: They give the sota women the bitter water to drink, and they purify women who have given birth (see Leviticus 12:6鈥8), and they purify the lepers (see Leviticus 14:10鈥20).

讜讻讛谉 讗讜讞讝 讘讘讙讚讬讛 讗诐 谞拽专注讜 谞拽专注讜 讜讗诐 谞驻专诪讜 谞驻专诪讜 注讚 砖讛讜讗 诪讙诇讛 讗转 诇讘讛 讜住讜转专 讗转 砖注专讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 讛讬讛 诇讘讛 谞讗讛 诇讗 讛讬讛 诪讙诇讛讜 讜讗诐 讛讬讛 砖注专讛 谞讗讛 诇讗 讛讬讛 住讜转专

The mishna continues describing the sota rite. And the priest grabs hold of her clothing and pulls them, unconcerned about what happens to the clothing. If the clothes are torn, so they are torn; if the stitches come apart, so they come apart. And he pulls her clothing until he reveals her heart, i.e., her chest. And then he unbraids her hair. Rabbi Yehuda says: If her heart was attractive he would not reveal it, and if her hair was attractive he would not unbraid it.

讛讬转讛 诪转讻住讛 讘诇讘谞讬诐 诪讻住讛 讘砖讞讜专讬诐 讛讬讛 注诇讬讛 讻诇讬 讝讛讘

If she was dressed in white garments, he would now cover her with black garments. If she was wearing gold adornments,

讜拽讟诇讬讗讜转 谞讝诪讬诐 讜讟讘注讜转 诪注讘讬专讬谉 诪诪谞讛 讻讚讬 诇谞讜讜诇讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 诪讘讬讗 讞讘诇 诪爪专讬 讜拽讜砖专讜 诇诪注诇讛 诪讚讚讬讛

or chokers [katliyot], or nose rings, or finger rings, they removed them from her in order to render her unattractive. And afterward the priest would bring an Egyptian rope fashioned from palm fibers, and he would tie it above her breasts.

讜讻诇 讛专讜爪讛 诇专讗讜转 讘讗 诇专讗讜转 讞讜抓 诪注讘讚讬讛 讜砖驻讞讜转讬讛 诪驻谞讬 砖诇讘讛 讙住 讘讛谉 讜讻诇 讛谞砖讬诐 诪讜转专讜转 诇专讗讜转讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜谞讜住专讜 讻诇 讛谞砖讬诐 讜诇讗 转注砖讬谞讛 讻讝诪转讻谞讛

And anyone who desires to watch her may come to watch, except for her slaves and maidservants, who are not permitted to watch because her heart is emboldened by them, as seeing one鈥檚 slaves reinforces one鈥檚 feeling of pride, and their presence may cause her to maintain her innocence. And all of the women are permitted to watch her, as it is stated: 鈥淭hus will I cause lewdness to cease out of the land, that all women may be taught not to do after your lewdness鈥 (Ezekiel 23:48).

讙诪壮 诪谞讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讙诪讚讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讗转讬讗 转讜专讛 转讜专讛 讻转讬讘 讛讻讗 讜注砖讛 诇讛 讛讻讛谉 讗转 讻诇 讛转讜专讛 讜讻转讬讘 讛转诐 注诇 驻讬 讛转讜专讛 讗砖专 讬讜专讜讱 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 讘砖讘注讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讗祝 讻讗谉 讘砖讘注讬诐 讜讗讞讚

GEMARA: The Gemara asks concerning the halakha that the sota is brought before the Sanhedrin: From where are these matters derived? Rabbi 岣yya bar Gamda says that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina, says: This is derived by means of a verbal analogy between the words tora and tora.鈥 It is written here, with regard to a sota: 鈥淎nd the priest shall execute upon her all this law [tora]鈥 (Numbers 5:30), and it is written there, with regard to a rebellious Elder, who must go to the place chosen by God and follow the ruling of the Sanhedrin: 鈥淎ccording to the law [tora] that they shall teach you鈥 (Deuteronomy 17:11). Just as there the verse is referring to what occurs in the presence of the Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges, so too here, with regard to a sota, the verse is referring to what occurs in the presence of the Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges.

讜诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 讜讻讜壮 讜专诪讬谞讛讜 讻讚专讱 砖诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 砖诇讗 转砖转讛 讻讱 诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 砖转砖转讛 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讛 讘转讬 讗诐 讘专讜专 诇讱 讛讚讘专 砖讟讛讜专讛 讗转 注诪讚讬 注诇 讘讜专讬讬讱 讜砖转讬 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讬诐 讛诪专讬诐 讚讜诪讬谉 讗诇讗 诇住诐 讬讘砖 砖诪讜谞讞 注诇 讘砖专 讞讬 讗诐 讬砖 砖诐 诪讻讛 诪讞诇讞诇 讜讬讜专讚 讗讬谉 砖诐 诪讻讛 讗讬谞讜 诪讜注讬诇 讻诇讜诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And they threaten her in order that she admit her sin, to obviate the need to erase God鈥檚 name. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from that which was taught in a baraita in the Tosefta (1:6): In the same manner that they threaten her so that she will not drink, so too, they threaten her so that she will drink, as they say to her: My daughter, if the matter is clear to you that you are pure, arise for the sake of your clear position and drink. If you are innocent you have nothing to fear, because the bitter water is similar only to a dry poison placed on the flesh. If there is a wound there, the poison will penetrate and enter the blood stream, but if there is no wound there, it does not have any effect. This teaches that the woman is warned not to drink if she is guilty, but if she is not guilty she is encouraged to drink. There is no mention of the latter in the mishna.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 拽讜讚诐 砖谞诪讞拽讛 诪讙讬诇讛 讻讗谉 诇讗讞专 砖谞诪讞拽讛 诪讙讬诇讛

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here the mishna is referring to before the scroll was erased, and at that point the woman is warned only not to drink if she is guilty, so that the name of God will not be erased. There the baraita is referring to after the scroll was erased. Then she is warned that if she is innocent she should drink because if she now refuses to drink, it will turn out that the scroll was erased for no purpose.

讜讗讜诪专 诇驻谞讬讛 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讜诪专 诇驻谞讬讛 讚讘专讬诐 砖诇 讛讙讚讛 讜诪注砖讬诐 砖讗讬专注讜 讘讻转讜讘讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讻讙讜谉 讗砖专 讞讻诪讬诐 讬讙讬讚讜 讜诇讗 讻讞讚讜 诪讗讘讜转诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And the judge says in her presence matters that are not worthy of being heard by her and all her father鈥檚 family in order to encourage her to admit her sin. The Gemara cites a baraita that details what was said. The Sages taught in a baraita: The judge says in her presence words of homiletical interpretation and mentions incidents that happened to previous generations that are recorded in the early prophetic writings. For example, they expound the following verse: 鈥淭hat wise men told and did not hide from their fathers鈥 (Job 15:18); this teaches that even during the time of the forefathers, there were people who admitted their sins despite the shame they incurred.

讬讛讜讚讛 讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 讘讜砖 诪讛 讛讬讛 住讜驻讜 谞讞诇 讞讬讬 讛注讜诇诐 讛讘讗 专讗讜讘谉 讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 讘讜砖 诪讛 讛讬讛 住讜驻讜 谞讞诇 讞讬讬 讛注讜诇诐 讛讘讗 讜诪讛 砖讻专谉 诪讛 砖讻专谉 讻讚拽讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讗诇讗 诪讛 砖讻专谉 讘注讜诇诐 讛讝讛 诇讛诐 诇讘讚诐 谞转谞讛 讛讗专抓 讜诇讗 注讘专 讝专 讘转讜讻诐

For example, Judah admitted that he sinned with Tamar and was not embarrassed to do so, and what was his end? He inherited the life of the World-to-Come. Reuben admitted that he lay with his father鈥檚 concubine Bilhah and was not embarrassed, and what was his end? He too inherited the life of the World-to-Come. The Gemara asks: And what is their reward? The Gemara interjects: What is their reward? Their reward was clearly as we say, that they inherited the life of the World-to-Come. The Gemara clarifies: Rather, the second question was: What is their reward in this world? The Gemara answers by citing the next verse in the book of Job: 鈥淭o them alone the land was given, and no stranger passed among them鈥 (Job 15:19). Judah was given the kingship, and Reuben inherited a portion of land in the Transjordan before the other tribes.

讘砖诇诪讗 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讗砖讻讞谉 讚讗讜讚讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讻专 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讬讗诪专 爪讚拽讛 诪诪谞讬 讗诇讗 专讗讜讘谉 诪谞诇谉 讚讗讜讚讬

The Gemara questions the source for Reuben鈥檚 admission. Granted, with regard to Judah we have found a source that he admitted his sin with Tamar, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Judah acknowledged them and said: She is more righteous than I鈥 (Genesis 38:26). Judah admitted that he was the one who had impregnated Tamar. But from where do we derive that Reuben admitted his sin?

讚讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讬讞讬 专讗讜讘谉 讜讗诇 讬诪转 讜讝讗转 诇讬讛讜讚讛

The Gemara answers: It is as Rabbi Shmuel bar Na岣ani says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: What is the meaning of that which is written concerning Reuben and Judah in Moses鈥 blessing of the tribes at the end of his life: 鈥淟et Reuben live and not die in that his men become few鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:6), and immediately afterward, in the following verse, it is stated: 鈥淎nd this for Judah, and he said: Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in unto his people; his hands shall contend for him, and You shall be a help against his adversaries鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7). What is the connection between the blessing of Reuben and that of Judah, juxtaposed with the conjunction 鈥渁nd鈥?

讻诇 讗讜转谉 砖谞讬诐 砖讛讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讘诪讚讘专 讛讬讜 注爪诪讜转讬讜 砖诇 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讙讜诇讙诇讬谉 讘讗专讜谉 注讚 砖注诪讚 诪砖讛 讜讘拽砖 注诇讬讜 专讞诪讬诐 讗诪专 诇驻谞讬讜 专讘讜谞讜 砖诇 注讜诇诐 诪讬 讙专诐 诇专讗讜讘谉 砖讛讜讚讛 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讝讗转 诇讬讛讜讚讛

Rabbi Yo岣nan says: All those years that the Jewish people were in the desert, the bones of Judah, which the Jewish people took with them from Egypt along with the bones of his brothers, were rolling around in the coffin, until Moses arose and asked for compassion on Judah鈥檚 behalf. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, who served as the impetus for Reuben that he admit his sin, through which he merited a blessing and was not excluded from the count of the twelve sons of Jacob (see Genesis 35:22)? It was Judah, as Reuben saw him confess his sin, and thereby did the same. Moses continues in the next verse: 鈥淎nd this for Judah,鈥 as if to say: Is this Judah鈥檚 reward for serving as an example of confessing to one鈥檚 sins, that his bones roll around?

诪讬讚 砖诪注 讛壮 拽讜诇 讬讛讜讚讛 注诇 讗讬讘专讬讛 诇砖驻讗 讜诇讗 讛讜讛 拽讗 诪注讬讬诇讬谉 诇讬讛 诇诪转讬讘转讗 讚专拽讬注讗 讜讗诇 注诪讜 转讘讬讗谞讜 讜诇讗 讛讜讛 拽讗 讬讚注 诪砖拽诇 讜诪讟专讞 讘砖诪注转讗 讘讛讚讬 专讘谞谉 讬讚讬讜 专讘 诇讜 诇讗 讛讜讛 拽讗 住诇拽讗 诇讬讛 砖诪注转讗 讗诇讬讘讗 讚讛讬诇讻转讗 讜注讝专 诪爪专讬讜 转讛讬讛

Immediately after Moses prayed, the verse states: 鈥淗ear, Lord, the voice of Judah鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7). His bones then entered their sockets [shafa], and his skeleton was reassembled. But the angels still did not elevate him into the heavenly study hall. Moses then prayed: 鈥淎nd bring him in unto his people鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7), i.e., those in the heavenly study hall. This prayer was accepted, but he still did not know how to deliberate in Torah matters with the heavenly sages. Moses then prayed: 鈥淗is hands shall contend for him鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7), meaning that he should have the ability to contend with them in study. But still he was unable to draw conclusions from his discussion in accordance with the halakha. Moses then prayed: 鈥淎nd You shall be a help against his adversaries鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7).

讘砖诇诪讗 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讜讚讬 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 转讬砖专祝 转诪专 讗诇讗 专讗讜讘谉 诇诪讛 诇讬讛 讚讗讜讚讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讞爪讬祝 注诇讬 讚诪驻专讬讟 讞讟讗讬讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬讞砖讚讜 讗讞讜讛讬

The Gemara discusses the propriety of admitting one鈥檚 sins in public. Granted, with regard to Judah, it was proper that he admitted his sin in public, as he did so in order that Tamar not be burned innocently. But why did Reuben admit his sin in public? But didn鈥檛 Rav Sheshet say: I consider one who specifies his sins in public to be brazen, as one who does so indicates that he is not embarrassed by his actions? The Gemara answers: The reason he admitted his sin in public was in order that his brothers should not be suspected of having committed the deed.

讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟诪讗讛 讗谞讬 讜讻讜壮 砖诪注转 诪讬谞讛 讻讜转讘讬谉 砖讜讘专

搂 The mishna teaches: If after the judge鈥檚 warning she says: I am defiled, she writes a receipt for her marriage contract. The Gemara comments: You can learn from this mishna that one writes a receipt to serve as proof that a debt has been paid rather than tearing the promissory note. This matter is the subject of a dispute between the tanna鈥檌m in tractate Bava Batra (170b).

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 转谞讬 诪拽专注转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 讜讛讗 砖讜讘专转 拽转谞讬 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 讻讜转讘讬谉 讻转讜讘讛 注住拽讬谞谉

Abaye said: Teach in the mishna differently. Rather than understanding that she writes a receipt, explain it to mean: She tears her marriage contract. Rava said to him: But the mishna teaches explicitly that she writes a receipt. Rather, to explain the mishna, Rava said: We are dealing with a place in which they do not write a marriage contract, as they rely on the rabbinical ordinance that all wives are entitled to the sum of a standard marriage contract upon divorce or being widowed, even if no marriage contract has been written. Because there is no marriage contract to tear, a receipt is written so that the man can prove that he no longer has a monetary obligation. However, generally, it is possible that the document would be torn, and no proof can be adduced from this mishna.

讜讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟讛讜专讛 讗谞讬 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇砖注专讬 诪讝专讞 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛

搂 The mishna teaches: But if after the warning she maintains her innocence and says: I am pure, they would bring her up to the Eastern Gate. The Gemara asks: Would they bring her up?

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Sotah 7

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Sotah 7

讬砖 诇讛 注讚讬诐 讘诪讚讬谞转 讛讬诐

the case where there are witnesses for her in a country overseas who can testify that she engaged in sexual intercourse, when the bitter water will not evaluate her faithfulness. Therefore, Rabbi Shimon should be concerned that such a dispensation will result in the defamation of the untainted women who drank and were unaffected, as people will view them as guilty women who were not affected because there were witnesses overseas.

诇讗 砖讻讬讞讗

The Gemara answers: The case of witnesses in a country overseas is not common, and therefore no one will assume that that is the reason why the woman was not affected. By contrast, a woman having merit is common.

诪转谞讬壮 讻讬爪讚 注讜砖讛 诇讛 诪讜诇讬讻讛 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 砖讘讗讜转讜 诪拽讜诐 讜诪讜住专讬谉 诇讜 砖谞讬 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 砖诪讗 讬讘讗 注诇讬讛 讘讚专讱 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛

MISHNA: The mishna details the procedure for administering the drinking of the bitter water of a sota. What does her husband do with her after she secluded herself with the man about whom she had been warned? He brings her to the court that is found in that location, and the court provides him with two Torah scholars to accompany him, lest he engage in sexual intercourse with her on the way to the Temple, which is not only prohibited but will also prevent the bitter water from evaluating her. Rabbi Yehuda says: Her husband is trusted with regard to her, so there is no need to provide scholars to accompany him.

讙诪壮 转专讬 讜讗讬讛讜 讛讗 转诇转讗 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讘注讬专 讗讘诇 讘讚专讱 注讚 讚讗讬讻讗 砖诇砖讛 砖诪讗 讬爪讟专讱 讗讞讚 诪讛谉 诇谞拽讘讬讜 讜谞诪爪讗 讗讞讚 诪讛谉 诪转讬讬讞讚 注诐 讛注专讜讛

GEMARA: The Gemara assumes that the requirement for there to be two Torah scholars is to avoid the prohibition against a woman being alone with a man. The Gemara notes: Two additional men and he, the husband, are three people altogether. Let us say that this mishna supports the opinion of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: When they taught that it is permitted for a woman to be secluded with two men, they taught that this is permitted only in the town (see Kiddushin 80b). But on the way, when traveling, this is not permitted unless there are three men with the woman. The reason for this stringency is that if there are only two men with her, perhaps one will need to relieve himself and will seek privacy, and it will be found that one of them is in seclusion with a woman forbidden to him.

诇讗 讛讻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讬讛讜讜 注诇讬讛 住讛讚讬

The Gemara refutes this assumption: No, here, in the case of a sota, this is the reason why there is a requirement for two scholars, so that there are two witnesses with regard to her, i.e., there will be two witnesses to testify in the event that the husband engages in sexual intercourse with her on the way to the Temple. The reason is not to avoid the prohibition against her being alone with a man, as one scholar would suffice for that.

转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 讗讬谉 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 诇讬诪讗 诪住讬讬注 诇讬讛 诇讗讬讚讱 讚专讘 讚讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 专讘 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 讻砖专讬谉 讗讘诇 驻专讜爪讬谉 讗驻讬诇讜 注砖专讛 谞诪讬 诇讗 诪注砖讛 讛讬讛 讜讛讜爪讬讗讜讛 注砖专讛 讘诪讟讛

The mishna teaches that the husband is provided with Torah scholars. The Gemara further comments: Torah scholars, yes; anyone else, no. It is specifically Torah scholars who are provided to accompany the husband and wife. Let us say that this mishna supports another statement of Rav, as Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: When they taught that it is permitted for a woman to be secluded with two men, they taught that this is permitted only with regard to men of fit morals. But with regard to those of loose morals, she may not be secluded even with ten men. The Gemara adds: There was an incident and ten men carried out a woman on a bier, as if she were dead, and engaged in sexual intercourse with her.

诇讗 讛讻讗 讛讬讬谞讜 讟注诪讗 讚讬讚注讬 诇讗转专讜讬讬 讘讬讛

The Gemara refutes this assumption: No, here, in the case of a sota, this is the reason why there is a requirement for two scholars, that they know how to properly warn him not to engage in sexual intercourse with her. Therefore, this mishna does not support the opinion of Rav.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 讜讻讜壮 转谞讬讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 诪拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讜诪讛 谞讚讛 砖讛讬讗 讘讻专转 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛 住讜讟讛 砖讛讬讗 讘诇讗讜 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉

搂 The Gemara now discusses Rabbi Yehuda鈥檚 statement in the mishna. Rabbi Yehuda says: Her husband is trusted with regard to her. It is taught in a baraita in the Tosefta (1:2): Rabbi Yehuda says: Her husband is trusted due to an a fortiori inference: And just as in the case of a menstruating woman, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband by penalty of karet, her husband is nevertheless trusted with regard to her, as he is permitted to seclude himself with her, so too, with regard to a sota, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband only by penalty of a prohibition, is it not all the more so that he should be trusted?

讜专讘谞谉 讛讬讗 讛谞讜转谞转 谞讚讛 讚讻专转 讞诪讬专讗 诇讬讛 讜诪讛讬诪谉 住讜讟讛 讚诇讗讜 诇讗 讞诪讬专讗 诇讬讛 讜诇讗 诪讛讬诪谉

And the Rabbis say: That provides support for the contrary opinion, as these considerations lead to the opposite conclusion. A menstruating woman is forbidden by penalty of karet. This is a stringent prohibition for him, and this is why he is trusted not to engage in sexual intercourse with her. By contrast, a sota is forbidden to him only by a prohibition. This is not a stringent prohibition to him, and he is therefore not trusted with her.

讜专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 诪讬讬转讬 诇讛 讜讛讗 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 诪拽专讗讬 诪讬讬转讬 诇讛 讚转谞讬讗 讜讛讘讬讗 讛讗讬砖 讗转 讗砖转讜 讗诇 讛讻讛谉 诪谉 讛转讜专讛 讛讗讬砖 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讗砖转讜 讗讘诇 讗诪专讜 讞讻诪讬诐 诪讜住专讬谉 诇讜 砖谞讬 转诇诪讬讚讬 讞讻诪讬诐 砖诪讗 讬讘讗 注诇讬讛 讘讚专讱

The Gemara asks: And does Rabbi Yehuda in fact derive this halakha from an a fortiori inference? But Rabbi Yehuda derives it from a verse, as it is taught in a baraita: The verse: 鈥淭hen shall the man bring his wife to the priest鈥 (Numbers 5:15), teaches that by Torah law the man alone brings his wife to the Temple, but the Sages said: The court provides him with two Torah scholars to accompany him, lest he engage in sexual intercourse with her on the way to the Temple.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛 诪拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讜诪讛 谞讚讛 砖讛讬讗 讘讻专转 讘注诇讛 谞讗诪谉 注诇讬讛 住讜讟讛 砖讛讬讗 讘诇讗讜 诇讗 讻诇 砖讻谉

The baraita records a second opinion. Rabbi Yosei says: Her husband is trusted with regard to her based on an a fortiori inference: And just as a menstruating woman, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband by penalty of karet, and her husband is nevertheless trusted with regard to her, then with regard to a sota, who is prohibited from engaging in sexual intercourse with her husband by penalty of only a prohibition, should he not all the more so be trusted?

讗诪专讜 诇讜 诇讗 讗诐 讗诪专转 讘谞讚讛 砖讻谉 讬砖 诇讛 讛讬转专 转讗诪专 讘住讜讟讛 砖讗讬谉 诇讛 讛讬转专 讜讗讜诪专 诪讬诐 讙谞讜讘讬诐 讬诪转拽讜 讜讙讜壮

The Sages said to him: No, if you say that this is true with regard to a menstruating woman, the reason he is trusted is not due to the severity of the prohibition. Rather, he is trusted because she has the ability to become permitted to her husband after her menstrual flow has ceased and she has immersed in a ritual bath. Shall you also say that this is the case with regard to a sota, who potentially does not have the ability to become permitted to her husband due to her suspected adultery? And proof to the notion that people will more readily commit illicit acts that are permanently prohibited comes from the verse that states: 鈥淪tolen waters are sweet and bread eaten in secret is pleasing鈥 (Proverbs 9:17). Consequently, there is a concern that the husband will engage in sexual intercourse with his sota wife if not accompanied by scholars.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪谉 讛转讜专讛 讛讗讬砖 诪讘讬讗 讗转 讗砖转讜 讗诇 讛讻讛谉 砖谞讗诪专 讜讛讘讬讗 讛讗讬砖 讗转 讗砖转讜

The baraita quotes a third opinion. Rabbi Yehuda says: By Torah law, the man alone brings his wife to the Temple, as is stated: 鈥淭hen shall the man bring his wife to the priest.鈥 This baraita states explicitly that Rabbi Yehuda derives this halakha from the verse itself, not from an a fortiori inference.

讗诪专 诇讛讜 拽诇 讜讞讜诪专 讘专讬砖讗 讜驻专讻讜讛 讜讛讚专 讗诪专 诇讛讜 拽专讗

The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda first said to them the a fortiori inference, and they refuted it as mentioned above, and he then said to them the derivation from the verse.

专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讛讬讬谞讜 转谞讗 拽诪讗 讗讬讻讗 讘讬谞讬讬讛讜 讗讘诇 讗诪专讜

The Gemara clarifies: Apparently, the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda is the same as that of the first tanna in the baraita, who also cites the verse as proof that by Torah law the husband alone brings his wife to the priest. The Gemara explains: The difference between them concerns the following clause: But the Sages said that the court provides him with two Torah scholars to accompany him. The first tanna holds that the Sages require two scholars to accompany the husband and wife, while Rabbi Yehuda holds that they do not.

诪转谞讬壮 讛讬讜 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇讘讬转 讚讬谉 讛讙讚讜诇 砖讘讬专讜砖诇讬诐 讜诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 讻讚专讱 砖诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇 注讚讬 谞驻砖讜转

MISHNA: The mishna details the next stage of the process. They would bring her up to the Sanhedrin that was in Jerusalem, and the judges would threaten her in order that she admit her sin. And this was done in the manner that they would threaten witnesses testifying in cases of capital law. In those cases, the judges would explain to the witnesses the gravity of their testimony by stressing the value of human life. Here too, the judges would attempt to convince the woman to admit her sin, to avoid the loss of her life.

讜讗讜诪专 诇讛 讘转讬 讛专讘讛 讬讬谉 注讜砖讛 讛专讘讛 砖讞讜拽 注讜砖讛 讛专讘讛 讬诇讚讜转 注讜砖讛 讛专讘讛 砖讻谞讬诐 讛专注讬诐 注讜砖讬谉

And additionally, the judge would say to her: My daughter, wine causes a great deal of immoral behavior, levity causes a great deal of immoral behavior, immaturity causes a great deal of immoral behavior, and bad neighbors cause a great deal of immoral behavior. The judge encouraged her to admit her sin by explaining to her that he understands that there may have been mitigating factors.

注砖讬 诇砖诪讜 讛讙讚讜诇 砖谞讻转讘 讘拽讚讜砖讛 砖诇讗 讬诪讞讛 注诇 讛诪讬诐 讜讗讜诪专 诇驻谞讬讛 讚讘专讬诐 砖讗讬谞诐 讻讚讬 诇砖讜诪注谉 讛讬讗 讜讻诇 诪砖驻讞转 讘讬转 讗讘讬讛

The judge then continues: Act for the sake of His great name, so that God鈥檚 name, which is written in sanctity, shall not be erased on the water. If the woman admits to having committed adultery, the scroll upon which the name of God is written will not be erased. And additionally, the judge says in her presence matters that are not worthy of being heard by her and all her father鈥檚 family, in order to encourage her to admit her sin, as the Gemara will explain.

讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟诪讗讛 讗谞讬 砖讜讘专转 讻转讜讘转讛 讜讬讜爪讗转

If after the judge鈥檚 warning she says: I am defiled, she writes a receipt for her marriage contract. That is, she writes a receipt indicating that she has no claims on her husband with regard to the sum written in her marriage contract, as a woman who admits to adultery forfeits her right to this payment. And she is then divorced from her husband.

讜讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟讛讜专讛 讗谞讬 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇砖注专 讛诪讝专讞 砖注诇 驻转讞 砖注专 谞拽谞讜专 砖砖诐 诪砖拽讬谉 讗转 讛住讜讟讜转 讜诪讟讛专讬谉 讗转 讛讬讜诇讚讜转 讜诪讟讛专讬谉 讗转 讛诪爪讜专注讬谉

But if after the warning she maintains her innocence and says: I am pure, they bring her up to the Eastern Gate, which is at the opening of the Gate of Nicanor, because three rites were performed there: They give the sota women the bitter water to drink, and they purify women who have given birth (see Leviticus 12:6鈥8), and they purify the lepers (see Leviticus 14:10鈥20).

讜讻讛谉 讗讜讞讝 讘讘讙讚讬讛 讗诐 谞拽专注讜 谞拽专注讜 讜讗诐 谞驻专诪讜 谞驻专诪讜 注讚 砖讛讜讗 诪讙诇讛 讗转 诇讘讛 讜住讜转专 讗转 砖注专讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 讗诐 讛讬讛 诇讘讛 谞讗讛 诇讗 讛讬讛 诪讙诇讛讜 讜讗诐 讛讬讛 砖注专讛 谞讗讛 诇讗 讛讬讛 住讜转专

The mishna continues describing the sota rite. And the priest grabs hold of her clothing and pulls them, unconcerned about what happens to the clothing. If the clothes are torn, so they are torn; if the stitches come apart, so they come apart. And he pulls her clothing until he reveals her heart, i.e., her chest. And then he unbraids her hair. Rabbi Yehuda says: If her heart was attractive he would not reveal it, and if her hair was attractive he would not unbraid it.

讛讬转讛 诪转讻住讛 讘诇讘谞讬诐 诪讻住讛 讘砖讞讜专讬诐 讛讬讛 注诇讬讛 讻诇讬 讝讛讘

If she was dressed in white garments, he would now cover her with black garments. If she was wearing gold adornments,

讜拽讟诇讬讗讜转 谞讝诪讬诐 讜讟讘注讜转 诪注讘讬专讬谉 诪诪谞讛 讻讚讬 诇谞讜讜诇讛 讜讗讞专 讻讱 诪讘讬讗 讞讘诇 诪爪专讬 讜拽讜砖专讜 诇诪注诇讛 诪讚讚讬讛

or chokers [katliyot], or nose rings, or finger rings, they removed them from her in order to render her unattractive. And afterward the priest would bring an Egyptian rope fashioned from palm fibers, and he would tie it above her breasts.

讜讻诇 讛专讜爪讛 诇专讗讜转 讘讗 诇专讗讜转 讞讜抓 诪注讘讚讬讛 讜砖驻讞讜转讬讛 诪驻谞讬 砖诇讘讛 讙住 讘讛谉 讜讻诇 讛谞砖讬诐 诪讜转专讜转 诇专讗讜转讛 砖谞讗诪专 讜谞讜住专讜 讻诇 讛谞砖讬诐 讜诇讗 转注砖讬谞讛 讻讝诪转讻谞讛

And anyone who desires to watch her may come to watch, except for her slaves and maidservants, who are not permitted to watch because her heart is emboldened by them, as seeing one鈥檚 slaves reinforces one鈥檚 feeling of pride, and their presence may cause her to maintain her innocence. And all of the women are permitted to watch her, as it is stated: 鈥淭hus will I cause lewdness to cease out of the land, that all women may be taught not to do after your lewdness鈥 (Ezekiel 23:48).

讙诪壮 诪谞讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讞讬讬讗 讘专 讙诪讚讗 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘专讘讬 讞谞讬谞讗 讗转讬讗 转讜专讛 转讜专讛 讻转讬讘 讛讻讗 讜注砖讛 诇讛 讛讻讛谉 讗转 讻诇 讛转讜专讛 讜讻转讬讘 讛转诐 注诇 驻讬 讛转讜专讛 讗砖专 讬讜专讜讱 诪讛 诇讛诇谉 讘砖讘注讬诐 讜讗讞讚 讗祝 讻讗谉 讘砖讘注讬诐 讜讗讞讚

GEMARA: The Gemara asks concerning the halakha that the sota is brought before the Sanhedrin: From where are these matters derived? Rabbi 岣yya bar Gamda says that Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi 岣nina, says: This is derived by means of a verbal analogy between the words tora and tora.鈥 It is written here, with regard to a sota: 鈥淎nd the priest shall execute upon her all this law [tora]鈥 (Numbers 5:30), and it is written there, with regard to a rebellious Elder, who must go to the place chosen by God and follow the ruling of the Sanhedrin: 鈥淎ccording to the law [tora] that they shall teach you鈥 (Deuteronomy 17:11). Just as there the verse is referring to what occurs in the presence of the Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges, so too here, with regard to a sota, the verse is referring to what occurs in the presence of the Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges.

讜诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 讜讻讜壮 讜专诪讬谞讛讜 讻讚专讱 砖诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 砖诇讗 转砖转讛 讻讱 诪讗讬讬诪讬谉 注诇讬讛 砖转砖转讛 讗讜诪专讬诐 诇讛 讘转讬 讗诐 讘专讜专 诇讱 讛讚讘专 砖讟讛讜专讛 讗转 注诪讚讬 注诇 讘讜专讬讬讱 讜砖转讬 诇驻讬 砖讗讬谉 诪讬诐 讛诪专讬诐 讚讜诪讬谉 讗诇讗 诇住诐 讬讘砖 砖诪讜谞讞 注诇 讘砖专 讞讬 讗诐 讬砖 砖诐 诪讻讛 诪讞诇讞诇 讜讬讜专讚 讗讬谉 砖诐 诪讻讛 讗讬谞讜 诪讜注讬诇 讻诇讜诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And they threaten her in order that she admit her sin, to obviate the need to erase God鈥檚 name. And the Gemara raises a contradiction from that which was taught in a baraita in the Tosefta (1:6): In the same manner that they threaten her so that she will not drink, so too, they threaten her so that she will drink, as they say to her: My daughter, if the matter is clear to you that you are pure, arise for the sake of your clear position and drink. If you are innocent you have nothing to fear, because the bitter water is similar only to a dry poison placed on the flesh. If there is a wound there, the poison will penetrate and enter the blood stream, but if there is no wound there, it does not have any effect. This teaches that the woman is warned not to drink if she is guilty, but if she is not guilty she is encouraged to drink. There is no mention of the latter in the mishna.

诇讗 拽砖讬讗 讻讗谉 拽讜讚诐 砖谞诪讞拽讛 诪讙讬诇讛 讻讗谉 诇讗讞专 砖谞诪讞拽讛 诪讙讬诇讛

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult. Here the mishna is referring to before the scroll was erased, and at that point the woman is warned only not to drink if she is guilty, so that the name of God will not be erased. There the baraita is referring to after the scroll was erased. Then she is warned that if she is innocent she should drink because if she now refuses to drink, it will turn out that the scroll was erased for no purpose.

讜讗讜诪专 诇驻谞讬讛 讜讻讜壮 转谞讜 专讘谞谉 讗讜诪专 诇驻谞讬讛 讚讘专讬诐 砖诇 讛讙讚讛 讜诪注砖讬诐 砖讗讬专注讜 讘讻转讜讘讬诐 讛专讗砖讜谞讬诐 讻讙讜谉 讗砖专 讞讻诪讬诐 讬讙讬讚讜 讜诇讗 讻讞讚讜 诪讗讘讜转诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And the judge says in her presence matters that are not worthy of being heard by her and all her father鈥檚 family in order to encourage her to admit her sin. The Gemara cites a baraita that details what was said. The Sages taught in a baraita: The judge says in her presence words of homiletical interpretation and mentions incidents that happened to previous generations that are recorded in the early prophetic writings. For example, they expound the following verse: 鈥淭hat wise men told and did not hide from their fathers鈥 (Job 15:18); this teaches that even during the time of the forefathers, there were people who admitted their sins despite the shame they incurred.

讬讛讜讚讛 讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 讘讜砖 诪讛 讛讬讛 住讜驻讜 谞讞诇 讞讬讬 讛注讜诇诐 讛讘讗 专讗讜讘谉 讛讜讚讛 讜诇讗 讘讜砖 诪讛 讛讬讛 住讜驻讜 谞讞诇 讞讬讬 讛注讜诇诐 讛讘讗 讜诪讛 砖讻专谉 诪讛 砖讻专谉 讻讚拽讗 讗诪专讬谞谉 讗诇讗 诪讛 砖讻专谉 讘注讜诇诐 讛讝讛 诇讛诐 诇讘讚诐 谞转谞讛 讛讗专抓 讜诇讗 注讘专 讝专 讘转讜讻诐

For example, Judah admitted that he sinned with Tamar and was not embarrassed to do so, and what was his end? He inherited the life of the World-to-Come. Reuben admitted that he lay with his father鈥檚 concubine Bilhah and was not embarrassed, and what was his end? He too inherited the life of the World-to-Come. The Gemara asks: And what is their reward? The Gemara interjects: What is their reward? Their reward was clearly as we say, that they inherited the life of the World-to-Come. The Gemara clarifies: Rather, the second question was: What is their reward in this world? The Gemara answers by citing the next verse in the book of Job: 鈥淭o them alone the land was given, and no stranger passed among them鈥 (Job 15:19). Judah was given the kingship, and Reuben inherited a portion of land in the Transjordan before the other tribes.

讘砖诇诪讗 讘讬讛讜讚讛 讗砖讻讞谉 讚讗讜讚讬 讚讻转讬讘 讜讬讻专 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讬讗诪专 爪讚拽讛 诪诪谞讬 讗诇讗 专讗讜讘谉 诪谞诇谉 讚讗讜讚讬

The Gemara questions the source for Reuben鈥檚 admission. Granted, with regard to Judah we have found a source that he admitted his sin with Tamar, as it is written: 鈥淎nd Judah acknowledged them and said: She is more righteous than I鈥 (Genesis 38:26). Judah admitted that he was the one who had impregnated Tamar. But from where do we derive that Reuben admitted his sin?

讚讗诪专 专讘讬 砖诪讜讗诇 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讗诪专 专讘讬 讬讜讞谞谉 诪讗讬 讚讻转讬讘 讬讞讬 专讗讜讘谉 讜讗诇 讬诪转 讜讝讗转 诇讬讛讜讚讛

The Gemara answers: It is as Rabbi Shmuel bar Na岣ani says that Rabbi Yo岣nan says: What is the meaning of that which is written concerning Reuben and Judah in Moses鈥 blessing of the tribes at the end of his life: 鈥淟et Reuben live and not die in that his men become few鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:6), and immediately afterward, in the following verse, it is stated: 鈥淎nd this for Judah, and he said: Hear, Lord, the voice of Judah, and bring him in unto his people; his hands shall contend for him, and You shall be a help against his adversaries鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7). What is the connection between the blessing of Reuben and that of Judah, juxtaposed with the conjunction 鈥渁nd鈥?

讻诇 讗讜转谉 砖谞讬诐 砖讛讬讜 讬砖专讗诇 讘诪讚讘专 讛讬讜 注爪诪讜转讬讜 砖诇 讬讛讜讚讛 诪讙讜诇讙诇讬谉 讘讗专讜谉 注讚 砖注诪讚 诪砖讛 讜讘拽砖 注诇讬讜 专讞诪讬诐 讗诪专 诇驻谞讬讜 专讘讜谞讜 砖诇 注讜诇诐 诪讬 讙专诐 诇专讗讜讘谉 砖讛讜讚讛 讬讛讜讚讛 讜讝讗转 诇讬讛讜讚讛

Rabbi Yo岣nan says: All those years that the Jewish people were in the desert, the bones of Judah, which the Jewish people took with them from Egypt along with the bones of his brothers, were rolling around in the coffin, until Moses arose and asked for compassion on Judah鈥檚 behalf. Moses said before God: Master of the Universe, who served as the impetus for Reuben that he admit his sin, through which he merited a blessing and was not excluded from the count of the twelve sons of Jacob (see Genesis 35:22)? It was Judah, as Reuben saw him confess his sin, and thereby did the same. Moses continues in the next verse: 鈥淎nd this for Judah,鈥 as if to say: Is this Judah鈥檚 reward for serving as an example of confessing to one鈥檚 sins, that his bones roll around?

诪讬讚 砖诪注 讛壮 拽讜诇 讬讛讜讚讛 注诇 讗讬讘专讬讛 诇砖驻讗 讜诇讗 讛讜讛 拽讗 诪注讬讬诇讬谉 诇讬讛 诇诪转讬讘转讗 讚专拽讬注讗 讜讗诇 注诪讜 转讘讬讗谞讜 讜诇讗 讛讜讛 拽讗 讬讚注 诪砖拽诇 讜诪讟专讞 讘砖诪注转讗 讘讛讚讬 专讘谞谉 讬讚讬讜 专讘 诇讜 诇讗 讛讜讛 拽讗 住诇拽讗 诇讬讛 砖诪注转讗 讗诇讬讘讗 讚讛讬诇讻转讗 讜注讝专 诪爪专讬讜 转讛讬讛

Immediately after Moses prayed, the verse states: 鈥淗ear, Lord, the voice of Judah鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7). His bones then entered their sockets [shafa], and his skeleton was reassembled. But the angels still did not elevate him into the heavenly study hall. Moses then prayed: 鈥淎nd bring him in unto his people鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7), i.e., those in the heavenly study hall. This prayer was accepted, but he still did not know how to deliberate in Torah matters with the heavenly sages. Moses then prayed: 鈥淗is hands shall contend for him鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7), meaning that he should have the ability to contend with them in study. But still he was unable to draw conclusions from his discussion in accordance with the halakha. Moses then prayed: 鈥淎nd You shall be a help against his adversaries鈥 (Deuteronomy 33:7).

讘砖诇诪讗 讬讛讜讚讛 讚讗讜讚讬 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 转讬砖专祝 转诪专 讗诇讗 专讗讜讘谉 诇诪讛 诇讬讛 讚讗讜讚讬 讜讛讗诪专 专讘 砖砖转 讞爪讬祝 注诇讬 讚诪驻专讬讟 讞讟讗讬讛 讻讬 讛讬讻讬 讚诇讗 诇讬讞砖讚讜 讗讞讜讛讬

The Gemara discusses the propriety of admitting one鈥檚 sins in public. Granted, with regard to Judah, it was proper that he admitted his sin in public, as he did so in order that Tamar not be burned innocently. But why did Reuben admit his sin in public? But didn鈥檛 Rav Sheshet say: I consider one who specifies his sins in public to be brazen, as one who does so indicates that he is not embarrassed by his actions? The Gemara answers: The reason he admitted his sin in public was in order that his brothers should not be suspected of having committed the deed.

讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟诪讗讛 讗谞讬 讜讻讜壮 砖诪注转 诪讬谞讛 讻讜转讘讬谉 砖讜讘专

搂 The mishna teaches: If after the judge鈥檚 warning she says: I am defiled, she writes a receipt for her marriage contract. The Gemara comments: You can learn from this mishna that one writes a receipt to serve as proof that a debt has been paid rather than tearing the promissory note. This matter is the subject of a dispute between the tanna鈥檌m in tractate Bava Batra (170b).

讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 转谞讬 诪拽专注转 讗诪专 诇讬讛 专讘讗 讜讛讗 砖讜讘专转 拽转谞讬 讗诇讗 讗诪专 专讘讗 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗讬谉 讻讜转讘讬谉 讻转讜讘讛 注住拽讬谞谉

Abaye said: Teach in the mishna differently. Rather than understanding that she writes a receipt, explain it to mean: She tears her marriage contract. Rava said to him: But the mishna teaches explicitly that she writes a receipt. Rather, to explain the mishna, Rava said: We are dealing with a place in which they do not write a marriage contract, as they rely on the rabbinical ordinance that all wives are entitled to the sum of a standard marriage contract upon divorce or being widowed, even if no marriage contract has been written. Because there is no marriage contract to tear, a receipt is written so that the man can prove that he no longer has a monetary obligation. However, generally, it is possible that the document would be torn, and no proof can be adduced from this mishna.

讜讗诐 讗诪专讛 讟讛讜专讛 讗谞讬 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛 诇砖注专讬 诪讝专讞 诪注诇讬谉 讗讜转讛

搂 The mishna teaches: But if after the warning she maintains her innocence and says: I am pure, they would bring her up to the Eastern Gate. The Gemara asks: Would they bring her up?

Scroll To Top