## Mishnah Sotah Chapter 5

###### Mishnah Sotah 5:1
[Mishnah Sotah 5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Sotah/r/5:1)

כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ, כָּךְ הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה) וּבָאוּ, וּבָאוּ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁאֲסוּרָה לַבַּעַל, כָּךְ אֲסוּרָה לַבּוֹעֵל, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם) נִטְמְאָה, וְנִטְמָאָה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, כָּךְ הָיָה דוֹרֵשׁ זְכַרְיָה בֶן הַקַּצָּב. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, שְׁנֵי פְעָמִים הָאֲמוּרִים בַּפָּרָשָׁה אִם נִטְמְאָה נִטְמָאָה, אֶחָד לַבַּעַל וְאֶחָד לַבּוֹעֵל:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Just as the water evaluates her** fidelity, **so too, the water evaluates his,** i.e., her alleged paramour’s, involvement in the sin, **as it is stated: “And** the water that causes the curse **shall enter** into her” (Numbers 5:24), and it is stated again: **“And** the water that causes the curse **shall enter** into her and become bitter” (Numbers 5:27). It is derived from the double mention of the phrase “and…shall enter” that both the woman and her paramour are evaluated by the water. Furthermore, prior to her drinking the water, **just as she is forbidden to** her **husband, so** too **is she forbidden to** her **paramour, because** in contrast to the verse stating: **“Is defiled [*nitma’a*]”** (Numbers 5:14), a superfluous conjoining prefix *vav* is added to a later verse, rendering the phrase: **“And is defiled [*venitma’a*]”** (Numbers 5:29). The addition indicates another prohibition, that of the woman to her paramour. This is **the statement of Rabbi Akiva.** **Rabbi Yehoshua said: That was how Zekharya ben HaKatzav would interpret** it, i.e., he also derived from the superfluous *vav* that the woman is forbidden to her paramour. **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says** an alternate source: The **two times that** the defilement of the wife **is stated in the passage,** namely: “And he warns his wife, and **she is defiled”** (Numbers 5:14), and the later verse: “When a wife, being under her husband, goes astray **and is defiled”** (Numbers 5:29), indicate that her defilement results in two prohibitions. **One** is that she is forbidden **to** her **husband and one** is that she is forbidden **to** her **paramour.**


###### Mishnah Sotah 5:2
[Mishnah Sotah 5:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Sotah/r/5:2)

בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, (ויקרא יא) וְכָל כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר יִפֹּל מֵהֶם אֶל תּוֹכוֹ כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא, אֵינוֹ אוֹמֵר טָמֵא אֶלָּא יִטְמָא, לְטַמֵּא אֲחֵרִים, לִמֵּד עַל כִּכָּר שֵׁנִי שֶׁמְּטַמֵּא אֶת הַשְּׁלִישִׁי. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מִי יְגַלֶּה עָפָר מֵעֵינֶיךָ, רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁהָיִיתָ אוֹמֵר, עָתִיד דּוֹר אַחֵר לְטַהֵר כִּכָּר שְׁלִישִׁי, שֶׁאֵין לוֹ מִקְרָא מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא. וַהֲלֹא עֲקִיבָא תַּלְמִידְךָ מֵבִיא לוֹ מִקְרָא מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁהוּא טָמֵא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר, כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹכוֹ יִטְמָא:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**On that same day** that Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya was appointed head of the Sanhedrin, **Rabbi Akiva interpreted** the verse: **“And every earthen vessel into which any of them falls, whatever is in it shall be impure [*yitma*],** and you shall break it” (Leviticus 11:33), as follows: The verse **does not state: Is impure [*tamei*],** but **rather: “Shall be impure,”** in order **to** indicate that not only does the vessel itself become ritually impure, but it can now **render other** items **ritually impure.** This **teaches with regard to a loaf** that has **second-**degree ritual impurity status due to its being placed inside an earthenware vessel that had first-degree impurity, **that it can render** other food with which it comes into contact **impure** with **third-**degree impurity status. After hearing Rabbi Akiva’s statement, **Rabbi Yehoshua said: Who will remove the dirt from your eyes, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai,** so that you could live and see this? **As you would say:** In the **future, another generation** is destined **to deem pure a loaf** that contracted **third-**degree impurity, **as there is no** explicit **verse from the Torah** stating **that it is impure. But** now **Rabbi Akiva, your disciple, brings a verse from the Torah** indicating **that it is impure, as it is stated: “Whatever is in it shall be impure.”**


###### Mishnah Sotah 5:3
[Mishnah Sotah 5:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Sotah/r/5:3)

בּוֹ בַיּוֹם דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא (במדבר לה) וּמַדֹּתֶם מִחוּץ לָעִיר אֶת פְּאַת קֵדְמָה אַלְפַּיִם בָּאַמָּה וְגוֹ', וּמִקְרָא אַחֵר אוֹמֵר (שם) מִקִּיר הָעִיר וָחוּצָה אֶלֶף אַמָּה סָבִיב. אִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר אֶלֶף אַמָּה, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה, וְאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר אַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה, שֶׁכְּבָר נֶאֱמַר אֶלֶף אַמָּה. הָא כֵיצַד, אֶלֶף אַמָּה מִגְרָשׁ, וְאַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה תְּחוּם שַׁבָּת. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר בְּנוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי יוֹסֵי הַגְּלִילִי אוֹמֵר, אֶלֶף אַמָּה מִגְרָשׁ, וְאַלְפַּיִם אַמָּה שָׂדוֹת וּכְרָמִים:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Furthermore, **on that same day Rabbi Akiva interpreted** the verses with regard to the Levite cities as follows: One verse states: **“And you shall measure outside the city for the east side two thousand cubits…**this shall be for them the open land outside the cities” (Numbers 35:5), **and another verse states:** “And the open land around the cities, which you shall give to the Levites, shall be **from the wall of the city and outward one thousand cubits round about”** (Numbers 35:4). **It is impossible to say** that the area around the cities given to the Levites was only **one thousand cubits, as it is already stated: “Two thousand cubits.” And it is impossible to say** that **two thousand cubits** were left for them, **as it is already stated: “One thousand cubits.” How** can **these** texts be reconciled? **One thousand cubits** are to be set aside as **a tract** of open land surrounding the city, **and** the **two thousand cubits** are mentioned not in order to be given to the Levites, but to indicate the boundary of **the Shabbat limit,** beyond which it is forbidden to travel on Shabbat. This verse thereby serves as the source for the two-thousand-cubit Shabbat limit. **Rabbi Eliezer, son of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili, says** otherwise: **One thousand cubits** were given to the Levites as an open **tract** of land, that could not be planted or built upon, **and two thousand cubits** of additional land were given to the Levites for planting **fields and vineyards.**


###### Mishnah Sotah 5:4
[Mishnah Sotah 5:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Sotah/r/5:4)

בּוֹ בַיּוֹם דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא (שמות טו), אָז יָשִׁיר משֶׁה וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת הַשִּׁירָה הַזֹּאת לַה' וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֵאמֹר, שֶׁאֵין תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר לֵאמֹר, וּמַה תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר לֵאמֹר, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהָיוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל עוֹנִין אַחֲרָיו שֶׁל משֶׁה עַל כָּל דָּבָר וְדָבָר, כְּקוֹרִין אֶת הַהַלֵּל, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר לֵאמֹר. רַבִּי נְחֶמְיָה אוֹמֵר, כְּקוֹרִין אֶת שְׁמַע וְלֹא כְקוֹרִין אֶת הַהַלֵּל:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
Additionally, **on that same day Rabbi Akiva interpreted** the verse: **“Then Moses and the children of Israel sang this song to the Lord, and said, saying”** (Exodus 15:1), as follows: **As** there is **no** need for **the verse to state** the word **“saying,”** because it states the word “said” immediately prior to it, **why** must **the verse state** the word **“saying”? It teaches that the Jewish people would repeat in song after Moses every single statement** he said, **as** is done when **reciting *hallel*.** After Moses would recite a verse, they would say as a refrain: **“I will sing to the Lord, for He is highly exalted”** (Exodus 15:1). It is **for this** reason that the word **“saying” is stated,** in addition to the word “said.” **Rabbi Neḥemya says:** The people sang the song together with Moses **as** is done when **reciting *Shema*,** which is recited in unison after the prayer leader begins, **and not as** is done when **reciting *hallel*.**


###### Mishnah Sotah 5:5
[Mishnah Sotah 5:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Mishnah%20Sotah/r/5:5)

בּוֹ בַיּוֹם דָּרַשׁ רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן הוּרְקְנוֹס, לֹא עָבַד אִיּוֹב אֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אֶלָּא מֵאַהֲבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (איוב יג) הֵן יִקְטְלֵנִי לוֹ אֲיַחֵל. וַעֲדַיִן הַדָּבָר שָׁקוּל, לוֹ אֲנִי מְצַפֶּה אוֹ אֵינִי מְצַפֶּה, תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר (שם כז) עַד אֶגְוָע לֹא אָסִיר תֻּמָּתִי מִמֶּנִּי, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁמֵּאַהֲבָה עָשָׂה. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, מִי יְגַלֶּה עָפָר מֵעֵינֶיךָ, רַבָּן יוֹחָנָן בֶּן זַכַּאי, שֶׁהָיִיתָ דוֹרֵשׁ כָּל יָמֶיךָ שֶׁלֹּא עָבַד אִיּוֹב אֶת הַמָּקוֹם אֶלָּא מִיִּרְאָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם א) אִישׁ תָּם וְיָשָׁר יְרֵא אֱלֹהִים וְסָר מֵרָע, וַהֲלֹא יְהוֹשֻׁעַ תַּלְמִיד תַּלְמִידְךָ לִמֵּד שֶׁמֵּאַהֲבָה עָשָׂה:

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**On that same day Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hyrcanus taught: Job served the Holy One, Blessed be He, only out of love, as it is stated: “Though He will slay me, still I will trust in Him”** (Job 13:15). **And still, the matter is even,** i.e., the verse is ambiguous, as there are two possible interpretations of the verse. Was Job saying: **I will await Him,** expressing his yearning for God; **or** should the verse be interpreted as saying **I will not await** Him. As the word “lo” can mean either “to him” or “not,” it is unclear which meaning is intended here. This dilemma is resolved elsewhere, where **the verse states** a clearer indication of Job’s intent: **“Till I die I will not put away my integrity from me”** (Job 27:5). This **teaches that he acted out of love.** **Rabbi Yehoshua said: Who will remove the dirt from your eyes, Rabban Yoḥanan ben Zakkai,** so that you could live and see this? **As you taught all your life that Job worshipped the Omnipresent only out of fear, as it is stated:** “And that **man** was **wholehearted and upright, and God-fearing, and shunned evil”** (Job 1:1); **but** now **Yehoshua** ben Hyrcanus, **the disciple of your disciple, has taught that** Job **acted out of love.**