## Sotah Daf 15a

###### Sotah 15a:1
[Sotah 15a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:1)

וּמַקְטִירוֹ בִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת. בִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת מַקְטֵיר לֵיהּ? אֶלָּא אֵימָא: מַעֲלֵהוּ בִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת לְהַקְטִירוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**and burns it in** the **service vessel.** The Gemara asks: **Does he** really **burn it in a service vessel? Rather, say: He brings it up** to the altar **in a service vessel** in order **to burn it.**


###### Sotah 15a:2
[Sotah 15a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:2)

וּמוֹלְחוֹ וְנוֹתְנוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי הָאִישִּׁים, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְכׇל קׇרְבַּן מִנְחָתְךָ בַּמֶּלַח תִּמְלָח וְגוֹ׳״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **And he salts it and places it on the fires.** The Gemara cites the source: **As it is written: “And every meal-offering of yours you shall season with salt”** (Leviticus 2:13).


###### Sotah 15a:3
[Sotah 15a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:3)

קָרַב הַקּוֹמֶץ שְׁיָרֶיהָ נֶאֱכָלִין. מְנָלַן — דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהִקְטִיר הַכֹּהֵן אֶת אַזְכָּרָתָהּ וְגוֹ׳״, וּכְתִיב: ״וְהַנּוֹתֶרֶת מִן הַמִּנְחָה לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: After **the handful is sacrificed, the remainders of** the meal-offering **are eaten.** The Gemara asks: **From where do we** derive this? **As it is written:** “And he shall bring it to Aaron’s sons, the priests…**and the priest shall make the memorial part thereof smoke** upon the altar” (Leviticus 2:2). The memorial part is the handful. **And it is written** afterward: **“But that which is left of the meal-offering shall be for Aaron and his sons”** (Leviticus 2:3).


###### Sotah 15a:4
[Sotah 15a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:4)

קָרַב הַקּוֹמֶץ. לְמָר כִּדְאִית לֵיהּ וּלְמָר כִּדְאִית לֵיהּ. דְּאִיתְּמַר: הַקּוֹמֶץ, מֵאֵימָתַי מַתִּיר שִׁירַיִים בַּאֲכִילָה? רַבִּי חֲנִינָא אָמַר: מִשֶּׁתִּשְׁלוֹט בּוֹ הָאוּר, רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: מִשֶּׁתִּיצַּת הָאוּר בְּרוּבּוֹ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* uses the phrase: After **the handful is sacrificed.** This phrase can be understood **according to** one **Sage as he holds, and according to** another **Sage as he holds. As it is stated** that there is a dispute between the Sages: **From when does the** sacrifice of the **handful render the remainder** of the meal-offering **permitted for consumption** by the priests? **Rabbi Ḥanina says:** It is **when the fire takes hold of it,** i.e., when it ignites. **Rabbi Yoḥanan says:** It is **when the fire consumes most of** the handful. Each of these *amora’im* understands the *baraita* in accordance with his opinion.


###### Sotah 15a:5
[Sotah 15a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:5)

וְרַשָּׁאִין הַכֹּהֲנִים לִיתֵּן לְתוֹכוֹ יַיִן וְשֶׁמֶן וּדְבַשׁ. מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר קְרָא: ״לְמׇשְׁחָה״ — לִגְדוּלָּה, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהַמְּלָכִים אוֹכְלִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* continues: **And the priests are permitted to put wine and oil and honey in** the remainder of the meal-offering. **What is the reason? The verse states** with regard to the gifts given to the priests: “And I, behold, I have given you the charge of My *terumot*…**for a consecrated portion”** (Numbers 18:8). The phrase “for a consecrated portion” indicates that the gifts are given **as** a mark of **greatness** and should be eaten **in the manner that the kings eat.**


###### Sotah 15a:6
[Sotah 15a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:6)

וְאֵין אֲסוּרִין אֶלָּא מִלְּחַמֵּץ, דִּכְתִיב: ״לֹא תֵאָפֶה חָמֵץ חֶלְקָם״, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ: אֲפִילּוּ חֶלְקָם לֹא תֵאָפֶה חָמֵץ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The *baraita* concludes: **And they are prohibited only from allowing** the meal-offering **to become leavened.** The Gemara cites the source: **As it is written** with regard to meal-offerings: **“It shall not be baked with leaven. Their portion** I have given it of My offerings made by fire” (Leviticus 6:10). **Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says:** One should read the verse as if the phrase “their portion” is part of the same phrase as the prohibition of baking with leaven. This teaches that **even their portion,** i.e., the portion given to the priests, **shall not be baked with leaven.**


###### Sotah 15a:7
[Sotah 15a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:7)

כׇּל הַמְּנָחוֹת כּוּ׳. וְכׇל הַמְּנָחוֹת טְעוּנוֹת שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה? וְהָאִיכָּא מִנְחַת חוֹטֵא, דְּרַחֲמָנָא אָמַר: ״לֹא יָשִׂים עָלֶיהָ שֶׁמֶן וְלֹא יִתֵּן עָלֶיהָ לְבֹנָה״!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna states: **All** other **meal-offerings** require oil and frankincense. The Gemara asks: **But** do **all** other **meal-offerings** actually **require oil and frankincense? But isn’t there the meal-offering of a sinner,** with regard to **which the Merciful One states: “He shall put no oil upon it, neither shall he put any frankincense thereon;** for it is a sin-offering” (Leviticus 5:11).


###### Sotah 15a:8
[Sotah 15a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:8)

הָכִי קָאָמַר: כׇּל הַמְּנָחוֹת טְעוּנוֹת שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה, וּבָאוֹת מִן הַחִיטִּין, וּבָאוֹת סֹלֶת. מִנְחַת חוֹטֵא, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה — בָּאָה מִן הַחִטִּין וּבָאָה סֹלֶת. מִנְחַת הָעוֹמֶר, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא בָּאָה מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין — טְעוּנָה שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה וּבָאָה גֶּרֶשׂ. וְזוֹ, אֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה לֹא שֶׁמֶן וְלֹא לְבוֹנָה, וּבָאָה מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין, וּבָאָה קֶמַח.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara responds: **This is what** the mishna **is saying: All meal-offerings** other than that of the *sota* **require oil and frankincense, and they are brought from wheat; and** they **are** also **brought from fine flour.** However, **the meal-offering of a sinner, even though it does not require oil and frankincense,** must still be **brought from wheat and brought from fine flour.** Similarly, **the *omer* meal-offering, even though it is brought from barley, requires oil and frankincense, and it is brought** as **groats. But this one,** the *sota* meal-offering, **requires neither oil nor frankincense, and it is brought from barley and brought** as unsifted **flour.** While the meal-offering of a sinner and the *omer* meal-offering are similar to other meal-offerings in one of these respects, the *sota* meal-offering is different in both respects.


###### Sotah 15a:9
[Sotah 15a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:9)

תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: בְּדִין הוּא שֶׁתְּהֵא מִנְחַת חוֹטֵא טְעוּנָה שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה, שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא חוֹטֵא נִשְׂכָּר. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה — שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא קׇרְבָּנוֹ מְהוּדָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**It is taught** in a *baraita* (*Tosefta* 1:10) that **Rabbi Shimon said: By right,** it should have been the *halakha* **that the meal-offering of a sinner requires oil and frankincense, so that a sinner should not** stand to **gain** by not having to pay for them. **For what** reason **does** the verse **not require** them? It is **so that his offering will not be** of **superior** quality.


###### Sotah 15a:10
[Sotah 15a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:10)

וּבְדִין הוּא שֶׁתְּהֵא חַטַּאת חֵלֶב טְעוּנָה נְסָכִים, שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא חוֹטֵא נִשְׂכָּר. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה אֵינָהּ טְעוּנָה — שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא קׇרְבָּנוֹ מְהוּדָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And by right,** it should have been the *halakha* **that a sin-offering** brought for transgression of a prohibition punishable by *karet*, e.g., consumption **of** forbidden **fat, requires** fine flour and **libations** of oil, and wine. Just as burnt-offerings and peace-offerings require these, a sin-offering should require them as well **so that a sinner should not** stand to **gain** by not having to pay for them. **For what** reason **does it not require** them? It is **so that his offering will not be** of **superior** quality.


###### Sotah 15a:11
[Sotah 15a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:11)

אֲבָל חַטָּאתוֹ שֶׁל מְצוֹרָע וַאֲשָׁמוֹ טְעוּנִין נְסָכִים, לְפִי שֶׁאֵין בָּאִין עַל חֵטְא. אִינִי? וְהָאָמַר רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: עַל שִׁבְעָה דְּבָרִים נְגָעִים בָּאִין וְכוּ׳! הָתָם מִנִּגְעֵיהּ הוּא דְּאִיכַּפַּר לֵיהּ, כִּי מַיְיתֵי קׇרְבָּן — לְאִשְׁתְּרוֹיֵי בְּקָדָשִׁים הוּא דְּקָא מַיְיתֵי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**But the sin-offering of a leper and his guilt-offering require libations, as they are not brought on account of a sin.** The Gemara asks: **Is that so? But didn’t Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani say** that **Rabbi Yonatan says: Leprosy comes on account of seven matters.** Leprosy develops on account of sin, so by extension the leper’s offerings are also brought on account of sin. The Gemara answers: **There, from** the time he contracts **his leprosy** he **gains atonement for** his sin through the plague of leprosy itself. Consequently, **when he brings the offering, he brings it** only **in order to permit him** to eat **sacrificial** food.


###### Sotah 15a:12
[Sotah 15a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:12)

אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, חַטַּאת נָזִיר תְּהֵא טְעוּנָה נְסָכִים, לְפִי שֶׁאֵינָהּ בָּאָה עַל חֵטְא! סָבַר לַהּ כְּרַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר הַקַּפָּר, דְּאָמַר: נָזִיר נָמֵי חוֹטֵא הוּא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **If that is so, then the sin-offering of a nazirite should require libations, because it is not brought on account of a sin.** The Gemara answers: Rabbi Shimon **holds in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi Elazar HaKappar, who says: The nazirite is also a sinner,** since he denies himself wine unnecessarily.


###### Sotah 15a:13
[Sotah 15a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/15a:13)

רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר: כְּשֵׁם כּוּ׳. תַּנְיָא, אָמַר לָהֶן רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל לַחֲכָמִים: סוֹפְרִים, הַנִּיחוּ לִי וְאֶדְרְשֶׁנָּה כְּמִין חוֹמֶר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The mishna states that **Rabban Gamliel says: Just as** her actions were the actions of an animal, so too, her offering is animal food. **It is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabban Gamliel said to the Sages: Scribes, permit me, and I will explain it as a type of decorative wreath [*ḥomer*],** i.e., an allegory.