## Sotah Daf 6a ###### Sotah 6a:1 [Sotah 6a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:1) מִי קָא רָמֵינַן לַהּ עֲלֵיהּ בְּעַל כֻּרְחֵיהּ? **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Do we impose on him** an obligation to marry **her against his will?** Unlike levirate marriage, there is no obligation for another man to marry her. Therefore, the verse is not instructing him to do so. ###### Sotah 6a:2 [Sotah 6a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:2) וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: הַכָּתוּב קְרָאוֹ ״אַחֵר״, שֶׁאֵין בֶּן זוּגוֹ שֶׁל רִאשׁוֹן. שֶׁזֶּה הוֹצִיא רְשָׁעָה מִבֵּיתוֹ, וְזֶה הִכְנִיס רְשָׁעָה לְתוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ, וְאַתְּ אָמְרַתְּ תִּתְיַבֵּם נָמֵי יַבּוֹמֵי?! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **And there are** those **who say** that **Rav Yosef said** differently: **The verse calls** a man who marries a woman after she was divorced from her first husband due to suspicion of adultery **“another** man,” as the verse states: “And she departs out of his house and goes and becomes another man’s wife” (Deuteronomy 24:2). This indicates that one who subsequently marries her **is not a peer of** her **first** husband **because this** one, the first husband, **removed an evil woman from his house, and that** one **brought an evil woman into his house.** There is an implied criticism of the second husband in the verse; **and** yet **you say** that the verse instructs that **she should also enter into levirate marriage.** ###### Sotah 6a:3 [Sotah 6a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:3) אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, נִשֵּׂאת לְאַחֵר וּמֵת בְּלֹא בָּנִים — לֹא תִּתְיַבֵּם, דְּהַכָּתוּב קְרָאוֹ ״אַחֵר״! גַּבֵּיהּ דְּהַאי מִיהָא בְּשֵׁם טוֹב הֲוָה קָיְימָא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Abaye said to him: If that is so,** then **if she married another** man **and he died without children,** then **she should not enter into levirate marriage** with the brother of her second husband even if she did not commit adultery during the second marriage, since **the verse calls** the second husband **“another** man,” which excluded the possibility of levirate marriage. Rav Yosef answered Abaye: **With regard to that one,** i.e., this second husband, **at least she remained with a good name.** Since she did not engage in illicit behavior during her second marriage, she can enter into levirate marriage with the brother of her second husband. ###### Sotah 6a:4 [Sotah 6a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:4) רָבָא אָמַר, קַל וָחוֹמֶר: אִם נֶאֶסְרָה בַּמּוּתָּר לָהּ — בָּאָסוּר לָהּ לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן? **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rava says** a different reason why a *sota* cannot enter into levirate marriage: This prohibition can be deduced through **an *a fortiori*** inference: **If,** due to the suspicion of adultery, **she becomes forbidden to the one who was** previously **permitted to her,** i.e., her first husband, then **with regard to one who was forbidden to her,** i.e., the husband’s brother, is it **not all the more so** that she remains forbidden to him? ###### Sotah 6a:5 [Sotah 6a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:5) אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: אֶלָּא מֵעַתָּה, כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל שֶׁקִּידֵּשׁ אֶת הָאַלְמָנָה וָמֵת, וְיֵשׁ לוֹ אָח כֹּהֵן הֶדְיוֹט, לֹא תִּתְיַבֵּם: אִם נֶאֶסְרָה בַּמּוּתָּר לָהּ — בָּאָסוּר לָהּ לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן?! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Abaye said to him: If that is so,** if this *a fortiori* reasoning is the basis of the prohibition against her entering into levirate marriage, then in the case of **a High Priest who betrothed a widow,** which he is prohibited from doing, **and he died** before the marriage took place, **and he has a brother** who is **a common priest,** who is permitted to marry a widow, **she should** still **not** be permitted to **enter into levirate marriage** with him, since the same inference can be stated: **If she becomes forbidden to the one who was permitted to her,** i.e., her husband the High Priest, who was prohibited from marrying a widow, then **with regard to one who was forbidden to her,** i.e., his brother, the common priest who wishes to enter into levirate marriage with her, is it **not all the more so** that she should be forbidden? ###### Sotah 6a:6 [Sotah 6a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:6) נֶאֶסְרָה?! הָא אֲסִירָא וְקָיְימָא! מוּתָּר לָהּ?! אָסוּר לָהּ הוּא! **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara refutes this inference. In the case of the High Priest, can one say: **She becomes forbidden? But** she **was forbidden** to him **and remains** forbidden to him. She did not become forbidden to her husband, the High Priest, due to the marriage. Furthermore, in the case of the High Priest, can one say: **Permitted to her? But** the High Priest **is forbidden to her** always. Therefore, the case of the High Priest does not serve as a refutation of the *a fortiori* inference. ###### Sotah 6a:7 [Sotah 6a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:7) אֶלָּא: אֵשֶׁת כֹּהֵן שֶׁנֶּאֶנְסָה וָמֵת, וְיֵשׁ לוֹ אָח חָלָל — לֹא תִּתְיַבֵּם. אִם נֶאֶסְרָה בַּמּוּתָּר לָהּ — בָּאָסוּר לָהּ לֹא כׇּל שֶׁכֵּן?! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rather,** the refutation is as follows: In the case of **a priest’s wife who was raped,** who becomes forbidden to her husband, **and** then her husband **dies; and he has a brother who is a priest disqualified due to flawed lineage [*ḥalal*],** who is not bound by the restrictions on marriage given to a priest, then **she should not** be permitted to **enter into levirate marriage** with him. **If she becomes forbidden to the one who was permitted to her,** i.e., her husband the priest, then **with regard to one who was forbidden to her,** i.e., her brother-in-law, is it **not all the more so** that she remains forbidden to him? ###### Sotah 6a:8 [Sotah 6a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:8) אוֹנֶס בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל מִישְׁרֵא שְׁרֵי, וְגַבֵּי דְּהַאי מִיהָא לֵיכָּא אִיסּוּרָא. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara answers: Nevertheless, this *a fortiori* inference is not applicable here because **a raped** woman **is** completely **permitted to an Israelite.** Therefore, a married woman raped by another man may remain with her Israelite husband. **And with regard to this** person, i.e., the brother of the deceased, who is a *ḥalal*, **in any event there is no prohibition.** The fact that the woman was forbidden to her *ḥalal* brother-in-law while she was married to her husband is immaterial. This is because, had she been raped while she was married to the *ḥalal*, it would not render her forbidden to him, as he has the status of an Israelite with regard to marriage. Consequently, this case cannot be compared to the case of the mishna, as a woman who commits adultery is forbidden to any husband, not only a priest. ###### Sotah 6a:9 [Sotah 6a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:9) **מַתְנִי׳** וְאֵלּוּ אֲסוּרוֹת מִלֶּאֱכוֹל בִּתְרוּמָה: הָאוֹמֶרֶת ״טְמֵאָה אֲנִי לָךְ״, וְשֶׁבָּאוּ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא טְמֵאָה, וְהָאוֹמֶרֶת ״אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה״, וְשֶׁבַּעְלָהּ אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ, וְשֶׁבַּעְלָהּ בָּא עָלֶיהָ בַּדֶּרֶךְ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **MISHNA:** **And these** are women who, despite being married to priests, **are prohibited from partaking of *teruma*** due to suspicion of adultery: A woman **who says** to her husband: **I am defiled to you,** i.e., she admitted to having committed adultery with another man; **and** in a case **where witnesses came** forth and testified **that she is defiled; and** a woman **who says** after a warning and seclusion: **I will not drink** the bitter water of a *sota*; **and** in a case **where her husband does not want to force her to drink** the water even after she secluded herself with another man after his warning; **and** in a case **where her husband engaged in sexual intercourse with her on the way** to bringing her to the Temple to drink the bitter water, as in such a case the water will not be effective in evaluating whether she was unfaithful, due to the husband’s own prohibited act. ###### Sotah 6a:10 [Sotah 6a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:10) **גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב עַמְרָם: הָא מִילְּתָא אֲמַר לַן רַב שֵׁשֶׁת, וְאַנְהַר לַן עַיְינִין מִמַּתְנִיתִין: סוֹטָה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ עֵדִים בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם — אֵין הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ. מַאי טַעְמָא? דְּאָמַר קְרָא ״וְנִסְתְּרָה וְהִיא נִטְמָאָה וְעֵד אֵין בָּהּ״, דְּלֵיכָּא דְּיָדַע בָּהּ. לְאַפּוֹקֵי הָא, דְּהָא אִיכָּא דְּיָדַע בָּהּ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **GEMARA:** **Rav Amram says: Rav Sheshet told us this matter, and he enlightened our eyes for us** by citing support for his statement **from the mishna:** In the case of **a *sota*** for **whom there are witnesses concerning her in a country overseas,** who can testify that she engaged in sexual intercourse, **the** bitter **water** of a *sota* **does not evaluate** whether or not **she** was unfaithful. Although she committed adultery, the water evaluates her fidelity only when there is no possibility of proving her guilt in court. **What is the reason** for this? It is **as the verse states:** “And a man lie with her carnally, and it was hidden from the eyes of her husband, **and she was defiled secretly, and there was no witness against her”** (Numbers 5:13). This indicates that the bitter water is given only **when there is no** one **who knows about her** action, **to the exclusion** of the case **of this** woman who is not given the bitter water, **as there are** those **who know about her.** ###### Sotah 6a:11 [Sotah 6a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:11) וְאַנְהַר לַן עַיְינִין מִמַּתְנִיתִין, דְּקָתָנֵי: וְשֶׁבָּאוּ לָהּ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא טְמֵאָה. דַּאֲתוּ עֵדִים אֵימַת? אִי נֵימָא מִקַּמֵּי דְּתִשְׁתֵּי — זוֹנָה הִיא! **William Davidson Edition - English:** **And** Rav Sheshet **enlightened our eyes for us** by adducing support for his ruling **from the mishna, as it teaches: And where witnesses came** forth and testified **that she is defiled,** this is one of the women who can no longer partake of *teruma*, Rav Sheshet asks: This is a case **where** the **witnesses came when? If we say** that they came **before she drank,** then what is novel about the fact that it is prohibited for her to partake of *teruma*? **She is a woman who had sexual relations with a man forbidden to her by the Torah [*zona*],** as she is a confirmed adulteress, and it is obviously prohibited for her to partake of *teruma*. ###### Sotah 6a:12 [Sotah 6a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:12) אֶלָּא לְבָתַר דִּשְׁתַאי. אִי אָמְרַתְּ בִּשְׁלָמָא אֵין הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ — שַׁפִּיר. אֶלָּא אִי אָמְרַתְּ מַיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ — תִּיגַּלֵּי מִילְּתָא לְמַפְרֵעַ דְּסָהֲדֵי שַׁקָּרֵי נִינְהוּ! **William Davidson Edition - English:** Rav Sheshet answers: **Rather,** it must be referring to a case where the witnesses testified **after she** already **drank. Granted, if you say** that **the** bitter **water** of a *sota* **does not evaluate her** in a case where there are witnesses elsewhere who can testify with regard to her infidelity, **it is well. But if you say** that **the water evaluates her** in a case where there are witnesses elsewhere who can testify with regard to her infidelity, then **it should be revealed retroactively that they are false witnesses,** as the fact that she survived the drinking of the bitter water would indicate that she never committed adultery. ###### Sotah 6a:13 [Sotah 6a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:13) אֲמַר לֵיהּ רַב יוֹסֵף: לְעוֹלָם אֵימָא לְךָ מַיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ, וְהָא — אֵימוֹר זְכוּת תּוֹלָה לָהּ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Yosef said to** Rav Sheshet: **Actually, I will say to you** that the bitter **water evaluates her** in a case where there are witnesses elsewhere who can testify with regard to her infidelity. Nevertheless, the fact that the woman survived the drinking of the water does not prove her innocence, **and** one can **say** that **this** woman who already drank had **merit** that **delayed** the punishment **for her.** According to some opinions, if an unfaithful woman has certain merits, she will not die immediately upon drinking the water. Therefore, if witnesses were to testify to her infidelity after she drank the water without dying, it is not clear that their testimony is false. ###### Sotah 6a:14 [Sotah 6a:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:14) בְּמַאי קָמִיפַּלְגִי — בְּמִתְנַוְּונָה דְּרַבִּי. דִּתְנַן, רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: זְכוּת תּוֹלָה בַּמַּיִם הַמָּרִים, וְאֵינָהּ יוֹלֶדֶת וְאֵינָהּ מַשְׁבַּחַת, אֶלָּא מִתְנַוְּונָה וְהוֹלֶכֶת, לְסוֹף שֶׁהִיא מֵתָה בְּאוֹתָהּ מִיתָה. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara explains: **With regard to what** principle **do** Rav Sheshet and Rav Yosef **disagree? With regard to** whether she **deteriorates [*mitnavvena*], as** explained by **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **as we learned** in a mishna (22a): **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says: Merit delays** punishment **with regard to the bitter water** of a *sota*. Even if a woman actually committed adultery, she will not die immediately due to the merit that she has. **But she will not give birth, and she will not improve** in terms of her physical condition after having drunk the bitter water. **Rather, she will progressively deteriorate** until **she ultimately dies in the same** manner of **death** as suffered by a *sota* who drank the bitter water without having merit. ###### Sotah 6a:15 [Sotah 6a:15](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:15) רַב שֵׁשֶׁת סָבַר: בֵּין לְרַבִּי וּבֵין לְרַבָּנַן הָוְיָא מִתְנַוְּונָה. וְרַב יוֹסֵף סָבַר: לְרַבִּי הָוְיָא מִתְנַוְּונָה, לְרַבָּנַן לָא הָוְיָא מִתְנַוְּונָה. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Sheshet holds: Both according to** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **and according to** the opinion of **the Rabbis,** who disagree with him, **she** begins to **deteriorate** despite her merit. Therefore, if she doesn’t begin to deteriorate immediately, the witnesses who testified subsequent to her drinking must be false witnesses. **And Rav Yosef holds:** Only **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi is it so that **she** begins to **deteriorate** when she has merit. **According to** the opinion of **the Rabbis, she does not** begins to **deteriorate.** Therefore, Rav Yosef explains that the mere fact that she survived the drinking of the bitter water and didn’t begin deteriorating does not prove that the testimony was false. ###### Sotah 6a:16 [Sotah 6a:16](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:16) מֵתִיב רַב שִׁימִי בַּר אָשֵׁי, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר: אֵין זְכוּת תּוֹלָה בַּמַּיִם הַמָּרִים. וְאִם אַתָּה אוֹמֵר זְכוּת תּוֹלָה בַּמַּיִם הַמָּרִים — מְדַחֶה אַתָּה אֶת הַמַּיִם בִּפְנֵי כׇּל הַנָּשִׁים הַשּׁוֹתוֹת. וְאַתָּה מוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל הַטְּהוֹרוֹת שֶׁשָּׁתוּ, וְהֵן אוֹמְרִים: טְמֵאוֹת הָיוּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁתָּלָה לָהֶן זְכוּת. **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav Shimi bar Ashi raises an objection** from the aforementioned mishna (22a), which also teaches that **Rabbi Shimon says: Merit does not delay** punishment **with regard to the bitter water** of a *sota*, **and if you say** that **merit delays** punishment **with regard to the bitter water,** then **you push aside** the deterrent force of **the** bitter **water before all the women who** must **drink** it, as guilty women will rely on their merit to protect them from the immediate consequences. **And** furthermore, **you defame the untainted women who drank** and survived. People will not view this as proof of their innocence, **and they** will **say: They are defiled, but** their **merit delayed** the punishment **for them.** ###### Sotah 6a:17 [Sotah 6a:17](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:17) וְאִם אִיתָא יֵשׁ לָהּ עֵדִים בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם נָמֵי: אַתָּה מוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע עַל הַטְּהוֹרוֹת שֶׁשָּׁתוּ, וְהֵן אוֹמְרִים: טְמֵאוֹת הָיוּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהֶן עֵדִים בִּמְדִינַת הַיָּם! **William Davidson Edition - English:** After quoting the statement of Rabbi Shimon, Rav Shimi bar Ashi now explains his objection: **And if it is so** that the bitter water of a *sota* does not evaluate the faithfulness of a women **about whom there are witnesses in a country overseas,** then the same claim can be made **as well: You defame the untainted women who drank** and survived. People will not view this as proof of their innocence, **and they** will **say: They are defiled, but there are witnesses about them in a country overseas.** ###### Sotah 6a:18 [Sotah 6a:18](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:18) לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן קָאָמְרַתְּ? לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן, מִדִּזְכוּת לָא תָּלְיָא — עֵדִים נָמֵי לָא תָּלוּ. **William Davidson Edition - English:** The Gemara responds: Do **you say** this **according to** the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon?** Indeed, **according to Rabbi Shimon, from** the same logic that **merit does not delay** punishment, **witnesses** in a country overseas **do not delay** it **either,** and Rav Sheshet would concede that his statement would not be accepted by Rabbi Shimon. ###### Sotah 6a:19 [Sotah 6a:19](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Sotah/r/6a:19) מֵתִיב רַב: וְאֵלּוּ שֶׁמִּנְחוֹתֵיהֶן נִשְׂרָפוֹת, **William Davidson Edition - English:** **Rav raises an objection** from the latter clause of the mishna there (22a), which teaches: **And these are** the *sota* women **whose meal-offerings are burned** and not offered on the altar: