Talmud Jerusalem
Talmud Jerusalem

Talmud for Sotah 2:1

לשבועת ממון הרי הוא משקה. עד א' שהוא זוקקו לשבועת ממון לא כל שכן. קרוב מהו שישקה. מי קרוב מבעלה. עד מפי עד מהו שישקה. מה בינו לבין הקרוב. קרוב אף על פי שאינו כשר עכשיו כשר הוא לאחר זמן. עד מפי עד אינו כשר לא עכשיו ולא לאחר זמן. מה טעמא דר' יהושע כי מצא בה ערות דבר. דבר זה הקינוי. כי מצא אין מציאה אלא בעדים. ומקנא על פי עד אחד או על פי עצמו ומעלה בו בקינוי. מה מקיים רבי יהושע ערוה. ערוה שהיא באה מכח דבר. השיבו על דברי רבי יוסי בן יודה א"כ אין לדבר סוף. הכל ממנו לקנאות לה בשנים ולהביא עדים שנסתרה ולפוסלה מכתובה. אמר ר' יוסי מה טיבה להיסתר. אלא אתיא די לא על דמתניתין הכל ממנו לקנות לה מפיו ולומר שנסתרה ולפוסלה מכתובתה. אמר רבי מנא אפי' כהדין תנייא אתייא היא כמאן דמר מקנא לה מאביה ומבנה. הכל ממנה לקנות לה מאביה ומבנה ולהביא עדים שנסתרה ולפוסלה מכתובתה. אין תימא מה טיבה להיסתר. התורה התירה להיסתר. דמר רבי יוחנן משום רבי שמעון בן יוחי כתיב (דברים י״ג:ז׳) כי יסיתך אחיך בן אמך וגו'. בתך בסתר. אמך בסתר. מתייחד אדם עם אמו ודר עמה. עם בתו ודר עמה. עם אחותו ואינו דר עמה. עידי קינוי שנמצאו זוממין לוקין. עידי סתירה שנמצאו זוממין אתה אמרתה לוקין.

Come and see, [let us test this hypothesis by implication from our mishnah]: "...from the time that the Kohanim go in to eat their terumah." It is [still close to] daytime. It is as soon as the stars come out!? [and the Tosefta says:] "...from the time when people usually go in to eat their bread on the eve of the Sabbath." That is an hour or two after nightfall! [These are obviously two very different times.] And yet you say: "These opinions are close enough to be equal!?" --Rabbi Yose said: "Let the problem be resolved [by claiming that the Tosefta refers only] to those small villages whose way is to go on up [home] while it is still day, to spare themselves from the animals." It teaches in a Baraita: "The one who recites [the Shema] before this has not fulfilled their obligation. If so, why do we recite it [before nightfall] in the synagogue? Rabbi Yose said: 'We do not recite it in the synagogue to fulfill its obligation. Rather, [we recite it] so that we may stand up in prayer after a word of Torah." Rabbi Zeira in the name of Rav Yirmiyah: "If there is doubt whether he made the blessings after his food or not, he should make the blessings [even though he may be doing it a second time]. For it is written (Deut. 8:10) 'And you shall eat, and you shall be satisfied, then you shall bless [the LORD your God...]' If there is doubt whether he prayed or not, he should not pray [as he may have already done so.]" But he disagrees with Rabbi Yohanan. For Rabbi Yohanan said: "If only a person could pray the entire day!" Why? For prayer is never a waste. If there is doubt whether he recited [Shema] or not, we may gather from this baraita: "The one who recites [the Shema] before this has not fulfilled their obligation." And is not before [nightfall] a time of doubt? And yet you say "he should recite [Shema]." This implies that if there is doubt whether he recited [Shema] or not, he should recite [Shema]. [From Tosefta 1:1] "The indicator of this is when the stars come out. And though there is no proof of it [from Scripture], there is a trace of it: (Neh. 4:21) '...we were doing the labor, and half of them were holding the spears from the break of dawn until the stars came out.' And he writes: '...it is guard-time for us by night and labor by day." How many stars should come out so that it becomes night? Rabbi Pinhas in the name of Rabbi Abba bar Papa: "One star, surely day. Two, doubt. Three, surely night." "...two doubt," [really]? But is it not written, "...until the stars came out!?" Rather, [the plural] "stars" indicates two! [Not three!]--The first one doesn't count. [An unattributed baraita:] "If he sees one star on the eve of the Sabbath and performs a creative task, he is exempt [from punishment]. Two, he brings a conditional guilt offering, Three, he brings a sin offering. On the departure of the Sabbath, if he sees on star and performs a creative task,

Jerusalem Talmud Sotah

MISHNAH: He1The officiating priest. took the flour-offering from the Egyptian palm-leaf basket2See Mishnah 2:1., put it into a Temple vessel and laid that on her hands. The Cohen puts his hands under hers and performs the weave3The prescribed movements for the dedication of private offerings. The movements in the six directions (fore and aft, right and left, up and down) are imitated today as the motions of the palm-branch on Tabernacles.. He weaved, presented4Before the altar receives its part, the entire offering in the vessel is presented to the altar at its South-West corner., took a fistful and put it into the fire. The remainder is eaten by the priests5As are all offerings except those of a priest; cf. Lev. 6:7–11..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Sotah

Did we not state: “Just as the water checks her out so it checks him out”? 16The next few sentences are copied from Chapter 1, Note 128. But see the Tosaphot text in which only one sentence from there (and Yebamot Chapter 10, Notes 49 ff.) appears. Just as she is forbidden to her husband, so she is forbidden to her paramour. Just as she is forbidden to her husband’s brother, so she is forbidden to her paramour’s brother. Just as the water checks her out for every single intercourse for which she receives her husband after [intercourse with] her paramour, so it checks him out. Since she in general becomes forbidden, whether by him or by another [man], she is checked out17Cf. Mishnah 2:5 that the husband may stipulate that the water check her out not only for adultery with the named respondent but with any man whosoever.. But when he18The husband. makes [her] drink, he19The suspected adulterer. is checked out20The water is presumed to act at a distance, to make the adulterer’s belly swell and his waist disappear. (Cf. Note 14).. If it checked him out but not her, I would say that merit suspends for her21Cf. Chapter 3, Halakhot 4,5.. That is according to him who says that merit suspends and it is not recognizable. But following him who says that merit suspends and it is recognizable? Look, she was not recognized! But I could say that she drank uncovered water22Water which was left standing uncovered and unattended may contain snake poison, cf. Terumot 8:5, in particular Notes 113 ff. and it23Meaning the adulterer’s. swelled. They should not have her15The scribe wrote מבדקונַיה. It seems that the ms. before him had מבדקוניה, “to check him out”, but the scribe recognized that the masculine was inappropriate and indicated that one should read מבדקונַהּ, “to check her out”. checked out in this way but correctly24Reading כדין “correctly” with Tosaphot, against a nondescript כדון “so” in the text. It would be against all rules if water which was left unattended in a vessel were used in the Temple.! But I could say that he was in secret with other women25The accused boy friend was an adulterer but not with that woman.. Did we not think to say, when he makes [her] drink, he is checked out26The water acts at a distance only from a woman with whom he actually committed adultery; the explanation attempted in the previous sentence is impossible.? Explain it that he had criminal intent but she acted in error; then the water checked him out but not her27If either it was a case similar to date rape or that the adulterer impersonated the husband.. [28Added from Tosaphot, missing in the mss. If the water checked her out but not him,] I would say that merit suspends for (her) [him]29From Tosaphot text.. That is according to him who says that merit suspends and it is not recognizable. But following him who says that merit suspends and it is recognizable? Look, she was not recognized! But I could say that she drank uncovered water and her belly swelled. They should not have her checked out in this way but correctly!24Reading כדין “correctly” with Tosaphot, against a nondescript כדון “so” in the text. It would be against all rules if water which was left unattended in a vessel were used in the Temple. But I could say that she was in secret with other men. Then if he18The husband. divorced her, she would be permitted to him.19The suspected adulterer. Explain it that he acted in error but she had criminal intent; then the water checked her out but not him. If he had criminal intent but she acted in error, then it is obvious that she is permitted to her house18The husband.. If he18The husband. divorced her, would she be permitted to him19The suspected adulterer.? Is it possible to say that he had criminal intent and you say so? If he acted in error but she had criminal intent, it is obvious that she is forbidden to her house. If he18The husband. divorced her, would she be permitted to him19The suspected adulterer.? Is it possible to say that she left because of him and you say so30The Yerushalmi forbids the wife even to the unintentional adulterer; e. g., if she told him that she was single.? From where do we know that all depends on her? Simeon bar Abba in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: Is is written31Lev. 18:20.: “Do not ejaculate semen into your neighbor’s wife to be impure through her.” It depends on her; if she had criminal intent, she is forbidden, acted in error she is permitted32Everything depends on her status; since a rape victim is permitted to her husband, the divorced rape victim is permitted to the rapist but the woman who pretended to be single is forbidden to her boyfriend after her divorce..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Full Chapter