Talmud Jerusalem
Talmud Jerusalem

Talmud for Sotah 6:1

והא תנינן כל שאין בו דעת לישאל ספיקו טהור. הא אם יש בו דעת לישאל ספיקו טמא. ברם הכא אע"פ שיש בו דעת לישאל ספיקו טהור. מפני מה ספק רשות הרבים טהור אמר לון מצינו שהציבור עושין פסחיהן בטומאה בשעה שרובן טמאין. מה טומאה ידוע הותרה לציבור. קל וחומר ספק טומאה. תמן תנינן כל העריות עשה בה את המערה כגומר וחייב על כל ביאה וביאה. החמיר בשפחה שעשה בה את המזיד כשוגג. ר' ירמיה ר' בא בר ממל בשם רב שכבת זרע עד שיפלוט. הכא כתיב שכבת זרע והכא כתיב שכבת זרע. הכא את אמר שכבת זרע עד שיפלוט. והכא את אמר כן. א"ר יוסי שנייה היא דכתיב ונסתרה והיא נטמאה כיון שנסתרה התורה קראה טמאה. ברם הכא שכבת זרע עד שיפלוט. ליידא מילה כתיב שכבת זרע לשעורין. כהדא דתני ונסתרה והיא נטמאה. כמה היא סתירה כדי טומאה. כמה היא כדי טומאה כדי ביאה. וכמה היא ביאה כדי הערייה. כמה היא הערייה ר' ליעזר אומר

But if the doubt exists, that the sight of the impurity dates partly from to-day and partly from the morrow, the impurity is certain, but the sacrifice uncertain. On account of this, R. Hiya bar-Joseph answered in the presence of B. Yohanan: Who is it who taught that one of these occasions of impurity can be divided into two? It was R. Yosse. He answered: You thus refute your own opinion; for you say that each twinkling of an eye of the time accomplished in a half-mile, according to R. Nehemiah, is doubtful, and not only the end of it. No contradiction can be offered to this; when the Prophet Elijah shall return to this world, and will explain to us what this twilight means, no one will contest him. R. Hanina argued against the disciples of the Rabbis: Since, said he, it is night as soon as three stars are visible, be the sun still high in the heavens, the same must apply (before the day) in the morning. R. Abba said: It is written (in Gen. xix. 23) : "The sun was risen upon the earth when Lot entered into Zoar;" and is written (in Lev. xxii. 7): "And when the sun is down he shall be clean." The sunrise is compared with the sunset: As sunset corresponds to the disappearance of the sun from the sight of man, so also sunrise is manifested by the appearance of the sun to the eye of man.

Jerusalem Talmud Sotah

HALAKHAH: “If somebody declared his jealousy and she went to a secluded place,” etc. Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Yannai: This entire chapter [deals with the case that] he warned her and said to her, do not be at a secluded place with man X, after he declared his jealousy and she went to a secluded place5That the husband had some information that his wife met the man forbidden to her.. Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, even if she did not go to a secluded place6If there is not even a single witness against her.. Rebbi Ze‘ira said before Rebbi Yasa: Not that Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagrees, only he is lenient about witnesses to the hiding7There is no difference of interpretation between R. Joḥanan and R. Simeon ben Laqish; the latter only follows the opinion attributed to R. Eliezer in Mishnah 1:1.. We have stated a disagreement. Some state it anonymously8The opinion attributed to R. Eliezer in Mishnah 6:1.. Rebbi Ze‘ira said before Rebbi Mana9R. Mana I.: Rebbi Joshua does not disagree with what Rebbi Eliezer said, only that we have stated: “Rebbi Joshua says, only if10This is the reading of the Mishnah in the Babli, which can be read as meaning that if the wife is the talk of the town, even a rumor of unknown origin forces the husband to divorce his wife. she is the subject of talk of women carding by moonlight.” Rebbi Abba Mari asked: There11‘Orlah, Chapter 2, Note 30., Rebbi Ḥizqiah, Rebbi Abbahu said in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, everywhere where Rebbi taught a disagreement and returned to the problem later and taught it anonymously, practice follows the anonymous opinion. And here he says so12If Mishnah 6:1 is stated anonymously, it would imply that in Mishnah 1:1 practice follows R. Eliezer. However, it is evident not only that general practice follows R. Joshua against R. Eliezer but also that in the case of the suspected wife, two witnesses of her misbehavior are needed to prohibit her to her husband. Therefore, the argument that R. Joshua only makes an anonymous statement precise is invalid.?
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy

Jerusalem Talmud Sotah

MISHNAH: If one witness says, she became impure, but another witness says, she did not become impure, or one woman50This case has to be treated separately since a woman, while she can point out facts, cannot be a formal witness. says, she became impure, but another woman says, she did not become impure, she would drink51Mishnah 1 stated that in case of certainty, the woman may not be brought to the Temple. In the case here, two contradicting statements cancel one another; there is uncertainty. In all cases, it is supposed that there are two witnesses who attest that the wife met another man in a secluded place.. If one [witness] says, she became impure, but two [witnesses] say, she did not become impure, she did drink52One witness against two witnesses accounts for nothing.. If two [witnesses] say, she became impure, but one [witness] says, she did not become impure, she would not drink.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Full Chapter