OpenGemara > Gemara > Sotah

מי קא רמינן לה עליה בעל כרחיה

Are we forcing her onto

her new husband

against his will?

 
Obviously not. 
 
(This   Gemara 

is following the opinion that the   Torah 

prefers   Yibum 

over   Chalitza, 

so by permitting   Yibum, 

we're effectively forcing him to marry this possibly immoral wife.)

ואיכא דאמרי אמר רב יוסף

Some say

that

Rav Yosef

answered:

הכתוב קראו אחר שאין בן זוגו של ראשון

The verse calls

the second husband

"another", since he's not on the same

spiritual standing

as the first

husband,

שזה הוציא רשעה מביתו וזה הכניס רשעה לתוך ביתו

The

first one

removed an evildoer from his house, and this

latter

one brought an evildoer into his house.

 
The first husband married her assuming she was righteous. The second, one who marries her, despite her immorality, is obviously worse than the first.

ואת אמרת תתיבם נמי יבומי

And

will the Torah force someone

to do Yibum

to an evildoer?

 
Would the   Torah 

condemn one who marries an immoral wife, and at the same time require the brother-in-law to marry her?

The Gemara Asks:

אמר ליה אביי

Abaye asked:

אלא מעתה נשאת לאחר ומת בלא בנים לא תתיבם דהכתוב קראו אחר

If so, had

a woman suspected of immorality

married another

man

and her

new

husband passed away without children, she should be forbidden to do Yibum

to her second husband's brother

(as the verse calls

the second husband

"another")?

 
For the same reason we don't permit the first brother in law to do   Yibum, 

the   Torah 

should prohibit the second husband's brother to do   Yibum.

The Gemara Answers:

גביה דהאי מיהא בשם טוב הוה קיימא

Regarding this

latter husband

, she kept her good name

and presumably repented, so now she is no longer suspected of immorality.

רבא אמר ק"ו

=קל וחומר

Rava said

that we can derive that a suspected Sotah does not do Yibum

from a logical inference:

אם נאסרה במותר לה באסור לה לא כל שכן

If she became forbidden to someone permitted to her

i.e her husband

, all the more so she's

forbidden

to one

originally

forbidden to her

i.e her

Who one is biblically forbidden to marry outside of Yibum .

The Gemara Asks:

אמר ליה אביי

Abaye asked:

אלא מעתה כ"ג

=כהן גדול

שקידש את האלמנה ומת ויש לו אח כהן הדיוט לא תתיבם

According to the above reasoning, if

a Kohen Gadol betrothed a

A Kohen Gadol is forbidden to marry a widow and

then

passed away, the

Kohen Gadol's

brother

(who is

a regular Kohen

and is permitted to marry a widow)

should

be forbidden to

do Yibum

with his brother-in-law's widow?

אם נאסרה במותר לה באסור לה לא כל שכן

If she was forbidden to the one permitted

(the Kohen Gadol )

, all the more so she's forbidden to one forbidden

(her brother-in-law )

The Gemara Answers:

נאסרה הא אסירא וקיימא

She

becomes

forbidden? She was always forbidden

to her Kohen Gadol husband!

מותר לה אסור לה הוא

To one who was

permitted

? He

(the Kohen Gadol )

was

always

forbidden

to marry her (even before her suspected adultery she was forbidden).

The Gemara attempts another disproof:

אלא אשת כהן שנאנסה ומת ויש לו אח חלל לא תתיבם

Rather,

the analogous case would be if

a Kohen's wife

had relations

against her will, and the husband passed away after that.

If the husband

had a brother who was a Chalal

(who is permitted to marry a formerly married woman who had relations against her will)

, shouldn't

the brother

do Yibum?

אם נאסרה במותר לה באסור לה לא כל שכן

If she's forbidden to

the

one

originally

permitted

(her Kohen husband)

, all the more so she should be forbidden to

the

one

who was always

forbidden

(her brother-in-law )?

The Gemara Answers:

אונס בישראל מישרא שרי וגבי דהאי (מיהא) ליכא איסורא

A woman

who had relations

against her will is permitted to a

regular

Jew, so for this one

(the Chalal brother)

, there

was

no prohibition.

 
In contrast to the above

case where an immoral woman would become prohibited to her brother-in-law had she been married to him at the time.

Mishna

ואלו אסורות מלאכול בתרומה

The following

five women who are suspected of having relations

are forbidden to eat Terumah:

 
The   Gemara 

will prove that one who was immoral may no longer eat   Terumah.

האומרת טמאה אני לך

1. A woman

who

admitted that she was immoral,

ושבאו עדים שהיא טמאה

If witnesses testify that

she was immoral,

והאומרת איני שותה

One who refuses to drink

the bitter water,

ושבעלה אינו רוצה להשקותה

One who's husband refuses to make her drink

the bitter water,

ושבעלה בא עליה בדרך

One who's husband had relations with her while on the way

to Jerusalem.

Gemara

אמר רב עמרם הא מילתא אמר לן רב ששת ואנהר לן עיינין ממתניתין

Rav Amram says that Rav Sheshes taught

the following

lesson,

and brought proof for his words

from the Mishna:

סוטה שיש לה עדים במדינת הים אין המים בודקין אותה

an immoral woman

had witnesses

that she had relations, even if the witnesses went

overseas

and couldn't testify

, the bitter waters wouldn't check her.

The Gemara Asks:

מ"ט

=מאי טעמא

What's the source

that the waters do not check someone who has witnesses of her immorality?

The Gemara Answers:

דאמר קרא ונסתרה והיא נטמאה ועד אין בה

The verse says that "she was secluded and there were no witnesses,"

דליכא דידע בה לאפוקי הא דהא איכא דידע בה

For the Sotah test to work, there had to be

no witnesses that knew of her

actions, but one who

does

have witnesses, even if they're overseas, the bitter waters wouldn't check her.

 
The   Gemara 
above

uses this verse to teach that the testimony of a single witness is believed to prevent the suspected wife from drinking the   Sotah 

waters. However, Rav Sheshes also derives the law that witnesses prevent the   Sotah 

test from working. 
 
The   Gemara 

will prove this law from another verse on page 6b

.

ואנהר לן עיינין ממתני'

=ממתניתן

And he proved this rule

from the Mishna:

דקתני ושבאו לה עדים שהיא טמאה

The Mishna

said

that one who has

"witnesses testifying that she was

immoral" may not eat Terumah.

 
The   Gemara 

will now prove that these witnesses didn't testify during the   Sotah's 

trial, and despite that, she would not be checked by the waters.

The Gemara Asks:

דאתו עדים אימת

When did these witnesses

testify?

The Gemara will attempt to answer:

אי נימא מקמי דתשתי

If you will answer

that they came

before she drank

the bitter water,

The Gemara rejects this answer:

זונה היא

Then she

was already

classified as a harlot

(upon the testimony of the witnesses), and it's obvious that she'd be forbidden to eat Terumah!

 
So the case must be that...

The answer is the proof from the Mishna:

אלא לבתר דשתאי

Rather, the

witnesses

came

after

she drank

the bitter waters.

אי אמרת בשלמא אין המים בודקין אותה שפיר

This law

makes sense if the bitter waters don't check her.

 
The   Mishna 

teaches that (despite "passing" the bitter water test) if witnesses testify that the wife was immoral, she may no longer eat   Terumah.

אלא אי אמרת מים בודקין אותה תיגלי מילתא למפרע דסהדי שקרי נינהו

But if the

Sotah

water

does

check her

despite there witnesses, her survival should prove

that the witnesses are false

(and she should be permitted to eat Terumah!)

Rav Yosef rejects this proof:

אמר ליה רב יוסף לעולם אימא לך מים בודקין אותה

Rav Yosef said

that the proof is weak, and in truth

the water checks her

even though there were witnesses,

והא אימור זכות תולה לה

But

she

lived through the Sotah test

because a merit protected her

from sudden death, and not because the witnesses lied.

 
The witnesses are still believed because the test isn't over yet.

The Gemara Asks:

במאי קמיפלגי

Over what is the debate

between Rav Sheshes and Rav Yosef?

 
Why does Rav Sheshes reject reject the possibility that merit could save the   Sotah?

במתנוונה דרבי

Rebbi's

opinion of

disgust:

דתנן רבי אומר זכות תולה במים המרים ואינה יולדת ואינה משבחת אלא מתנוונה והולכת לסוף שהיא מתה באותה מיתה

For the

Mishna

taught (in the name of Rebbi), that merit protects

an immoral woman

against

the affects of the Sotah

water,

she will not give birth and will not improve. Rather she will waste away until her end is the same death

as other Sotahs.

 
   Rebbi 

said that if the   Sotah 

was generally righteous, but stumbled in immorality, she would live a bit longer. However, she would be visibly deformed after the procedure.

רב ששת סבר בין לרבי ובין לרבנן הויא מתנוונה

Rav Sheshes reasons that both Rebbi and The Sages agree that

a Sotah with merits

wastes away.

 
So if she's not wasting away, it means that either: 
 
1. She's innocent 
2. The waters didn't check her. 
 
So because the   Mishna 

rejects option #1, #2 must be correct.

ורב יוסף סבר לרבי הויא מתנוונה לרבנן לא הויא מתנוונה

But Rav Yosef reasons that while Rebbi says that she wastes away, The Sages say that she doesn't

(and lives a normal life until she dies).

 
So according to the Sages, it could be that she's guilty and will be tested, but is still being protected by her merits.

The Gemara attempts to reject this disproof:

מתיב רב שימי בר אשי

Rav Shimi bar Ashi asked:

 
The   Mishna 

there says that not all agree that merits protect at all ...

ר'

=רבי

שמעון אומר אין זכות תולה במים המרים

Rabbi Shimon

says that merit doesn't postpone the effects of the

Bitter

waters,

ואם אתה אומר זכות תולה במים המרים מדחה אתה את המים בפני כל הנשים השותות ואתה מוציא שם רע על הטהורות ששתו

For if you will say that merit postpones

the effects of the bitter waters,

one will cause a bad name to spread about all the innocent who drank,

והן אומרים טמאות היו אלא שתלה להן זכות

people

will say that

these women

were not

so innocent,

but

they had

a merit which postponed

their punishment.

 
And the same concern exists if (unknown) witnesses can invalidate the   Sotah's 

test:

ואם איתא יש לה עדים במדינת הים נמי אתה מוציא שם רע על הטהורות ששתו

And if

any

witnesses,

(even if they are

overseas

cancel the affect of the bitter waters, the same

rumors will arise against the innocent:

והן אומרים טמאות היו אלא שיש להן עדים במדינת הים

People

will say that they

survived despite

being impure

only because

they had witnesses

present at the time of their sin

The Gemara Answers:

לר'

=לרבי

שמעון קאמרת

You ask according to Rabbi Shimon?

לר'

=לרבי

שמעון מדזכות לא תליא עדים נמי לא תלו

Just as Rabbi Shimon doesn't agree that merit holds off

punishment

, so too witnesses don't cancel

her punishment.

 
And Rav Sheshes (and the current   Mishna) 

don't agree with Rabbi Shimon, and aren't concerned that onlookers will not believe the suspected   Sotah's 

innocence. 
 
(However, see page 6b

, where the   Gemara 

says a different reason for Rabbi Shimon's rule, according to which Rabbi Shimon agrees that witnesses do 

cancel punishment.)

The Gemara attempts another disproof:

מתיב רב

Rav asked from a Mishna on page

22a

 
During her test, the   Sotah 

must bring a   Mincha 

sacrifice. The   Mishna 

discusses what happens if the   Mincha 

cannot be offered for whatever reason:

ואלו שמנחותיהן נשרפות

The following people's Minchas are burned

as they cannot be offered and cannot be redeemed out of holiness: