משנה: אֵילּוּ אֲסוּרוֹת לוֹכַל בַּתְּרוּמָה הָאוֹמֶרֶת טְמֵיאָה אֲנִי לָךְ וְשֶׁבָּאוֹ עֵדִים שֶׁהִיא טְמֵיאָה. וְהָאוֹמֶרֶת אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה וְשֶׁבַּעֲלָהּ אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה לְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ וְשֶׁבַּעֲלָהּ בָּא עָלֶיהָ בַדֶּרֶךְ. כֵּיצַד הוּא עוֹשֶׂה לָהּ. מוֹלִיכָהּ בְּבֵית דִּין שֶׁבְּאוֹתוֹ הַמָּקוֹם וּמוֹסְרִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי תַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא עָלֶיהָ בַדֶּרֶךְ. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר בַּעֲלָהּ נֶאֱמָן עָלֶיהָ. MISHNAH: The following are prohibited from eating heave142A Cohen’s wife (or the Cohen’s daughter who is the childless widow of a Non-Cohen) who is desecrated by adultery; cf. also Sotah 1:2:8" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.1.2.8">Note 123.: One who says, I am impure for you143I. e., she says that she slept with another man; there is no difference in this respect whether she committed adultery or was raped., and where witnesses proved that she is impure144Witnesses to the act of adultery., and one who refuses to drink145She maintains her innocence, even though two witnesses attested that she met the man against whom she was warned in a secluded place, but refuses to submit to the ordeal. She remains permanently forbidden to her husband and is permanently excluded from eating consecrated food., and one whose husband refuses to let her drink146Two witnesses attested that she met the man against whom she was warned in a secluded place; therefore, she is disabled from eating heave. She can regain her priestly status only by being cleansed by the ordeal. Since it is written (Numbers.5.15">Num. 5:15): “This husband has to bring his wife,” without him appearing before the court of the Temple there can be no ordeal and no rehabilitation., and one whose husband slept with her on the trip147Numbers.5.31">Num. 5:31 is read as meaning: If the husband is blameless, then this woman has to bear her sin. It follows that if the husband is not blameless [in sexual matters of any kind], the ordeal becomes inactive. Since the Soṭah is forbidden to her husband, if he sleeps with her before she is cleansed by the ordeal he is not blameless and the innocence of his wife can never be proven.. What does he have to do: He brings her to the court at his place and they give him two scholars to prevent him from sleeping with her on the trip. Rebbi Jehudah says, her husband is believed about her.
הלכה: אֵילּוּ אֲסוּרוֹת מִלֶּאֱכֹל בַּתְּרוּמָה כול׳. מַתְנִיתִין לֹא כַמִּשְׁנָה הָרִאשׁוֹנָה. דְּתַנִינָן תַּמָּן. בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים. שָׁלֹשׁ נָשִׁים יוֹצְאוֹת וְנוֹטְלוֹת כְּתוּבָּה. הָאוֹמֶרֶת. טְמֵיאָה אֲנִי לָךְ. שָׁמַיִם בֵּינִי לְבֵינָךְ. וּנְטוּלָה אֲנִי מִן הַיְּהוּדִים. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. וַאֲפִילוּ תֹאמַר כַּמִּשְׁנָה הָאַחֲרוֹנָה. מִכָּל־מָקוֹם יֵשׁ רַגְלַיִם לְדָבָר. HALAKHAH: “The following are prohibited from eating heave,” etc. Our Mishnah does not follow the earlier Mishnah, as we have stated there148Nedarim 11:11:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Nedarim.11.11.1">Mishnah Nedarim 11:12.: “Three [kinds of] women leave149The court would force the husband to divorce her. and collect their ketubah: One who says, I am impure for you150A woman married to a Cohen who says that she was raped. Then she is forbidden to him not because of any fault of hers; therefore, she collects the entire amount promised her. The later Mishnah, in a change of practice, requires that the woman prove her case; if she cannot do that, she remains permitted to her husband and permitted to eat heave (because the later authorities suspected that a woman might invent the story of the rape to force a divorce). This contradicts the Mishnah here which states that a woman claiming to have been raped is permanently desecrated., [or] Heaven is between you and me151She claims that he is impotent and unable to have satisfactory intercourse; the truth in these intimate matters is known only to Heaven. In the later practice, the rabbi has to negotiate a settlement between the parties., [or] I am separated from the Jews152She made a vow forbidding to herself any sexual relation with any Jew. In the later practice, this is considered a “vow of deprivation” which the husband may annul (Numbers.30.14">Num. 30:14). He may annul his part, live with her, and let her be forbidden to all other Jews..” Rebbi Abin said, even if you say following the later Mishnah, does not the affair have likelihood153The situation here cannot be compared to the one described in Nedarim. The woman is forbidden to eat heave only after she was warned before witnesses and nevertheless was in a secluded place according to the testimony of two witnesses. It is a credible inference, even if there is no proof, that she had relations with her paramour.?
תַּנֵּי. מִבַּלְעֲדֵי אִישֵׁךְ. פְּרָט לְשֶׁקָֽדְמָה שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע אֲחֶרֶת לְאִישֵׁךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי אִילָא. כְּעִנְייָן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר מִלְּבַד עוֹלַת הַבּוֹקֶר. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ כָּךְ הֵן בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לַבַּעַל כָּךְ הִיא אֲסוּרָה לַבּוֹעֵל. וּכְשֵׁם שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לְאָחִיו שֶׁלַּבַּעַל כָּךְ הִיא אֲסוּרָה לְאָחִיו שֶׁלַּבּוֹעֵל. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ עַל כָּל־בִּיאָה וּבִיאָה שֶׁהִיא מְקַבֶּלֶת אֶת בַּעֲלָהּ לְאַחַר הַבּוֹעֵל כָּךְ הֵן בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתוֹ. רִבִּי אָבִין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי הִילָא. כָּאן בְּיוֹדֵעַ כָּאן בְּשֶׁאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ. It was stated154The same statement in Yevamot.58a">Babli Yebamot 58a, Sotah.24b">Soṭa 24b.: “‘Except your husband,155Numbers.5.19">Num. 5:19.” which excludes that other semen preceded your husband’s156If the affair with her paramour preceded her current marriage, the ordeal will be ineffective.. Rebbi Hila said, parallel what has been said, “except the morning elevation offering.157Numbers.28.23">Num. 28:23. While this verse is written at the end of the list of holiday sacrifices, it is obvious that the daily sacrifice precedes all others, Therefore, מִלְּבַד means really “after”. Similarly, מִבַּלְעֲדֵי אִישֵׁךְ should be translated: “after your husband”. (In Sifry Num. 13, Sifry Zuṭa 20, the verse is interpreted in two other, much different, ways.)” But did we not state: “Just as the water examines her, so the water examines him. Just as she is forbidden to her husband, so she is forbidden to her paramour”158Sotah 5:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.5.1.1">Mishnah 5:1.? Just as she is forbidden to her husband’s brother, so she is forbidden to her paramour’s brother159This sentence is an intrusion from the preceding text, Sotah 1:2:10" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.1.2.10">Note 128, induced by the similarly formulated Mishnah.. Just as the water examines her for every intercourse in which she receives her husband after [she had slept with] her paramour, so it examines him160This baraita assumes that the ordeal is effective if the husband slept with his wife after she committed adultery. But the Mishnah excluded this case!? Rebbi Abin in the name of Rebbi Hila: Here, if he knows, there, if he does not know161The ordeal is effective if she committed adultery before the husband even became aware of a possible affair. He is not free from sin only if he sleeps with his wife after officially charging her and receiving notice that she was alone with her paramour..
רִבִּי חִייָה בַּר יוֹסֵף שָׁלַח בָּתָר אִיתְּתֵיהּ. אָמַר. יִסְקוּן עִמָּהּ תְּלַת תַּלְמִידִין. שֶׁאִם יַפְנֶה אֶחָד מֵהֶן לְצוֹרְכוֹ תִּתְייָחֵד עִם שְׁנַיִם. וְהָא תַנִּינָן. וּמוֹסְרִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי תַלְמִידֵי חֲכָמִים שֶׁמָּא יָבוֹא עָלֶיהָ בַדֶּרֶךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. וּבַעֲלָהּ. הֲרֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה. אַף הוּא שָׂכַר לָהּ בַּיִת וְהָיָה מַעֲלֶה לָהּ מְזוֹנוֹת וְלֹא הָיָה מִתְייָחֵד עִמָּהּ אֶלָּא בִּפְנֵי בָנֶיהָ. וְקָרָא עַל עַצְמוֹ הַפָּסוּק הַזֶּה יָגַעְתִּי בְאַנְחָתִי וּמְנוּחָה לֹא מָצָאתִי. 162The same text in Ketubot 2:9:2-6" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Ketubot.2.9.2-6">Ketubot 2:10. Copied in Num. Rabba Naśo 9(38), a text of doubtful antiquity. Rebbi Ḥiyya bar Yosef sent after his wife. He said, three students should accompany her, so that if one has to absent himself for his needs, she should still be with two of them. But did we not state163In the Mishnah here, which requires only two chaperones.: “And they give him two scholars to prevent him from sleeping with her on the trip”? Rebbi Abin said, with her husband that makes three164In Kiddushin 4:12:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Kiddushin.4.12.1">Mishnah Qiddušin 4:12 it is stated that a woman may be alone with two men, but not with a single man who is not her husband or close relative. The anecdotal fact told here is stated in the Sotah.7a">Babli, 7a, as a legal precept by R. Ḥiyya bar Yosef’s teacher Rav.. 165These sentences make no sense here; they are copied from Ketubot, where they refer to Mishnah 2:10, that in a city conquered by an enemy army all women, in absence of testimony to the contrary, are considered raped and, therefore, all wives of Cohanim are prohibited to their husbands. It is reported that R. Zachariah ben Haqqaṣab, who was a priest, testified that his wife’s hand did not leave his own from the moment the Roman army entered Jerusalem until it left, but he was rebuked and told that nobody may testify in his own behalf. The baraita notes that he refused to divorce her.{Also he rented a house for her and looked after her upkeep but was never alone with her except in presence of her children. He applied to himself the verse: “I exercised myself in my worry but found no rest166Jeremiah.45.3">Jer. 45:3.”.}
תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. בַּעֲלָהּ נֶאֱמָן עָלֶיהָ מִקַּל וָחוֹמֶר. וּמַה אִם הַנִדָּה שֶׁחַייָבִין עָלֶיהָ כָרֵת הֲרֵי הוּא נֵאֱמָן עָלֶיהָ. זוֹ שֶׁאֵין חַייָבִין עָלֶיהָ כָרֵת אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵא נֵאֱמָן עָלֶיהָ. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ. לֹא. אִם אָמַרְתָּ בְּנִידָּה שֶׁיֵּשׁ לָהּ הֵיתֵר לְאַחַר אִיסּוּרָהּ. תֹּאמַר בְּזוֹ שֶׁאֵין לָהּ הֵיתֵר לְאַחַר אִיסּוּרָהּ. וְאוֹמֵר מַיִם גְּנוּבִים יִמְתָּקוּ וגו׳. אָמַר לָהֶן רִבִּי יְהוּדָה. גְּזֵירַת הַכָּתוּב הִיא. וְהֵבִיא הָאִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל הַכֹּהֵן וגו׳. אָֽמְרוּ לוֹ. וּבִלְבַד בְּעֵדִים. It was stated167Sifry Num. 8, Num. Rabba 9(38); a more elaborate text in Sotah.7a">Babli 7a, Tosephta 1:1.: “Rebbi Jehudah says, her husband is believed about her by an argument de minore ad majus. Since he is believed about her when she is menstruating168The menstruating woman is forbidden to her husband on penalty of extirpation (Leviticus.20.18">Lev. 20:18). Nobody requires chaperones during the time the wife is forbidden to her husband., when he would be subject to extirpation because of her, but for this one169A wife suspected of adultery (and even a proven adulteress) is forbidden to her husband but no penalties are specified. he is not subject to extirpation because of her, is it not logical that he should be believed about her? They said to him, no. If you mention the menstruating, she will be permitted after being forbidden, what can you say about this one who may not be permitted after being forbidden170If she is found guilty, she will be permanently forbidden and he will be forced to divorce her.? And it says, “stolen waters are sweet”171Proverbs.9.17">Prov. 9:17. She is more attractive forbidden than permitted.. Rebbi Jehudah said to them, it is a decree of the verse: “The man shall bring his wife to the priest”178Numbers.5.15">Num. 5:15., etc. They said to him, only with witnesses179General statements in verses are never interpreted to override the general principles of administration of justice. Since relatives cannot testify for or against a person, the husband cannot testify for himself, just as he cannot testify against his bride whom he accuses of prenuptial adultery (Deuteronomy.22.14">Deut. 22:14)..