סוטה ב׳Sotah 2

Mishnah

משנה: הָיָה מֵבִיא אֶת מִנְחָתָהּ בִּכְפִיפָה מִצְרִית וְנוֹתְנָהּ עַל יָדֶיהָ כְּדֵי לְיַיגְּעָהּ. כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת תְּחִילָּתָן וְסוֹפָן בִּכְלֵי שָׁרֵת. וְזוֹ תְחִילָּתָהּ בִּכְפִיפָה מִצְרִית וְסוֹפָהּ בִּכְלֵי שָׁרֵת. כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת טְעוּנוֹת שֶׁמֶן וּלְבוֹנָה וְזוֹ אֵינָהּ טְעוּנה לֹא שֶׁמֶן וְלֹא לְבוֹנָה. כָּל הַמְּנָחוֹת בָּאוֹת מִן הַחִטִּים וְזוֹ אֵינָהּ בָּאָה אָלָּא מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִים. מִנְחַת הָעוֹמֶר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא בָאָה מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִים הִיא בָאָה גֶרֶשׂ וְזוֹ הָיְתָה בָאָה קֶמַח. רַבָּן גַּמְלִיאֵל אוֹמֵר כְּשֵׁם שֶׁמַּעֲשֶׂיהָ מַעֲשֵׂה בְהֵמָה כָּךְ קָרְבָּנָהּ מַאֲכַל בְּהֵמָה.

MISHNAH: He brought her flour offering in an Egyptian palm-leaf basket and then puts it on her hands to tire her out. All flour offerings are from start to finish in a Temple vessel except this which at the start is in an Egyptian palm-leaf basket and at the end in a Temple vessel. All flour offerings need oil and incense except this one which needs neither oil nor incense. All flour offerings come from wheat except this one which only comes from barley. The ‘omer flour offering, even though it comes from barley, comes as roasted kernels but this one comes as flour. Rabban Gamliel said, since she behaved like an animal so her offering is animal feed.

Halakhah

הלכה: הָיָה מֵבִיא אֶת מִנְחָתָהּ כול׳. כְּתִיב וּבְיַד הַכֹּהֵן יִהְיוּ מֵי הַמָּרִים הַמְאָרְרִים. מֵעַתָּה כְדֵי לְיַיגְּעָהּ. אֶלָּא כְדֵי לְהַטִּיל אֵימָה עָלֶיהָ.

HALAKHAH: “He brought her flour offering,” etc. It is written: “In the Cohen’s hand shall be the spell-inducing bitter water.” Is that to tire her out? Rather to inspire her with fear.

מִנְחָתָהּ. מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהִיא קְדֹשָׁה לִשְׁמָהּ. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהִיא קְדֹשָׁה לִשְׁמָהּ כָּךְ הִיא קְדֹשָׁה לִשְׁמוֹ. וְתַנֵּי רִבִּי חִיָיה וּפְלִיג. לִיקָרֵב כָּלִיל אֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה מִפְּנֵי שׁוּתָפוּתָהּ שֶׁל אִשָּׁה. לֵאָכֵל אֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה מִפְּנֵי שׁוּתָפוּתוֹ שֶׁלָּאִישׁ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. הַקּוֹמֶץ קָרֵב לְעַצְמוֹ וְהַשְּׁיֵירִים קְרֵיבִין לְעַצְמָן. וְאַתְּ אָמַר. מִנְחָתָהּ. וְאֶלָּא מַה דְאִישְׁתָּעֵי קִרְיָיא אִישְׁתָּעֵית מַתְנִיתָא. וְהֵבִיא אֶת קָרְבָּנָהּ עָלֶיהָ.

“Her flour-offering.” Does that mean that it is sanctified in her name? Just as it is sanctified in her name, so it is sanctified in his name. Rebbi Hiyya stated and disagreed: “It cannot be brought completely because of the participation by the wife. It cannot be eaten because of the participation by the husband.” He said to him, the handful is brought separately and the remainder is brought separately. And you say, “her flour offering”? But the expression used by the verse is used by the Mishnah: “He shall bring her flour-offering for her.”

בַּעֲלָהּ מַהוּ שֶׁיַּפְרִישׁ עָלֶיהָ חוּץ מִדַּעְתָּהּ. [מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ שׁוּתָפוּת בַּמִּנְחָה מַפְרִישׁ עָלֶיהָ חוּץ מִדַּעְתָּהּ.] אַחֵר מַהוּ שֶׁיַּפְרִישׁ עָלֶיהָ חוּץ מִדַּעְתָּהּ. יָיבֹא כַּיי דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. [דְּרִבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר] אַרְבָּעָה מְחוּסְּרֵי כַפָּרָה מַפְרִישִׁין עֲלֵיהֶן שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעְתָּן. וְאֵילּוּ הֵן. הַזָּב וְהַזָּבָה וְהַמְצוֹרָע וְהַיּוֹלֶדֶת. שֶׁכֵּן אָדָם מַפְרִישׁ עַל בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן וְהוּא נָתוּן בָּעֲרִיסָה. נִיחָא זָב וְזָבָה וּמְצוֹרָע. וְיוֹלֶדֶת. וְיֵשׁ קְטַנָּה יוֹלֶדֶת. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי רְדִיפָה רִבִּי יוֹנָה בְשֵׁם רַב חוּנָא. עִיבֵּרָה וְיָלְדָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵּי שְׂעָרוֹת הִיא וּבְנָהּ מֵתִים. מִשֶּׁהֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵי שְׂעָרוֹת [הִיא וּבְנָהּ חַיִין. עִיבֵּרָה עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵי שְׂעָרוֹת וָלְדָה מִשֶּׁהֵבִיאָה שְׁתֵי שְׂעָרוֹת] הִיא חָיָה וּבְנָהּ מַת. מַאי כְדוֹן. שֶׁכֵּן אָדָם מַפְרִישׁ עַל בִּתּוֹ קְטַנָּה. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהֵבִיאָהּ לוֹ כְּבַר יָצָאת מֵרְשׁוּת אָבִיהָ. אֶלָּא שֶׁכֵּן אָדָם מַפְרִישׁ עַל אִשְׁתּוֹ חֲרֶשֶׁת. וְכָאן סוֹטָה קְטַנָּה אֵין אַתְּ יָכוֹל. דָּמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא רִבִּי יָסָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. קְטַנָּה שֶׁזִּינָת אֵין לָהּ רָצוֹן לְהֵיאָסֵר עַל בַּעֲלָהּ. וַחֲרֶשֶׁת אֵין אַתְּ יָכוֹל. דִּכְתִיב וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה אָמֵן אָמֵן. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. מִכֵּיוָן דִּכְתִיב וְשָׂמַחְתָּ אַתָּה וּבֵיתֶךָ וְהוּא מְעַכֵּב מִלִּשְׂמוֹחַ עִמָּהּ. מַפְרִישׁ עָלֶיהָ חוּץ מִדַּעְתָּהּ.

May her husband dedicate for her without her knowledge? Since he is a partner in the flour offering, may he dedicate for her without her knowledge? May another person dedicate for her without her knowledge? It comes following what Rebbi Joḥanan said, as Rebbi Joḥanan said, for the four who need cleansing others may dedicate without their knowledge; these are the following: Man or woman [healed from] genital discharges, one [healed from] scale disease, and the woman after childbirth; since a father may dedicate for his small son who is lying in a crib. One understands man or woman [healed from] genital discharges or [healed from] scale disease, but a woman after childbirth? May a minor give birth? Did not Rebbi Redifa, Rebbi Jonah, say in the name of Rebbi Hila: If a woman became pregnant and gave birth before she grew two hairs, she and her son will die. After she grew two hairs, she and her son will live. If she became pregnant before she grew two hairs and gave birth after she grew two hairs, she will live but her son will die. How is the situation? Since a man may dedicate for his underage daughter. Since she grew [pubic hair] she already left his power. But it must be since a man may dedicate for his deaf-mute wife. Here, in the case of the suspected wife, the case of the minor does not apply since Rebbi Ze‘ira, Rebbi Yasa said in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: An underage girl who whored has no will to be forbidden to her husband. The case of the deaf-mute does not apply since it is written: “The woman shall say: Amen, amen.” Rebbi Abin said, since it is written: “You shall enjoy together with your house,” and he is the cause that he cannot enjoy with her, he may dedicate without her knowledge.

רִבִּי אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אִילָא. אֵינוֹ מַפְרִישׁ עָלֶיהָ עוֹלַת הָעוֹף אֶלָּא חַטָּאת הָעוֹף. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא מַכְשֵׁרָתָהּ לֶאֱכֹל בִּזְבָחִים. תַּנֵּי. אֵינוֹ מַפְרִישׁ עָלֶיהָ אֶלָּא דָבָר שֶׁהוּא מַתִּירָהּ לָהּ בְּזֶה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אֵין לָךְ אֶלָּא זֶה. תַּנֵּי. מַה זֶה מְעַכְּבָהּ מִלֶּאֱכוֹל בִּזְבָחִים. מְעַכְּבָה הִיא מִלֶּאֱכוֹל בִּזְבָחִים. וּמִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהוּא מְעוֹכָּב מִלִּשְׂמוֹחַ עִמָּהּ. כְּמִי שֶׁהוּא מְעַכְּבָהּ מִלֶּאֱכוֹל בִּזְבָחִים. תַּנֵּי. אֲפִילוּ הַקָּפַת נְזִירוּת עַל רֹאשָׁהּ מְעַכְּבָה הִיא מִלּוֹכַל בִּזְבָחִים. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁהִיא מְנוּוֶּלֶת וְהוּא מְעוֹכָּב מִלִּשְׂמוֹחַ עִמָּהּ. כְּמוֹ שֶׁהוּא מְעַכְּבָהּ מִלּוֹכַל בִּזְבָחִים.

Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Ila: He may not dedicate for her the bird elevation offering, only the bird purification offering because the latter enables her to eat family sacrifices. It was stated: He may dedicate for her only something that enables her to eat family sacrifices. Rebbi Yose said, that is all. It was stated: Just as that disables her from eating family sacrifices, so she disables others from eating family sacrifices; since he is hindered from enjoying with her it is as if he disabled her from eating family sacrifices. It was stated: Even by the shearing of her head she hinders him from eating family sacrifices. Since she is ugly and he is hindered from enjoying with her it is as if he disabled her from eating family sacrifices.

תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. מֵבִיא אָדָם עַל יְדֵי אִשְׁתּוֹ כָּל קָרְבָּן שֶׁהִיא חַיֶיבֶת. אֲפִילוּ אָכְלָה חֵלֶב וַאֲפִילוּ חִילְלָה שַׁבָּת. וְכֵן הָיָה רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. פָּטְרָהּ. אֵינוֹ חַיָיב בָּהּ. שֶׁכֵּן הוּא כוֹתֵב לָהּ. וְאַחְרָן דִּי אַתְיָין לִי עֲלָךְ מִן קַדְמַת דְּנָא.

It was stated in the name of Rebbi Jehudah: A person brings for his wife any sacrifice she is obligated for, even if she ate suet or desecrated the Sabbath. Also, Rebbi Jehudah says, once he divorces her, he is no longer obligated for her, for he writes to her “any other obligations that come to me because of you from earlier times.”

וְהָתַנֵּי. סֵדֶר מְנָחוֹת כָּךְ הִיא. מְבִיאִין מִתּוֹךְ בֵּיתוֹ בִּכְלִי כֶסֶף וּבִכְלִי זָהָב. וּרְאוּיָה לִיקָּרֵב בִּכְלִי שָׁרֵת.

Was it not stated: “The order of flour offerings is the following: One brings from his house in silver or gold vessels.” These would be acceptable as Temple vessels.

תַּנֵּי רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן יוֹחַי. מִפְּנֵי מַה אָמְרוּ. כָּל הַחַטָּאוֹת וְהָאֲשָׁמוֹת שֶׁבַּתּוֹרָה אֵין טְעוּנִין נְסָכִים. שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא קָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁלַּחוֹטֵא נִרְאֶה מְהוּדָּר. הָתִיבוּן. הֲרֵי חַטָּאתוֹ וָאֲשָׁמוֹ שֶׁלַּמְצוֹרָע. אִין תֵּימַר שֶׁאֵינוֹ חוֹטֵא. הָאָמַר רִבִּי יִצְחָק. זֹאת תִּהְיֶה תּוֹרַת הַמְצוֹרָע. זֹאת תּוֹרַת הַמּוֹצִיא שֵׁם רַע. אָמַר רִבִּי לָא. מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּתְיַיסֵּר וּכְתִיב וְנִקְלָה אָחִיךָ לְעִינֶיךָ כְמִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ חוֹטֵא.

Rebbi Simeon bar Ioḥai stated: Why did they say that no purification or reparation sacrifices need wine offerings? That the sacrifice of a sinner should not be magnificent. They objected: There are the purification and the reparation offerings of the scale-diseased. If you say that he is no sinner, did not Rebbi Isaac say: “That shall be the instruction for the scale-diseased,” this is the instruction for the slanderer! Rebbi Hila said, since he was made to suffer and it is written “that your brother should [not] be contemptible in your eyes,” he is as if he had not sinned.

רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. מִנְחַת מִנְחַת. מַה מִנְחַת שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר לְהַלָּן שְׂעוֹרִין אַף כָּאן שְׂעוֹרִין. אָמַר רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. נֶאֱמַר כָּאן אָבִיב וְנֶאֱמַר בְּמִצְרַיִם אָבִיב. מַה אָבִיב הָאָמוּר בְּמִצְרָיִם שְׂעוֹרִין אַף כָּאן שְׂעוֹרִין. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אוֹמֵר. נֶאֱמַר לַצִּיבּוּר. הֲבֵא בִיכּוּרִים בַּפֶּסַח וַהֲבֵא בִיכּוּרִים בָּעֲצֶרֶת. אִם מָצִינוּ שֶׁמִּמִּין שֶׁהַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ מִמֶּנּוּ הַצִּיבּוּר מֵבִיא בִּיכּוּרִים בָּעֲצֶרֶת. מֵאֵי זֶה מִין הַיָּחִיד מֵבִיא חוֹבָתוֹ. מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין. אַף הַצִּיבּוּר לֹא יָבִיא אֶלָּא מִן הַשְּׂעוֹרִין. אִם תֹּאמַר. מִן הַחִיטִּין. אֵין שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם בִּיכּוּרִין.

Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Ismael: “Flour offering of, flour offering of.” Since “flour offering of” said there is of barley, here also it is of barley. Rebbi Eliezer said, it says here “milky white” and it says in Egypt “milky white”. Since “milky white” mentioned in Egypt refers to barley, here also it refers to barley. Rebbi Aqiba said, it was said to the public, bring first fruits on Passover and bring first fruits on Pentecost. If we find that from the kind a private person brings his obligatory offering the public bring their first fruits on Pentecost. From which kind does the private person bring his obligatory offering? From barley! Also the public should bring only from barley. If you say from wheat, the Two Breads would not be first fruits.

תַּמָּן אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹנָה. חִילְקָא לִשְׁנַיִם. טְרַגִיס לִשְׁלֹשָׁה. טִיסָנֵי לְאַרְבָּעָה. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן בָּעֵי. מִיכָּן וָהֶילַךְ קְמָחִין הֵן. אֵין צָרִיךְ לָבוּר אֶת הַסּוֹלֶת מִתּוֹכָן.

There, said by Rebbi Jonah: “ Halica, into two parts. Tragos, into three. Tisana, into four.” Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun asked: From there on, is it coarse flour? One does not have to sift out the fine flour from in between.

Mishnah

משנה: הָיָה מֵבִיא פִיָילֵי שֶׁלְּחֶרֶשׂ חֲדָשָׁה וְנוֹתֵן לְתוֹכָהּ חֲצִי לוֹג מַיִם מִן הַכִּיּוֹר. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר רְבִיעִית. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מְמָעֵט בַּכְּתָב כָּךְ הוּא מְמָעֵט בַּמַּיִם. נִכְנַס לָהֵיכָל וּפָנָה לִימִינוֹ וּמָקוֹם הָיָה שָׁם אַמָּה עַל אַמָּה וְטַבֶּלָּה שֶׁלְּשַׁיִשׁ וְטַבַּעַת הָיְתָה קְבוּעָה בָהּ כְּשֶׁהוּא מִגְבִּיהָהּ נוֹטֵל עָפָר מִתַּחְתֶּיהָ וְנוֹתֵן כְּדֵי שֶׁיֵירָאֶה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וּמִן הֶעָפָר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בְּקַרְקַע הַמִּשְׁכָּן יִקַּח הַכֹּהֵן וְנָתַן אֶל הַמָּיִם.

MISHNAH: He brought a new earthenware bowl and filled it with half a log of water from the laver; Rebbi Jehudah says, a quarter [log]. (Just as he shortens the writing so he decreases the amount of water.) He entered the Temple building and turned right. There was a place there, one cubit square, where a handle was fastened to a marble plate. He lifted it, took dust from under it, and put it so that it was seen on the water, as it was said: “From the dust which will be on the ground of the Temple the Cohen shall take and put on the water.”

Halakhah

הלכה: הָיָה מֵבִיא פִיָילֵי כול׳. תַּנֵּי חֲדָשָׁה. מַתְנִיתִין דְּרִבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. דְּתַנִינָן תַּמָּן. הָיָה מֵבִיא פִיָילֵי שֶׁלְּחֶרֶשׂ חֲדָשָׁה. מָאן תַּנָּא חֲדָשָׁה. רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. דְּהוּא דָרִישׁ לָהּ. אֶל כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ עַל מַיִם חַיִּים. מַה מַיִם שֶׁלֹּא נַעֲשֶׂה בָהֶן מְלָאכָה. אַף כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ שֶׁלֹּא נַעֲשֶׂה בוֹ מְלָאכָה. נִיחָא תַמָּן דְּהוּא דָרִישׁ אֶל כְּלִי חֶרֶשׂ עַל מַיִם חַיִּים. הָכָא מָה אִית לָךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. דּוּ סָבַר כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. תַּנֵּי. מֵי כִיּוֹר. רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אוֹמֵר מֵי מַעְיָין. וַחֲכָמִים מַכְשִׁירִין בְּכָל הַמֵּימוֹת. וְהָא דְּרִבִּי לִעֶזֶר כְּרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל בַּמַּיִם. וְרִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל כְּרִבִּי אֱלִעֶזֶר בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ. אַשְׁכַּח תַּנֵּי. [רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר. בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ חֲדָשָׁה.] אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ לֹא בְּמַקֵּידָה. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. אֲפִילוּ בְּמַקֵּידָה. הֲווֹן בָּעֵי מֵימַר. מָּאן דָּמַר. בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ לֹא בְּמַקֵּידָה. רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. מָאן דְּאמַר אֲפִילוּ בְּמַקֵּידָה. רַבָּנִן. כּוּלָּהּ רַבָּנִין. מָּאן דָּמַר בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ לֹא בְּמַקֵּידָה. בְשֶׁנִּיטָל רוּבָּהּ וּמִיעוּטָהּ קַיָים. וּמָּאן דָּמַר. בְּמַקֵּידָה. בְשֶׁנִּיטָל מִיעוּטָהּ וּרוּבָּהּ קַיָים.

HALAKHAH: “He brought a bowl,” etc. It was stated: “A new one.” Our Mishnah follows Rebbi Eliezer, as we have stated there: “He brought a new earthenware bowl.” Who stated “a new one”? Rebbi Eliezer! Since he explains: “Into an earthenware vessel on fresh water.” Just as the water had no prior use, so the earthenware vessel should not have had any prior use. It is understandable there because he explains: “Into an earthenware vessel on fresh water;” but what may one say here? Rebbi Joḥanan said, because he agrees with Rebbi Ismael. It was stated: From the wash basin. Rebbi Ismael says, water from a fountain. But the Sages approve of all kinds of water. Therefore, Rebbi Eliezer holds with Rebbi Ismael about the water and Rebbi Ismael with Rebbi Eliezer about the earthenware vessel. It was found stated: Rebbi Ismael says, into a new earthenware vessel. Some Tannaїm state: Into an earthenware vessel but not into a maqqēdah. Some Tannaїm state: Even into a maqqēdah. They wanted to say, he who says, into an earthenware vessel but not into a maqqēdah, is Rebbi Eliezer but those who say, even into a maqqēdah, are the rabbis. It all is the rabbis’. He who says, into an earthenware vessel but not into a maqqēdah, if most of it was removed but a small part was left; he who says, even into a maqqēdah, if a small part was removed but most of it was left.

אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ. לֹא בִּמְפוּחָם. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. אֲפִילוּ בִּמְפוּחָם. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָאן דָּמַר. בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ לֹא בִּמְפוּחָם. רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. מָאן דָּמַר. אֲפִילוּ בִּמְפוּחָם. רַבָּנִן. כּוּלָּהּ דְּרַבָּנִין. מָאן דָּמַר. בִּכְלִי חֶרֶשׂ לֹא בִּמְפוּחָם. רַבָּנִין. וּמָאן דָּמַר אֲפִילוּ בִּמְפוּחָם. רַבָּנִין.

Some Tannaїm state: “In an earthenware vessel”, not if it is sooty. Some Tannaїm state: “In an earthenware vessel”, even if it is sooty. They wanted to say, he who says “in an earthenware vessel”, not if it is sooty, is Rebbi Eliezer, but he who says, “in an earthenware vessel”, even if it is sooty, follows the rabbis. All is of the rabbis: He who says “in an earthenware vessel”, not if it is sooty, follows the rabbis, and he who says, “in an earthenware vessel”, even if it is sooty, follows the rabbis.

תַּמָּן תַּנִינָן. אֵזוֹב שֶׁהִזָּה בוֹ כָּשֵׁר לְטָהֵר בּוֹ אֶת הַמְצוֹרָע. רִבִּי אִימִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. זוֹ לְהוֹצִיא מִדִּבְרֵי רִבִּי לִעֶזֶר. דְּתַנֵּי. הִזָּה בוֹ עַל הַחַטָּאת פָּסוּל לַמְצוֹרָע. הִזָּה בוֹ עַל הַמְצוֹרָע פָּסוּל לַחַטָּאת. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. וַהֲלֹא קַל וַחוֹמֶר הוּא. מָה אִם הַמְצוֹרָע שֶׁאֵין הַמְלָאכָה פוֹסֶלֶת בּוֹ הִזָּה בוֹ עַל הַחַטָּאת פָּסוּל לַמְצוֹרָע. חַטָּאת שֶׁהַמְלָאכָה פוֹסֶלֶת בָּהּ הִזָּה בָהּ עַל הַחַטָּאת אֵינוֹ דִין שֶׁיְּהֵא פָסוּל לַחַטָּאת.

There, we have stated: “A hyssop which was used to sprinkle is acceptable [to be used] to purify the sufferer from skin disease.” Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: That [was stated] to exclude the opinion of Rebbi Eliezer, as it was stated: If he sprinkled with it for purifying, it is disqualified for the sufferer from skin disease. If he sprinkled with it for the sufferer from skin disease, it is disqualified for purifying. Rebbi Yose said, would that not be an argument de minore ad majus? Since for the sufferer from skin disease, for whose ceremony use does not disable, if he sprinkled with it for purifying, it is disqualified for the sufferer from skin disease; purifying, for whose ceremony use does disable, if he sprinkled with it for purifying, is it not logical that it should be disqualified for purifying?

הִזָּה בוֹ עַל הַמְצוֹרָע זֶה. מַהוּ שֶׁיְּכַשֵּׁר לִמְצוֹרָע אַחֵר. מַה דָמַר כָּשֵׁר. הָדָא רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי לָעְזָר מוֹדֵי בֵיהּ. וּמָאן דָּמַר פָּסוּל. הָדָא לֵית רִבִּי יוּדָה וְרִבִּי לָעְזָר מוֹדֵיי בֵהּ. תַּנֵּי. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה. שַׁבָּתִי הָיְתָה וְהָלַכְתִּי אַחַר רִבִּי טַרְפוֹן לְבֵיתוֹ. אָמַר לִי. יְהוּדָה בְנִי. תֵּן לִי סַנְדָּלִי. וְנָתַתִּי לוֹ. וּפָשַׁט יָדוֹ לַחֲלוֹן וְנָתַן לִי מִמֶּנָּהּ מַקֵּל. אָמַר לִי. יְהוּדָה בְנִי. בְּזוֹ טִיהַרְתִּי שְׁלֹשָׁה מְצוֹרָעִין וְלִמַּדְתִּי בָּהּ שֶׁבַע הֲלָכוֹת. שֶׁהִיא שֶׁלַּיַּבְּרוֹת. וְרֹאשָׁהּ טֶרֶף. וְאוֹרְכָהּ אַמָּהּ. וְעוֹבְיָיהּ כִּרְבִיעַ כֶּרַע מִיטָּה. אַחַת לִשְׁנַיִם וּשְׁנַיִם לְאַרְבָּעָה. וּמַזִין וְשׁוֹנִין וּמְשַׁלְּשִין וּמְטָהֲרִין. בִּפְנֵי הַבַּיִת וּשֶׁלֹּא בִפְנֵי הַבַּיִת. וּמְטָהֲרִין בִּגְבוּלִין.

If he used it to sprinkle on the sufferer from skin disease, is it acceptable to use it for another sufferer from skin disease? If somebody said it is acceptable, Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Eleazar will agree with him. But with him who said, it is disqualified, Rebbi Jehudah and Rebbi Eleazar will disagree. It was stated: Rebbi Jehudah said, it was my Sabbath and I followed Rebbi Tarphon to his house. He said to me, Jehudah, my son, give me my sandals. I gave them to him. He reached with his hand to the window and gave me a stick from there. He said to me, Jehudah, my son, with this one I cleansed three sufferers from skin disease and I taught with it seven practices. That it is yabrut, on its head is a leaf, it is one cubit long, its width is about one fourth that of a bed’s leg (split one into two and two into four), and one sprinkles and repeats and does it a third time, and one purifies when there is a Temple and when there is no Temple, and one purifies in the countryside.

מֵי. יָכוֹל מַרְאֶה מַיִם. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר אַרְדְּ. אוֹ אַרְדְּ. יָכוֹל מַרְאֶה דְּיוֹ. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר מֵי. הָּא כֵיצַד. מַרְאֶה מַיִם וּמַרְאֶה אַרְדְּ. שִׁיעֲרוּ חֲכָמִים חֲצִי לוֹג מַיִם מִן הַכִּיּוֹר. וְהָא תַנֵּי. רִבִּי יוּדָה אוֹמֵר. רְבִיעִית. רִבִּי יוּדָה כְדַעְתֵּיהּ. דְּתַנִּינָן. כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהוּא מְמָעֵט בִּכְתָב כָּךְ הוּא מְמָעֵט בַּמַּיִם.

“Water”, I could think it should look like water. The verse says, “dust”. Or “dust”, I could think it should look like ink. The verse says, “water”. How is that? The looks of water and the looks of dust. The Sages estimated half a log of water from the wash basin. But did we not state: “Rebbi Jehudah says, a quarter [log]”. Rebbi Jehudah follows his particular way, as we have stated: “Just as he shortens the writing so he decreases the amount of water.”

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. אַף הִיא עָשְׂתָה טַבֶּלָּה שֶׁלְּזָהָב שֶׁפָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה כְתוּבָה עָלֶיהָ. שֶׁבְּשָׁעָה שֶׁהַחַמָּה זוֹרַחַת הָיוּ הַנִּיצוֹצִים מְנַתְּזִין מִמֶּנָּה וְהָיוּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁזָּרְחָה הַחַמָּה. מַה הָיָה כָתוּב עָלֶיהָ. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יַנַּאי. אָלֶף בֵּית הָיָה כוֹתֵב עָלֶיהָ. וְהָא תָאנֵי. בִּכְתָב שֶׁכָּן כֵּן כְּתִיב שֶׁכָּן. לֹא מְעוֹבֶּה וְלֹא מֵידַק אֶלָּא בֵינוֹנִי. פָּתַר לָהּ בְּאָלֶף שֶׁבּוֹ מֵאָלֶף שֶׁבּוֹ בְּבֵית שֶׁכָּן מִבֵּית שֶׁכָּן. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי הוֹשַׁעְיָא. כָּל פָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה הָיְתָה כְתוּבָה עָלֶיהָ. שֶׁמִּמֶּנָּה הָיָה קוֹרֵא וּמְתַרְגֵּם כָּל דִּיקְדּוּקֵי הַפָּרָשָׁה. וְלָמָּה מַיִם וְעָפָר וּכְתָב. מַיִם. מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁבָּאת. עָפָר. לְמָקוֹם שֶׁהִיא הוֹלֶכֶת. כְּתָב. לִפְנֵי מִי שֶׁהִיא עֲתִידָה לִיתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן.

There, we have stated: “Also she made a golden plate with the paragraph of the suspected wife written on it.” When the sun rose, sparks were reflected on it and one knew that the sun had risen. What was written on it? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said in the name of Rebbi Yannai: Alef-Bet was written on it. But did we not state: In the script there it was written here, not heavy, not thin, but average. Explain “the Alef there” by “from the Alef there”; “the Bet there” by “from the Bet there”. Rebbi Hoshaia stated: The entire paragraph of the suspected wife was written there, and from it he was reading and explaining all details of the paragraph: Why water, dust, and writing? Water, from the place she came; dust, the place she goes to; writing, before Whom she will have to be accountable in the future.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. עֲקַבְיָה בֶּן מְהַלַּלְאֵל אוֹמֵר. הִסְתַּכֵּל בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים וְאֵין אַתָּה בָא לִידֵי עֲבֵירָה. רִבִּי אַבָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב פַּפַּי וְרִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ דְּסִיכְנִין בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי לֵוִי. שְׁלָשְׁתָּן דָּרַשׁ עֲקַבְיָא מִפָּסוּק אֶחָד. וּזְכוֹר אֶת בּוֹרְאֶךָ. בֵּירְךָ. בּוֹרְךָ. בּוֹרְאֲךָ. בֵּירְךָ. מִמָּקוֹם שֶׁבָּאתָה. בּוֹרְךָ. לְמָקוֹם שֶׁאַתְּ הוֹלֵךְ. בּוֹרְאֲךָ. לִפְנֵי מִי שֶׁאַתָּה עָתִיד לִיתֵּן דִּין וְחֶשְׁבּוֹן.

There, we have stated: “Aqabiah ben Mehallalel says, consider three things and you will not commit any transgression.” Rebbi Abba ben Rav Pappaeus and Rebbi Joshua from Sikhnin in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi: All three Aqabiah derived from the same verse: “Remember your Creator,” your fountain, your cavern, your Creator. Your fountain, from where you came. Your cave, to where you are going. Your Creator, before Whom you will have to be accountable in the future.

שְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים צְרִיכִין שֶׁיְּהוּ לִשְׁמָהּ. וְכָתַב לָהּ. וְעָשָׂה לָהּ. אוֹ חֻפְשָׁה לֹא נִיתָּן לָהּ. שְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים צְרִיכִין שֶׁיְּהוּ נִרְאִין. אֶפֶר פָּרָה. וַעֲפַר סוֹטָה. וְרוֹק יְבָמָה. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. אַף דַּם צִפּוֹר מְצוֹרָע. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. שִׁיעֲרוּ לוֹמָר. אֵין דַּם צִפּוֹר קְטַנָּה בָטֶל בְּרְבִיעִית. וְלֹא דַם צִיפּוֹר גְדוֹלָה מְבַטֵּל אֶת הָרְבִיעִית. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. בְּדָם. יָכוֹל בְדַם וַודַּאי. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר מַיַם חַיִים. אִי מַיַם חַיִים. יָכוֹל שֶׁיְּהוּ כוּלָּן מַיִם חַיִים. תַּלמוּד לוֹמַר דָּם. הָא כֵיצַד. מַיִם חַיִים שֶׁדַּם צִיפּוֹר נִיכָר בָּהֶן. שִׁיעֲרוּ חֲכָמִים. רְבִיעִית. רִבִּי פְּדָת בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. מֵי סוֹטָה נִפְסָלִין בְּלִינָּה. רִבִּי אָחָה בְשָׁם רַב אָבִינָא. כָּל שֶׁאֵין מִמֶּנּוּ לַמַּזְבֵּחַ אֵין הַלִּינָה פוֹסֶלֶת בּוֹ.

Three things have to be executed in the name [of the woman]. “He shall write for her.” “He shall execute for her.” “Or manumission was not given to her.” Three things have to be seen: The ashes of the cow, the dust of the suspected wife, and the spittle of the sister-in-law. Rebbi Ismael stated: Also the blood of the bird for the sufferer from skin disease. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, the Sages estimated that the blood of a small bird becomes negligible in a quarter [log] and the blood of a large bird does not render a quarter [log of water] negligible. As it was stated: “In the blood”, should that be only blood? The verse says, “fresh water”. If fresh water, should that be all fresh water? The verse says, “in the blood”. How is this? Fresh water in which the bird’s blood is recognizable. The Sages estimated, a quarter [log]. Rebbi Pedat in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The water of a suspected wife becomes disqualified by staying overnight. Rebbi Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Abina: Nothing of which the altar has no part becomes disqualified by staying overnight.

וּמִן הֶעָפָר. יָכוֹל מִן הַמּוּנָח לְקוּפָּה. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בְּקַרְקַע הַמִּשְׁכָּן. אוֹ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה בְּקַרְקַע הַמִּשְׁכָּן. יָכוֹל עַד שֶׁיַּחְפּוֹר בַּדֶּקֶל. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה. הָא כֵיצַד. אִם אֵין שָׁם מֵבִיא וְנוֹתֵן שָׁם. אָמַר רִבִּי אָבִין. אָכֵן אִתְאֲמַרְתְּ. יָכוֹל לֹא יְהֵא כָשֵׁר עַד שֶׁיַּחְפּוֹר בַּדֶּקֶל. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה. מִכָּל מָקוֹם. הַמִּשְׁכָּן. לְרַבּוֹת הַמִּשְׁכָּן וְנוֹב וְגִבְעוֹן וְשִׁילוֹ וּבֵית הָעוֹלָמִים.

“And from the dust.” One could think, from what lies in a chest. The verse says, “which will be on the floor of the Sanctuary”. If “which will be on the floor of the Sanctuary”, one could think only that he has to dig with a pick-axe, the verse says “which will be”. How is that? If there is nothing there, one brings and puts it there. Rebbi Abin said, “which will be on the floor of the Sanctuary”, one could think [the dust] qualified only if he digs with a pick-axe, the verse says “which will be”. From anywhere. “The Sanctuary”, that includes the Tabernacle, Nob, Gibeon, Shilo, and the Eternal House.

Mishnah

משנה: בָּא לוֹ לִכְתוֹב אֶת הַמְּגִילָּה מֵאֵי זֶה מָקוֹם הוּא כוֹתֵב. אִם לֹא שָׁכַב אִישׁ אוֹתָךְ וְאַתְּ כִּי שָׂטִית תַּחַת אִישֵׁךְ וגו׳. וְאֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הָאִשָּׁה בִּשְׁבוּעַת הָאָלָה. וְכוֹתֵב יִתֵּן יי אוֹתָךְ לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבוּעָה בְתוֹךְ עַמֵּךְ בְּתֵת יי אֶת יְרֵכֵךְ נוֹפֶלֶת וְאֶת בִּטְנֵךְ צָבָה. וּבָאוּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרְרִים הָאֵלֶּה בְּמֵעַיִךְ לַצְבּוֹת בֶּטֶן וְלַנְפִּיל יָרֵךְ. וְאֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה אָמֵן אָמֵן. רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר לֹא הָיָה מַפְסִיק. רִבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר כָּל עַצְמוֹ אֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב אֶלָּא יִתֵּן יי אוֹתָךְ לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבוּעָה בְּתוֹךְ עַמֵּךְ בְּתֵת יי אֶת יְרֵכֵךְ נוֹפֶלֶת וְאֶת בִּטְנֵךְ צָבָה. וּבָאוּ הַמַּיִם הַמְאָרְרִים הָאֵלֶּה בְּמֵעַיִיךְ וגו׳. וְאֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה אָמֵן אָמֵן.

MISHNAH: Then he starts writing the scroll. From where does he start writing? ( Num. 5:19) “If no man has lain with you, …” ( v. 20) “but if you deviated from under your husband,” etc. He does not write ( v. 21) “the Cohen has to administer the oath of curse to the woman,” but he writes “may the Eternal make you a curse and a swear-word among your people when the Eternal will make your hips diminish and your belly inflate.” ( v. 22) “This curse-water would come into your intestines to inflate belly and diminish hips.” He does not write ( v. 22) “the woman shall say, Amen, Amen.” Rebbi Yose says, he does not interrupt. Rebbi Jehudah said he does not write anything but ( Num. 5:21): “May the Eternal make you a curse and a swear-word among your people when the Eternal makes your hips diminish and your belly swell.” ( v. 22) “This curse-water would come into your intestines …” He does not write ( v. 22) “the woman shall say, Amen, Amen.”

Halakhah

הלכה: בָּא לוֹ לִכְתוֹב אֶת הַמְּגִילָּה כול׳. רִבִּי קְרִיסְפָּא אָמַר. אִיתְפַּלְּגוֹן רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. חַד אָמַר מַשְׁבִּיעַ וְאַחַר כָּךְ כּוֹתֵב. וְחָרָנָה אָמַר. כּוֹתֵב וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁבִּיעַ. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָאן דָּמַר. מַשְׁבִּיעַ וְאַחַר כָּךְ כּוֹתֵב. הֵיךְ מַה דְהוּא קִרְיָיא. וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ וְכָתַב. וּמָאן דָּמַר. כּוֹתֵב וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁבִּיעַ. כְּדֵי לִסְמוֹךְ שְׁבוּעָה לְהַשְׁקַיָיה. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. בֵּין תְּנַיִין בֵּין שְׁבוּעוֹת מְעַכְּבִין. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. שְׁבוּעוֹת מְעַכְּבוֹת. תְּנַיִין אֵינָן מְעַכְּבִין. הֲווֹן בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָאן דָּמַר. בֵּין תְּנַיִין בֵּין שְׁבוּעוֹת מְעַכְּבִין. אִית לֵיה חוּקָּה תּוֹרָה מְעַכֵּב. וּמָאן דָּמַר. שְׁבוּעוֹת מְעַכְּבוֹת וּתְנַיִין אֵינָן מְעַכְּבִין לֵית לֵיהּ. עוֹד הוּא אִית לֵיהּ. אֶלָּא שֶׁאֵינָן עַל סֵדֶר. וְאַתְיָין אִילֵּין פְּלוּגָתָא כְהָכֵין פְּלוּגָתָא. מָאן דָּמַר. בֵּין תְּנַיִין בֵּין שְׁבוּעוֹת מְעַכְּבִין. כְּמָאן דָּמַר. מַשְׁבִּיעַ וְאַחַר כָּךְ כּוֹתֵב. וּמָאן דָּמַר. שְׁבוּעוֹת מְעַכְּבוֹת וּתְנַיִין אֵינָן מְעַכְּבִין. כְּמָאן דָּמַר. כּוֹתֵב וְאַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁבִּיעַ.

HALAKHAH: “Then he starts writing the scroll,” etc. Rebbi Crispus said, Rebbi Joḥanan and Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish disagreed. One said, he administers the oath and then he writes; the other one said, he writes and then he administers the oath. They wanted to say that he who says, he administers the oath and then he writes, follows what is written in the verse but he who says, he writes and then he administers the oath, to join the oath to the drinking. There are Tannaїm who state: The conditions and the oaths impede; there are Tannaїm who state: The oaths impede, the conditions do not impede. They wanted to say that he who says, the conditions and the oaths impede, holds that “law” and “teaching” impedes; but he who says, the oaths impede, the conditions do not impede, does not agree. Certainly he does agree but they are not [written] in order. It turns out that this disagreement is like the previous disagreement. He who says, the conditions and the oaths impede, agrees with him who says, he administers the oath and then he writes; but he who says, the oaths impede, the conditions do not impede, agrees with him who says, he writes and then he administers the oath.

Mishnah

משנה: וְאֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב לֹא עַל הַלּוּחַ וְלֹא עַל הַנְּיָיר וְלֹא עַל הַדִּיפְתְּרָא אֶלָּא עַל הַמְגִילָּה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בַּסֵּפֶר. אֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב לֹא בַקּוֹמוֹס וְלֹא בַקַּנְקַלְתּוֹס וְלֹא בְּכָל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא רוֹשֵׁם אֶלָּא בַדְּיוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וּמָחָה כְּתָב שֶׁיָּכוֹל לְהִימָּחוֹת.

MISHNAH: He does not write on a wooden plank, or on papyrus, or on διφθέρα, only on a scroll, as it is said: “In a book”. He does not write with gum or vitriol nor with anything leaving a permanent impression except with ink; it is written “he shall wipe off”, writing that can be wiped off.

Halakhah

הלכה: רִבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹמֵר לֹא הָיָה מַפְסִיק כול׳. לֵוִי בַּר סִיסִי בְּעָא קוֹמֵי רִבִּי. מְגִילַּת סוֹטָה מָהוּ שֶׁתְּטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם. אָמַר לֵיהּ. הֲרֵי זֶה שְׁאֵלָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. אֵינָהּ שְׁאֵילָה. כְּלוּם גָּזְרוּ עַל הַסְּפָרִים שֶׁיְּטַמְּאוּ אֶת הַיָּדַיִם לֹא מִפְּנֵי קְדוּשָׁתָן. וְזוֹ לִמְחִיקָה נִיתְּנָה. לֹא צוֹרְכָא דְלֹא הוֹאִיל וְנִיתְּנָה לִמְחִיקָה.

HALAKHAH: “Rebbi Yose says, he does not interrupt,” etc. Levi bar Sisi asked before Rebbi: Does the suspected wife’s scroll defile the hands? He said to him, that is a question. Rebbi Yose said, it is no question. Did they not decree impurity of the hands for books only because of their holiness? And that one has to be erased! One only questions because it had to be erased.

כַּמָּה אוֹתִיּוֹת כָּתוּב בָּהּ וִיהֵא שֶׁלֹּא לְצוֹרֶךְ וִיהֵא חַיָיב. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חָנִין. בֵּית שַׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. אַחַת. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. שְׁתַּיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי הִילַי. טַעֲמוֹן דְּבֵית הִלֵּל כְּדֵי לִכְתוֹב יָהּ. רִבִּי יוּדָן בָּעֵי. כָּתַב מִפִּיו. וּמָחַק בֶּעָפָר. הָיָה כוֹתֵב רִאשׁוֹן רִאשׁוֹן וּמוֹחֵק. [תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן שַׁמּוּעַ אוֹמֵר. אֵין כּוֹתְבִין עַל עוֹר בְּהֵמָה טְמֵיאָה. אָמַר רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. מִכֵּיוָן דְּאַתְּ אָמַר. לִמְחִיקָה נִיתְּנָה. לָמָּה אֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב.] תַּנֵּי. רִבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן [שִׁמְעוֹן] אוֹמֵר. רוֹאֶה אֲנִי אֶת דִּבְרֵי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן שַׁמּוּעַ מִדִּבְרֵי אַבָּא. שֶׁמָּא תֹאמַר. אֵינוֹ שׁוֹתָה. וְנִמְצָא הַשֵּׁם גָּנוּז עַל עוֹר שֶׁלִּבְהֵמָה טְמֵיאָה.

How many letters have to be written unnecessarily for him to be guilty? Rebbi Ḥanin stated: The House of Shammai say, one; the House of Hillel say, two. Rebbi Hilai said, the reason of the House of Hillel: That he could have written Yah. Rebbi Yudan asked, if he wrote from memory, or rubbed it off with dust, or wrote one word and wiped it off immediately? It was stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Shamua said, one does not write on leather from an unclean animal. Rebbi Simeon said, since you said it is written to be erased, why can he not write? It was stated: Rebbi Eleazar ben Simeon said, I prefer the words of Eleazar ben Shamua over my father’s words. Maybe she will say: I will not drink. Then the Name would be hidden on leather from an unclean animal.

הָכָא כְּתִיב סֵפֶר וְהָכָא כְּתִיב סֵפֶר. הָכָא אַתְּ אָמַר. כָּל דָּבָר שֶׁהוּא כְתָלוּשׁ. וְהָכָא [אַתְּ] אָמַר הָכֵין. אָמַר לֵיהּ. שַׁנְיָיה הִיא הָכָא דִּכְתִיב בַּסֵּפֶר.

There is written “book”, and here is written “book”. There, you say anything which is plucked. And here, you say so? He said to him, it is different here because it is written “in a book”.

וְכָתַב. יָכוֹל בִּדְיוֹ וּבְסִיקְרָא וּבְקוֹמוֹס וּבְקַלְקַנְתּוֹס. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וּמָחָה. אִי מָחָה יָכוֹל בְּמַשְׁקִין אוֹ בְמֵי פֵּירוֹת. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר וְכָתַב. הָא כֵיצַד. כְּתָב שֶׁהוּא יָכוֹל לְהִימָּחוֹת. וְאֵי זוֹ זוֹ. זוֹ [דְיוֹ] שֶׁאֵין בּוֹ קַלְקַנְתּוֹס. וְהָתַנֵּי. אִם מָחַק מִתּוֹךְ הַסֵּפֶר כָּשֵׁר. תִּיפְתָּר כְּהָדֵין תַּנָּיָיא דְתַנֵּי. אָמַר רִבִּי מֵאִיר. כָּל יָמִים שֶׁהָיִינוּ לְמֵידִין אֶצֶל רִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל לֹא הָיִינוּ נוֹתְנִין קַלְקַנְתּוֹס בַּדְּיוֹ.

“And he writes”. I could think [one writes] with ink, or vermilion, or gum, or copper sulfate, the verse says, “he shall wipe off”. If he has to erase, I could think [one writes] with drinks or fruit juice; the verse says, “he shall write”. How is that? Writing that can be wiped off. What is this? This is ink without vitriol. But did we not state: If he wiped off from a Torah scroll it is valid. Explain it following the Tanna who stated: Rebbi Meïr said, all the time we were studying with Rebbi Ismael, we put no vitriol in the ink.

Mishnah

משנה: וְלָמָּה הִיא אוֹמֶרֶת אָמֵן אַָמֵן. אָמֵן עַל הָאָלָה. אָמֵן עַל הַשְּׁבוּעָה. אָמֵן מֵאִישׁ זֶה. אָמֵן מֵאִישׁ אַחֵר. אָמֵן שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמֵאתִי וְאִם נִטְמֵאתִי יָבוֹאוּ בִי. אָמֵן שֶׁלֹּא שָׂטִיתִי אֲרוּסָה וּנְשׂוּאָה וְשׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם וּכְנוּסָה. רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר אָמֵן שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמֵאתִי אָמֵן שֶׁלֹּא אֶטַּמֵּא.

MISHNAH: Why does she repeat: “Amen Amen”? Amen on the curse, Amen on the oath, Amen from this man, Amen from any other man. Amen that I was not defiled and if I was defiled it should hurt me. Amen that I did not deviate preliminarily married and married, waiting for the levir and taken in. Rebbi Meїr says, Amen that I was not defiled, Amen that I shall not be defiled.

Halakhah

הלכה: אֵינוֹ כוֹתֵב לֹא עַל הַלּוּחַ כול׳. רִבִּי לָעְזָר בְשֵׁם רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֶּן זִימְרָה. אָמֵן לְקַבָלָה. אָמֵן לִשְׁבוּעָה. אָמֵן יֵיאָמְנוּ הַדְּבָרִים. אָמֵן לְקַבָלָה. מִסּוֹטָה. אָמֵן לִשְׁבוּעָה. לְמַעַן הָקִים אֶת הַשְּׁבוּעָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּעְתִּי לַאֲבוֹתֶיךָ וגו׳. אָמֵן יֵיאָמְנוּ הַדְּבָרִים. וַיַּעַן בְּנָיָה בֶּן יְהוֹיָדָע [הַכֹּהֵן] אֶת הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיֹּאמֶר אָמֵן וגו׳. אָמַר רִבִּי תַנְחוּמָא. אֵין מִן הָדֵין אָמֵן שְׁבוּעָה. לֵית שְׁמַע מִינָהּ כְּלוּם. וְיֵידָא אָמְרָה דָא לְעָבְרְךָ בִּבְרִית יי אֱלֹהֶיךָ וּבְאָלָתוֹ. וְאֵין אָלָה אֶלָּא שְׁבוּעָה. כְּמָה דְתֵימַר. וְהִשְׁבִּיעַ הַכֹּהֵן אֶת הָאִשָּׁה בִּשְׁבוּעַת הָאָלָה.

HALAKHAH:: “He does not write on a wooden plank,” etc. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Yose ben Zimra: “Amen” [is said] for acceptance, “Amen” for an oath, “Amen”, may the words be confirmed. “Amen” [is said] for acceptance, from the suspected wife. “Amen” for an oath: “To keep the oath I had sworn to your forefathers”, etc. “Amen”, may the words be confirmed: “Benaiah ben Yehoyada (the priest) answered the king and said Amen”, etc. Rebbi Tanḥuma said, that does not prove that Amen means an oath, it implies nothing. But the following says: “that you pass by the covenant of your God and His curse,” because oath means curse, as you say: “The Cohen has to administer to the woman the oath of the curse.”

מְנַיִין לָמְדוּ לְגִילְגּוּל שְׁבוּעָה. מִסּוֹטָה. וְאָמְרָה הָאִשָּׁה אָמֵן אָמֵן. אָמֵן עִם אִישׁ זֶה. אָמֵן עִם אִישׁ אַחֵר. עַד כְּדוֹן דְּבָרִים שֶׁהוּא רָאוּי לְהַשְׁבִּיעַ. דְּבָרִים שֶׁאֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְהַשְׁבִּיעַ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. נִישְׁמְעִינָהּ מִן הָדָא. אָמֵן שֶׁלֹּא סָטִיתִי אֲרוּסָה וּנְשׂוּאָה שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם וּכְנוּסָה. אֲרוּסָה וְשׁוֹמרֶת יָבָם רָאוּי הוּא לְהִישְּׁבַע. וְתֵימַר מְגַלְגְּלִין. וְהָכָא מְגַלְגְּלִין.

From where did they learn rollover of oaths? From the suspected wife: “The woman shall say, Amen, Amen”; Amen from this man, Amen from any other man. That refers to subjects he is able to make her swear about. What about subjects he is not able to make her swear about? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, let us hear from the following: “Amen that I was not deviant preliminarily married and married, waiting for the levir and taken in.” Can he make her swear when she is preliminarily married or waiting for the levir? Nevertheless one rolls over.

אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. מַה זוֹ בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה אַף כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה. וְאִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. זוֹ בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה וְאֵין כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה. הֲווֹ בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָּאן דָּמַר. [מַה] זוֹ בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה אַף כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה נִיחָא. מָּאן דָּמַר. זוֹ בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה וְאֵין כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָלָה וּבִשְׁבוּעָה. לְגִילְגּוּל אַתְּ לָמֵד. לְאָלָה וְלִשְׁבוּעָה אֵין אַתְּ לָמֵד. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. מַה זוֹ בְּאָמֵן וְאָמֵן. אַף כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָמֵן וְאָמֵן. אִית תַּנָּיֵי תַנֵּי. זוֹ בְּאָמֵן וְאָמֵן. וְאֵין כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָמֵן אָמֵן. הֲווֹ בָּעֵיי מֵימַר. מָּאן דָּמַר. [מַזּוֹ] בְּאָמֵן אָמֵן אַף כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָמֵן אָמֵן. נִיחָא. מָאן דָּמַר. זוֹ בְּאָמֵן אָמֵן וְאֵין כָּל הַנִּשְׁבָּעִין בְּאָמֵן וְאָמֵן. כְּלוּם לָמְדוּ גִילְגּוּל שְׁבוּעָה לֹא מִסּוֹטָה. לְגִילְגּוּל אַתְּ לָמֵד. לְאָמֵן וּלְאָמֵן אֵין אַתְּ לָמֵד.

Some Tannaїm state: Since this one is subject to curse and oath, so also all who have to swear are under curse and oath. Some Tannaїm state: This one is subject to curse and oath, but no others who have to swear are under curse and oath. They wanted to say, the one who said, since this one is subject to curse and oath, so also all who have to swear are under curse and oath, is understandable. The one who said, this one is subject to curse and oath, but no others who have to swear are under curse and oath, can you infer for rollover only but not for curse and oath? Some Tannaїm state: Since this one is subject to Amen, Amen, so also all who have to swear are under Amen, Amen. Some Tannaїm state: This one is subject to Amen, Amen, but no others who have to swear are under Amen, Amen. They wanted to say, the one who said, since this one is subject to Amen, Amen, so also all who have to swear are under Amen, Amen, is understandable. The one who said, this one is subject to Amen, Amen, but no others who have to swear are under Amen, Amen, did one not infer rollover of oaths from the suspected wife? Can you infer for rollover only but not for Amen, Amen?

אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל. מָאן תַּנָּא שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. דְּרִבִּי עֲקִוּבָה אָמַר. יֵשׁ מִמְזֵר בִּיבָמָה. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי אִילַי. מַה אִיכְפַּת לֵיהּ מַמְזֵר גַּבֵּי קִינּוּי. הַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה וְקִנֵּא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. אֲפִילוּ מִקְצַת אִשְׁתּוֹ. אָמַר רִבִּי שַׁמַּי. וְלֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יַנַּאי. נִמְנוּ שְׁלֹשִׁים וְכַמָּה זְקֵינִים. מְנַיִין שֶׁאֵין קִידּוּשִׁין תּוֹפְסִין בִּיבָמָה. תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר לֹא תִהְיֶה אֵשֶׁת הַמֵּת הַחוּצָה לְאִישׁ זָר יְבָמָהּ יָבוֹא עָלֶיהָ. שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא לָהּ הֲוָויָה אֵצֶל אַחֵר. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן. וְלֹא מַתְנִיתָא הִיא. לְאַחַר שֶׁיַּחֲלוֹץ לֵיךְ יַבְּמֵיךְ. אֵינֶהּ מְקוּדֶּשֶׁת. וְהָיָה רִבִּי יַנַּיי מְקַלֵּס לֵיהּ. הַזָּלִים זָהָב מִכִּיס. בְּנִי אַל יָלִיזוּ מֵעֵינֶיךָ. חֲכַם בְּנִי וְשַׂמַּח לִבִּי. תֵּן לְחָכָם וְיֶחְכַּם עוֹד. יִשְׁמַע חָכָם וְיוֹסֵף לֶקַח. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן לָקִישׁ. בָּתַר כָּל אִילֵּין פְּסוּקֵי קִילּוּסַיָיא יָכִיל הוּא פָּתַר לָהּ כְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אָמַר. יֵשׁ מַמְזֵר בִּיבָמָה. וִיתִיבִינֵהּ. מַה אִיכְפַּת לֵהּ מַמְזֵר גַּבֵּי [קִינּוּי]. הַתּוֹרָה אָמְרָה וְקִינֵּא אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ. אֲפִילוּ מִקְצַת אִשְׁתּוֹ. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁזִּינָת. רִבִּי לָעְזָר אָמַר מוּתֶּרֶת לְבֵיתָהּ. רִבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי אָמַר. אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ. רַבָּנִין אָמְרִין. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר אָחָא בְשֵׁם רִבִּי לָעְזָר. שׁוֹמֶרֶת יָבָם שֶׁמֵּתָה מוּתָּר בְּאִמָּהּ. בְּגִין דְּתַנִינָן. זֶה הַכְּלָל. כָּל שֶׁתִּיבָּעֵל וְלֹא תְהֵא אֲסוּרָה לוֹ לֹא הָיָה מַתְנֶה עִמָּהּ.

Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, who stated “the one waiting for her levir”? Rebbi Aqiba! For Rebbi Aqiba said, there exists a bastard from a sister-in-law. Rebbi Ilai said to him, why should a bastard be relevant for jealousy? The Torah said: “He shall declare his jealousy to his wife”, even a partial wife. Rebbi Shammai said, did not Rebbi Yannai say the following: More than 30 Elders voted, from where that qiddushin have no legal effect on a sister-in-law? The verse says, “the wife of the deceased may not belong to any outside unrelated man, her levir shall come to her”, that she cannot have any existence with another man. Rebbi Joḥanan said to him, is that not a Mishnah? “Or after your levir will have performed ḥalîṣah with you, she is not preliminarily married.” And Rebbi Yannai praised him “those who pour out gold from the wallet,” “my son, they should not be removed from your eyes,” “get wise, my son, and make me happy”, “give to the wise that he shall become wiser,” “let the wise listen that he increase in knowledge.” Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, after all these praises I can explain it following Rebbi Aqiba since Rebbi Aqiba said that there exists a bastard from a sister-in-law! Could he not object: Why should a bastard be relevant for jealousy? The Torah said: “He shall declare his jealousy to his wife”, even a partial wife. A woman waiting for her levir who whored, Rebbi Eleazar said she is permitted to her house, Rebbi Joshua ben Levi said she is forbidden to her house. What do the rabbis say? Rebbi Mana said, did not Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa say in the name of Rebbi Eleazar, if a woman waiting for her levir died, her mother is permitted to [the levir], since we have stated: “This is the rule: He cannot stipulate about any intercourse she could have had and would not be forbidden to him.”

מַה תַּנָּא הָדָא מַתְנִיתָא. לֹא רַבָּנִן וְלֹא רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. אֶלָּא כֵינִי. מָאן דָּמַר. מוּתֶּרֶת לְבֵיתָהּ. דְּרַבָּנִן דְּלֹא כְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וּמָאן דָּמַר. אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ. רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה דְּלֹא כְרַבָּנִן. אָמַר רִבִּי יַנַּאי. שׁוֹמרֶת יָבָם שֶׁזִּינָת מוּתֶּרֶת לְבֵיתָהּ. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. וְנֶעֱלַם מֵעֵינֵי אִישָׁהּ. וְלֹא מֵעֵינֵי יְבָמָהּ. רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב בַּר זַבְדִּי בְשֵׁם רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ. מַעֲשֶׂה הָיָה וְכֹהֶנֶת הָיְיתָה וְהִתִּירוּהָ לְבֵיתָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. אַף לֹא מַכּוֹת אֵין בָּהּ.

How could one state this Mishnah? Not the rabbis nor Rebbi Aqiba! But it is as follows. He who says that she is permitted to her house [follows] the rabbis against Rebbi Aqiba. He who says that she is forbidden to her house [follows] Rebbi Aqiba against the rabbis. Rebbi Yannai said, a woman waiting for her levir who whored is permitted to her house. One had stated this: “It was hidden from her husband’s eyes,” not from her levir’s eyes. Rebbi Jacob bar Zavdi in the name of Rebbi Abbahu: It happened, she was the wife of a Cohen, and they permitted her to her house. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, no whipping is involved.

לא שֶׁהָיָה רִבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר. הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אוֹתָהּ לְמַפְרֵעַ.

Not that Rebbi Meïr was saying that the water checks her outside of its time

תּוֹרַת הַקְּנָאוֹת. תּוֹרַת הָעוֹלָמִים זוֹ. אֵין הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹתָה וְשׁוֹנָה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה. הֵעִיד נֶחֶמְיָה אִישׁ שִׁיחִין אֶת רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹתָה וְשׁוֹנָה. אָמַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה אֲנִי אֲפָרֵשׁ. מֵאִישׁ אֶחָד אֵין הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹתָה וְשׁוֹנָה. מִשְּׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים הָאִשָּׁה שׁוֹתָה וְשׁוֹנָה. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים בֵּין מֵאִישׁ אֶחָד בֵּין מִשְּׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים שׁוֹתָה וְשׁוֹנָה. כּוֹרְכְּמִית תּוֹכִיחַ. שֶׁשָּׁתָת וְשֵׁנָּת וְשִׁילְּשָׁה לִפְנֵי שְׁמַעְיָה‬ וְאַבְטַלְיוֹן מֵאִישׁ אֶחָד.

“The teaching about jealousies”. This is a teaching of the Temple. A woman does not drink and repeat. Rebbi Jehudah said, Neḥemiah the ditch-digger testified before Rebbi Aqiba that a woman drinks and repeats. Rebbi Aqiba said, I shall explain. From one husband a woman does not drink and repeat, from two husbands a woman drinks and repeats. But the Sages say she drinks and repeats whether from one husband or from two husbands. Korkemit shall prove it, who drank and repeated and did it a third time from one husband before Shemaia and Abtalyon.

תַּמָּן תַּנִּינָן. אֵין מַשְׁקִין אֶת הַגִּיּוֹרֶת וכול׳. וַחֲכָמִים אוֹמְרִים. מַשְׁקִין. מַה אֲנָן קַיָימִין. אִם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁנָּשָׂא גִיּוֹרֶת. כְּבָר כְּתִיב. בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. לֹא גֵרִים. אִם בְּגֵר שֶׁנָּשָׂא בַת יִשְׂרָאֵל. כְּבָר כְּתִיב וְהֵבִיא הָאִישׁ אֶת אִשְׁתּוֹ אֶל הַכֹּהֵן. אֶלָּא כֵן אֲנָן קַיָימִין. בְּגֵר שֶׁנָּשָׂא גִיּוֹרֶת. וּמַה טַעֲמָא דְּרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. לֹא גֵרִים. מַה טַעֲמוֹן דְּרַבָּנִן. וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵיהֶם. לְרַבּוֹת כָּל הַכָּתוּב בַּפָּרָשָׁה. וּמַה כָּתוּב בַּפָּרָשָׁה. וְשָׁכַב אִישׁ אוֹתָהּ. שְׁכִיבָתָהּ אוֹסְרָתָהּ. בַּעֲלָהּ מְקַנֵּא וּמַשְׁקֶה.

There, we have stated: “One does not make the proselyte drink, etc. But the Sages say, one makes her drink.” Where do we hold? If about an Israel who married a proselyte, it already is written: “The sons of Israel” (not proselytes). If about a proselyte who married a Jewish girl, it already is written: “The man has to bring his wife to the Cohen.” But we must hold about a proselyte who married a proselyte. What is the reason of Rebbi Aqiba? “The children of Israel”, not proselytes. What is the reason of the Sages? “You shall say to them”, to add everything written in that paragraph. What is written in that paragraph? “A man slept with her”. His lying with her makes her forbidden, then her husband declares his jealousy and makes her drink.

וְנֶעֱלַם מֵעֵינֵי אִישָׁהּ. פְּרָט לְסוּמֵא שֶׁאֵין לוֹ עֵינַיִם. הוּא סוּמֵא הִיא סוּמָה. מַתְנִיתָא דְּרִבִּי יוּדָן. פּוֹטְרוֹ מִכָּל מִצְוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בַּתּוֹרָה.

“It was hidden from her husband’s eyes”, that excludes the blind man who has no eyes. It is the same for the blind man and the blind woman. This baraita follows Rebbi Jehudah who frees him from all obligations in the Torah.

Mishnah

משנה: הַכֹּל שָׁוִין שֶׁאֵינוֹ מַתְנֶה עִמָּהּ קוֹדֶם לְשֶׁנִּתְאָרָסָה וְלֹא מִשֶּׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה. נִסְתְּרָה לְאַחַר וְנִיטְמֵאת וְאַחַר כָּךְ הֶחֱזִירָהּ לֹא הָיָה מַתְנֶה עִמָּהּ. זֶה הַכְּלָל. כָּל שֶׁתִּיבָּעֵל וְלֹא הָיְתָה אֲסוּרָה לוֹ לֹא הָיָה מַתְנֶה עִמָּהּ.

MISHNAH: Everybody agrees that he may not stipulate with her about before she was preliminarily married or about after she was divorced. If she was secluded after that, became impure, and after that he took her back, he cannot stipulate with her. This is the rule: He cannot stipulate about any intercourse she could have had and would not be forbidden to him.

Halakhah

הלכה: הַכֹּל שָׁוִין שֶׁאֵין מַתְנֶה עִמָּהּ קוֹדֶם שֶׁנִּתְאָרָסָה וְלֹא מִשֶּׁנִּתְגָּרְשָׁה כול׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יַנַּאי. פְּשִׁיטָא שֶׁאָדָם מוֹחֵל עַל קִיּנּוּיוֹ. גֵּירַשׁ כְּמִי שֶׁמָּחַל. הֵיךְ עֲבִידָא. קִינֵּא לָהּ וְנִתְגָּרְשָׁה וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה. אִין תֵּימַר. גֵּירַשׁ כְּמִי שֶׁמָּחַל. צָרִיךְ לְקַנּוֹת לָהּ פַּעַם שְׁנִיָיה. אִין תֵּימַר. גֵּירַשׁ כְּמִי שֶׁלֹּא מָחַל. אֵין צָרִיךְ לְקַנּוֹת לָהּ פַּעַם שְׁנִיָיה. אֲבָל אִם קִינֵּא לָהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה וְיָדַע בָּהּ. וְגֵירְשָׁהּ וְהֶחֱזִירָהּ וְנִסְתְּרָה. שָׁתָת וְלֹא בָדְקוּ אוֹתָהּ הַמַּיִם טְהוֹרָה הִיא. אִי מֵאַחַר שֶׁאֵין הַמַּיִם בּוֹדְקִין אֶת הָאִשָּׁה שֶׁהִיא אֲסוּרָה לְבֵיתָהּ טְמֵיאָה הִיא.

HALAKHAH: “Everybody agrees that he may not stipulate with her about before she was preliminarily married or about after she was divorced,” etc. Rebbi Yannai said, it is obvious that a man may forgive about his jealousy. If he divorced her it is as if he had forgiven. How is that? If he had declared his jealousy, divorced her, took her back, and then she was at a secluded place. If you say, if he divorced her it is as if he had forgiven, he has to declare his jealousy a second time. But if you say, if he divorced her it is as if he had not forgiven, he does not have to declare his jealousy a second time. But if he had declared his jealousy, she was at a secluded place and he knew it, then he divorced her, took her back, and then she was at a secluded place, if she drank and the water did nothing to her, she is pure. Or maybe that since the water does not check out a woman forbidden to her husband, she might be impure.