ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Sotah 27
SOTAH 26,27,29,30 - These Dafim have been dedicated by Mrs. Estanne Abraham-Fauer in
honor of the first Yahrzeit (18 Teves 5761) of her father, Reb Mordechai ben Eliezer
Zvi (Weiner). May the merit of supporting and advancing the study of the Talmud be
(a) According to Shmuel, one should rather marry a Domah than the daughter of a
Domah. A Domah is a woman about whose licentiousness everyone talks.
(b) Shmuel's reason is - because whereas *she* is from Kasher parents, her daughter
is not (and her father may well be a Nochri or a Mamzer).
(c) Rebbi Yochanan permits marrying the daughter - who has a Chezkas Kashrus (due to
the principle 'Most Be'ilos are attributed to her husband', for which reason, he is
not concerned about a 'Tipah Pesulah'), whereas her mother, who is known to go out
with other men, does not.
(a) We refute the proof for Shmuel from the Beraisa 'Nosei Adam Domah' - by pointing
out that we need to change it anyway, seeing as one may certainly not marry a Domah
Lechatchilah. Consequently, one needs to change the wording to 'Im Nasa Adam Domah
Mutar'. In that case, we may as well make a second change, to read 'Im Nasa Bas Domah
(b) One may not marry a Domah or a bas Domah Lechatchilah.
(c) We rule like Rebbi Yochanan on the basis of a Beraisa quoted by Rav Tachlifa bar
Ma'arva in front of Rebbi Avahu - who said that the children of a licentious woman
are Kasher, because most of a woman's Be'ilos are attributed to her husband.
(a) Rav Amram asks whether one may marry the daughter of a Domah who is highly
licentious, which might be forbidden even according to Rebbi Yochanan - because it is
no longer possible to attribute most of the Be'ilos to her husband.
(b) This She'eilah is not applicable according to those who hold that a woman becomes
pregnant only a short while before her Veses (period) - because seeing as her husband
does not know when her Veses is due, he cannot keep check of her movements whenever
it occurs (and the answer to the She'eilah is obvious).
(c) It applies however - according to those who hold that a woman becomes pregnant
shortly after her Tevilah, in which case, it is possible for her husband keep check
of her movements.
(d) Despite the fact that her husband is able to keep track of her movements, it
might nevertheless be forbidden to marry her daughter - because when a woman is
excessively licenteous, even her husband cannot possibly keep track of all her
escapades, and we may well no longer attribute most of her Be'ilos to her husband.
(a) We learn from the Pasuk "Ish Ish" - that whenever the husband is unable to warn
his wife, then Beis-Din take his place.
(b) The Tana Kama learns from "Ve'heivi *ha'Ish* es Ishto" that Beis-Din's warning
will only suffice for her to lose her Kesuvah, but not to drink the Mei Sotah.
According to Rebbi Yossi - it will even be effective to make her drink, though only
under the auspices of her husband, when he is freed from jail.
(c) The basis of their Machlokes is - whether we Darshen from "Ve'kina Ve'heivi" that
the one who makes her drink must be the one who warned her (the Chachamim) or not
(d) We do not preclude the Beis-Din warning her from "Ve'Kinei ha'Ish es Ishto",
implying that only her husband can warn her - because the Torah writes "Ish Ish" to
(a) We learn from the Pasuk ...
***** Hadran Alach Arusah *****
1. ... "Ve'ne'elam *me'Einei* Iyshah" - that a woman whose husband is blind cannot
become a Sotah (Rav Sheishes).
(b) The Beraisa learns from the Hekesh "Asher Tisteh *Ishah* Tachas *Iyshah*" - that
we compare the man to the woman and vice-versa in all the above regards.
2. ... "*Ve'he'emid* ha'Kohen es ha'Ishah Lifnei Hashem, Ve'Nasan al *Kapehah*" -
that a woman who is lame or who has no hands cannot become a Sotah either (Rav
3. ... "*Ve'amrah* ha'Ishah Amen Amen" - that a mute woman cannot become a Sotah (Mar
bar Rav Ashi).
***** Perek ke'Sheim *****
(a) Rebbi Akiva learns from ...
1. ... "U'va'u ... U'va'u" - that just as the water examines the Sotah, so too, does
it examine the Bo'el.
(b) The latter D'rashah is based on the two Pesukim "Ve'kinei es Ishto ve'Hi
Nitma'ah" and "Ve'haysah im Nitma'ah". We learn from the Pasuk ...
2. ... the extra 'Vav' in "Nitme'ah Ve'nitme'ah" - that just as she is forbidden to
her husband, so too, is she forbidden to the Bo'el.
1. ... "Ve'nisterah ve'Hi Nitma'ah" - that the Sotah is considered Vaday Tamei if
there is one witness who testifies that she is guilty.
(c) These two D'rashos are not inserted in this Mishnah - because the Tana only
brings the two "Ve'nitma'ah" that it does to teach us the Machlokes between Rebbi
Akiva and Rebbi.
2. ... "Asher Tisteh Ishah ... ve'Nitma'ah" - that, if she is a Kohenes, she is
forbidden to eat Terumah.
(d) Rebbi learns the latter D'rashah of Rebbi Akiva - (not from the 'Vav', like Rebbi
Akiva does, but) from the double usage of the word "Nitma'ah".
(a) 'On that day', Rebbi Akiva made other D'rashos (which will now be discussed). 'On
that day' refers to - the day that Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah took over the Nesi'us
from Raban Gamliel. The latter would only permit people whom he knew to be totally
sincere into the Beis Hamedrash. But when the former took over, he opened the doors
wide, allowing entry to anyone who wished to enter. The result was an upsurge of
Talmidim in the Beis Hamedrash, and they in turn, clarified many Halachos that had
previously been obscure.
(b) He learned from the Pasuk "u'K'li Cheres Asher Yipol Meihem el Tocho, Kol Asher
be'Socho *Yitma*" (instead of "Tamei") - that a loaf of bread in an earthenware oven
does not only become a Sheini le'Tum'ah, but it also render whatever it touches a
Shelishi (the source of a Shelishi le'Tum'ah both by Chulin and by Terumah, according
to Rebbi Akiva).
(c) The Tana cites the current D'rashos here - because the D'rashah of "Nitma'ah"
"Ve'Nitma'ah" it appears, was also Darshened 'on that day'.
(d) When Rebbi Yehoshua said 'Mi Yegaleh Afar me'Einecha Raban Yochanan ben Zakai! -
he meant who would enlighten him and tell him Rebbi Akiva's D'rashah, because he had
stated that there will come a generation who will declare a loaf that is a Shelishi
Tahor, since there is no Pasuk that renders it Tamei.
(a) Everone agrees that the one thousand Amos surrounding the cities of the Levi'im
constitute empty space. According to Rebbi Akiva, the second Pasuk which gives the
Shiur as two thousand Amos, is referring to T'chum Shabbos (and not to the space
surrounding the Levi'im's cities). Rebbi Eliezer B'no shel Rebbi Yossi Hagelili
reconciles the two Pesukim - by establishing the latter as an extras thousand Amos
for the planting of fields and vineyards for the benefit of the Levi'im (but T'chum
Shabbos according to him, is only mi'de'Rabbanan).
(b) Rebbi Akiva also explained the Pasuk "Az Yashir Moshe ... *Leimor* to mean that
Yisrael all repeated after him like one recites Hallel. Rebbi Nechemyah says - that
they repeated it after him like one recites the Sh'ma (both opinion will be explained
(c) Rebbi Yehoshua learns from the Pasuk "Hein Yikteleini Lo Ayachel" that Iyov
served Hashem with love. He nevertheless requires the Pasuk "Ad Egva Lo Asir Tumasi
Mimeni" (declaring that his perfection will never leave him) - because we might
otherwise have interpreted the first Pasuk to mean that if Hashem kills him, he will
no longer hope for His salvation (since sometimes the word "Lo", even when it is
spelt with a 'Vav', means 'not' [as if it was spelt with an 'Alef']).
(d) Rebbi Yehoshua commented - that, based on the Pasuk "Ish Tam ve'Yashar Yerei
Elokim ve'Sar me'Ra", Raban Yochanan ben Zakai Darshened that Iyov served Hashem out
of fear, but not out of love; and here was his Talmid Rebbi Yehoshua, Darshening from
a Pasuk that he also served Hashem out of love.