ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Sotah 36
SOTAH 36 - Dedicated by Lawrence and Judy Turkel to Mr. and Mrs. David
Kornfeld and their lovely family. May they always be blessed with good
health and all that they need.
(a) K'lal Yisrael arrived at Har Gerizim and Har Eival on the same day that
they crossed the Yarden - a distance of sixty Mil?
(b) The Torah writes with regard to the conquest of Cana'an "es Eimasai
Ashalach Lefanecha Va'hamosi es Kol ha'Am Asher Tavo Bahem". "Va'hamosi"
means - that whoever tried to stand up to Yisrael, would become soiled (see
(c) We learn from the double expression used by the Pasuk "Ad Ya'avor Amcha
Hashem, Ad Ya'avor Am Zu Kanisa" - that, when they returned from Galus Bavel
with Ezra, Hashem intended to perform with Yisrael the same miracles that He
performed when they entered Eretz Yisrael with Yehoshua, and that they
should be as free as they were then.
(d) This did not happen - on account of their sins.
(a) After having ...
1. ... constructed the Mizbe'ach, before they read the B'rachos and the
K'lalos - they brought Shelamim and Olos, ate and drank.
(b) To reconcile the Beraisa, which states that the hornet did not cross the
Yarden with the Pasuk "Ve'shalachti es ha'Tzir'ah Lefanecha" - Resh Lakish
explains that the hornet did not in fact, cross the Yarden with Yisrael.
2. ... read the B'rachos and K'lalos - they took down the Mizbe'ach and
carried the stones to Gilgal.
(c) Its function was - to remain on the east-bank of the Yarden and shoot
poison across the river, blinding the Cana'anim and castrating them.
(d) According to Rav Papa - there were two groups of hornets, one crossed
the Yarden, the other, did not.
(a) Rav Kahana learns from the Pasuk (with regard to the tribes on Har
Gerizim and Har Eival) "ve'Chol Yisrael ... Chetzyo el Mul Har Gerizim
*ve'ha'Chetzyo* el Mul Har Eival" - that the order of names on the two
stones of the Eifod was identical to the order of names that the Pasuk lists
(b) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa explains that "ke'Soldosam" which the Torah
writes in Tetzaveh, is confined to the second stone of the Eifod, but not
the first. What prevents the names on the second stone from following the
order of birth - is the fact that Yehudah appears first on the stone, and
(c) The first three names in their right order on the ...
1. ... first stone were Yehudah, Reuven and Shimon - the remaining three
names in their right order were Levi, Dan and Naftali.
(d) Each stone contained twenty-five letters.
2. ... second stone were Gad, Asher and Yisachar - the remaining three names
in their right order were Zevulun, Yosef and Binyamin.
(a) According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel, the stones of the Eifod did not
follow the order of birth at all and "ke'Soldosam" means - that they did not
engrave on them the names that Moshe called them (Reuveni, Shimoni ...) but
the names that their father Ya'akov called them (Reuven, Shimon ... ).
(b) The names did not follow the order that they appear at the beginning of
Bamidbar - but the order that they appear in Sh'mos; the sons of Le'ah on
one stone, and the sons of the maidservants on the other, flanked by the
sons of Rachel.
(c) According to Rebbi Chanina ben Gamliel then, the order on the second
stone was Binyamin, Dan, Naftali, Gad, Asher and Yosef, and the order on the
first stone - Reuven, Shimon, Levi, Yehudah, Yisachar and Zevulun.
(a) The tribes that ascended Har Gerizim were Shimon, Levi, Yehudah,
Yisachar, Yosef and Binyamin, and those that ascended Har Eival - Reuven,
Gad, Asher, Zevulun, Dan and Naftali.
(b) We prove from the current Beraisa - that Rav Kahana's interpretation of
"ve'ha'Chetzyo" (that the order on the Eifod followed that of Har Gerizim
and Har Eival) is wrong.
(c) We learn from "ve'ha'Chetzyo" (written in connection with Har Eival) -
that less people ascended Har Eival than those that ascended Har Gerizim.
(d) The numbers on Har Gerizim were more numerous than those on Har Eival -
because the tribe of Menasheh, which had increased remarkably, was among
them. When the Tana of the Beraisa ascribed it to the fact that (part of)
Levi remained at the foot of the mountain - he really meant that they were
more numerous (not because [part of] Levi remained at the foot of the
mountain. but) in spite of it.
(a) The tribe of Menasheh complained to Yehoshua - because they had grown so
vastly that they considered their territory too small.
(b) When Yehoshua advised them to go and live in the forests to avoid Ayin
ha'Ra (though this was not a real solution to their problem, which was not
in his hands to solve) was - they responded that there was no point in doing
that, because the tribe of Yosef was not subject to Ayin ha'Ra anyway.
(c) Rebbi Avahu explains the Pasuk in Va'yechi "Ben Poras Yosef, *Ben Poras
Alei Ayin*" to mean that Yosef's descendants will increase rapidly because
they are not subject to Ayin ha'Ra. Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina learns this
from the Pasuk there "Ve'yidgu la'Rov be'Kerev ha'Aretz".
(a) We learned earlier that there were twenty-five letters on each stone of
the Eifod. Initially, there would appear to be only twenty-four on the
second stone. We reject the suggestion that, based on the Pasuk in Tehilim
"Eidus bi'Yehosef Samo", Yosef had an extra 'Vav' - because of the Pasuk
"ke'Soldosam", which implies that the names (at least on the second stone,
in similar vein to what we explained on the previous Amud) were spelt as
they were when they were born.
(b) We therefore account for the twenty-fifth letter - by spelling Binyamin
with an extra 'Yud', which is indeed the way it is spelt at his birth.
(c) Yosef earned the extra 'Vav' (causing his name to contain three of the
four letters of Hashem's Name) because he sanctified Hashem's Name (in
private) - by refusing to accede to the demands of his mistress, the wife of
(a) Rebbi Yochanan interprets the Pasuk in Va'yeishev "Va'yehi ke'ha'Yom
ha'Zeh, Va'yavo ha'Baysah *La'asos Melachto*" to mean that Yosef actually
entered the house with the express intention of committing adultery with
Potifera's wife. Rav or Shmuel also agrees with Rebbi Yochanan's
explanation. The other Amora explains - that he entered the house in order
to do his work, and Potifera's wife caught him by surprise.
(b) The Torah records that "ve'Ein Ish me'Anshei ha'Bayis Sham ba'Bayis".
The reason that such a prestigious household was devoid of people, says Tana
de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, is - because they had all gone to participate in the
celebrations of a national holiday.
(c) Potifera's wife exploited the situation - by feigning that she was sick
and returning home, where she knew she would find Yosef.
(a) What inspired Yosef to desist from sinning was - the image of his father
which appeared in the window, just as he was about to accede to her demands.
(b) His father asked him - whether he would like his name to be omitted from
the stones of the Eifod, to be called instead, one who sustains prostitutes?
(c) Rebbi Yochanan quoting Rebbi Meir explains the Pasuk ...
1. ... Va'tashav be'Eisan Kashto" - to mean that the heat of his desires
(d) Yosef resembled his father in many ways (as the Torah testifies "Eileh
Toldos Ya'akov, Yosef"). What caused him to forfeit fathering twelve
children like him - was the very fact that, like his father, he would emit
twelve 'drops' of seed in his lifetime, and no more; and ten of those drops,
he had already lost during his confrontation with Potifera's wife.
2. ... "Va'yafozu Zero'ei Yadav" - that he fell on his finger-tips to
disengage himself from the urge to sin, and as he did so, the seed emerged
from his ten finger-tips.
3. ... "Midei Avir Ya'akov" - that it was his father's appearance that saved
him, to ensure that his name would be engraved on the Eifod (Rashi seems to
include the words "Even Yisrael" in this D'rashah).
4. ... "mi'Sham Ro'eh Even Yisrael"- that this episode earned him the title
"Ro'eh Yisrael" ('Shepherd of Yisrael, because he sustained them and looked
after them for eighty years).
(a) In a certain sense, the remaining ten sons descended from him anyway -
because Binyamin his brother (maternal as well as paternal), fathered ten
sons, all of whom he named after his lost brother.
(b) Binyamin named his first two sons 'Bela' and 'Becher', after Yosef, who
was swallowed up among the nations and who was the first-born son of his
mother. He called ...
1. ... his third son 'Ashbel' - because Hashem brought about his capture
(c) It is obvious why he called his sixth and seventh son 'Eichi' and
'Rosh'. He called ...
2. ... his fourth son 'Geira' - because he sojourned in a foreign country.
3. ... his fifth son 'Na'aman' - because of his good looks.
1. ... his eighth son 'Mupim' - because he studied Torah 'from the mouth' of
2. ... his ninth son 'Chupim' - because he and Yosef did not attend each
3. ... and his tenth son 'Ard' - because his face resembled a rose
(a) When his astrologers objected to Yosef ruling on the grounds that he was
a slave whose master bought him for twenty silver pieces - Paroh replied
that he saw in him the makings of a king.
Paroh made Yosef swear that he would not divulge the fact that Yosef knew a
language that he did not. Yosef would exploit this seventeen years later -
when Paroh initially refused him permission to bury Ya'akov, until he
pointed to the oath that his father had made him swear. When Paroh suggested
that he have his oath to his father rescinded, he replied that, in that
case, he would also have the oath that he had made him rescinded. That is
when Paroh relented.
(b) When they demanded that he should at least be conversant in the seventy
languages (which he was not) - Gavriel attempted to teach them to him,
though he did not initially succeed.
(c) The significance of the Pasuk "Eidus bi'Yehosef Samo" in this regard
(although earlier, we explained it differently) is - that Gavriel then added
a 'Vav' to his name, after which, he had no problem teaching him the seventy
languages (although earlier, we explained the 'Vav' differently).
(d) Yosef gained the upper hand over Paroh - when he spoke Lashon ha'Kodesh,
with which Paroh was not conversant (and which, for some reason, he was
unable to master).