Mishnah.org Logo

המשנה היומית של היום

סוטה ו׳:א׳ - ו׳:ב׳

The Mishnah Yomi for Tuesday, July 30, 2019 is סוטה ו׳:א׳ - ו׳:ב׳

＜ היום הקודםהיוםלמחרת ＞

משנה א

Mishnayos Sotah Perek 6 Mishnah 1

סוטה פרק ו׳ משנה א׳

1
In the case of one who warned his wife not to seclude herself with a particular man and she subsequently secluded herself with the man she was warned about, even if he heard about it from a flying bird, or any other source whatsoever, he must divorce his wife. However, he must still grant her the money accorded to her by her marriage contract because there is no actual proof of her seclusion with the man in question. This is the statement of Rabbi Eliezer, who, as quoted in the first mishna of the tractate (2a), holds that there is no necessity for witnesses to testify with regard to the seclusion, and the woman becomes forbidden to her husband even in the absence of witnesses, by the husband’s word alone. Rabbi Yehoshua disagrees, as he did in the mishna (2a), and says: He does not divorce his wife in the absence of witnesses until the gossiping women who sit and spin thread by the light of the moon begin to discuss her behavior, as they share the gossip of the town. The Gemara earlier (6b) taught that a woman whose infidelity became subject to this public discussion can no longer be tested by the bitter water of a sota. Consequently, she must get divorced.
מִי שֶׁקִּנֵּא לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וְנִסְתְּרָה, אֲפִלּוּ שָׁמַע מֵעוֹף הַפּוֹרֵחַ, יוֹצִיא וְיִתֵּן כְּתֻבָּה, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, עַד שֶׁיִּשְׂאוּ וְיִתְּנוּ בָהּ מוֹזְרוֹת בַּלְּבָנָה:
א׳
ברטנורא

משקינא לה ונסתרה אפילו שמע מעף הפורח that she retired under suspicious circumstances–secluded herself,

יוציא ויתן כתובה – he should divorce her and provide her Ketubah settlement. Rabbi Eliezer, according to his reasoning who said in the first chapter (Tractate Sotah, Chapter 1, Mishnah 1), that a married woman’s retirement with a man under suspicious circumstances does not require testimony and even a slave and even a maid-servant are believed, that is (identical with) a flying bird for a married woman’s retirement with a man under suspicious circumstances is compared through close analogy of Biblical verses to ritual defilement and everyone is believed regarding her. Therefore, if she retired with a man under suspicious circumstances and he does not want to have to cause her to drink [the bitter waters], he should divorce her and provide her with her Ketubah settlement.

רבי יהושע אומר עד שישאו ויתנו בה מוזרות בלבנה – women who spin by the light of the moon. Rabbi Yehoshua, according to his reasoning, who said that we cause her to drink [by the testimony] of two [witnesses]. However, when they (i.e., the women twisting yarn) speak of her by [the light of] the moon, the matter is ugly licentiousness, and she should be divorced for even water, moreover, does not examine her as it is taught in the first chapter. But she is ritually pure, and women twisting yarn by moonlight should be talking about her. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

מי שקינא לאשתו ונסתרה אפילו שמע מעוף הפורח. שנסתרה:

יוציא ויתן כתובה. ר׳ אליעזר לטעמיה דאמר בפ״ק סתירה לא בעיא עדות ואפילו עבד ואפילו שפחה נאמנים דהיינו נמי כעוף הפורח, דאתקש סתירה לטומאה דכולהו מהימני בה, הלכך נאסרה עליו. ואם אינו רוצה להשקותה יוציא ויתן כתובה:

רבי יהושע אומר עד שישאו ויתנו בה מוזרות בלבנה. נשים הטוות לאור הלבנה. רבי יהושע לטעמיה דאמר משקה על פי שנים. מיהו משישאו ויתנו בה מוזרות בלבנה בפריצותה מכוער הדבר ותצא, דהא אפילו מיא תו לא בדקי לה כדתניא בפ״ק, וטהורה היא, ולא שישאו ויתנו בה מוזרות בלבנה. והלכה כרבי יהושע:

משנה ב

Mishnayos Sotah Perek 6 Mishnah 2

סוטה פרק ו׳ משנה ב׳

2
The mishna continues to list various possible testimonies concerning of such acts of seclusion. If one witness said: I saw that she became defiled during her seclusion by engaging in sexual intercourse with that other man, she does not drink the bitter water, but rather, he divorces her immediately. And furthermore, even if the one who testified was a slave or a maidservant, neither of whom is generally regarded as a valid witness, they are deemed credible to testify to the wife’s adultery even to the extent that their testimony disqualifies her from receiving her marriage contract and prevents her from drinking the bitter water. The mishna continues by listing women whose testimony is only partially accepted concerning this matter: Her mother-in-law, and her mother in-law’s daughter, and her rival wife, i.e., a second wife of the husband, and her yevama, i.e., her husband’s brother’s wife, and her husband’s daughter, all of whom are generally not deemed credible if they say anything incriminating pertaining to this woman due to the tumultuous relationships these women often have. They are all deemed credible to testify concerning the woman’s defilement while in seclusion, but are not deemed credible to the extent that their testimony will disqualify her from receiving her marriage contract; rather, it is deemed credible to the extent that she will not drink of the bitter water of a sota.
אָמַר עֵד אֶחָד, אֲנִי רְאִיתִיהָ שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת, לֹא הָיְתָה שׁוֹתָה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אֲפִלּוּ עֶבֶד, אֲפִלּוּ שִׁפְחָה, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנִין אַף לְפָסְלָהּ מִכְּתֻבָּתָהּ. חֲמוֹתָהּ וּבַת חֲמוֹתָהּ וְצָרָתָהּ וִיבִמְתָּהּ וּבַת בַּעְלָהּ, הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נֶאֱמָנוֹת, וְלֹא לְפָסְלָהּ מִכְּתֻבָּתָהּ, אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא תִשְׁתֶּה:
ב׳
ברטנורא

אני ראיתיה שנטמאת – in that retirement [of hers] under suspicious circumstances which is through two witnesses according to Rabbi Yehoshua or through the flying bird according to Rabbi Eliezer.

לא היתה שותה – for one witness is believed concerning her even to cause her to lose her Ketubah settlement for there is a basis for it.

אף לפסלה מכתובתה – that she should not drink [the bitter waters] not take [the settlement of] her Ketubah.

יבמתה – the wife of her husband’s brother.

ובת בעלה – from another wife.

הרי אלו נאמנות – for this testimony, even though they are ineligible for all other testimony which is to her detriment because the Torah believed all testimony that there is concerning her. But, however, not to make her ineligible for her Ketubah [settlement], for they hate her, but rather, that she should not be suspected by her husband of having been unfaithful.

אני ראיתיה שנטמאת. באותה סתירה, שהיא ע״פ עדים לר׳ יהושע, או ע״פ עוף הפורח לר׳ אליעזר:

לא היתה שותה. דעד אחד נאמן בה אף להפסידה כתובתה שרגלים לדבר:

אף לפסלה מכתובתה. שלא תשתה ולא תטול כתובתה:

יבמתה. אשת אחי בעלה:

ובת בעלה. מאשה אחרת:

הרי אלו נאמנות. לעדות זו, אע״פ שהן פסולות לכל שאר עדות שהוא לרעתה, לפי שהתורה האמינה כל עדות שיש בה. ומיהו לא לפסלה מכתובתה, הואיל ושונאות אותה, אלא שלא תשתה:

שאלות נפוצות על משנה יומית

עדיין יש לכם שאלה? צרו קשר