Sotah 26a — the Talmud in English

The pregnant wife of another and the nursing wife of another do not drink and do not receive a ketuba, the words of Rabbi Meir.

For Rabbi Meir would say: A man may not marry the pregnant wife of another or the nursing wife of another; and if he married, he must divorce her and may never remarry her;

for thus the Sages fined him because he transgressed the prohibition, and it is found that he is not fit to retain her; therefore she does not drink.

And the Sages say: He must divorce her, and when the time comes for him to bring her in—

when two years have been completed for the infant—

he may bring her in,

and therefore she drinks, for she is fit for him to retain her.

And the young man,

a youth [who is capable of fathering children]

who married a barren woman

or an old woman, and has no other wife

or

children from the outset,

from before this,

does not drink and does not receive a ketuba.

Rabbi Eliezer says:

She drinks, for

he can marry another and be fruitful and multiply through her.

But one who warns his betrothed or his yevama, and

only

after he brings her in [

after he has brought her in]

she secluded herself, either she drinks or she does not receive her ketuba.

That is to say, her law is like that of an ordinary sota, who drinks, since the seclusion was after the marriage; and if she does not wish to drink, she forfeits her ketuba.

The pregnant wife and nursing wife of himself,

whose wife was pregnant or nursing, and he warned her and she secluded herself,

either she drinks or she does not receive her ketuba.

For this woman drinks even while she is still pregnant, and we do not wait until she gives birth, even though the child might die if she is impure.

The young man

a youth

who married a barren woman or an old woman, and has

a wife

or

children, either she drinks or she does not receive her ketuba,

for it is permitted for him to retain her.

The wife of a mamzer,

that is, a woman who is fit to marry a mamzer, such as a mamzeret or a convert, who is married

to a mamzer, and the wife of a netin,

a netina who is married

to a netin, and the wife of a convert or a freed slave,

and below it will be explained what the novelty is in each of these,

and an aylonit,

whose husband has a wife or children,

either she drinks or she does not receive her ketuba.

And we conclude the challenge:

In any event, it teaches an aylonit,

that she drinks when her husband has a wife or children!

A refutation of Rav Naḥman!

For according to his position, even in this case she does not drink, because Scripture excluded her since she is not fit to sow; and there is no distinction between whether she is fit to be retained or not?

And we answer:

Rav Naḥman could say to you: It is a dispute among tannaim,

the matter is disputed among tannaim: whether an aylonit is different from the other women who do not give birth or not.

And I state my view according to this tanna,

who holds that an aylonit indeed has a special reason, and everyone agrees that she does not drink.

For it was taught in a beraita: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: An aylonit does not drink and does not receive her ketuba,

because

it is stated: “

And she shall be cleared and shall sow seed,”

one whose nature is to sow; this one, whose nature is not to sow, is excluded.

Since this tanna mentioned only an aylonit, and not a barren woman or an old woman, and stated the reason “whose nature is to sow,” rather than because she is not fit to be retained, it necessarily follows that he holds like Rabbi Eliezer, who disagrees with the reason that she is not fit to be retained, since he can marry another woman; nevertheless, he concedes concerning an aylonit, because it is not her nature to sow,

and this is proof of my position: according to everyone, an aylonit does not drink.

And we inquire about it:

And the Sages,

the tanna of the earlier beraita, who holds that an aylonit is not different from the other women who do not give birth,

this “

and she shall be cleared and shall sow seed,”

what do they do with it?

And we answer: They need it for that which was taught in a beraita: “

And she shall be cleared and shall sow

seed”;

Scripture teaches

that if she had been barren

previously,

she will be visited

after she is cleared through the drinking,

the words of Rabbi Akiva.

Rabbi Ishmael says to him: If so, let all the barren women seclude themselves, and let them be visited, and this

modest barren woman,

since she did not seclude herself, has she lost out?!

If so, what does the verse come to teach, “

and she shall be cleared and shall sow seed”?—

That if she had been giving birth

previously with

pain, she will give birth

from now on

with ease;

and if she had been

giving birth to females, she will give birth

from now on to

males; short children, she will give birth to tall ones; black ones, she will give birth to white ones.

We learned in a beraita:

The wife of a mamzer

either she drinks or she does not receive her ketuba.

And we inquire about it:

It is obvious

that she drinks, for she is fit to be retained?

And we answer:

Lest you say: Let the disqualified ones not multiply,

why should we increase those disqualified from entering the congregation in Israel? It is preferable not to make her drink and not to make peace between them, so that mamzerim will not be born.

It teaches us

that nevertheless they make her drink.

We learned in a beraita:

The wife of a convert or a freed slave.

And we inquire about it:

It is obvious

that she drinks? And we answer:

Lest you say

that since it is written at the beginning of the section of the sota, “

Speak to the children of Israel,”

we should expound: specifically the children of Israel

and not converts.

It teaches us

that the law of drinking also applies to converts.

And we object:

But say that this is indeed so,

that we should truly exclude converts?

And we answer: “

And you shall say,”

which is stated there later,

is an inclusion!

To include converts as well.

We learned in the Mishna:

The wife of a koen drinks.

And we inquire about it:

It is obvious

that she drinks?

And we answer:

Lest you say

that since it is written in the section of the sota, “

and she was not seized,”

it implies that only when she committed adultery willingly is she

forbidden

to her husband;

but here,

if

she was seized,

that she was forced,

she is permitted, but this one,

the wife of a koen,

since

even if

she was seized, she is forbidden

to her koen husband [for we expound “and she” to exclude the wife of a koen], the section does not speak of her, and

say that she should not drink.

It teaches us

that the wife of a koen also drinks.

We learned in the Mishna: The wife of a koen drinks

and is permitted to her husband.

And we inquire about it:

It is obvious

that if she is found pure, she is permitted to her husband? And we answer:

Rav Huna said: In a case where she is wasting away,

where she became ill through drinking the bitter waters, and nevertheless we do not suspect that she committed adultery.

And we object:

“Where she is wasting away”—then the waters examined her,

and it became clear that she indeed committed adultery, and the reason she did not die was that she had merit, as we learned above in the Mishna [20a]?

And we answer:

In a case where she is wasting away through the limbs,

where she did not become ill in the intestines and thighs, but in her head and the rest of her limbs; and had she committed adultery, she would have become ill in the intestines and thighs, in accordance with the manner of the examination by the waters.

Lest you say: This one,

this woman,

did commit adultery,

but she committed adultery only under compulsion,

and the reason the waters did not examine her in their usual manner

in the intestines and thighs

is because she committed adultery under compulsion, and with regard to a koen she is forbidden.

It teaches us

that she is permitted to her husband.

We learned in the Mishna:

The wife of a eunuch drinks.

And we inquire about it:

Is it obvious?

And we answer:

Lest you say: “

And a man gives you his lying,”

apart from your husband,”

the Merciful One said,

and it implies that her husband is capable of intercourse;

but here,

the eunuch,

he is not capable of this,

and the section of the sota was not stated concerning him.

It teaches us

that the verse comes only to place the husband’s intercourse before that of the adulterer, and not to exclude the wife of a eunuch; and a eunuch is indeed capable of intercourse, but he is not capable of sowing.

We learned in the Mishna:

Through all forbidden relations they warn.

And we inquire about it:

It is obvious

that he can warn her not to seclude herself with her relatives?