Sotah 27a — the Talmud in English

Shmuel said: A man should marry ![](pamud.bmp "

exact page location")

a suspected adulteress,

a woman about whose adulteries everyone speaks,

but he should not marry the daughter of a suspected adulteress.

Because

this one,

the suspected adulteress,

comes from a valid drop.

And

if

this one,

her daughter,

comes from an invalid drop,

perhaps she was born from a gentile or from a mamzer.

And Rabbi Yohanan said: A man should marry the daughter of a suspected adulteress, but he should not marry a suspected adulteress.

Because

this one,

the daughter,

stands with a presumption of validity,

for there is no concern regarding her that perhaps she will commit adultery beneath her husband and become forbidden to him; and there is also no concern that perhaps she was born from invalid intercourse, as he explains below that most intercourse of a woman is from the husband, and presumably she was born from her mother's intercourse with her father.

And

if

this one,

the suspected adulteress,

does not stand with a presumption of validity,

rather she is liable to commit adultery beneath him without his knowledge, and afterward he will have intercourse with her in prohibition.

It was objected

from that which was taught

a man may marry a suspected adulteress!

And it is difficult for Rabbi Yohanan?

And we answer:

Rava said: And can you understand it thus?

And do you think that

he marries

her

initially, a suspected adulteress? But surely it is certain that initially it is not proper to do so, lest she corrupt him.

Rather,

you are compelled to emend this beraita and to read:

"

If he married

a suspected adulteress"—it is permitted after the fact to keep her; and if so, one may say that there is another error in the words of the tannay, and

also teach: "

the daughter of a suspected adulteress."

And the dispute between Shmuel and Rabbi Yohanan is also not concerning the outset, but when a man finds no other woman whom he can marry besides these two, which of them is preferable.

And the halakha is: A man should marry the daughter of a suspected adulteress, but he should not marry a suspected adulteress.

For Rav Tahlifa bar Ma'arava taught before Rav Abbahu: A woman who commits adultery—her children are valid,

because

most intercourse

of a woman is

after the husband,

and the daughter is a "suspected adulteress" who is valid with regard to her lineage; and if so, she is preferable, for she is always presumed permitted to her husband, to the suspected adulteress herself, who is liable to commit adultery beneath him and become forbidden to him.

Rav Amram inquired: If she was exceedingly promiscuous,

in a manner that raises concern that most of her intercourse was with other men,

what is

the law? Is it also the case that her children are valid?

And we explain the inquiry:

According to the one who says: A woman becomes pregnant only near the onset of her menstrual period,

the day before the appearance of the menstrual flow,

you need not inquire of this,

for her children are not valid,

for he does not know about it,

since her husband does not know when it is,

and he does not guard her,

he cannot guard her so that she will not commit adultery on that day and become pregnant through adultery.

When you inquire of this, according to the one who says:

A woman becomes pregnant only near her immersion,

what is the law?

Do we say:

Since he knows about it,

her husband knows the day of her immersion,

he certainly guards her,

so that she will not commit adultery then,

or perhaps, since she is promiscuous

she is

exceedingly, she does not? She suddenly disappears from him, and he cannot guard her even at that time?

And we conclude:

It stands unresolved!

We learned in the Mishna:

"And these are those whom

the court

warns."

The Sages taught:

It is stated in the section of the suspected adulteress: "When any man’s wife goes astray." And it would have been sufficient for it to write

"man"

once.

What does

"any man"

teach? It comes to include the wife of a deaf-mute, the wife of an imbecile, and the wife of one afflicted with bewilderment of heart,

who was stricken with confusion of heart,

and one whose husband went to an overseas country, and one whose husband was imprisoned in the prison, for the court warns them,

they warn the woman, if they see that she conducts herself immodestly, not to seclude herself with other men, in order

to disqualify them from their marriage contracts

if they seclude themselves.

One might

think that this warning would be effective

also for making them drink?

The verse teaches

with regard to making her drink:

"And the man shall bring his wife."

And it implies that specifically her husband can make her drink.

Rabbi Yose says:

The warning of the court is effective

also for making her drink.

Not that they themselves make her drink, but rather

when her husband leaves the prison, he shall make her drink.

And we explain:

In what do they disagree,

the Rabbis and Rabbi Yose?

The Rabbis hold: We require

"and he warned"—

"and he shall bring."

For only when he warned her can he make her drink.

Rabbi Yose holds: We do not require

"and he warned and he shall bring,"

but her husband can make her drink even on the basis of the warning of the court.

The Sages taught:

It is stated at the end of the section of the suspected adulteress: "This is the law of jealousies,

when a woman goes astray beneath her husband."

And this verse is superfluous, and it comes

to compare a man to a woman, and a woman to a man.

And we inquire concerning it:

For what halakhic matter?

For which laws were these compared to one another?

And we answer:

Rav Sheshet said: Just as, if he was blind, he would not make her drink,

her,

as it is written,

"And it was hidden from the eyes of her husband,"

and it implies that he sees with his eyes,

so too, if she was blind, she would not drink.

Rav Ashi said:

For this the comparison comes:

Just as one who was lame

limps,

and one who was without hands

who has no hands,

would not drink,

because of

as it is written