Sotah 32b (לב:) — the Talmud in English

Gemara:

We learned in the Mishna: And these are recited in any language: the passage concerning a sota. And we explain:

From where do we derive

that the passage concerning a sota is recited in any language? And we explain: Because

it is written

in the passage concerning a sota: “

And he shall say to the woman

‘If no man has lain with you, and if you have not gone astray to impurity under your husband, be clear from this water of bitterness that brings the curse,’” and “to the woman” indicates words that enter her heart, so that she will understand the language; therefore we have learned:

in any language in which he recites it.

The Sages taught: They make known to her

The Sages taught:

They make known

to her

[before erasing the scroll]

in any language that she hears

[that she understands]:

for what

[why]

she drinks, and in what she drinks; for what she became impure, and through what she became impure,

and all of these matters are explained one by one. “

For what does she drink”:

because of the matters of warning and seclusion,

that is, immodest conduct caused her to drink. “

And in what does she drink”:

in a contemptible vessel,

in an earthenware bowl.

For what did she become impure: because of frivolity and childishness,

that is, what brought her to impurity? Frivolity and levity. He says this in order to discipline the women, so that they will not behave frivolously with men, thereby causing this woman to reach the state of “and her belly shall swell.”

And through what did she become impure: unintentionally or intentionally, under duress

or

willingly,

that is, he details for her the laws that apply if she became impure in any of these circumstances: that she dies only if she did so intentionally and willingly, but not if she did so unintentionally, such as when they told her that her husband had died, or if it occurred under duress.

And why so much

that we detail the laws of the sota for her?

Granted, he says the other matters in order to discipline the women, so that they will not behave frivolously with men, thereby causing them to suffer the swelling of the belly.

So as not to cast aspersions on the bitter waters,

for if she became impure under duress or unintentionally and was not tested, she should not think: Even if I had become impure intentionally and willingly, the waters would not have tested me.

We learned in the Mishna: These are recited in any language, etc.,

the confession over the tithe:

And we explain:

From where do we derive

that it is recited in any language?

Because

it is written: “

And you shall say before the Lord

your God: I have cleared out the sacred things from the house”—

And he derives

by means of a gzera shava:

“saying” [“and you shall say”]

which is stated concerning the confession over the tithe,

from

“saying” that is stated concerning the

sota [“and he shall say to the woman”]: Just as the saying stated concerning the sota may be in any language in which he recites it, so too the saying stated concerning the confession over the tithe is

Let us derive “

in any language in which he recites it.

Rabbi Zevid

asked

Abaye:

From where do we know that the gzera shava “saying, saying” was accepted in order to derive the law from the sota?

Let us derive

“saying”

“saying”

from

the blessings and curses recited by the

Levites [“And they shall respond and say”]:

saying”

Just as there

concerning the Levites, it is only

in the sacred tongue,

as explained in our Mishna,

so too here,

concerning the confession over the tithe, it is only

in the sacred tongue!?

And we answer:

We derive

“saying”

alone

[a saying unaccompanied by a response] stated concerning the confession over the tithe,

from

“saying”

alone

stated concerning the sota.

But we do not derive a saying alone from a response and a saying [“And they shall respond and say”] stated concerning the Levites.

you learn this

It was taught: Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai says:

A person recites his praise in a low voice, but

his

shame

he recites

in a loud voice!

And from where?

His praise in a low voice,

you learn

from the confession over the tithe,

which is the person’s praise, for he says: “I have not transgressed any of Your commandments, nor have I forgotten,” and no response is mentioned concerning it, indicating that it is said in a low voice.

His shame in a loud voice,

you learn

from the declaration over the first fruits,

where he says: “An Aramean sought to destroy my father,” which is his shame, as he confesses that his ancestor Laban the Aramean was wicked, and concerning it the term “response” is stated [“And you shall respond and say”], indicating that it is said in a loud voice.

And we challenge this:

But

does a person really say

his shame in a loud voice!?

But Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai:

Why did the Sages institute

that

prayer

be recited

silently,

as we find with Hannah [I Samuel 1:12]: “And it came to pass, as she prayed at length before the Lord, that Eli observed her mouth. Now Hannah spoke in her heart; only her lips moved, but her voice could not be heard”?

In order not to shame those who transgress,

who confess in their prayers the sins in their possession.

And from where do we know that one does not shame even those who transgress?

For the verse did not divide

the place

for slaughtering the offering

between a sin-offering and a burnt-offering,

that is, the verse did not assign the sin-offering [which comes for a sin] a different place of slaughter from that of the burnt-offering. Both are slaughtered on the north side of the outer altar in the Temple courtyard, so that people would not recognize it as a sin-offering and he would be ashamed.

Thus, it is not appropriate to proclaim one’s shame publicly in a loud voice

!? And we answer:

Do not say:

A person recites

his shame

in a loud voice;

rather, say:

A person recites

his distress

in a loud voice. When he announces loudly his distress—that Laban sought to destroy Jacob—and announces loudly Israel’s descent to Egypt [“and he went down to Egypt”], he is reciting his distress.

As it was taught,

that a person recites his distress in a loud voice:

It is written: “And the leper in whom the plague is, his garments shall be torn, and the hair of his head shall be loose, and he shall cover his upper lip,

and he shall call: Impure, impure

[the leper].” From here

it is necessary for him to make his distress known to the public, and the public—

as a result—

ask mercy for him.

whereas the blood of a burnt offering is sprinkled on the altar

And

so,

anyone to whom something

bad

happens must make it known to the public, and the public asks mercy for him.

The essential passage: Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai: Why did they institute silent prayer? In order not to shame those who transgress, for the verse did not divide the place between a sin-offering and a burnt-offering.

And we wonder:

But

is it the case that

the

sin-offering does not differ from the burnt-offering, such that you say that the Torah took care not to distinguish it from the burnt-offering so that he would not be ashamed

?

But there is a distinction between the sin-offering and the burnt-offering in

the blood.

For

the blood of a sin-offering

is sprinkled on the altar

above

the scarlet line [the red line that ran around the middle of the altar],

whereas

the

blood of a burnt-offering

is sprinkled on the altar

below

the scarlet line

!?

And if so, what advantage is there in their being slaughtered in one place? In any event, he is already standing in a state of shame !? And we answer: The difference between them concerning the blood does not shame him, because

there the priest knows

[only the priest knows about it], but no one else in the world knows, and there is no shame in the matter.

We nevertheless challenge this:

But there is another distinction:

the

sin-offering comes from a

What can be said about the sin offering for idolatry, which necessarily must be a she-goat

female, whereas the

What can be said!?

burnt-offering comes only from a

[he shames himself],

male!?

And we answer:

There, the females are concealed

by

the tail

[the females are covered by the tail], and one cannot tell whether it is female or male.

And we challenge this:

That works for a ewe,

whose being female is indeed not apparent, since it is covered by a tail; but

a she-goat,

which has no tail,

what can be said? Its being female is apparent, and it differs from a burnt-offering, which comes only from a male

!? And we answer:

There, he is the one who brings shame upon himself,

[he shames himself],

for he should have brought a ewe

[which has a tail],

but he brings a she-goat

[which has no tail]. The sin-offering is valid whether it is a ewe, whose sex is not apparent, or a she-goat, whose being female is apparent.

We nevertheless challenge this:

What can be said concerning the sin-offering for idolatry, which necessarily must be a she-goat

[it may come only as a she-goat, not as a ewe],

what can be said!?

And we answer:

There,

in the case of idolatry, the Torah indeed said that he should bring a she-goat in order to impose upon him the punishment of

being ashamed and continuing to be ashamed, so that he may achieve atonement

[he is shamed so that he will receive atonement through such a severe punishment].

We learned in the Mishna: These are recited in every language, etc.,

the Shema:

And we explain:

From where do we derive

that it is recited in every language?

Because

it is written: “

Hear, Israel,”

and this indicates:

in every language that you hear.

The Sages taught:

The Shema

is recited

as it is written

in the Holy Tongue,

the statement of Rabbi.

But the Sages say: It is recited in every language

that one chooses.

And we explain:

What is Rabbi’s reason?

Because the verse says: “

And they shall be

these words, which I command you today, upon your heart,” and this indicates:

they shall remain as they are,

as they are, without alteration; that is, in the Holy Tongue.

And

the reason of

the Sages

who hold that it is recited in every language is because

the verse says: “

Hear”

in every language that you hear.

And we challenge this:

But the Sages also have the verse written

“And they shall be,”

which indicates: They shall remain as they are, in the Holy Tongue!?

And we explain: The Sages hold that

that

“and they shall be” comes to teach

that one must not recite it

as part of the Shema

in reverse order,

for example, by saying: “And in your gates your house doorposts.”

And we challenge this:

But Rabbi,

who derives from “and they shall be” that it must be in the Holy Tongue—if so,

that one must not recite it in reverse order, from where does he derive it

[from where does he know this]?

And we explain:

Rabbi derives

that one may not recite the Shema in reverse order

from

the fact that it says “these words,” whereas it could have said

“words,”

and it says

“the words,”

in order to teach that one may not recite it in reverse order.

But the Sages,

who do not need this exposition to teach that one may not recite it in reverse order, since they already derive it from “and they shall be”: “

words,” “

the words,”

they do not understand

this as a valid exposition.

But Rabbi as well—

who holds that the Shema may be recited only in the Holy Tongue—

has the verse written: “

Hear,”

which indicates that it may be recited in every language that you hear.

And we answer:

That

“hear”

is needed

by Rabbi in order

to

teach: “

Make audible to your ears what you utter with your mouth”; and anyone who recites the Shema without making it audible to his ears has not fulfilled his obligation.

and anyone who recites the Shema without making his ears hear it has not fulfilled his obligation.

But the Sages—

who do not consider the word “hear” superfluous for deriving this law—

hold in accordance with the one

who says: One who recites the Shema without making it audible to his ears has fulfilled his obligation.

The Gemara asks further:

Let us say that Rabbi holds

[is it necessary to say that Rabbi holds]: