Sotah 4a — the Talmud in English

And how much

is

the measure of seclusion?

What is the amount of time during which, if she is secluded after the warning, we are concerned that she became impure and is forbidden to her husband by uncertainty—

the time of impurity.

And how much is the measure of impurity

? — the time of intercourse.

And how much is the measure of intercourse

? — the time of initial penetration.

The measure of the contact of the organ with that place.

And how much is the measure of initial penetration—

the time of circling a palm tree,

the amount of time that a person walks around the palm tree,

the words of Rabbi Ishmael.

Rabbi Eliezer says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time of mixing the cup,

the amount of time it takes to mix water into a cup containing a quarter-log that was mixed with wine.

Rabbi Joshua says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time needed to drink it,

a cup containing a quarter-log.

Ben Azzai says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time

the amount of time needed

to roast an egg.

Rabbi Akiva says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time needed to swallow it,

to drink the egg.

Rabbi Judah ben Beteira says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time needed to swallow

the drinking of

three eggs, one after the other.

Rabbi Eliezer ben Jeremiah says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time

the amount of time that a weaver takes

to tie a weaver’s thread,

to tie the thread that was torn for him in the middle of the weaving.

Hanin ben Pinhas says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time needed for her to extend

the woman

her hand into her mouth, to take a splinter,

to remove the splinter found between her teeth.

Pelimo says:

The measure of the time of seclusion is—

the time needed for her to extend her hand to a basket to take a loaf—

even though there is no proof for the matter

that it is the measure of extending her hand to the basket, nevertheless we find

a remembrance for the matter—

for it is written in Proverbs, “

For on account of a prostitute a man is reduced to a loaf of bread.”

Thus, the verse compares the matter of a prostitute to a loaf of bread; and although this is not complete proof, since the verse does not speak of extending a hand, there is a remembrance for the matter.

The Gemara asks:

And all these, why do I need them?

Why did the tanna lengthen and write that the measure is the time of impurity, the time of intercourse, the time of initial penetration, and the time of circling a palm tree? For he could have written briefly that the measure of seclusion is the measure of impurity, and the measure of impurity is the measure of circling a palm tree.

The Gemara answers:

They are necessary—

For if he had taught,

if the tanna had written only

“the time of impurity,” I would have said

that the measure required is

the time of

her impurity and her enticement,

that the measure of impurity alone is insufficient, but that the measure of the requirements of intercourse is also needed, and this includes the time needed to speak to her heart until she consents.

It teaches us

that the measure of impurity is only

the time of intercourse

alone, and there is no need to wait with him also for the time of consent, since it is possible that he had already spoken to her heart before she secluded herself with him, and immediately when she secluded herself with him they performed the act of intercourse.

And if he had taught,

if the tanna had written only

“the time of intercourse,” I would have said, the time of completed intercourse,

and the measure of time of completed intercourse is required.

It teaches us

that the measure of time during which there could have been

initial penetration is sufficient.

And if he had informed us of the time of initial penetration,

even if it had been written “the time of intercourse” and “the time of initial penetration,”

I would have said, the time of initial penetration and her enticement,

I would have said that “the time of intercourse” means the time of initial penetration, and it comes to exclude the need for the measure of completed intercourse; however, he still would not have informed us that seclusion for the measure of time of consent is unnecessary, and therefore—

it teaches us “the time of impurity,”

therefore the tanna wrote “the time of impurity,” from which it would have been understood that the measure of the time of impurity and of consent is required, and afterward the tanna wrote “the time of intercourse,” and came to teach us that seclusion for the measure of intercourse is sufficient, and seclusion for the measure of consent is not also required. And afterward the tanna wrote “the time of initial penetration,” to teach us that seclusion for the measure of completed intercourse is not required, but the measure of initial penetration is sufficient.

And concerning this Rabbi Eliezer concludes—

And how much is the time

of initial penetration? —

the time of circling a palm tree.

The Gemara asks:

And he raises a contradiction,

a contradiction to this from the Tosefta—

It is written in the verse, “

And she was secluded,”

that the woman becomes forbidden through seclusion.

And how much is the measure of seclusion? We have not heard.

When it says, when the verse says—

“And she became impure”—

since the Torah writes that the seclusion forbids her because we are concerned lest she became impure,

you must say

therefore we say that the measure is—

the time of impurity, the time of intercourse, the time of initial penetration, the time of a palm tree’s return—

the words of Rabbi Eliezer.

Rabbi Joshua says: the time of mixing the cup.

Ben Azzai says: the time needed to drink it.

Rabbi Akiva says: the time needed to roast an egg.

Rabbi Judah ben Beteira says: the time needed to swallow it.

The Gemara asks:

It might enter your mind: the circling of a palm tree is the same as the return of a palm tree.

The measure of Rabbi Ishmael, who says in the first beraita “the time of circling a palm tree,” and the measure of Rabbi Eliezer, who says in the second beraita “the time of a palm tree’s return,” are the same measure.

And if so, it is difficult:

there,

in the first beraita,

Rabbi Ishmael said “the time of circling a palm tree,” and Rabbi Eliezer disagreed with him

and said that the measure is the time of mixing the cup, implying that Rabbi Eliezer disputes the measure of circling a palm tree.

Whereas

here,

in the second beraita,

Rabbi Eliezer said “the time of a palm tree’s return.”

And this is the measure of Rabbi Ishmael in the first beraita; there it implies that he disputes him, whereas here it implies that he agrees with him.

The Gemara answers:

Abaye said:

The measure of Rabbi Ishmael, who says “the time of circling a palm tree,” is the amount of time that it takes for

a circling on foot

around the palm tree; and the measure of Rabbi Eliezer, who said “the time of a palm tree’s return,” is the measure of

a return by wind,

when the wind pushes the palm branch and it returns to its place.

And if so, the view of Rabbi Eliezer in the second beraita is not the same amount of time as the time of Rabbi Ishmael in the first beraita.

The Gemara is uncertain:

Rav Ashi inquired:

What is meant by

“a return by wind”?

Just as it goes and returns, it comes.

Is it the amount of time in which the wind pushes the branch and it returns?

Or perhaps, just as it goes and comes and then the branch stands in its place and its form.

It is not sufficient to measure the amount of time in which the branch returns to its place; rather, the measure of time needed for the branch to cease moving from the shaking with which the wind shook it is also required.

And we conclude:

It remains unresolved.

The Gemara asks:

There,

in the first beraita,

Rabbi Eliezer said

that the measure is

the time of mixing the cup; here,

in the second beraita, Rabbi Eliezer said that the measure is

the time of a palm tree’s return.

The Gemara answers:

Both this and that are one measure.

They are both the same measure, because the amount of time that the wind takes to move and return the branch is the same amount of time as the mixing of the cup, and Rabbi Eliezer merely stated the measure in two ways.

The Gemara asks:

There,

in the first beraita,

Rabbi Joshua said

that the measure is

the time needed to drink it.

Whereas

here,

in the second beraita,

he said

that the measure is

the time of mixing the cup.

The Gemara answers:

Say: the time needed to mix and drink.

Rabbi Joshua’s intention is the amount of time it takes to mix the cup and drink it, and Rabbi Joshua stated his words as a continuation of Rabbi Eliezer’s words: the mixing of the cup alone is insufficient, but the time needed to drink it is also required.

And the reason that in the second beraita he mentioned mixing, and did not mention drinking, is that ordinary mixing is for drinking, since the wine is spoiled by the water if he does not drink it immediately.

The Gemara asks:

And let him say: Both this and that are one measure!?

Why do we not answer that Rabbi Joshua’s intention is only the measure of mixing, but that he stated two forms of the same amount of time, as we explained according to Rabbi Eliezer?

The Gemara answers:

If so,

Rabbi Joshua

would be Rabbi Eliezer,

for this is Rabbi Eliezer’s measure in the first beraita, and what did Rabbi Joshua add to him by saying “the time needed to drink it”? Necessarily, his intention is that the measure of drinking it is also required.

The Gemara asks:

There,

in the first beraita,

Ben Azzai said

that the measure is

the time needed to roast an egg,

whereas

here,

in the second beraita,

he said

that the measure is

the time needed to drink it.

The Gemara answers:

Both this and that are one measure,

for these are two forms of the same amount of time.

The Gemara asks:

There,

in the first beraita,

Rabbi Akiva said

that the measure is

the time needed to swallow it; here,

in the second beraita,

he said

that the measure is

the time needed to roast an egg.

The Gemara answers:

Say: the time needed to roast an egg and swallow it.

He stated his words as an addition to Ben Azzai’s words: it is insufficient for her to be secluded for the time needed to roast the egg; rather, she must also be secluded for the time needed to swallow and drink it, since the ordinary practice is to drink it while it is hot, and not when it is soft.

The Gemara asks:

And let him say: Both this and that are one measure!

Why do we not answer that these are two forms of the same amount of time? And from where do we know that he came to add that the measure of both is required?

And the Gemara answers:

If so,

Rabbi Akiva

would be Ben Azzai! And

what did Rabbi Akiva add to Ben Azzai by saying “the time needed to swallow it”? It is the same measure.

And necessarily, Rabbi Akiva’s intention is that the measure of the time needed to roast and swallow it is required.

The Gemara asks:

There,

in the first beraita,

Rabbi Judah ben Beteira said

that the measure is

the time needed to swallow three eggs, one after the other. Whereas here,

in the second beraita,

he said

that the measure is

the time needed to swallow it.

The Gemara answers:

He said it according to the words of Rabbi Akiva.

His intention is not to disagree with Rabbi Akiva, but to give an answer to Rabbi Akiva’s words,

who said

that Rabbi Akiva said

“we measure by roasting and swallowing,”

and as we explained, the time of roasting, according to Ben Azzai, and also the time needed to swallow it are required; and Rabbi Judah said to him: Why do you need to say this?

Say: the measure of swallowing alone.

State that measure by swallowing alone, for the measure of roasting and swallowing is the same as

the time needed to swallow three eggs one after the other, that is,

that it is the same measure as

roasting and swallowing

one egg.

We learned in the first beraita:

Rabbi Eliezer ben Jeremiah says: the time needed to tie a weaver’s thread. —

He inquired

he was uncertain

Rav Ashi:

Was Rabbi Eliezer ben Jeremiah’s intention

that they are distant,

that the two threads that were severed are far from one another, and this takes more time

to join them, or that they are near

that they are [unclear: the source text is truncated].

Hanin ben Pinhas says

that the measure of seclusion is

the time needed for her to extend her hand into her mouth to take a splinter—

He inquired,

he was uncertain,

Rav Ashi:

Was Hanin ben Pinhas’s intention

that it is tight,

that the splinter is tightly lodged and it takes more time to remove it,

or that it is not tight,

and it takes less time to remove it?

It remains unresolved.

Pelimo says,

that the measure of seclusion is

the time needed for her to extend her hand to a basket to take a loaf—

He inquired

he was uncertain

Rav Ashi,

Was Pelimo’s intention

that it is tight,

that the loaf is wedged tightly inside the basket and it takes more time to remove it,

or that it is not tight,

that the measure is taken with a loaf that is not wedged tightly in the basket, which takes a little time to remove?

And likewise, he was uncertain:

with a new one,

whether the basket is new, so that it is more difficult to remove the bread because the threads of the weaving protrude there,

or with an old one,

an old basket, from which it is easier to remove the bread.

And likewise, he was uncertain:

with hot bread,

whether his intention is to bread that is hot, whose nature is to become crushed and slip from the hand, and it takes more time to remove it,

or with cold bread,

with cold bread, which is easier to remove.