Sotah 7b (ז:) — the Talmud in English

And necklaces,

a type of jewelry that encircles the neck, or

nose rings and rings, are removed

and taken off

from her,

and all this

in order to disfigure her—

so that she will confess.

Afterward, the

Egyptian rope,

a rope made from the fiber that grows around the palm tree,

is tied

over her garments

above her breasts,

so that her garments will not fall to the ground.

And anyone

who wishes to come and see, except for her male and female slaves,

who are not permitted to come and see,

because she is emboldened by them,

meaning, she would be encouraged by their presence and would not confess if she had in fact committed adultery—and we want her to confess, so that the Ineffable Name will not be erased into the water—

and all the women are permitted to come

to see her,

as

it is stated

in the Prophets, in Ezekiel: “

And all the women shall be chastised, and they shall not act according to your lewdness.” —

For when they see all this, they will guard themselves more carefully against adultery.

Gemara:

And the Gemara discusses this:

From where are these matters derived? —

From where did the Sages learn that the drinking of the sota, which takes place in the Temple, must be performed by the Great Sanhedrin of seventy-one judges, and that a Sanhedrin of twenty-three does not suffice?

And we answer:

Rav Hiyya bar Gamda said,

in the name of

Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina: It is derived by means of a verbal analogy between “Torah” and “Torah,”

learning this through a gezerah shavah from the word “Torah.”

As

it is written here,

in the passage concerning the sota: “And the priest shall perform for her all the Torah.”

And it is written there,

in the passage concerning the rebellious elder:

“According to the Torah that they teach you.”

And we learn through a gezerah shavah from the word “Torah,” which appears in both passages:

Just as there,

just as in the case of a rebellious elder, he is judged

by seventy-one, so

here, in the case of the sota, she is judged by the Sanhedrin

of seventy-one.

And they intimidate her: But we raised a contradiction,

the Gemara challenges our Mishna from the words of a beraita: Why does the Mishna mention that she is intimidated so that she will confess that she became impure and will not drink, but does not mention that she is also comforted and reassured not to fear if she is pure?

And so we find in a beraita:

Just as they intimidate her so that she will not drink, so they intimidate her so that she will drink.

And this is what

they say to her: My daughter, if you are certain that you are pure

and have not become impure,

stand upon your certainty

—rely on your knowledge that you are free of transgression—

and drink

the water without fear,

because the bitter water

the water of the sota

is comparable only to dry powder placed upon living flesh,

for

if there is a wound

in the flesh,

it penetrates

the powder

and descends

into the body.

But if

there is no wound, it has no effect

and causes no harm

at all,

so why did the Mishna not mention this?

And we answer—

It is not difficult.

Here,

it is before the scroll has been erased.

Here, it is after the scroll has been erased.

That is to say: The Mishna, which mentions only the intimidation if she became impure, is referring to the time when they have not yet erased the Ineffable Name appearing in the sota scroll. At that point, they do not comfort her; rather, they frighten her so that she will not confess, thereby causing the Ineffable Name to be erased. But after they have already erased the scroll into the water, on the contrary, they comfort and reassure her so that she will not fear, in order that she will not confess that she is impure if she is in fact pure, thereby bringing disrepute upon her family.

And he says before her various matters, etc.

The Sages taught: He says before her

the priest

matters of aggada and events that occurred,

which are brought

in the early Writings.

For example, as Scripture alludes in Proverbs:

“Which the wise declare, and have not concealed from their fathers,”

as this verse alludes to Judah and Reuben, who sinned and confessed their sins.

Judah confessed regarding the incident of Tamar when he said, “She is more righteous than I,” and was not ashamed.

What was his end?—

He merited life in the World-to-Come.

Likewise,

Reuben confessed

regarding the incident of Bilhah, and was not ashamed. What was his end?—

He merited life in the World-to-Come.

The woman, too, would do well to confess that she sinned, and thereby merit reward.

And what was their reward

for Judah and Reuben?

The Gemara wonders: What is the question,

“What was their reward”?

As we have said!

Their reward has already been stated: They merited life in the World-to-Come.

Rather, the Gemara explains:

What was their reward

for Judah and Reuben

in this world—

They merited, as it is written in Job:

“To them alone was the land given, and no stranger passed among them.”

That is, Reuben merited taking a portion and inheritance in the Land before everyone else, while Judah merited royalty, which was given only to the descendants of Judah and not to strangers.

And we challenge this—

Granted, with regard to Judah, we find that he confessed, —

we find in the verse that he confessed,

as it is written—

“And Judah recognized them and said: She is more righteous than I.”

But with regard to Reuben—

from where do we know that he confessed? From where

do we know that he confessed his sin?

And we answer—

As Rav Shmuel bar Naḥmani said,

in the name of

Rabbi Yoḥanan.

What is the meaning of that which is written: “Let Reuben live and not die, and this for Judah”?

What is the meaning of the expression “and this,” which is stated before Moses’s blessing to Judah? Throughout all the years that Israel was in the wilderness, while the bones of the tribes were with them,

the bones of Judah were rolling around in the coffin,

for he had excommunicated himself when he said to his father: “I shall have sinned against you all the days”!

Until Moses arose and pleaded for mercy on his behalf. He said before Him: Master of the Universe! What caused Reuben to confess

that he had sinned?—

Judah!

By confessing regarding the incident of Tamar, he caused Reuben to confess as well.

And this is the meaning of

“and this for Judah,”

that is, Reuben’s confession, mentioned earlier, was due to Judah’s confession.

Moses our teacher then continued and said: Since this is so—“The Lord shall hear Judah’s voice”!

His limbs became whole—

Judah’s limbs returned to their places, joining together, and ceased rolling.

But they were not bringing him into the heavenly academy.

His soul had still not ascended to the academy on high.

Moses our teacher continued to pray:

“And You shall bring him to his people.”

They raised his soul to the heavenly court.

But he did not yet know how to deliberate and answer in discussion of Torah matters with the Sages—

and Judah still did not know how to engage in give-and-take with the students of the heavenly academy.

Moses continued to pray:

“His hands will contend for him.”

But still,

his Torah discussion did not accord with the halakha.

He did not merit having his words accepted.

Moses continued to pray:

“And may You be a help against his adversaries

be.”

In any event, it is explained in this beraita that the verse “and this for Judah” alludes to Reuben’s confession regarding the incident of Bilhah.

And we challenge this—

Granted, Judah confessed in order that Tamar would not be burned—

Judah confessed appropriately, in order to prevent Tamar from being burned, as without his confession they would have thought that she had committed adultery.

But with regard to Reuben, why did he confess—

why did he confess?

But Rav Sheshet said: I consider brazen the one who details his sins—

he is brazen in my eyes who publicizes his sins and is not ashamed of them.

And we answer—

In order that his brothers would not be suspected along with him —

Reuben confessed so that they would know that none of his other brothers was among those who had sinned, and would not suspect each of his brothers on the basis of uncertainty.

If she says: I am impure

etc.:

Infer from this—

from the Mishna’s statement that she writes a receipt for her marriage contract, we learn

that a receipt is written,

whenever a debtor pays his debt, and the creditor is not required to tear up the document.

And this is contrary to the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, who maintains [Bava Batra 170b] that a receipt is not written; rather, the creditor must tear up the document. Otherwise, the debtor would have to safeguard the receipt for his entire life.

Abaye said: Teach in the Mishna: She tears it.—

Nothing can be proven from here. Rather, it is possible to read in the Mishna, instead of “she writes a receipt for her marriage contract”: “she tears up her marriage contract,” which accords with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

Rava said to him: But it teaches: She writes a receipt!

The correct reading in the Mishna is indeed “she writes a receipt for her marriage contract,” and the reading should not be altered; thus, the proof returns that the Mishna’s opinion is that a receipt is written.

Rather, Rava said—

even if the reading is “she writes a receipt for her marriage contract,” it is possible to reject the proof, for

we are dealing with a place where a marriage contract is not written,

and the Mishna is being established in a place where there is no custom to write a marriage contract; rather, they rely on the enactment of the court that obligates payment of a marriage contract. Therefore, she is required to write a receipt, since there is no marriage contract that can be torn up.

And if she says: I am pure, they bring her up to the Eastern Gate:

And we challenge this:

They bring her up?