How can the Torah consider "Im Lo Shachav Ish osach ... Hinaki", which implies innocence, to be a curse?
Rashi: The Shevu'ah lies in the inference - 'Im Shachav osach, Chinaki!' ('If he did lie with you, you will be strangled!') - only the Pasuk begins with "Im Lo Shachav ... " because it is customary, in cases involving the death sentence, to begin with acquittal. 1
According to R. Meir, who reuires both sides of a condition to be specifically stated, where is the side of guilt mentioned here?
Why does the Torah repeat the word "ha'Kohen"?
Sifri: To teach us that the Kohen must make her swear and she is not permitted to swear on her own volition. 1
Unlike Shevu'as ha'Eidus and Shevu'as Shevu'as Bituy - See Torah Temimah, note 104.
Why does the Torah write "Ve'amar el ha'Ishah" (and not simply 'Leimor' or 'Ve'amar Eilehah')?
Sotah, 32b: To teach the Kohen that he may read out the Parshah in any language that the Sotah understands (and that a woman who cannot hear is precluded from the Din of Sotah - Rambam (Hilchos Sotah, 2:3). 1
See Torah Temimah, note 106.
Why does the Pasuk add the phrase "ve Im Lo Satis Tum'ah Tachas Ishech"?
Ramban #1: To clarify that he (the Kohen) is referring to another man - and not her husband, who is also a man, and with whom she was entitled to have been intimate.
Ramban #2: Assuming that the word "Im Lo Shachav Ish osach" is missing a 'Hey' ('ha'Ish'), the Pasuk means that she did not lie with the man in question, nor with any other man whilst they were married. 1
Seforno: The Pasuk means that she did not commit adultery on this occasion or on any previous occasion. 2
Yerushalmi Sotah, 1:2: "Tachas Ishech" implies that, like the intimacy that with her husband, the intimacy with the adulterer was with her consent - otherwise, she remains permitted to her husband. 3
What are the connotations of "Hinaki"?
Rashi, Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan: It means that the Sotah will be proven innocent.
Seforno: Bearing in mind the Pasuk in Yisro Sh'mos, 20:7, "Ki Lo Yinakeh Hashem eis asher Yisa es Sh'mo la'Shav", implicating anyone who swears - even truthfully - unnecessarily, the Kohen releases her from the sin of Shevu'as Shav here, even though she brought the need to swear upon herself by her actions.
Seeing as the main objective of the Shevu'as ha'Alah is to implicate the Sotah in the event that she is guilty, why does the Torah open with "Im Lo Shachav Ish osach"?
Rashi: To teach us that in matters involving the death-sentence, Beis-Din always open the proceedings with the side of merit. 1
So as not to discourage the defendent in the event that he is innocent. See also Torah Temimah, note 110.
Rashi, citing Sanhedrin, 32b writes that the Kohen begins with "Im Lo Shachav...", because in cases concerning capital punishment, Beis-Din always open with the side of merit. In any case, the first side of a condition is always 'Hein' fulfillment of the condition - Gitin 75b)?
Moshav Zekeinim: The Gemara in Sanhedrin holds like the opinion that does not require a double T'nai and 'Hein' first.
