1)

(a)How can the Tana state that they took the Sotah up to Sha'ar Nikanor, when she was already there?

(b)We have a precedent for this from a statement by Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar. What did he say?

1)

(a)The Tana states that they took the Sotah up to Sha'ar Nikanor, despite the fact that she was already there - because they would move her around, making her walk a considerable distance in order to wear down her resistance, in an attempt to get her to confess.

(b)We have a precedent for this from a statement by Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar - who issued a similar ruling with regard to witnesses of matters of life and death (that they would move them around to get them to retract should they not be quite certain of their testimony).

2)

(a)We know that a Sotah and a Metzora had to stand by Sha'ar Nikanor, because the Torah writes "Lifnei Hash-m". But why does a Yoledes have to stand there?

(b)What do we learn from the word "Tishm'ru" (in the Pasuk in Pinchas "Tishm'ru Lehakriv Li be'Mo'ado")?

(c)Who else is obligated to stand in the same spot for the same reason as a Yoledes (even though the Tana does not mention them)?

(d)The Tana Kama of a Beraisa prohibits giving two Sotos to drink simultaneously, because the one might encourage the other to dig in her heels and persist that she is innocent. On what grounds does Rebbi Yehudah consider this reason superfluous?

2)

(a)We know that a Sotah and a Metzora had to stand by Sha'ar Nikanor, because the Torah writes "Lifnei Hash-m". A Yoledes has to stand there - just like everybody else who brought a Korban, because it is not befitting to bring a Korban and not stand by it (at least in the same area - of "Lifnei Hash-m") when it is brought.

(b)We learn from the word "Tishmeru (in the Pasuk in Pinchas "Tishm'ru Lehakriv Li be'Mo'ado") - that a person is expected to stand by his Korban whilst it is being brought.

(c)A Zav and a Zavah are obligated to stand in the same spot for the same reason as a Yoledes.

(d)The Tana Kama of a Beraisa prohibits giving two Sotos to drink simultaneously, because the one might encourage the other to dig in her heels and persist that she is innocent. Rebbi Yehudah considers this reason superfluous - seeing as we already have a Pasuk "ve'Hishbi'a Osah" ha'Kohen" (implying one Sotah and not two).

3)

(a)If the Tana Kama does not disagree with Rebbi Yehudah's D'rashah, why does he see fit to give an additional reason?

(b)What are the ramifications of Rebbi Shimon's D'rashah?

(c)In view of the principle 'Ein Osin Mitzvos Chavilos Chavilos', under what circumstances ...

1. ... is this permitted?

2. ... is it permitted to pierce the ears of two Avadim Ivrim (who want to remain beyond the initial six-year period)?

(d)What is the reason for the principle 'Ein Osin Mitzvos Chavilos Chavilos'?

3)

(a)The Tana Kama does not disagree with Rebbi Yehudah's D'rashah, and the reason that he sees fit to give as additional reason - because the Tana Kama is Rebbi Shimon, who Darshens the Torah's reasons and fixes the Halachah accordingly.

(b)The ramifications of Rebbi Shimon's D'rashah - are that if the first Sotah is trembling with trepidation at the effect of the water, it is permitted to give a second Sotah to drink at the same time.

(c)In view of the principle 'Ein Osin Mitzvos Chavilos Chavilos' ...

1. ... says Abaye, this is permitted - provided the two Sotos are handled by two different Kohanim.

2. ... it is permitted to pierce the ears of two Avadim Ivrim (who want to remain beyond the initial six-year period) - provided the two servants either belong to two different masters, or the ceremony takes place in two different Batei-Din.

(d)The reason for the principle 'Ein Osin Mitzvos Chavilos Chavilos' is - because by performing two Mitzvos simultaneously, one conveys the impression that the Mitzvos are a burden and that one is trying to get rid of them as quickly as possible.

4)

(a)How do we learn from the Pasuk "u'Para es Rosh ha'Ishah" that the Kohen is obligated to uncover not only the Sotah's hair, but also part of her body?

(b)Then what do we learn from the word "Rosh"? Why is that not included in "ha'Ishah"?

4)

(a)We learn that the Kohen is obligated to uncover not only the Sotah's hair, but also part of her body from the word "ha'Ishah" (in the Pasuk "u'Para es Rosh ha'Ishah )" - because otherwise, the Torah should have written "u'Para es Roshah".

(b)And we learn from the word "Rosh" - that the Kohen not only uncovers her hair, but that he also undoes her plaits.

5)

(a)When stoning a man, says Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, one covers him in front with a loin-cloth (but no more, in order not to prolong his death and increase the pain); whereas a woman one covers at the back, too. What do the Rabbanan say?

(b)How does Rabah reconcile Rebbi Yehudah in the Beraisa with Rebbi Yehudah in the Mishnah? Seeing as in the latter case he is more concerned about the effect of the woman on the men present than the Rabbanan, why is he less concerned than they in the former case?

(c)How does Rava reconcile the contradictory opinions of the Rabbanan in the two places?

(d)And why is Rebbi Yehudah not afraid that the men present will molest other women after the Sotah's death, on account of what they saw?

5)

(a)When stoning a man, says Rebbi Yehudah in a Beraisa, one covers him in front with a loin-cloth (but no more, in order not to prolong his death and increase the pain); whereas a woman one covers at the back, too. The Rabbanan say - that a woman is stoned fully-clothed.

(b)Rabah reconciles Rebbi Yehudah in the Beraisa with Rebbi Yehudah in the Mishnah like this: In the latter case he is more concerned about the effect of the woman on the young Kohanim (and other men present) than the Rabbanan, because assuming the woman to be innocent, they will proceed to molest her for the rest of her life; whereas in the former case, where she is about to die anyway, there is nothing to worry about.

(c)Rava reconciles the contradictory opinions of the Rabbanan in the two places - by reminding us that their reason in our Mishnah is based on the Pasuk in Yechezkel "ve'Nosru Kol ha'Nashim" (so that all the women who are there should take note what happens to a woman who behaves in this way), a lesson which is unnecessary in the case of the Beraisa, where the woman's death will serve that purpose admirably.

(d)Neither is Rebbi Yehudah afraid that the men present, on account of what they saw, will molest other women after the Sotah's death - becauseRava (or Rabah) has already taught that it is not the way of the Yeitzer-ha'Ra for a man to molest Rachel because he saw Leah.

8b----------------------------------------8b

6)

(a)What does Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah say to explain why the Rabbanan not increase the warning to other women by disgracing the guilty woman too?

(b)The same Amora however, does require the woman to be killed partially uncovered. Does this mean that his holds like the Rabbanan?

(c)What do the Rabbanan say?

6)

(a)Rav Nachman Amar Rabah bar Avuhah explains that the Rabbanan do not want to increase the warning by disgracing the guilty woman too - because of the Pasuk in Kedoshim "ve'Ahavta le'Rei'acha Kamocha", which teaches us to treat every person with respect.

(b)The same Amora however, does require the woman to be killed partially uncovered, not because he holds like the Rabbanan, but - because, Rebbi Yehudah is of the opinion that reducing the pain of the woman's death takes precedence over her dignity ...

(c)... whereas the Rabbanan hold - that her dignity takes precedence over the pain.

7)

(a)We learned in our Mishnah that the Kohen would change her white clothes for black ones. Was this absolutely binding?

(b)Having taught us that the Kohen uncovered the top of her body to make her look ugly, why does the Tana need to add that he should remove her jewelry? Is that not obvious?

(c)This is based on the mantra 'Shali'ach Artil ve'Sayam Mesa'ani'. What does that mean?

7)

(a)We learned in our Mishnah that the Kohen would change her white clothes for black ones - provided she did not look more attractive in black clothes.

(b)Having taught us that the Kohen uncovered the top of her body to make her look ugly, he nevertheless needs to add that he should remove her jewelry. This is - because we may otherwise have thought that a woman wearing jewelry whilst not properly dressed looks silly, and that she should therefore continue to wear it.

(c)This is based on the mantra 'Shali'ach Artil ve'Sayam Mesa'ani', meaning - that a naked man wearing shoes looks ridiculous.

8)

(a)Rebbi Aba asked Rav Huna whether the reason for tying the Chevel ha'Metzari around the Sotah's chest is to stop her clothes from falling down or whether it was 'measure for measure' because she had worn a nice belt to attract her lover. What are the ramifications of the She'eilah?

(b)What did Rav Huna reply?

(c)First the Tana of our Mishnah says that whoever wanted to come and watch was welcome to do so; then he says that only the women were invited. On what grounds does Rava reject Abaye's suggestion that the Tana is only referring women?

(d)Then how does he reconcile the two statements?

8)

(a)Rebbi Aba asked Rav Huna whether the reason for tying the Chevel ha'Metzari around the Sotah's chest is to stop her clothes from falling down - in which case any rope will do (should a Chevel ha'Metzari not be available); or whether it was 'measure for measure' (because she wore a pretty belt to attract her lover), and Chazal insisted on that kind of rope because it is ugly.

(b)Rav Huna replied - by citing the Mishnah, which specifically gives the first of the two reasons (as the main one).

(c)First the Tana of our Mishnah says that whoever wanted to come and watch was welcome to do so; then he says that only the women were invited. Rava rejects Abaye's suggestion that the Tana throughout is only speaking about women - on the grounds that, in the Reisha, he specifically writes 'Kol ha'Rotzeh Lir'os ... '.

(d)So he reconciles the two statements by establishing the first one as being voluntary (that men are invited to watch the spectacle should they wish to do so) - whereas the second one is obligatory (in that all women in the vicinity of the Sha'ar Nikanor had to come and witness the spectacle).

9)

(a)Hash-m always punishes 'measure for measure'. How does the Tana of our Mishnah portray this principle here in her punishment for the way she behaved in the three stages of sin: whilst preparing for the sin, at the commencement of the sin and during the sin?

(b)What statement did Rav Yosef (as well as the Tana of the Beraisa) make with regard to nowadays, when there is no longer a Sanhedrin to put into practice the four deaths of Beis-Din?

(c)Someone who deserves Sekilah, might die by falling off the roof, someone who deserves Sereifah might be burned to death. What else might happen to a person who deserves to die by ...

1. ... stoning?

2. ... burning?

(d)Someone who is Chayav Hereg (the sword) might be captured and put to death by the ruling power, and someone who deserves Chenek (strangulation) might drown. What else might happen to someone who deserves to die by ...

1. ... the sword?

2. ... by strangulation?

9)

(a)Hash-m always punishes measure for measure. The Tana of our Mishnah portrays this principle here in her punishment for the way she behaved in the three stages of sin inasmuch as - her ornaments are removed because she adorned herself in preparation for the sin; she is exposed - because she exposed herself to her lover at the commencement of the sin, whereas the curse begins with her thigh and ends with her stomach - because that is the order in which she actually sinned.

(b)Rav Yosef (as well as the Tana of a Beraisa) stated with regard to nowadays, that, even though there is no longer a Sanhedrin to put into practice the four deaths of Beis-Din - the Din of the four deaths nevertheless takes effect.

(c)Someone who deserves Sekilah, might die by falling off the roof; someone who deserves Sereifah might be burned to death. Alternatively, a person who deserves to die by ...

1. ... stoning - might be bowled over and killed by a lion, by ...

2. ... burning - he might be poisoned by a snake.

(d)Someone who is Chayav Hereg (the sword) might be captured and put to death by the ruling power, and someone who deserves Chenek (strangulation) might drown. Alternatively, someone who is Chayav ...

1. ... Hereg - might be killed by armed robbers.

2. ... Chenek - might contract quinsy (an illness that chokes a person to death).

10)

(a)What do we learn from the Pasuk in Yeshayah ...

1. ... "be'Sa'asah be'Shalchah Terivenah"?

2. ... "Ki Chol Se'on So'en be'Ra'ash"?

(b)And what do we learn from the Pasuk in Koheles "Achas le'Achas Limtzo Cheshbon"?

(c)Based on these Pesukim, why ...

1. ... is the Sotah made to stand by Sha'ar Nikanor?

2. ... is her head-cover removed and placed at her feet?

3. ... does her face turn yellow?

4. ... do her eyes protrude?

10)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "be'Sa'asah be'Shalchah Terivenah" - that Hash-m punishes measure for measure.

2. ... "Ki Chol Se'on So'en be'Ra'ash" - that the principle of measure for measure (is not confined to those who are Chayav Misah, but) extends even to smaller sins.

(b)We learn from the Pasuk "Achas le'Achas Limtzo Cheshbon" - that sometimes Hash-m punishes bit by bit until the punishment is complete.

(c)Based on these Pesukim ...

1. ... the Sotah is made to stand by Sha'ar Nikanor to be disgraced in front of everybody - because she stood outside her house to receive her lover.

2. ... her head-cover is removed and placed at her feet - because she wore beautiful hats when he came to visit her.

3. ... her face turns yellow - because she painted her face to look pretty.

4. ... her eyes protrude - because she painted her eyes to look attractive.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF