(Mishnah): Just like the water tests her, so the water tests him, for it says "u'Va'u... u'Va'u (the water will come)."

Just like she is forbidden to her husband (until she drinks), so she is forbidden to the Bo'el, for it says "Nitme'ah... Nitme'ah." R. Akiva says so";

R. Yehoshua: So R. Zecharyah ben ha'Katzav used to expound.

Rebbi says, it says "Im Nitme'ah... Im Nitme'ah" to teach that she is forbidden to her husband and to the Bo'el.

(Gemara): Our text of the Mishnah says "Va'u u'Va'u". Some teach "u'Va'u u'Va'u";

The one who says "Va'u u'Va'u" is R. Akiva (who expounds the prefix Vov). The one who says "u'Va'u u'Va'u" is R. Yishmael (he does not expound the Vov. Rather, he expounds the repetition.)

Our text of the Mishnah says "Nitme'ah v'Nitme'ah". Some teach "v'Nitme'ah v'Nitme'ah";

The one who says "Nitme'ah v'Nitme'ah" is R. Akiva. The one who says "v'Nitme'ah v'Nitme'ah" is R. Yishmael. (We explained this like SHA'AREI TORAS ERETZ YISRAEL. He and NO'AM YERUSHALMI reject those who say that they argue about Dibrah Torah k'Leshon Bnei Adam, for that applies only to a doubled word (Ish Ish, Himol Yimol), but not when the matter is repeated later. In our Mishnah, R. Akiva expounds Nitme'ah Nitme'ah! However, in the text of the Mishnayos and the Bavli, he expounds Nitme'ah v'Nitme'ah (i.e. the extra Vov). Perhaps a scribe deleted the Vov in the latter word in our Mishnah, to match the text he saw in the Gemara. (PF)

(Beraisa): It says "Bo" and "u'Vah" [to teach that the water checks him and her].

Question: Does the verse say so?!

Answer: It is like R. Ami said in the name of R. Yochanan - we remove [letters from words] and expound [through moving letters] from the beginning to the end. (The prefix Vov in u'Va'u is put after the Veis, to make "Bo". It can be read with the Aleph and the Vov is silent (Ba), or with the Vov and the Aleph is silent (Bo). Also, Vov is put in front of "Bah" to make "u'Vah". In all, we read Ba Bo u'Vah (it comes in him and in her).

(R. Chaninah citing R. Yirmeyah): We do so even in the middle of a Parshah - "v'Yatzakta Aleha Shemen" - [we expound as if it said] 'v'Yatzakta Shemen Al ha'Minchah' to include all Menachos for Yetzikah (pouring oil on them. "Aleha" is put between "Shemen" and "Minchah", and the Yud is removed from the middle, and it is divided into 'Al' and the letter 'Hei'. We explained this like KORBAN HA'EDAH in Nazir.)

Support (Mishnah): Just like the water checks her, so the water checks him.

"Ha'Me'ararim" - R. Tanchuma said, the Gematriya of ha'Me'ararim is (496), corresponding to the 248 limbs in her and the 248 limbs in him. )We explained this like MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.)

(Beraisa): Just like she is forbidden to her husband, so she is forbidden to the Bo'el. Just like she is forbidden to her husband's brother (she may not do Yibum), she is forbidden to the Bo'el's brother (if the Bo'el transgressed and married her, and he died).

Just like the water tests her for every Bi'ah that she has with her husband after [she had Bi'ah with] the Bo'el (her death is more painful), so it tests him (the Bo'el).

Note: There is an implied question. If the water kills her, but not the man with whom she was secluded, how can we explain this?

Answer: She, since she becomes forbidden whether [she had Bi'ah with] him or with another man, she is tested. However, he - when she drinks, he is tested. (He dies only if he sinned with her.)

Note: MEICHAL HA'MAYIM is unsure whether or not the water test other men [who had Bi'ah with her] about whom she was not warned. Perhaps only the first, who forbade her to her husband, dies like a Sotah; the others are like Stam adulterers with a woman whose husband was not Mekanei her. (PF) Presumably, if merit suspends her death, and it is not recognized, we can say the same for the Bo'el! The Gemara gave an answer according to all opinions.

Question: If the water tests him, but does not test her, [how can we explain this]?

Answer: I say that merit suspends for her.

Question: This is fine for the opinion that merit suspends, and it is not recognized. However, according to the opinion that merit suspends, and it is recognized, it was not recognized [that she will die. How can we explain this?]

Answer #1: I say that he drank exposed water (perhaps a snake drank from it and inserted venom, and his stomach) swelled.

Rejection: Exposed water would not afflict him like this (the stomach swells and the thigh falls)!

Answer #2: I say that he was secluded with other women.

Objection: Is it not reasonable to say that when she (the woman with him he sinned) drinks, he will be tested?!

Answer #3: The case is, he was Mezid and she was Shogeg. The water tests him, but does not test her.

Note: The Gemara now explicitly asks the implied question above, and gives other answers, like we answered this question.

Question: If the water tested her, but did not test him, [how can we explain this]?

Answer: I say that merit suspends for him.

Question: This is fine for the opinion that merit suspends, and it is not recognized. However, according to the opinion that merit suspends, and it is recognized, it was not recognized [that he will die. How can we explain this?]

Answer #1: I say that she drank exposed water, and [her stomach] swelled.

Rejection: Exposed water would not afflict her like this!

Answer #2: I say that she was secluded with other men (and sinned with one of them).

Question: If so, if her husband divorced her [or died, the one whom she was warned about] should be permitted to her! (Even if it is recognized that she will die, since he is healthy, he did not sin with her!)

Answer: [Perhaps] the case is, he was Shogeg, and she was Mezid, [therefore the water] tested her, but did not test him. (Therefore, we do not let him marry her. We explained the Sugya like MEICHAL HA'MAYIM.)

If he was Mezid and she was Shogeg, obviously she is permitted to her husband.

Question: If her husband divorced her, is [the one whom she was warned about] permitted to her (e.g. when it is recognized that he will die)?

Objection: We can say that he was Mezid about her, and you say so?! (Obviously he is forbidden!)

Note: I.e. even though she was permitted to her husband, she is forbidden to the Bo'el. TZIYON YERUSHALAYIM says that this is like one opinion in the Bavli.

Question: If he was Shogeg and she was Mezid, obviously she is forbidden to her husband. If he divorced her, is [the Bo'el] permitted to her?

Answer: Is it possible that [she forbade herself to her husband, and against his will] she leaves him, and you say so?! (Surely she is forbidden to the Bo'el!)

Question: What is the source that it depends on her? (If she is Shogeg, she is permitted to her husband, and when she is Mezid, she is forbidden to the Bo'el, even if he was Shogeg?)

Answer (Shimon bar Ba citing R. Yochanan): It says "v'El Eshes Amisecha Lo Siten Es Shechavtecha Lezara Letam'ah Vah" - it depends on her. If she was Mezid, she is forbidden. If she was Shogeg, she is permitted.