Previous daf

1) The Tana of our Mishnah draws a distinction between the 'ha'Omeres Temei'ah Ani Lach', 've'she'Ba'u Lah Eidim she'Hi Temei'ah', ve'ha'Omeres Eini Shosah', who neither drink nor receive their Kesuvah on the one hand - and 'Amar Ba'alah Eini Mashkeh', 've'she'Ba'alah Ba Alehah ba'Derech', on the other, who do not drink, but who do receive their Kesuvah (seeing as it is the husband who prevents her from drinking).

2)

(a) According to Beis Shamai, in the event that the Sotah's husband dies before she has managed to bring the Mei Sotah, she receives her Kesuvah and does not drink. When Beis Hillel say 'O Shosos O Lo Notlos Kesuvah' - they mean that she either drinks or she will not receive her Kesuvah.

(b) A woman whose husband died is no longer obligated to drink - because the Torah writes "Ve'heivi ha'Ish es Ishto", and if this is not possible, then she does not drink.

(c) According to Rebbi Meir, a pregnant or feeding woman whose husband married her without waiting the required time-period, who then becomes a Sotah, does not receive her Kesuvah; nor does she drink - because he is forbidden to remain with her (in which case she does not drink as we learned earlier).

(d) The Chachamim nevertheless require her to drink - because even though he cannot remain with her now, it is possible to separate from now, and remarry her later (in which case she is 'Ishah ha'Re'uyah Lo').

(a) According to the Chachamim, an Aylonis, an old woman and one who cannot have children, neither drink not receive their Kesuvah. A woman who cannot have children - refers to a woman who drank a potion that causes sterility.

(b) Rebbi Eliezer requires this group of women to drink - because unlike a woman who is forbidden to him, he can marry a second wife and still remain with her.

(c) 'Eishes S'ris Shoseh' must be speaking about a man who became a S'ris only after the marriage - because the Mei Sotah will only take effect if her husband was intimate with her before the adulterer.

(a) Even if the man she secludes herself with is a close relative - the woman becomes a Sotah.

(b) We learn from the Pasuk "Ve'shachav *Ish* Osach" - that the secluding herself with a Katan does not make her a Sotah.

(a) The wife of a deaf or a demented man, and one whose husband is in jail have in common - the fact that if Beis-Din have reason to suspect her of misconduct, they warn her in place of her husband.

(b) The ramifications of their warning are - that she loses her Kesuvah. They cannot make her drink the Mei Sotah - because of the Pasuk "Ve'heivi ha'Ish es Ishto".

(c) Neither, in the latter case, can the husband subsequently make her drink the Mei Sotah when he goes free - because the Torah writes "Ve'kinei ... Ve'heivi" (from which the Chachamim derive that the one who warns must bring her to drink).

(d) Rebbi Yossi disagrees - because he does not hold of the D'rashah "Ve'kinei ... Ve'heivi".

(a) We learn from the Pasuk "Daber el B'nei Yisrael *Ve'amarta Aleihem*" that, even though an Arusah and a Shomeres Yavam - are exempt from drinking, they are nevertheless subject to 'Kinuy', which should they contravene, will render them forbidden to their husbands and cause them to lose their Kesuvos.

(b) Rebbi Yashiyah precludes an Arusah from the Pasuk "Tachas Ishech" - but includes a Shomeres Yavam from "Ish Ish".

(c) He prefer to include a Shomeres Yavam and exclude an Arusah (rather than vice-versa) - because she is considered his wife, and does not require Chupah.

(a) Rebbi Yonasan precludes a Shomeres Yavam from "Tachas Ishech". From "Asher Tisteh Ishah *Tachas Iyshah" - he precludes an Arusah.

(b) We just explained why Rebbi Yashiyah precludes an Arusah rather than a Shomeres Yavam. Rebbi Yonasan precludes first a Shomeres Yavam (and only then an Arusah) - because the Arusah is *his own* betrothed, and not someone else's (like a Yevamah).

(c) The author of our Mishnah, which precludes both an Arusah and a Shomeres Yavam from drinking - must be Rebbi Yonasan.

(d) From "Ish Ish" - Rebbi Yonasan includes in the Din of Sotah the wife of a Cheresh, that of a Shotah and that of an idiot.

8)

(a) Rebbi Yashiyah learns from "Tachas Iyshah" - that we compare a man to a woman and vice-versa (as will be explained later).

(b) We learn from the Pasuk "Mibal'adei Ishech" - that the Mei Sotah will not take effect if she was intimate with the adulterer before having been intimate with her husband.

(c) We nevertheless need a Pasuk to preclude an Arusah from drinking (and cannot preclude it anyway, because the adulterer was intimate with her before her husband was) - because the Pasuk will speak when the Arus was intimate with the Arusah before the marriage (as was indeed common in Yehudah).

(a) We just established the D'rashah that precludes an Arusah by an Arus who was intimate with his Arusah before their marriage. The problem with establishing a Shomeres Yavam in the same way is - that if the Yavam was intimate with her any time after the death of her husband, he acquires her (so how can the Tana refer to her as a Shomeres Yavam)?

(b) We resolve this problem by restricting it to the opinion of Rav - who says - that a Yavam who had relations with the Yevamah without intending to perform Yibum with her, nevertheless acquires her as effectively as if he had performed Yibum with her.

(c) We therefore establish the D'rashah ' like Shmuel, who maintains that he only acquires her with regard to the things mentioned in the Parshah (to inherit his deceased brother and that he may only release her with a Get), but not to make her a full-fledged wife (explaining why the Tana nevertheless refers to her as a Shomeres Yavam).

(d) This does not mean that ...

1. ... Rav follows the opinion of Rebbi Yashiyah (who holds that a Shomeres Yavam drinks) - because even Rebbi Yonasan ill agree that she is considered his wife; otherwise, the Torah would not have found it necessary to preclude her.
2. ... Shmuel follows the opinion of Rebbi Yonasan (who holds that she does not) - because even Rebbi Yashiyah will agree that she is not considered his wife; otherwise the Torah would not have needed to include her.