Sotah 42: מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 42

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Torah contains a series of commandments that relate directly to rules of warfare. Among them is the charge made by the High Priest – called mashu’ah milhamah – a priest anointed specifically for the purpose of leading the troops to war. The Torah commands that this priest instruct the soldiers – in Hebrew – that they cannot fear their enemies as they enter into war, and followed by listing those individuals who were free from participating as soldiers.

Those exemptions included people who were in the middle of various uncompleted projects, e.g., someone who was building a house, planting a vineyard, or had gotten engaged to be married (see Devarim 20:1-9).

We explore the role of the מְשׁוּחַ מִלְחָמָה as well as modern military chaplains and the moral issues they face.

Sotah 41: כׇּל אָדָם שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ חֲנוּפָּה Flattering kings

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 41

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna on our daf describes an event that it calls parashat ha-melekh. The reference is to hakhel, a biblical commandment obligating the entire Jewish people to gather on Sukkot following the Sabbatical year (see Devarim 31:10). This event included a public reading of certain parts of the Torah by the king.

The Mishna relates that during the times of the Second Temple, King Agrippas read the Torah publicly, and broke into tears when he reached the passage describing the obligations of the king, and the rule forbidding the people from accepting upon themselves a non-Jewish king to rule them. The response of the people was to cry out, “Do not fear, Agrippas! You are truly our brother!”

We explore the ceremony off Hakhel, on this day the coronation of King Charles.

Sotah 40: מוֹדִים לָךְ

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 40

To download, click/tap here: PDF

What is the proper name of God to call upon when we want to offer gratitude? This is the subject of a debate on our daf.

The discussion picks up after relating which verses the people should say when the priests offered the priestly blessing at the end of various services. The Gemara now asks:

While the prayer leader is reciting the blessing of: “We give thanks,” what do the people say?

When the Amidah is recited by the leader, the worshipers are meant to listen and answer amen to the blessings. But Modim demands more of the worshipers; they are meant to say their own prayer. What should they say? Here we see a debate:

Said Rav: “We are thankful to you, Adonai our God, that we are thankful to you.”

Shmuel said: “We are thankful to you, God of all flesh, that we are thankful to you.”

Rabbi Simai said: “We are thankful to you, our Molder, Molder of creation, that we are thankful to you.”

Rav, Shmuel and Rabbi Simai are debating the name of God to be used in this short prayer.

We explore different religious attitudes to gratitude.

Sotah 39: Duchenin’

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 39

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara (Sota 38a) teaches that Birkat Kohanim must be recited in Hebrew.

Our Rabbis taught: "'In this way shall you bless…' (Bamidbar 6:23) — in the Holy Tongue. You say that it means in the Holy Tongue, but perhaps it is not so, and it means in any language! It is stated here, 'In this way shall you bless…' and elsewhere it is stated: 'These shall stand to bless the people' (Devarim 27:12) - just as in this latter passage, it must be in the Holy Tongue, so also in the former it must be in the Holy Tongue.

"Rabbi Yehuda says: '[This deduction] is unnecessary, because it states, "In THIS way shall you bless" [which signifies] that they must pronounce it in this language [as written in Scripture].’"

We explore more halachot regarding the act o duchening…

Sotah 38: כֹּה תְבָרְכוּ

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 38

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Mishna (37b-38a) focuses on birkat kahanim – the three part Priestly blessing that the kohanim give to the rest of the people – distinguishing between the way it was done in the Temple and the way it is done outside the Temple as part of the prayer service.

Among the differences enumerated in the Mishna are the way God’s name is pronounced (according to the actual writing or the way it is commonly said) and the way the kohanim hold their hands during the blessing (in front of them or above their heads).

We explore the history of the blessing its structure and function.

Sotah 37: Mount Grizim vs. Mount Ebal

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 37

To download, click/tap here: PDF

“Six tribes were sent to each mountain. And all Israel, and their elders and officers and their judges, stood on this side of the Ark and on that side, before the priests the Levites, the bearers of the Ark of the covenant of the L—rd … half of them in front of Mount Gerizim and half of them in front of Mount Ebal, as Moses the servant of the L-rd had commanded, to bless the people of Israel first. And afterward [Joshua] read all the words of the law, the blessing and the curse, according to all that is written in the book of the Torah.”

§ It is stated in the mishna: They turned to face Mount Gerizim and opened with a blessing: Blessed be the man who does not make a graven or molten image (see Deuteronomy 27:15), and these people and those people, i.e., the two groups standing on either mountain, answered: Amen. Then they turned to face Mount Ebal and opened with the curse:

We explore the differences and similarities between these mountains and the polemic with the karaites…

Sotah 36: עֵדוּת בִּיהוֹסֵף

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 36

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemora asks: What was the incident with Yosef? It is written: There was one such day that he went into the house to do his work. Rabbi Yochanan said: This teaches us that both Yosef and Potiphar’s wife had the intention of sinning. He went into the house to do his work.

Rav and Shmuel disagree in their interpretation. One of them said that it literally means that he entered the house in order to do his work; but the other one said that he entered to satisfy his desires with her.

And there were no men of the house in the house. Is it possible that no one was around in a huge house like that of the wicked Potiphar?

We explore the episode from different perspectives and what we learn about human behavior and self control.

How Yosef had an added letter to his name because of his moral stand.

Sotah 35: "שֶׁקָּרָא לְדִבְרֵי תוֹרָה ״זְמִירוֹת

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 35

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Dovid ha'Melech was punished for calling Divrei Torah "Zemiros," songs (Tehilim 119:54). Hashem said to him, "Divrei Torah can be forgotten in the blink of an eye (Mishlei 23:5), and you are calling them 'Zemiros' (that are treated lightly, without concentration)!" Hashem caused him to forget an explicit verse as punishment for treating Divrei Torah like Zemiros.

The Marsha suggests that Dovid ha'Melech was criticized for calling Divrei Torah "Zemiros," because calling the Torah "song" implies that the Torah flows easily from the lips without concentration and constant effort. In order to truly acquire Divrei Torah, a person must put great effort into learning Torah.

For one who does not learn Torah Lishmah, but merely in order to reach a particular goal, the Torah indeed is comparable to "Zemiros" and it does not become a part of the person.

We explore various topics including Uzza’s death and my essay on Dovid Hamelech.

Sotah 34: מַיִם נִגְדָּשִׁין וְעוֹלִין כִּיפִּין

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 34

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The rabbis tell us their thoughts about what happened when the Israelites crossed the Jordan to finally reach Ha'aretz. It is clear that the rabbis are trying to make sense of source texts. How did the water flow backward? How did it rise to such heights? How did the water suddenly retract again? How did the different groups of Israelites manage? And what about the Ark?

The rabbis look at the speed of the water; the rate at which it would rise or fall. Based on descriptions in the books of Numbers and Joshua, they describe precisely who carried the Ark on poles; how the people were placed as they crossed the Jordan.

Sotah 33: וּתְפִלָּה בְּכׇל לָשׁוֹן

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 33

To download, click/tap here: PDF

One of the examples presented by the Mishna (32a) of things that can be said in any language is tefilla – prayer. The Gemara simply explains that since prayer is a heartfelt request from God, a person must be able to express it in any way that he desires.

The Gemara raises an objection to this by pointing to a statement made by Rav Yehuda that a person should not pray in Aramaic, since the heavenly angels cannot understand that language; Rabbi Yoḥanan teaches that if a person prays in Aramaic, his prayers are ignored by the angels since they do not understand Aramaic.

We explore the halachot of praying in the vernacular and the approach of the Chasm Sofer.

Sotah 32: לְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 32

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Steinsaltz introduces the new perk:

The seventh perek of Massekhet Sota, which begins on our daf , teaches the halakha that the warning given to a woman who is suspected of adultery can be given be-khol lashon – “in any language”; it does not need to be said in the language that it is written in the Torah.

This teaching leads the Mishna to list a number of formal statements that can be made in any language (for example, the recitation of Shema, Grace after meals, various vows made in court) and some that can only be said in the original Hebrew text (such as a Priestly blessing, a halitza, the speech made by the kohen before leading the army into battle).

We explore the importance of lashon hakodesh in our self definition.

Sotah 31: עוּבָּרִים שֶׁבִּמְעֵי אִמָּן אָמְרוּ שִׁירָה

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 31

To download, click/tap here: PDF

As we learned on yesterday’s daf, based on his interpretation of the passage in Tehillim (68:27) Rabbi Meir taught that at the time the Jewish people crossed the Red Sea, even unborn children in their mothers’ wombs broke out in a song of praise.

The Gemara on our daf questions how this could have happened; after all, how could they have seen the miracle that was taking place from their position inside the womb? Rabbi Tanhum responds to this question by saying that despite being hidden from the world, they were able to see because their mothers’ stomachs became like aspaklaria ha-me’ira – transparent glass – which allowed them to look out.

The term aspaklaria has its source in Latin as specularis or speculare, meaning “something transparent” or “a seeing glass” – from the same root as the word “spectacles.” On occasion the Talmud uses it to mean “a mirror.”

We explore this wonderful trope of the seeing fetus…in metaphor and in modern science.

Sotah 30: וְכֵיצַד אָמְרוּ שִׁירָה

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 30

To download, click/tap here: PDF

We find that bo ba-yom Rabbi Akiva taught that az yashir was sung responsively (i.e., Moshe recited a line and the people repeated it), while Rabbi Nehemya understood that Moshe would begin a passage and the people would complete it. This discussion leads to a statement brought in the name of Rabbi Yosei HaGelili:

When the Children of Israel climbed out of the sea onto dry land, natnu enehem lomar shirah – they wanted to sing a song of praise. What did they do? With the appearance of the Shehina (God’s presence), a child resting on his mother’s lap sat up and a baby nursing at his mother’s breast dropped it from his mouth to say – “this is my God and I will glorify Him.”

We present a number of meditations on (Shirat Hayam) the Song of the Sea and explore the music of songs of the sea.

Sotah 29: דָּבָר שֶׁיֵּשׁ בּוֹ דַּעַת

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 29

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The Gemara explains the need for two separate derivations concerning uncertain contractions of ritual impurity: And the derivation that Rav Giddel said that Rav said was necessary, and it was also necessary to derive the principle of uncertain ritual impurity from sota; since if it were derived only through the derivation of Rav, I would say that it makes no difference whether the uncertain contraction of impurity occurred in the private domain or whether it occurred in the public domain. Therefore, it was necessary to derive from sota that uncertain impurity is considered impure only in the private domain.

We further explain the rabbinic views on infidelity as a metaphor for the divine communal axis with a comparison with Paul’s theology in Romans 7 as well ass Daniel Boyarin’s cultural analysis.

Sotah 28: Tit for Tat

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 28

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The first of the “Bo Bayom" teachings relates to the laws of Sota, where we find that Rabbi Akiva learns from passages in the parasha of Sota (see Bamidbar 5:12-31) that the “bitter waters” examine not only her behaviors, but his, as well.

Our Daf tell us that the woman who is accused of adultery after having been warned about seclusion is defiled in two different verses. Why? The rabbis consider the possibility that these defilements are in fact directed at the woman's husband and paramour as well as herself.

The rabbis speak about whether or not it makes a difference if the husband is also guilty of adultery. Or perhaps the husband is guilty of having intercourse with his wife on their way to the Temple when she is forbidden to him.

We explore the notion of the husband’s motive and guilt and a review of the novel The French Lieutenant’s Woman, and the obsessions of the paramour.

Sotah 27: בּוֹ בַּיּוֹם

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 27

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our Daf references one of the most dramatic stories in the Talmud, in which the rabbis come together to depose Rabban Gamliel as nasi (נשיא), or chief, of the rabbinic court.

Rabban Gamliel’s offense is the use of intimidation tactics to strengthen his own interpretations of Torah in the face of disagreement.

He actually has a history of acting in this way, particularly toward Rabbi Yehoshua, the second-highest ranking figure in the court and (perhaps) someone R. Gamliel saw as a threat to his own authority.

We explore the back story to the halachot decided on “that day” after his deposition.

Sotah 26: אִם כֵּן, יִסָּתְרוּ כׇּל הָעֲקָרוֹת

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 26

To download, click/tap here: PDF

“And she shall be cleared, and shall conceive seed” (Numbers 5:28), indicates that if she was barren, she will be remembered and conceive a child; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva.

Rabbi Yishmael said to him: If so, all the barren women will seclude themselves with other men, and they will be remembered and conceive after drinking the bitter water and being found innocent; but that virtuous barren woman, who does not transgress the prohibition of seclusion, since she does not seclude herself with other men, she loses the opportunity to receive this blessing.

We explore the threat of becoming a South to induce the promise of pregnancy.

Sotah 25: עוֹבֶרֶת עַל דָּת

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 25

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Steinsaltz summarizes as follows:

Our Gemara discusses the case of overet al dat – a woman who violates the precepts of Jewish custom, asking whether she needs to be warned by her husband if he plans to divorce her without paying her ketuba. Can he simply divorce her, given her behavior, or must he warn her in order to give her the opportunity to rectify her behavior? After some discussion of the matter, the Gemara concludes that she needs to be warned.

specifically, as explained by the rishonim, when her actions bring her husband to transgress as well. Examples include feeding him non-kosher food or engaging in relations with him when she is a nidda and forbidden to him.

The case of overet al dat yehudit is where the woman engages in behaviors that are considered inappropriate for a Jewish married woman – for example, going out in public without a covering on her head.

We explore the dual nature of the Sota, both the water ritual and the oath ritual buried in the literary strata of the text.

Sotah 24: תּוֹרַת, הַקְּנָאֹת

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 24

To download, click/tap here: PDF

Our mishnah deals with situations in which the woman, suspected of committing adultery, does not have the opportunity to drink the bitter waters, but rather she must be divorced and does not receive her ketubah.

The Torah uses the word “wife” (alternatively translated as woman) in summarizing the laws of the Sotah. From here the rabbis deduce that she must have the status of full wife in order to drink the bitter waters. A betrothed woman does not have such a status and hence, even if her fiancé forbids her from being secluded with a certain man and afterwards, she is secluded with him, she does not undergo the sotah ordeal. Similarly, a “shomeret yavam”, a woman whose husband died childless and is waiting for either levirate marriage (yibbum) or the release from levirate marriage (halitzah), does not drink the bitter waters.

We explore further the notion of the jealous husband.

Sotah 23: הִיא כְּכׇל הַמְּנָחוֹת

For the source text click/tap here: Sotah 23

To download, click/tap here: PDF

The next Mishnah lists the differences between men and women with regard to details of Mitzvos such as the procedure required by a woman who is a Metzora or a woman who is a Nezirah, the status of a son whose mother attempts to make him a Nazir, how a woman is punished with Sekilah, and how she is treated if she steals.

The Mishnah mentions only these differences because they are related to the Mishnah's discussion about the how to sacrifice the Minchah offering of a Kohen. The Mishnah says that when a Kohen donates a Minchah, there is a difference between the way the Minchah is offered when donated by a male Kohen and when donated by a female Kohenes. This difference is not a general difference between the Kohen and Kohenes. In contrast, all of the Mitzvos omitted by the Mishnah are general obligations and not matters of details about a Mitzvah.

We explore the korban minchah according to the Rambam and further understanding of rabbinic attitudes to adultery compared to Roman and Christian attitudes in the late antique period.