More Discussions for this daf
1. kegon shezintah baazara, shezintah mepirchei kehuna 2. Giyores According To Shemayah v'Avtalyon 3. u'Tehorah Hi
4. u'Tehorah Hi 5. A Woman who Drinks the water and is innocent 6. R. Shimon's Opinion
7. Choletzes v'Lo Misyabemes 8. Machlokes between Rav Yosef and Rav Sheshes 9. Edim she'Nitma'ah
10. The Order of Events by a Sotah 11. Shitas Rabanan 12. Muzaros b'Levanah
13. תניא כוותיה דרב ששת ולא מטעמיה 14. רשד"ה אלא בתר דקדיש
DAF DISCUSSIONS - SOTAH 6

Aaron Shemtob asks:

Shalom Rabbi Kornfeld

I hope that this email finds you and the whole group well. On Sotah 6B the Gemarah brings a Beraita where it's Doresh the seemingly superfluous words "Uthora Hee" to teach that in the following 3 scenarios even though the water won't work she wont have the Berachah of "Venizreah Zara". They are:

1) If There were eyewitnesses to the Tumah(Sotah Sheyesh Lah Edim Bimdinat Hayam)

2) If she had a Zechut(Zechut Toleh)

3) if it was common gossip by the seamstresses(Sheyisu Veyitnu Bah Muzarot Bilvanah)

My questions are:

1)Is there any other biblical source that the water won't work in the 2nd and 3rd scenarios namely Zechut Toleh and Sheyisu Veyitnu Bah Muzarot Bilevanah?

2)Why did the Beraita exclude the case of eyewitnesses from he word "Tehora" and "Zechut Toleh Lah" from the VAV, and not vice versa? The Nafka Minah is for R' Shimon who doesn't Doresh the VAV. If it were reversed than he'd be forced to say that Zechut is Toleh.

3) Why is there a Petur from the effects of the water for seamstresses gossiping about the affair in the moonlight?

Thank you

Aaron Shemtob

The Kollel replies:

Rav Aaaron, my family and I are all fine Baruch Hash-m. Hope you are all well at your end.

3)

(a) Rashi writes that since the seamstressers are gossiping this means that it is famous to everyone what she did. The Mishnah states below 31a that according to Rabbi Eliezer, since he warned her not to be alone with him, and she defied the husband's warning, then even if he has the most miminal of evidence that they were alone, he must divorce her. Rabbi Yehoshua disagrees and holds that he does not have to divorce her until the seamstressers start gossiping. However when that happens, Rashi writes that it is ugly not to divorce her since this nasty talk is widespread.

(b) In this scenario there have already been too many negative factors. Her husband warned her and she defied him and the gossip is famous. This scandal is too great for the waters to help. The shame is already too much and it would be disgraceful to allow a couple to remain together in such circumstances.

(c) The Gemara Gitin 89a tells us that according to Rabbi Akiva the gossiping of the seamstressers is sufficient to force her husband to divorce her (possibly we can understand what R. Akiva says with the help of what the Gemara Moed Katan 18b says that a person is not suspected of something unless he actually did it). The Halacha does not follow R. Akiva since gossip is not sufficient to force a divorce. However, in our Gemara, there was the warning and the seclusion before the gossip started, which gives strong reason to believe that this is not merely idle gossip.

Answer to question 1):

I found that the Mishneh leMelech Hilchot Sotah 2:8, end of DH Ach Mai deKashia, writes that they did not find a Tana who disagrees with the derasha of "Tehorah; and not that she has witensses overseas".

Possible answer to question 2):

It may be possible to suggest an answer to this question based on the Mishneh leMelech cited above. It seems that the drsaha of "Tehorah; and not that she has witnesses overseas"; is a well-accepted drasha. In contrast any drasha based merely on an extra Vav is much more questionable because we know that there are Tanaim who do not make drashot from an extra Vav. We also knew right from the beginning that Rabbi Shimon holds that zechut is not toleh. Therefore we used the drasha of the Vav for the din that we anyway knew that R. Shimon would not agree with.

Dovid Bloom