Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) IS IT PROPER TO WARN?

(a) We infer that Reish Lakish and Rav Yemar both hold that it is forbidden to warn.
(b) Question: According to the opinion that it is permitted to warn - what does Kinuy mean?
(c) Answer (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): It is a language of warning - "Hash-m warned regarding his land".
(d) (Beraisa - R. Meir): One who does a sin in private, Hash-m publicizes it.

1. "*v'Avar* (will pass) on him a spirit of Kin'ah" - this is a language of announcing - "va'Ya'aviru (they passed) a proclamation in the camp".

(e) (Reish Lakish): A person only sins if a spirit of lunacy enters him - "A man whose wife Sishteh (will stray)" - it is written Sishteh (as the word Shoteh, a fool).
(f) (Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): The Torah believed 1 witness by a Sotah because there are grounds for believing him - she was warned, she was secluded, and 1 witness says she became Teme'ah.
(g) Question (Rav Papa): But the Torah mentions warning after seclusion and Tum'ah
(h) Answer (Abaye): It says, "*v'Avar* (passed) on him a spirit of Kin'ah" - the spirit already passed (before seclusion and Tum'ah).
(i) Question: If v'Avar means 'already passed' - we should also say this by "v'Avar (already passed?!) every armed person" (we know, they did not pass yet)!
(j) Answer: No - there, it says, "You will conquer ... later, you will return", proving that "*v'Avar* means (there) 'will pass'.

1. Here, "*v'Avar* cannot mean 'passed (afterwards)' - if seclusion and Tum'ah already occurred, there is no reason for warning!

(k) (Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): A man does not warn his wife until a spirit enters him - "(Already) passed on him a spirit of Kin'ah, and he warned his wife".
(l) Question: What spirit passed on him?
(m) Answer #1 (Chachamim): A spirit of Tum'ah.
(n) Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): A spirit of Taharah.

1. Presumably, it is a spirit of Taharah.
2. (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): "He warned his wife" - this is optional; R. Akiva says, it is an obligation.

i. This fits well according to the opinion that it is a spirit of Taharah.
ii. Question: If it is a spirit of Tum'ah - would it be optional or an obligation to put such a spirit on oneself?!

(a) (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): "He warned his wife" - this is optional; R. Akiva says, it is an obligation;

1. "He will become Tamei to (bury) her" - R. Yishmael says, this is optional; R. Akiva says, it is an obligation;
2. "(Kenanite slaves) will work for you forever" - R. Yishmael says, this is optional; R. Akiva says, it is an obligation (i.e. it is forbidden to needlessly free them).

(b) Question (Rav Papa): Do they argue by all positive Mitzvos, R. Yishmael says they are all optional, R. Akiva says they are all obligations?
(c) Answer (Abaye): No - only in these 3 cases, they argue how to interpret the verses.

1. Regarding "He warned his wife" - R. Yishmael holds as the following Tana.

i. (Beraisa - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): "Do not hate your brother in your heart" - one might have thought, this applies even to a wife that abandons the modest ways of Benos Yisrael - "Passed on him a spirit of Kin'ah, and he warned his wife."

2. R. Akiva holds, another verse says "he warned", to make this an obligation.
3. R. Yishmael holds, since the Torah had to write the cases when she is innocent and guilty, it said "he warned" in both cases, but we do not learn from the repetition.

i. (Tana d'Vei R. Yishmael): Any portion repeated in the Torah, was only repeated for the new law taught.

(d) (Beraisa): "He will become Tamei to (bury) her" - R. Yishmael says, this is optional; R. Akiva says, it is an obligation.

1. R. Yishmael holds, since Kohanim are normally forbidden to become Tamei, the Torah had to permit a Kohen to become Tamei to his close relatives;
2. R. Akiva holds, "To his close kin" teaches that he is permitted; "He will become Tamei to her" teaches that he must.
3. R. Yishmael also learns permission from "To his close kin"; "He will become Tamei to her" is needed to teach that he may not become Tamei to her limbs (Rashi - that fell off in her lifetime; Tosfos - if the corpse is incomplete).

4. R. Akiva reasons, we could have learned that from just "To her"; "He will become Tamei" makes it mandatory.
5. R. Yishmael holds, since the Torah had to write "To her", it also said "He will become Tamei", but we do not learn from the repetition (as before).

(e) "(Kenanite slaves) will work for you forever" - R. Yishmael says, this is optional; R. Akiva says, it is an obligation.

1. R. Yishmael holds, since it says "Do not leave any soul (of the 7 Kenanite nations) alive" - "They will work for you forever" is needed to permit (keeping alive and) buying as a slave someone whose mother is a Kenanite, but his father is not.

i. (Beraisa): "Also from the children of the (visiting) settlers that live with you, you may buy slaves" - someone whose mother is a Kenanite, but his father is not, you may (keep him alive and) buy him as a slave
ii. Someone whose father is a Kenanite, but his mother is not - one might have thought, you may (keep him alive and) buy him as a slave - "that were born in your land", not that (the father permanently) lives in your land.

2. R. Akiva holds, "Also from the children ... you may buy" teaches that it is permitted; "They will work for you forever makes it an obligation".
3. R. Yishmael holds, "They" comes to exclude Yisraelim your brothers (you may not treat a Yisrael as a Kenanite slave).
4. R. Akiva holds, this latter law is learned from "With your brothers, Bnei Yisrael, you will not make them work rigorously".
5. R. Yishmael holds, since the Torah had to say "With your brothers", it also said "They"; nothing is from learned "They" (as above).

(a) (Rav Chisda): Adultery in the house (consumes the money) as a worm consumes sesame; the same applies to anger in the house.

1. Both of these apply to the wife; they are not problems in the husband.

(b) (Rav Chisda): Before Yisrael sinned, the Divine Presence dwelled with each person - "Hash-m goes amidst your camp";

1. After they sinned, the Divine Presence departed from them - "Will not be seen in you an immoral matter, (lest the Divine Presence) will leave you".

(c) (Rav Shmuel bar Nachmani): Whoever does 1 Mitzvah in this world, it goes before him in the world to come - "Your righteousness will go before you".

1. Whoever does a sin in this world, it envelops him and goes before him in the world to come - "They are gripped in their ways, they achieve nothing and perish".
2. (R. Elazar): It clings to him as a dog - "(Yosef) did not listen to (Potifar's wife) to lie with her, to be with her";

i. "To lie with her" - in this world; "To be with her" - in the world to come.

(a) (Mishnah): If the 1st testimony (on seclusion), which does not permanently forbid her, needs 2 witnesses - Kal va'Chomer, the latter testimony (on adultery), which permanently forbids her, should require 2 witnesses!

1. "There is not a witness on her" - the Torah teaches, any testimony about her (that she is guilty, permanently forbids her).

(b) If the latter testimony, which permanently forbids her, needs only 1 witnesses - Kal va'Chomer, the 1st testimony, which does not permanently forbids her, should need only 1 witness!

1. The Torah says, "He found in her an immoral matter"; also (by monetary cases) it says "According to 2 or 3 witnesses a matter will be established".

i. Just as 2 witnesses are needed there, also by seclusion.

(c) Question: We do not learn that seclusion needs 2 witnesses from there - we learned from "On her"!

1. "On her (adultery)" 1 witness suffices, but not on her warning or seclusion!

(d) Answer: Indeed, this is the intent of the Mishnah! The Torah says "On her" - on her adultery, 1 witness suffices, but not on her warning or seclusion;

1. Question: Where do we learn that 2 witnesses of adultery are needed if there was no warning and seclusion?
2. Answer: "He found in her an immoral matter"; it also says "According to 2 or 3 witnesses a matter will be established".

(e) (Beraisa): The 1st testimony (in the Mishnah) is on seclusion; the latter testimony is on adultery.