The Mishnah (Sotah 18a) says that she swears that she did not sin while she
was an "Arusah, Nesu'ah, Shomeres Yavam, or Kenusah." How is it possible
that Mei Sotah can determine whether she committed adultery as an Arusah,
when another Mishnah (Sotah 23b) says that an Arusah does not drink Mei
Sotah? It must be, concludes the Gemara, that the first Mishnah is referring
to when her husband warned her not to isolate herself with another man
(Kinuy) while she was an Arusah, after which she isolated herself with the
man (Setirah). Then she entered the Chupah with her husband, effecting
Nisu'in. He can make her drink the Mei Sotah because she is now a Nesu'ah,
even though the Chupah with her was a Chupah with a Pesulah, since she is
prohibited to him since the time of the Setirah. From here we see that "Yesh
Chupah l'Pesulos," like Rav says.
The Gemara adds that an Arusah can become a Sotah only if she lived with her
husband during Erusin before she sinned, because in order to become a Sotah,
her husband must have done Bi'ah with her before the adulterer.
The Gemara challenges this proof, saying that the Mishnah is problematic in
any case and thus no proof can be brought from there, because the Mishnah
also mentions that she swears that she did not sin while she was a Shomeres
Yavam. It is not possible for her to be a Sotah while still a Shomeres
Yavam!
(a) INTRODUCTION: The Mishnah (Sotah 18a) says that it is possible to make a
woman a Sotah for a sin that was done while she was an Arusah or Shomeres
Yavam. This contradicts another Mishnah (Sotah 23b) which says that an
Arusah and Shomeres Yavam cannot be made to drink Mei Sotah. The Gemara
answers that the first Mishnah (that says an Arusah *can* be a Sotah) is
referring to when there was Kinuy and Setirah while she was an Arusah, and
then *after she married* her husband the husband wants her to drink Mei
Sotah.
The Gemara then faces two problems with this answer. First, there is a rule
that a woman cannot be made into a Sotah unless she lived with her husband
*before* living with the adulterer. If she did Setirah when she was an
Arusah or Shomeres Yavam, she did not yet have the opportunity to live with
her husband, and so she should not be able to be made a Sotah!
Second, in order to change her status from an Arusah or a Shomeres Yavam
into a Nesu'ah, the husband must effect Nisu'in with her through an act of
Bi'ah. Once she has done Setirah, she is Asur to him, and if a man had
prohibited relations with his wife after her Setirah (and he is no longer
"Menukeh me'Avon," or "clean of any wrongdoing"), she cannot be given the
Mei Sotah.
Thus, there are two problems in the cases of an Arusah and a Shomeres Yavam:
how is it possible that the husband did Bi'ah *before* the adulterer, and
how is it possible that he did Bi'ah *after* the adulterer (in order to be
Koneh her)?
The Gemara resolves these two questions with regard to an Arusah in a
relatively simple manner. The husband did Bi'ah before the adulterer by
doing Bi'ah with his Arusah (l'Shem Zenus) while she was still in her
father's home. Regarding doing Bi'ah afterwards in order to be Koneh her to
make her a Nesu'ah, that Bi'ah is not necessary, because Chupah without
Bi'ah also makes her into a Nesu'ah, even though she is Pesulah to him (this
is the proof for Rav that "Yesh Chupah l'Pesulos").
However, the Gemara is bothered by the case of Shomeres Yavam mentioned in
the Mishnah in Sotah. It is at this point that Rashi offers two different
explanations for the Gemara's question.
(b) RASHI'S FIRST APPROACH: Rashi explains that the Gemara wants to know how
the Shomeres Yavam could have had Bi'ah with the Yevamah *before* the
woman's Setirah. If she lived with her husband, then he is Koneh her through
Yibum and by the time of the Setirah she was no longer a Shomeres Yavam! The
Gemara suggests that perhaps the Bi'ah was done b'Shogeg or b'Ones, and
since such a Bi'ah is not Koneh a Yevamah for Nisu'in, according to Shmuel,
but only for Erusin, it is still possible to call her a Shomeres Yavam.
This answer does not suffice according to Rav (who says that such a Bi'ah
will be Koneh the Yevamah in all respects), and so the Gemara suggests
another answer. It says that the Mishnah is according to Beis Shamai and is
discussing a case where the Yavam did Ma'amar. After Ma'amar, a Bi'ah
b'Shogeg or b'Ones is not Koneh her even according to Rav, a possibility
which the Gemara mentioned earlier (29b). Once the Yavam did Ma'amar with
her it turns the bond between them into an Erusin-like bond, which must
culminate in Nisu'in. Bi'as Shogeg or Ones can no longer accomplish Nisu'in.
1. One problem with this approach is why the Gemara does not address the
other problem that exists with a Shomeres Yavam: how can the Yavam be Koneh
her after the Setirah, and yet remain "Menukeh me'Avon?" How does the Gemara
address that question? (It could be argued that after Bi'as Shogeg, a
Shomeres Yavam can become a Sotah even without completing Yibum, since a
partial Kinyan has been made. However, that partial Kinyan resembles Erusin,
and a woman cannot become a Sotah from Erusin. In addition, it seems from
the Gemara in Sotah 24b that even after such a Bi'ah she cannot become a
Sotah.)
TOSFOS (DH d'Kavasa) answers that the Mishnah (from Sotah 18a0 that our
Gemara is quoting represents the opinion of Rebbi Oshiya (Sotah 24b), who
holds that a Shomeres Yavam may actually drink the Mei Sotah even before she
becomes a Nesu'ah. According to that opinion, it is not necessary for the
Yavam to be Koneh her in order for her to drink the Mei Sotah.
2. Another problematic point with this approach is that the Gemara is taking
sides on an issue that was left unresolved earlier in the Maseches (Daf
29b), whether Ma'amar (according to Beis Shamai) can change the Zikah into
an Erusin-like Kinyan and prevent Bi'as Shogeg from completing the Yibum.
(b) RASHI'S SECOND APPROACH: According to Rashi's second approach, the
Gemara is addressing the second question -- how could the Yavam be Koneh the
Shomeres Yavam? She can only drink the Mei Sotah once she is a Nesu'ah --
but if the Yavam does Bi'as Yibum with her (making her like a Nesu'ah) he is
no longer "Menukeh me'Avon?" The Gemara does not address the first question
of how the husband can do Bi'ah with the Yevamah before the adulterer,
because the Gemara understands that the Bi'ah that the *first* brother did
with his wife (before he died) qualifies for having the "husband's" Bi'ah
precede the adulterer's.
The Gemara first suggests that, according to Shmuel, the Yavam did Bi'ah
b'Shogeg or b'Ones. (This answer might be construed as saying that *after*
the Setirah, he did Bi'as Shogeg or Ones to acquire her, and he is Menukah
me'Avon since his act, although prohibited, was done b'Ones. However, if
this were true the Gemara would stop right here. Even according to Rav, who
holds that Bi'as Ones *is* a full-fledged Yibum, we could offer the same
explanation as to how she became a Nesu'ah (i.e. a Yevamah) without making
him Eino Menukah me'Avon. Even though she is a Nesu'ah at the time that she
is given the Mei Sotah, the Mishnah calls her a Shomeres Yavam because the
Kinuy and Setirah occurred while she was a Shomeres Yavam -- like the Gemara
suggested on the other side of the page, regarding Arusah. Rather this
answer must be understood in a manner similar to Rashi's first explanation,
as follows:)
What the Gemara means by this is that the Yavam did Bi'as Shogeg or Ones
*before* the woman became a Sotah. Since, according to Shmuel, she is not
fully acquired by the Yavam with a Bi'as Shogeg or Ones, she is still called
"Shomeres Yavam." On the other hand, she *can* become a Sotah after a Bi'as
Shogeg or Ones, even though she still is a Yevamah, since she can be called
"Tachas Ishech," under wedlock, to a certain extent.
Rashi is effectively answering the first problem (above (a):1) with his
first approach by saying that our Gemara clearly argues with the Gemara in
Sotah 24b which was the source of our problem. The Gemara there said that
even after Bi'as Shogeg u'Mezid the Yevamah cannot become a Sotah. But the
Gemara there also held that the Bi'ah the first brother did with his wife
(before he died) *does not* qualify for having the "husband's Bi'ah precede
the adulterer's." It was this very point that forced it to conclude that
after Bi'as Shogeg u'Mezid the Yevamah still cannot become a Sotah. Since
our Gemara disagrees on that count, it is able to conclude that after Bi'as
Shogeg u'Mezid the woman *is* able to become a Sotah, and *is* considered to
be "Tachas Ishech." (This also opens the way to answer TOSFOS' questions on
Rashi in Kidushin 27b, DH Hachi Garsinan.")
The Gemara concludes that even according to Rav, there is a way for the
Yavam to be Koneh the Yevamah only partially, so that she is "Tachas
Ishech," but not yet in the category of a Nesu'ah. This can be accomplished
through Ma'amar -- according to Beis Shamai. Ma'amar accomplishes a Kinyan
with a Yevamah, after which the Yevamah is considered "Tachas Ishech," under
wedlock with the husband. However, Ma'amar does not complete the Nisu'in
until it is followed by Chupah, so she may be still called "Shomeres Yavam."
This answers the second problem we posed on Rashi's first approach (above,
(a):2). It is no longer necessary for the Gemara to get involved in the
question of whether or not *Bi'as Shogeg u'Mezid after Ma'amar* accomplishes
Yibum. The Gemara here is referring to Ma'amar that is *not* followed by
Bi'as Shogeg u'Mezid, which certainly is not Koneh a Yevamah completely
(just as Erusin is not Koneh a woman completely, without Chupah, Rashi and
Tosfos 29b).
(One point about this second approach remains to be explained. Rashi earlier
(29b) wrote that Ma'amar with a Yevamah is only a Kinyan d'Rabanan even
according to Beis Shamai. If Ma'amar is only a Kinyan d'Rabanan, then
mid'Oraisa she is not really a Nesu'ah after Ma'amar and if so how can she
drink the Mei Sotah after Ma'amar? According to Rashi's first approach,
since there was a Bi'ah with the Ma'amar, on a d'Oraisa level it certainly
effects a complete Kinyan, and therefore the Yevamah can become a Sotah.
However, according to his second approach, that there was Ma'amar without
any Bi'ah, why should she be able to drink Mei Sotah, if mid'Oraisa she is
not a Nesu'ah?)