משנה: עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִמְחְקָה הַמְּגִילָּה אָֽמְרָה אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה מְגִילָּתָהּ נִגְנֶזֶת וּמִנְחָתָהּ מִתְפַּזֶּרֶת עַל הַדֶּשֶׁן. וְאֵין מְגִילָּתָהּ כְּשֵׁירָה לְהַשְקוֹת בָּהּ סוֹטָה אַחֶרֶת. נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה וְאָֽמְרָה טְמֵיאָה אֲנִי הַמַּיִם נִשְׁפָּכִים וּמִנְחָתָהּ מִתְפַּזֶּרֶת עַל הַדֶּשֶׁן. נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה וְאָֽמְרָה אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה מֶעַרְעֲרִין אוֹתָהּ וּמַשְׁקִין אוֹתָהּ בְּעַל כּוֹרְחָהּ. MISHNAH: If she said “I shall not drink62Since she is forbidden to her husband from the moment she was found to have been in a secluded place with her paramour until after she drank the water, by refusing to drink she accepts to be divorced by her husband without any ketubah money but without explicitly admitting guilt.” before the scroll was erased, her scroll is put away63Since it was written in holiness and contains the Divine Name, it cannot be destroyed. and her offering dispersed on the ashes64Since the offering was already dedicated in a Temple vessel, it cannot be returned to profane status. It is put on the ashes taken from the altar.. Her scroll is not acceptable to be used to make another suspected wife drink65Cf. Sotah 2:2:9" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.2.2.9">Halakhah 2:2, Note 104.. If she said “I am impure” after the scroll was erased, the water is poured out and her offering dispersed on the ashes66Since there is no longer any doubt, the water cannot be used, neither can the offering. By her confession of adultery she has to be divorced by her husband, without him having to pay the ketubah. On her confession she cannot be prosecuted for adultery because confessions are not acceptable in a court of law since the testimony of close relatives is not admissible and everybody is a relative to himself.. If she said “I shall not drink” after the scroll was erased, one makes her gargle and forces her to drink against her will67Since she caused the Divine Name to be erased, if she does not drink she commits blasphemy..
הלכה: עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִמְחְקָה הַמְּגִילָּה כול׳. תַּנֵּי. מְגִילָּתָהּ נִגְנֶזֶת תַּחַת צִירוֹ שֶׁל הֵיכָל. לָמָּה. בִּשְׁבִיל לְשָׁחֲקָהּ. לוּל קָטָן הָיָה. שָׁם הַמַּיִם נִשְׁפָּכִין. תַּנֵּי. אֵין בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם קְדוּשָׁה. מַהוּ לִגְבּוֹל בָּהֶן אֶת הַטִּיט. מַה בְּכָךְ. הַמַּיִם נִשְׁפָּכִין. תַּנֵּי. יֵשׁ בָּהֶן מִשּׁוּם קְדוּשָׁה. HALAKHAH: “Before the scroll was erased,” etc. It was stated: Her scroll is put away under the hinges of a [gate of] the Temple hall. Why? In order to shred it70Tosephta 2:2. The scroll has to be destroyed to avoid its being used again, but this must be done in holiness and without anybody touching the Divine Names.. A small hollow space was where the water was poured out71There is no parallel to this statement in any known tannaїtic source; one does not know where this hollow space was. In Pesachim.34a">Babli Pesaḥim 34a, the open space between the ramp leading to the top of the altar and the altar is called lul; in the parallel Zevachim 7:2" href="/Tosefta_Zevachim.7.2">Tosephta Zebaḥim 7:6 this is called חלון “window” or רבוכה ,רביבה “hollow with masonry walls.” That hollow could not be classified as “small”.. It was stated72Tosephta 2:2, referring to the water which no longer is needed.: There is no holiness in it. May it be used to moisten mortar73It is sinful to use Temple property for private use. But the water might be used in ongoing repairs on the Temple mount.? What should be wrong? It is poured out! It was stated74In another, otherwise undocumented baraita. Since it is unknown which of the two baraitot represents practice, the unneeded water cannot be used for anything.: There is holiness in it.
נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה וְאָֽמְרָה. טְמֵיאָה אֲנִי. הַמַּיִם נִשְׁפָּכִין וּמִנְחָתָהּ מִתְפַּזֶּרֶת עַל גַּבֵּי הַדֶּשֶׁן. הָדָא אָֽמְרָה שֶׁמִּנְחַת סוֹטָה קְדֹשָׁה עַד שֶׁלֹּא תִכָּתֵב הַמְּגִילָּה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי דְרוֹבָהּ. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חִייָה. עַד שֶׁהִיא בַדֶּרֶךְ מִנְחָתָהּ קְדֹשָׁה. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. מַתְנִיתִין אָֽמְרָה כֵן. שֶׁבַּעֲלָהּ בָּעֲלָהּ בַּדֶּרֶךְ. “If she said ‘I am impure’ after the scroll was erased, the water is poured out and her offering dispersed over the ashes.” This proves that the suspected wife’s offering is holy before the scroll is written75Since following the rabbis the offering is transferred to the Temple vessel only after she drank the water, if her offering is treated as holy but invalid by being poured over the ashes of the sacrifices, the question arises when the offering acquires the holiness of a Temple offering. The question is obvious even for R. Simeon since it is forbidden to bring profane food into the Temple precinct even though according to him the case of the Mishnah could not arise.. Rebbi Yose said, there is more: Rebbi Ḥiyya stated, her offering is holy once she is on her way76From the moment the husband had dedicated the flour, irrespective of the vessel it was brought in.. Rebbi Yose bar Abun said, our Mishnah states this77Sotah 4:1:1" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.4.1.1">Mishnah 4:2, detailing the cases in which the procedure becomes inactive. If the husband had relations with his wife while she was forbidden to him, he must divorce her since without the Temple procedure she cannot become permitted to him. But because it is his fault that she cannot rehabilitate herself, he has to pay the full amount of his ketubah obligation.: “Or if her husband had sexual relations with her on the road.”
נִמְחֲקָה הַמְּגִילָּה וְאָֽמְרָה. אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה מְעַרְעֲרִין אוֹתָהּ וּמַשְׁקִין אוֹתָהּ בְּעַל כָּרְחָהּ. לָמָּה. שֶׁגָּֽרְמָה לַשֵּׁם שֶׁייִמָּחֵק. כַּמָּה יִמְחוֹק. תַּנֵּי רִבִּי חָנִין. בֵּית שֶׁמַּי אוֹמְרִים. אַחַת. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים. שְׁתַּיִם. אָמַר רִבִּי אִילַי. טַעֲמוֹן דְּבֵית הִלֵּל כְּדֵי לִכְתוֹב יָהּ. אָמַר לוֹ רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מַה מַשְׁקִין אֶת זוֹ. אִם לְבוֹדְקָהּ. כְּבָר הִיא בְדוּקָה וּמְתוּקֶּנֶת. אֶלָּא סָבַר רִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. הָאוֹמֶרֶת. אֵינִי שׁוֹתָה. כְּאוֹמֶרֶת. אֲנִי טְמֵיאָה לָךְ. וְלֵית לְרִבִּי עֲקִיבָה. מְעַרְעֲרִים אוֹתָהּ לִשְׁתּוֹת עַד שֶּׁפָּנֶיהָ מוֹרִיקוֹת וּמַשְׁקִין אוֹתָהּ עַל כּוֹרְחָהּ. אִית לֵיהּ. כְּשֶׁהִתְחִילָה לִשְּׁתּוֹת. “If she said ‘I shall not drink’ after the scroll was erased, one makes her gargle and forces her to drink against her will.” 78Cf. Sotah 2:4:3" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.2.4.3">Chapter 2, Notes 135–136. How many letters have to be erased? Rebbi Ḥanin stated: The House of Shammai say, one; the House of Hillel say, two. Rebbi Hilai said, the reason of the House of Hillel: That he could have written Yah. 79In a discussion between R. Jehudah and R. Aqiba, quoted in full in Sotah.19b">Babli 19b, Tosephta 2:3. Rebbi Aqiba said to him: But why does one make her drink? If it is to check her out, she already is completely checked out80In the Babli, בדוקה ועומדת “lawfully checked out”; in the Tosephta בדוקה ומנוולת “checked out and degraded”.! But Rebbi Aqiba must hold that the one who says “I shall not drink” is as the one who says “I am impure for you”81One admits her guilt, the other accepts the consequences as if she were guilty; since the proceedings are extra-judicial, there is no reason to treat the two cases differently.. But does Rebbi Aqiba not agree that “one makes her gargle until her face turned yellow and forces her to drink against her will”? He does, if she started to drink82In the Tosephta, following the rabbis who make the entire procedure depend on the burning of the flour offering, R. Aqiba holds that she does not have to drink as long as the offering was not burned. Since for the rabbis the offering follows the drinking, he treats the one who says “I am impure” exactly as the one who pays the fine without admitting guilt. In the Babli, R. Aqiba’s argument is explained away: one accepts her statement that she is impure only if made in a self-assured way, when she can be believed; but if she makes the confession while trembling, one suspects that she might be pure but has been intimidated by the procedure and therefore her guilt has not been established. Both sources disagree with the Yerushalmi..