משנה: אֵילּוּ נֶאֱמָרִין בִּלְשׁוֹנָם. פָּרָשַׁת סוֹטָה וּוִידּוּי מַעֲשֵׂר וְקִרְיַת שְׁמַע וּתְפִילָּה וּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן וּשְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת וּשְׁבוּעַת הַפִּיקָּדוֹן. MISHNAH: The following are recited in the vernacular: The verses of the suspect wife1The verses the Cohen has to read to the wife before she drinks. While the scroll has to be written in Hebrew, the wife has to understand them and, therefore, they have to be translated into her vernacular., and the declaration of tithes2Deuteronomy.26.12-16">Deut. 26:12–16., and the recitation of the Šema‘3Cf. Berakhot, Chapters 1–2., and prayer4The eighteen (respectively 7 or 9) benedictions of the ‘Amidah; cf. Berakhot, Chapters 1–2., and grace5After a meal., and the oath of a witness6If somebody puts an oath on a possible witness that he should come and testify for him; Leviticus.5.1">Lev. 5:1. Testimony itself is given without an oath., and the oath about a deposit7Exodus.22.6-12">Ex. 22:6–12..
הלכה: אֵילּוּ נֶאֱמָרִין כול׳. כְּתִיב וְאָמַר הַכֹּהֵן לָאִשָּׁה. בְּכָל־לָשׁוֹן שֶׁהִיא שׁוֹמַעַת. דִּבְרֵי רִבִּי יֹאשִׁיָּה. אָמַר לֵיהּ רִבִּי יוֹנָתָן. וְאִם אֵינָהּ שׁוֹמַעַת וְלָמָּה הִיא עוֹנָה אַחֲרָיו אָמֵן. אֶלָּא שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמַר לָהּ עַל יְדֵי תּוּרְגְּמָן. HALAKHAH: “The following are recited,” etc. It is written8Numbers.5.21">Num. 5:21. The argument being that this clause is redundant. The full verse reads: “The Cohen shall make the woman swear by a curse-oath, the Cohen shall tell the woman: …”.: “The Cohen shall tell the woman,” in any language she understands, the words of Rebbi Joshia. Rebbi Jonathan said to him, if she does not understand, how could she answer “Amen, Amen”9In Sifry Num. 12, the objection is attributed to R. Ismael, R. Joshia’s teacher, not to R. Jonathan, R. Joshia’s student. R. Ismael’s interpretation is that the Cohen has to go into all details of the proceedings. The Sotah.32b">Babli, 32b, is the only source which accepts R. Joshia’s derivation. Then the Babli, without mentioning names, follows R. Ismael’s interpretation but treats it as purely rabbinic.? But that he should not talk to her through an interpreter.
רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּשֵׁם רִבִּי לָֽעְזָר בֵּירִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. לֹא מָצִינוּ שֶׁדִּיבֵּר הַמָּקוֹם עִם אִשָּׁה אֶלָּא עִם שָׂרָה בִּלְבַד. וְהָא כְתִיב אֶל הָאִשָּׁה אָמַר הַרְבָּה אַרְבֶּה וגו׳. אָמַר רִבִּי יַעֲקֹב דִּכְפַר חָנִין. עַל יְדֵי הַתּוּרְגְּמָן. וְהָא כְתִיב וַיֹּאמֶר יי֨ לָהּ שְׁנֵי גוֹיִם בְּבִטְנֵךְ. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַר כַּהֲנָא. הַדִּיבּוּר נָֽפְלָה לָהּ. אָמַר רִבִּי בִּירִי. כַּמָּה כִירְכּוּרֵי כִירְכּוּרִים. הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מִתְאַוֶּה לִשְׁמוֹעַ שִׂיחָתָן שֶׁלַּצַּדְקָנִיּוֹת וַיֹּאמֶר לא כִּי צָחַקְתְּ. 10Gen. rabba 20(12), 45(14), 63(8). Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Eleazar ben Rebbi Simeon: We do not find that the Omnipresent talked to a woman, except only to Sarah. But is there not written11Genesis.3.16">Gen. 3:16.: “To the woman He said: I shall increase,” etc.? Rebbi Jacob of Kefar Ḥanin12Elsewhere he is called “from Kefar Ḥanan”. said, through an interpreter13Adam is addressed by the Eternal in Sotah 3:8:2-7" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.3.8.2-7">3:9, the woman in 3:13, the snake in 3:14.. But is there not written14Genesis.25.23">Gen. 25:23.: “The Eternal said to her, two peoples are in your womb”? Rebbi Abba bar Cahana said, the Word fell to her15A word about her fell to a prophet (in the opinion of Gen. rabba, Sem ben Noah.). Rebbi Biri said, how many weaver’s shuttles! The Holy One, praise to Him, desires to hear the talk of the just women: “He said no, but you laughed.16The only time we find a mention of God addressing a woman directly it is about an unimportant matter.”
וִידּוּי מַעֲשֵׂר. דִּכְתִּיב וְעָנִיתָ וְאָמַרְתָּ. “The declaration of tithes, as it is written17There is no such verse. It really should read (Deuteronomy.26.13">Deut. 26:13): “You should say before the Eternal, your God,” Who understands all languages, in contrast to the declaration of First Fruits (Deuteronomy.26.3">v. 3), where it says “you should say to him (the priest)”, who is supposed to speak only Hebrew. The quote contradicts Sotah 2:1:9" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.2.1.9">Halakhah 2, Notes 43ff; it is correct in Sifry Deut. 303 and in the Sotah.32b">Babli, 32b, where it is pointed out that “declare and say” always means Hebrew only (as in Deuteronomy.27.14">Deut. 27:14).: “You should declare and say.”
וְקִרְיַת שְׁמַע. דִּכְתִיב וְדִבַּרְתָּ בָּם. רִבִּי אוֹמֵר. אוֹמֵר אֲנִי. קִרְיַת שְׁמַע אֵינוֹ נֶאֶמְרָה אֶלָּא בִלְשׁוֹן הַקּוֹדֶשׁ. מַה טָעֲמָא. וְהָיוּ הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה. רִבִּי לֵוִי בַר חַיְתָה אֲזַל לְקַיְסָרִין. שְׁמַע קָלוֹן קַרֵייָן שְׁמַע אֱלֵונִיסְתִּין. בְּעָא מְעַכְבְּתוֹן. שְׁמַע רִבִּי יוֹסֵי וְאִיקְפַּד. אָמַר. כָּךְ אוֹמֵר אֲנִי. מִי שֶׁאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ לִקְרוֹת אֲשׁוּרִית לֹא יִקְרֶינָּה כָּל־עִיקַּר. אֶלָּא יוֹצֵא בְכָל־לָשׁוֹן שֶׁהוּא יוֹדֵעַ. הֵשִׁיב רִבִּי בְּרֶכְיָה. הֲרֵי מְגִילַּת אֶסְתֵּר. הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ לִקְרוֹתָהּ אֲשׁוּרִית וְלָעַז. אֵינוֹ יוֹצֵא בָהּ אֶלָּא אֲשׁוּרִית. אָמַר רִבִּי מָנָא. מְגִילַּת אֶסְתֵּר הָיָה יוֹדֵעַ לִקְרוֹתָהּ אֲשׁוּרִית וְלָעַז אֵינוֹ יוֹצֵא אֶלָּא אֲשׁוּרִית. בְּלָעַז יוֹצֵא בָהּ בְּלָעַז. וְכֵן יוֹצֵא בָהּ בְּכָל־לָשׁוֹן שֶׁהוּא יוֹדֵעַ. “And the recitation of the Šema‘.” For it is written18Deuteronomy.6.7">Deut. 6:7. Nobody can discuss something he does not understand.: “You shall talk about them.” Rebbi says, I say that the Šema‘ is recited only in the holy language. What is the reason? “The words shall be19Deuteronomy.6.7">Deut. 6:7. It is understood that the verb היה “to be” in general describes a permanent state. In our case, this means that the words, Deuteronomy.6.1-9">Deut. 6:1–9, should not be changed. Then they cannot be recited in translation. The Sotah.32b">Babli, 32b, goes into an extended discussion on the relative merits of the two positions.”. Rebbi Levi bar Ḥaita20In the Arukh, s. v. אלנסתין, reads בר הזותא but the reading here seems to be original. A Galilean preacher of the fourth/fifth generation. went21In the Arukh, על “he ascended”, to Caesarea Philippi. to Caesarea. He heard their voices when they were reading the Šema‘ in Hellenistic22Greek ἑλληνιστί, adv., “in the Greek language”, here probably Judeo-Greek. [The final ן might indicate a nasal pronuciation]. In Tanḥuma texts, the word is always written אלנסטי. {While in the commentary to Genesis.35.8">Gen. 35:8 [Tanḥuma Buber Wayyišlaḥ 26 (Note 100)], the word ἄλλον is Greek and is characterized as such in Gen. rabba 81(5), the identification of the root in Hosea.13.14">קָטָבְךָ (Hos. 13:14) as κατάβα קאטאבא (“go down’, imperative, short for κατάβηθι) with a Semitic suffix [Leviticus.6.1-8.36">Tanḥuma Buber Ṣaw 4 (Note 30), Leviticus.6.1-8.36">Tanḥuma Ṣaw 2] can only be described as Judeo-Greek.} manner. He wanted to hinder them, but Rebbi Yose heard of it and was offended. He said, do I say that someone who does not know to read Assyrian letters23Hebrew Square letters, which replaced the paleo-Hebrew script. Since the latter was retained by the Samaritans, the rabbinic authorities insisted on the exclusive use of the square alphabet. One might wonder whether the text expressly authorizes, e. g., Judeo-Arabic or Judeo-German translations written in “Assyrian” characters. should not recite it at all? But he fulfills his duty in any language he knows. Rebbi Berekhiah objected: But there is the Esther scroll, where somebody who knows to read both Asssyrian script and Greek24לעז “barbaric”, is used in talmudic literature exclusively for Greek, for which approved translations existed. can fulfill his obligation only from Assyrian script25The Megillah.18a">Babli, Megillah 18a, permits the bilingual person to hear the Esther story in Greek but rules that reading from a Hebrew scroll written in square letters is acceptable for everybody, even for those who do not know Hebrew. (In Sotah 7:2:2-4" href="/Jerusalem_Talmud_Sotah.7.2.2-4">Halakhah 2, there is a discussion whether square letters are “Assyrian” or “rich” script.). Rebbi Mana said: About the Esther scroll, somebody who knows to read both Asssyrian script and Greek can fulfill his obligation only from Assyrian script; Greek only, he fulfills his obligation in Greek; and so he can fulfill his obligation in any language he understands.
וּתְפִילָּה. כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹדֵעַ לִתְבוֹעַ צְרָכָיו. וּבִרְכַּת הַמָּזוֹן. כְּדֵי שֶׁיְּהֵא יוֹדֵעַ לְמִי מְבָרֵךְ. “And prayer,” that one should know how to ask according to his needs. “And grace,” that one should know to Whom he gives praise.
וּשְׁבוּעַת הָעֵדוּת וּשְׁבוּעַת הַפִּקָּדוֹן. מַשְׁבִּיעִין אוֹתוֹ בִלְשׁוֹנוֹ. הִשְׁבִּיעָן שֶׁלֹּא בִלְשׁוֹנָן וְאָֽמְרוּ. אָמֵן. הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ פְטוּרִין. כְּהָדָא דְתַנֵּי. שְׁבוּעַת הַדַּייָנִין כִּתְנַיִין שֶׁבְּלִיבֵּינוּ לֹא כִתְנַיִין שֶׁבְּלִיבְּכֶם. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָן. חֲזָקָה כִתְנַיִין שֶׁבְּלִיבּוֹ הוּא מַשְׁבִּיעוֹ. וְלָמָּה הוּא מַתְנֶה עִמּוֹ. מִפְּנֵי הַהֶדְיוֹטוֹת. שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמְרוּ. יֵשׁ תְּנַיִין בַּשְּׁבוּעוֹת. תַּנָּא רִבִּי חֲנַנְיָה קוֹמֵי רִבִּי מָנָא. וְהָא כְתִיב. כִּי אֶת אֲשֶׁר יֵשְׁנוֹ פֹה עִמָּנוּ עֹמֵד הַיּוֹם. מַה שְׁמַע מִינָהּ. אָמַר לֵיהּ. הַדּוֹרוֹת הַבָּאִים אַחֲרֵינוּ אֵין בְּלִיבָּם תְּנַיי. “And the oath of a witness and the oath about a deposit.” One makes him swear in his own language. If one made them swear not in their language and they said “Amen”, they are not prosecutable26Nobody is prosecutable for perjury if he was not admonished in his own language by the court before answering the oath read to him. In the Sotah.33a">Babli, 33a, the rule is derived from verses. The Tosephta, 7:1, has a different version: If the court explained to him five times in any language he understands and he confirms his oath, he is guilty (if he swears falsely).. As we have stated27The text is also in Nedarim 3:1; a parallel text in Shevuot.29a">Babli Šebuot 29a, Nedarim.25a">Nedarim 25a.: The oath before the judges is according to our understanding, not according to your understanding. Rebbi Yudan said, it is to be assumed that he makes them swear according to his understanding. Why does he have to spell out this condition to him? Because of the uneducated, lest they say that there may be mental reservations for oaths. Rebbi Ḥanania stated before Rebbi Mana: Is there not written28Deuteronomy.29.14">Deut. 29:14. The argument is about what is written before and after the fragment quoted: “Not with you alone am I concluding this covenant and this oath. But with everybody who stands here with us today, and with those who are not with us today.” How can you have an oath with anybody not involved?: “But with everybody who stands here with us today”? He said to him, the future generations do not have mental reservations29Since the unborn cannot have mental reservations, so the mental reservations of the living are invalid..