When the wife is perceived innocent and her husband a nudnik TB Sotah 19

Starting on yesterday’s daf and continuing on today’s daf TB Sotah 19, the Gemara discusses how many times may husband bring his wife to the Temple in Jerusalem and have a drink the bitter waters of a sotah. There are three opinions, the tanna kamma Rabbi Yehuda, and the sages. They are all interpreting the verse “This is the law of jealousy-זֹאת תּוֹרַת הַקְּנָאֹת” (Numbers 5:29). The rabbis understand the word “This- זֹאת” as a restrictive term, limiting the application of the law. They also understand the word “law- תּוֹרַת” as an expansive term. Each opinion either emphasizes the limited application of this law or emphasizes the expansive application of this law.

The tanna kamma emphasizes the word “law” and teaches “This teaches that the woman drinks and repeats, i.e., she must drink a second time if she becomes a sota again.” (Sefaria.org translation) Rabbi Yehuda emphasizes the word “This” and teaches “that the woman does not drink and repeat. Rabbi Yehuda said: There was an incident in which Neḥunya the ditch digger testified before us in the name of his teachers that the woman drinks and repeats, and we accepted his testimony with regard to two men, but not with regard to one man. Even if she drinks the water of a sota while married to her first husband, she must drink again after violating a warning by her second husband. However, one husband cannot have his wife drink twice.” (Sefaria.org translation) “The baraita concludes: And the Rabbis say: The woman does not drink and repeat, whether with regard to one man or with regard to two men.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rava explains where each position agrees with each other and when they disagree. “Rava said: Different halakhot apply to different cases: With regard to one husband who accused his wife twice about one paramour, everyone agrees that the woman does not drink and repeat, having been proven innocent once, as it is written: “This is the law of jealousy.” The word “this” is a restricting term and excludes that possibility. With regard to two different husbands and two different paramours, where her first husband suspected her with regard to one paramour during her first marriage and the second husband suspected her with regard to a different man during the second marriage, everyone agrees that the woman drinks and repeats, as it is written: “This is the law of jealousy,” in all cases of jealousy.

“They disagree when there is one husband and two paramours, i.e., where one husband warned her with regard to a second paramour after she survived her first ordeal. They also disagree in a case of two husbands and one paramour, i.e., if her second husband accused her with regard to the same paramour on account of whom she was compelled to drink by her first husband.

“The opinions are justified as follows: The first tanna holds that the phrase “the law of jealousy” serves to include all of these cases. In almost all cases the woman drinks and repeats. The word “this” serves to exclude only the case of one husband and one paramour, in which she does not drink and repeat.

“And the Rabbis mentioned later in the baraita hold that the word “this” serves to exclude all of these cases. The woman almost never drinks and repeats. The phrase “the law of jealousy” serves to include only the case of two husbands and two paramours, in which she does drink and repeat.

“And Rabbi Yehuda holds: The word “this” serves to exclude two of the cases, and the phrase “the law of jealousy” serves to include two. The word “this” serves to exclude the two cases of one husband and one paramour and one husband and two paramours. In neither of these cases does the woman drink and repeat. The phrase “the law of jealousy” serves to include two cases, i.e., two husbands and one paramour, and all the more so two husbands and two paramours. In both of these cases, the woman must drink and repeat.” (Sefaria.org translation)

Rashi ד"ה ורבי יהודה really clarifies Rabbi Yehuda’s position. His position is that a husband can only bring his wife as a sotah to the Temple once. If the same husband wants to bring his wife to the Temple as a sotah again and again, the blame shifts from the wife to the husband. By treating his wife who has already been proven innocent once thusly, he demonstrates that he is cantankerous and his wife is now perceived innocent by the rabbis.