Sota 6: Forbidden Relationships; When Women Cannot Partake of Teruma

Before beginning a new Mishna, the rabbis discuss when a woman is forbidden from her husband and when she is not.  If the wife of a Kohen is raped, she is forbidden to her husband.  If the wife of an Israelite or a Levi is raped, she is allowed to her husband again.  However, if the wife of an Israelite or Levite is adulterous - consenting to intercourse with a man other than her husband - then she is not permitted to her husband.  In fact, other men are encouraged to avoid marrying women who were divorced due to adultery.

Our new Mishna teaches that there are a number of things that forbid a woman from partaking of teruma:

• When a woman tells her husband that she has been defiled to him and witnesses agree to her adulterous behaviour
• When a woman refuses to drink the bitter waters after having been secluded and defiled
• When a husband refuses to allow his wife to drink the bitter waters though she has been accused of adultery
• When the couple have intercourse on their way to the Temple to drink the bitter waters

The Gemara notes that the test of the sota only takes place when there are no witnesses to the adulterous act.  If witnesses are present, the husband divorces his wife without paying her ketuba.  Drinking the bitter waters is required only if a woman denies adultery although she was warned and was then witnessed moving toward seclusion with a forbidden man with enough time passing for her to have had intercourse.

The Gemara continues its questioning of this Mishna, now regarding the timing of witnesses reports and the possibility of a woman having intercourse partially through the ritual.  If a witness brings forward his/her report after a woman has given her offering, the offering might be considered to have been made "in vain", which is another punishable offence.  Further, a woman should be accompanied at all times to ensure that she has no opportunity to have intercourse while there.  But can she be held by the shoulders by one of the younger priests at all times?  She could sneak away to urinate and than take advantage of the opportunity to have intercourse with one of the young priests!

The notion of 'false witnesses' is discussed at some length.  How do we know if witnesses are lying about what they have seen?  There are a number of circumstances that do not require witnesses.  However, it people are found to be false witnesses, they are subject to the liability that was at question: death if the death penalty was a possibility; monetary compensation if a financial reward was to be assigned.

We also learn that women would sit together and weave in the moonlight, discussing news and community gossip.  If a woman's behaivour or status were to come up at these circles, it could also affect the process and the outcome of an investigation into the woman's conduct.

We witness an underlying fear of the power of women's sexual desire in today's daf.  It was powerful enough to stand up to censure and punishment, to push a husband to controlling behaviour and a crush to rape.  A woman's sexual desire is strong enough corrupt a priest in the holy Temple.  

The discussion of women's desire and men's control with such clinical detachment is challenging to read.  What about the emotion involved?  What about the feelings of insecurity, fear and desperation that these women would have felt - whether or not they had been adulterous?