Sota 18: Prosicuting a Woman for Her Suspected Sexual Behaviours; The Law of Jealousy

Amud (a) documents our rabbis asking questions about the script dissolving in the bitter waters.  Rather than going with "It must be one unbroken scroll placed in water for each sota", the rabbis ask about scrolls that have been torn or separated into more than one part.  They discuss water that has spilled and water that is shared with writing for two different accused women.  It ends with an explanation, again, about the difference between the sota's spoken oath, the words written on the scroll, and which words are placed in the water.  The rabbis then argue about whether the oath contains a curse (for example, "I administer an oath to you that you were not defiled, and if you were defiled, you will be cursed...").

A new Mishna teaches us why the sota responds with, "Amen, amen".  

• Amen on the curse and Amen on the oath?
• Amen that I committed adultery with this man and Amen that I committed adultery with another man?
• Amen that I did not stray when I was betrothed/married/a widow/a yavam, and Amen that I was not defiled but if I was, these curses will fall on me?
• Rabbi Meir: Amen that I did not become defiled in the past and Amen that I will not become defiled in the future?

The rabbis note in this Mishna that a sota cannot swear an oath to other behaviour in the past nor in the future.  This includes a woman that was divorced, was defiled, and then remarried her former husband.  Oaths cannot stipulate that a woman behaved 'promiscuously' when she was not married to her husband, the accuser.  There is a principle: only behaviours that would cause the sota to be forbidden to her husband can be stipulated in the oath.  How unusual to limit the consequences on a woman's unwanted sexual behaviour!  Clearly the sota ritual was such a strange and delicate process that the rabbis were careful to limit its control over the larger community.

The Gemara pores over different behaviours, timing and situations to ensure that they understand how to apply these halachot.  We are reminded that the Sages quote Numbers 5:29: zeh torat hakna'ot, this is the law of jealousy.  They confirm that a man is not permitted to accuse his wife twice with the same man if she drank the bitter water and was found to be innocent.  However, he is permitted to call his wife a sota for a second time if she was warned and then secluded with a different man.  If she remarries, her new husband is permitted to have her drink the bitter waters again.

What I have not touched upon yet is a very obvious point:  drinking consecrated water that contains dust from the Temple floor and a piece of parchment with soot-based ink will not cause a woman's stomach and thigh to fall away.  I can only imagine that 99.9% of women who underwent the humiliation of the sota's ritual were deemed to be innocent.  This allowed Jewish women to be lauded as disciplined and pure and Jewish men to be thought of as jealous and mistrusting.  Perhaps that was one of the reasons the rabbis did not encourage men to begin this process: they knew that it would bring humiliation upon a woman who would ultimately be found innocent.  Or they knew that a man's jealousy would only be appeased until he warned his wife against secluding herself with another potential lover.  This ritual is known as zeh torat hakna'ot, after all.