Sotah 45

האומרת טמאה אני לך ושבאו לה עדים שהיא טמאה והאומרת איני שותה ושבעלה אינו רוצה להשקותה ושבעלה בא עליה בדרך

SHE WHO SAYS, 'I AM UNCLEAN TO THEE',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To her husband through infidelity. ');">¹</span> WHEN WITNESSES CAME [AND TESTIFIED] THAT SHE HAD MISCONDUCTED HERSELF, SHE WHO SAYS I REFUSE TO DRINK, WHEN THE HUSBAND REFUSES TO LET HER DRINK, AND WHEN HER HUSBAND COHABITED WITH HER ON THE JOURNEY [TO JERUSALEM]. FURTHERMORE, THE MEAL-OFFERINGS OF ALL WOMEN MARRIED TO PRIESTS ARE DESTROYED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Although not defiled. The law of Lev. II, 3 does not apply, v. Gemara. ');">²</span>

וכל הנשואות לכהנים מנחותיהן נשרפות בת ישראל שנשאת לכהן מנחתה נשרפת וכהנת שנשאת לישראל מנחתה נאכלת

THE MEAL-OFFERING OF THE DAUGHTER OF AN ISRAELITE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A non-priest. ');">³</span> WHO IS MARRIED TO A PRIEST IS DESTROYED. BUT THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER WHO IS MARRIED TO AN ISRAELITE IS EATEN. WHAT [DIFFERENCES ARE THERE IN LAW] BETWEEN A PRIEST AND A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER? THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER IS EATEN BUT THE MEAL-OFFERING OF A PRIEST IS NOT EATEN.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. VI, 16. ');">⁴</span>

מה בין כהן לכהנת מנחת כהנת נאכלת ומנחת כהן אינה נאכלת כהנת מתחללת וכהן אין מתחלל

A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER MAY BECOME DECLASSED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' By contracting an illegal marriage. Even after divorce or in widowhood she loses her privileges. ');">⁵</span> BUT A PRIEST DOES NOT BECOME DECLASSED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Permanently by contracting an illegal marriage. After divorce or his wife's death he regains his privileges. ');">⁶</span>

כהנת מטמאה למתים ואין כהן מטמא למתים כהן אוכל בקדשי קדשים ואין כהנת אוכלת בקדשי קדשים

A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER MAY RENDER HERSELF UNCLEAN BY CONTACT WITH THE DEAD, BUT A PRIEST MAY NOT RENDER HIMSELF UNCLEAN BY CONTACT WITH THE DEAD. A PRIEST EATS OF THE MOST HOLY [CLASS OF OFFERINGS],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A sin-offering or guilt-offering. ');">⁷</span> BUT A PRIEST'S DAUGHTER MAY NOT EAT OF THE MOST HOLY.

מה בין איש לאשה האיש פורע ופורם ואין האשה פורעת ופורמת האיש מדיר את בנו בנזיר ואין האשה מדרת בנה בנזיר האיש מגלח על נזירות אביו ואין האשה מגלחת על נזירות אביה

WHAT [DIFFERENCES ARE THERE IN LAW] BETWEEN A MAN AND A WOMAN? A MAN RENDS HIS CLOTHES AND LOOSENS HIS HAIR,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When declared a leper (Lev. XIII, 45). ');">⁸</span> BUT A WOMAN DOES NOT REND HER CLOTHES AND LOOSEN HER HAIR. A MAN MAY VOW THAT HIS SON WILL BECOME A NAZIRITE, BUT A WOMAN MAY NOT VOW THAT HER SON WILL BECOME A NAZIRITE.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Nazir 28b. ');">⁹</span>

האיש מקדש את בתו ואין האשה מקדשת את בתה האיש מוכר את בתו ואין האשה מוכרת את בתה האיש נסקל ערום ואין האשה נסקלת ערומה האיש נתלה ואין האשה נתלית האיש נמכר בגניבתו ואין האשה נמכרת בגניבתה

A MAN MAY BE SHAVED ON ACCOUNT OF THE NAZIRITESHIP OF HIS FATHER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in the event of his father's death, he can go through the ceremony described in Num. VI, 18, v. Nazir 30a. ');">¹⁰</span> BUT A WOMAN CANNOT BE SHAVED ON ACCOUNT OF THE NAZIRITESHIP OF HER FATHER. A MAN MAY SELL HIS DAUGHTER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' As a bondwoman (Ex. XXI, 7). ');">¹¹</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ת"ר כל הנשואות לכהונה מנחותיהן נשרפות כיצד כהנת לויה וישראלית שנשאת לכהן אין מנחתה נאכלת מפני שיש לו חלק בה ואינה עולה כליל מפני שיש לה חלק בה אלא הקומץ קרב בעצמו והשירים קריבין בעצמן

BUT A WOMAN MAY NOT SELL HER DAUGHTER. A MAN MAY GIVE HIS DAUGHTER IN BETROTHAL,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without her consent when she is a minor. ');">¹²</span> BUT A WOMAN MAY NOT GIVE HER DAUGHTER IN BETROTHAL. A MAN IS STONED NAKED, BUT A WOMAN IS NOT STONED NAKED.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Sanh. 44b. ');">¹³</span>

איקרי כאן כל שהוא ממנו לאישים הרי הוא בבל תקטירו אמר יהודה בריה דר"ש בן פזי דמסיק להו לשום עצים כר"א דתניא ר"א אומר לריח ניחוח אי אתה מעלה אבל אתה מעליהו לשום עצים

A MAN IS HANGED,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After capital punishment (Deut. XXI, 22). ');">¹⁴</span> BUT A WOMAN IS NOT HANGED. A MAN IS SOLD FOR HIS THEFT,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XXII, 2. ');">¹⁵</span>

הניחא לר"א דאית ליה האי סברא אלא לרבנן דלית להו האי סברא מא"ל דעבדי להו כר"א בר"ש דתניא רבי אלעזר בר"ש אומר הקומץ קרב בעצמו והשירים מתפזרים על בית הדשן

BUT A WOMAN IS NOT SOLD FOR HER THEFT. <b><i>GEMARA</i></b>. Our Rabbis taught: The meal-offerings of all women who had married into the priesthood are to be destroyed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And not eaten by the priests. ');">¹⁶</span> How is this? In the case of the daughter of a priest, Levite or Israelite who had married a priest, her meal-offering is not eaten because he has a share in it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The flour belongs to him, and so the offering in fact comes under the law of Lev. VI, 16. ');">¹⁷</span> nor is it treated as a holocaust<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which is the way the meal-offering of a priest is treated ');">¹⁸</span> because she<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who is a non-priest. ');">¹⁹</span> has a share in it; but the handful is offered separately and the remainder separately. But there is to be applied here the rule that whatever sacrifice has a portion thereof treated as 'offerings made by fire' comes under the law of ye shall not burn!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. II, 11. In this verse the word mimmennu 'of it' appears to be superfluous, and the deduction is drawn that the parts of a sacrifice which are designated as not to be burnt upon the altar must not be burnt upon it. How, then, can it be stated that 'the remainder' is to be burnt separately? ');">²⁰</span> — R. Judah, son of R. Simeon b. Pazi said: They are burnt as fuel,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Upon the altar but not as part of the sacrifice. ');">²¹</span> in accordance with the statement of R. Eliezer; for it has been taught: R. Eliezer says: For a sweet savour<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 12. ');">²²</span> thou mayest not bring it [upon the altar] but thou mayest bring it as fuel. This is right for R. Eliezer who holds this opinion; but what is there to say as regards the Rabbis who do not hold this opinion? — [They declare that] it is to be treated according to the view of R. Eleazar b. Simeon; for it has been taught: R. Eleazar b. Simeon says: The handful<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of a meal-offering for a sin brought by a priest. Lev. VI, 16 speaks of a freewill-offering. ');">²³</span> is offered separately and the remainder is scattered upon the place of the ashes.