(י) וְאִ֗ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֤ר יִנְאַף֙ אֶת־אֵ֣שֶׁת אִ֔ישׁ אֲשֶׁ֥ר יִנְאַ֖ף אֶת־אֵ֣שֶׁת רֵעֵ֑הוּ מֽוֹת־יוּמַ֥ת הַנֹּאֵ֖ף וְהַנֹּאָֽפֶת׃
(10) If a man commits adultery with a married woman, committing adultery with another man’s wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall be put to death.
What kinds of expectations and parameters are described regarding adultery in the Ten Commandments and Leviticus texts?
Who is the tenth commandment directed towards?
If any man’s wife has gone astray and broken faith with him (13) in that a man has had relations with her unbeknown to her husband, and she keeps secret the fact that she has defiled herself without being forced, and there is no witness against her— (14) but a fit of jealousy comes over him and he is wrought up about the wife who has defiled herself; or if a fit of jealousy comes over one and he is wrought up about his wife although she has not defiled herself— (15) the man shall bring his wife to the priest.
And he shall bring as an offering for her one-tenth of an ephah of barley flour...it is a meal offering of jealousy, a meal offering of remembrance which recalls wrongdoing. (16) The priest shall bring her forward and have her stand before the Eternal....
After he has made the woman stand before the Eternal, the priest shall bare the woman’s head and place upon her hands the meal offering of remembrance, which is a meal offering of jealousy. And in the priest’s hands shall be the water of bitterness that induces the spell. (19) The priest shall adjure the woman, saying to her, “If no man has lain with you, if you have not gone astray in defilement while married to your husband, be immune to harm from this water of bitterness that induces the spell. (20) But if you have gone astray while married to your husband and have defiled yourself...may the Eternal make you a curse and an imprecation among your people, as the Eternal causes your thigh to sag and your belly to distend; (22) may this water that induces the spell enter your body, causing the belly to distend and the thigh to sag.” And the woman shall say, “Amen, amen!” (23) The priest shall put these curses down in writing and rub it off into the water of bitterness. (24)
He is to make the woman drink the water of bitterness that induces the spell, so that the spell-inducing water may enter into her to bring on bitterness. (25) Then the priest shall take from the woman’s hand the meal offering of jealousy, elevate the meal offering before the Eternal, and present it on the altar. (26) The priest shall scoop out of the meal offering a token part of it and turn it into smoke on the altar. Last, he shall make the woman drink the water. (27)
Once he has made her drink the water—if she has defiled herself by breaking faith with her husband, the spell-inducing water shall enter into her to bring on bitterness, so that her belly shall distend and her thigh shall sag; and the woman shall become a curse among her people. (28) But if the woman has not defiled herself and is pure, she shall be unharmed and able to retain seed. (29)
This is the ritual in cases of jealousy, when a woman goes astray while married to her husband and defiles herself, (30) or when a fit of jealousy comes over a man and he is wrought up over his wife...The man shall be clear of guilt; but that woman shall suffer for her guilt.
How are the parameters of the Ten Commandments (number ten, specifically!) and Leviticus texts subverted or changed by this section?
How does the text manage jealousy, assumption of guilt, and shame, especially in regards to gender?
What do men potentially risk by doing this ritual?
§ The Gemara discusses matters related to sin and sexual impropriety. Rav Ḥisda says: Licentious behavior in a home causes damage like a worm causes damage to sesame. And Rav Ḥisda says: Anger in a home causes damage like a worm causes damage to sesame. The Gemara comments: Both this and that, i.e., that licentious behavior and anger destroy a home, were said with regard to the woman of the house, but with regard to the man, although these behaviors are improper, we do not have the same extreme consequences with regard to it, as the woman’s role in the home is more significant, resulting in a more detrimental result if she acts improperly.
What is the rationale for a greater punishment towards women? On a scale of 1-10, how much does it fill you with rage?
Why do you think the rabbis are concerned with an immediacy or delay in punishment? What do you think "merit" means?
Storytime! The Sotah in action
מַעֲשֶׂה בִּשְׁתֵּי אֲחָיוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ דּוֹמוֹת זוֹ לְזוֹ. וְהָיְתָה אַחַת נְשׂוּאָה בְּעִיר אַחַת, וְאַחַת נְשׂוּאָה בְּעִיר אַחֶרֶת. בִּקֵּשׁ בַּעֲלָהּ שֶׁל אַחַת מֵהֶן לְקַנְּאוֹת לָהּ וּלְהַשְׁקוֹתָהּ מַיִם הַמָּרִים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם. הָלְכָה לְאוֹתָהּ הָעִיר שֶׁהָיְתָה אֲחוֹתָהּ נְשׂוּאָה שָׁם. אָמְרָה לָהּ אֲחוֹתָהּ, מָה רָאִית לָבֹא לְכָאן. אָמְרָה לָהּ, בַּעֲלִי מְבַקֵּשׁ לְהַשְׁקוֹת אוֹתִי מַיִם הַמָּרִים. אָמְרָה לָהּ אֲחוֹתָהּ, אֲנִי הוֹלֶכֶת תַּחְתַּיִךְ וְשׁוֹתָה. אָמְרָה לָהּ לְכִי. לָבְשָׁה בִּגְדֵי אֲחוֹתָהּ וְהָלְכָה תַּחְתֶּיהָ וְשָׁתְתָה מֵי הַמָּרִים וְנִמְצֵאת טְהוֹרָה, וְחָזְרָה לְבֵית אֲחוֹתָהּ. יָצָאת שְׂמֵחָה לִקְרָאתָהּ, חִבְּקָה אוֹתָהּ וְנָשְׁקָה לָהּ בְּפִיהָ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁנָּשְׁקוּ זוֹ לְזוֹ, הֵרִיחָה בַּמַּיִם הַמָּרִים, וּמִיָּד מֵתָה, לְקַיֵּם מַה שֶּׁנֶּאֱמַר: אֵין אָדָם שַׁלִּיט בָּרוּחַ לִכְלֹא אֶת הָרוּחַ, וְאֵין שִׁלְטוֹן בְּיוֹם הַמָּוֶת, וְאֵין מִשְׁלַחַת בַּמִּלְחָמָה, וְלֹא יְמַלֵּט רֶשַׁע אֶת בְּעָלָיו (קהלת ח, ח).
[There is] a story about two sisters who resembled each other. Now one was married in one city and the other was married in another city. The husband of one of them wanted to accuse her of infidelity and have her drink the bitter water in Jerusalem. She went to that city where her married sister was. Her sister said to her, “What was your reason for coming here?” She said to her, “My husband wants to have me drink [the bitter water].” Her sister said to her, “I will go in your place and drink it.” She said to her, “Go.” She put on her sister's clothes, went in her place, drank the bitter water, and was found clean. When she returned to her sister's house, she joyfully went out to meet her, then embraced and kissed her on the mouth. As soon as the one kissed the other, she smelled the bitter water and immediately died, in order to fulfill what is stated (in Eccl. 8:8), “No human has control over the wind to contain the wind, nor is there control on the day of death […].”
More double standards in the Talmud!
Yose ben Yochanan (a man) of Jerusalem used to say: Let thy house be wide open, and let the poor be members of thy household. Engage not in too much conversation with women. They said this with regard to one’s own wife, how much more [does the rule apply] with regard to another man’s wife. From here the Sages said: as long as a man engages in too much conversation with women, he causes evil to himself, he neglects the study of the Torah, and in the end he will inherit gehinnom.
Joshua ben Perahiah and Nittai the Arbelite received [the oral tradition] from them. Joshua ben Perahiah used to say: appoint for thyself a teacher, and acquire for thyself a companion and judge all men with the scale weighted in his favor.
Note: "in his favor," l'chav zchut - z'chut is the same word as "merit" in regards to the sotah punishment.
If the “finger is pointed” at a man’s wife about another man, but she is not caught sleeping with the other man, she shall jump into the river for her husband.
Ishay Rosen-Zvi (author of Sotah) is the Head of the Talmud and Late Antiquity section in the department of Hebrew Culture Studies at Tel-Aviv University, where he teaches Talmudic literature and culture.
The Code of Hammurabi is a Babylonian legal text composed c. 1755–1750 BC. It is the longest, best-organized, and best-preserved legal text from the ancient Near East. - Wikipedia
There are several similarities in some lines of Hammurabi texts and Torah texts as well. What do you think about this possible reconciliation of the text? Does it work for you?
"...[I]t should be noted that jealousy appears to be an exclusively male passion in the Hebrew Bible (with the possible exception of Song of Songs 8:6, which has an ambiguous reference), and one that can be associated with the sort of violence that must be controlled."
"The mention of ‘curse and oath’ in the Sotah text, seems designed to deter women from adultery and to coerce a confession from them. Everything about the ritual, from the priestly context to the ritual props of the scroll, dirt, and offering, is designed to intimidate and humiliate the woman. The threat of such a ritual, not to mention undergoing it, could certainly terrify anyone, especially a woman accused of such a serious offense. Because the Sotah works as a form of social control, it is paradoxically the mention of the curse, more than its performance, that accounts for its efficacy."
"The Sotah text offers less access to humour than the Balaam narrative. One can imagine, however, the scenario in which the woman is vindicated and her uterus does not drop. The husband in this case must now face the entire community as one who gave in to the ‘spirit of jealousy’, whose suspicion was groundless. If, on the other hand, the husband’s suspicion is affirmed, his reward is a wife (presuming he wishes to remain married) who cannot bear children. Little hermeneutical imagination is needed, then, to imagine how this ritual could ‘backfire’. The logic of reversal so central to the Balaam story, in which curses become blessings, presents readers of the Sotah text with the possibility that the curse may somehow become a blessing – perhaps by the humiliation of the husband and priest, who may seem ludicrous in their efforts, or by the vindication of the woman. Also, from a retrospective standpoint, when the ritual had been abandoned or at least placed at some historical distance, the high level of detail could presumably look rather silly, especially if the reader were inclined to doubt the efficacious power of such a ritual. The sheer uniqueness of the text itself exposes it to the risk of marginal status, if not outright disregard."
Brian Britt is a Professor of Biblical Studies at Virginia Tech.
As students of Torah, we ask, “Why this ritual?”
One possibility is that it is not really the actual physical “test” that matters, but rather the devastating psychological reaction to the frightening and humiliating experience. A woman is brought before the priest, her hair is uncovered, and she is forced to drink a concoction that, by comparison, makes m’vushal wine seem alluring. The reasoning behind this “test” may have been that the psychological impact would be so great, the humiliation so severe, that a woman with a guilty conscience would reveal her guilt one way or the other. Another read is that the ambiguous nature of the ritual is intended in order to practically guarantee that a woman could prove her innocence. Perhaps the ritual afforded a way for women to clear themselves of suspicion.
One might imagine that the Torah would say that a man who has sexual relations with a married women has, in effect, taken what belongs to another man. In the case of the sotah, however, it is the woman, and not her lover, who is accused of the crime of ma’al, of “misappropriation of property.” The errant wife has taken something belonging to her husband – perhaps his honor, her fidelity, or the exclusive rights to her sexuality. Therefore, the subject of this section of Torah is not her adultery, but rather, his jealousy (and pride). After all, the ritual is enacted when a man feels suspicious.
Rabbi Sarra Levine points out that this societal problem of men’s jealousy is marked onto the bodies of women, the true abhorrence here, much in the way that men’s legislation of a woman’s body is equally disturbing in today’s public and legal arena (The Women’s Torah Commentary). Perhaps the ambiguity in the text is the Torah’s own way of withholding support for the husband’s lack of control of his emotions or even condemning the misplaced blame. The uncertainty of the text just may be the Torah’s way of saying, “Men, pull yourselves together and stop blaming women for your shortcomings!” We can even imagine the tone she might take when offering such a tochechah (constructive criticism).
Rabbi Laurie Rice is co-senior rabbi at Congregation Micah in Nashville, Tennessee, where she shares the pulpit with her husband, Rabbi Philip "Flip" Rice.
Thankfully, we no longer have witch trials and we no longer practice the ritual of sotah, but we might wonder about other ways in which our overwhelmingly male-dominated society continues to seek to control women. Over the last year, Sheryl Sandberg's book, Lean In, has gotten a lot of media attention, and has highlighted many of the challenges for women seeking to combine a career and a family life. What comes across loud and clear through the book is that men and women are judged differently, held to different standards, and that society's generally accepted career paths favor men significantly over women. As she writes, "the promise of equality is not the same as true equality."
Despite all of the progress toward equality in modern society, we can still see ways in which men seek to control women, especially in the professional arena. Women with children have to choose whether to be a "stay at home mom" or a "working mother"; there is no equivalent male language, because no similar dichotomy is presented to men.
In the case of sotah, as Rabbi Laurie Rice makes clear, it is the husband's suspicion and jealousy that lead to the ritual's enactment. In this way, it is a reminder for us men that the quest for true equality is not a women's issue; it is an issue for all of us who are concerned with building a fair and equal society. As we read about sotah it is a reminder of how far we have come, but also how far we have still to go. I want to be a working father in partnership with my wife as we build our family and careers together.
Rabbi Danny Burkeman is a rabbi at the Community Synagogue in Port Washington, New York.
Thanks to Dr Laurie Fisher and Alexandra Botzum