Jewish Audio on Chabad.org. Today's שיעור will be in מסכת סוטה דף י"ז, from the beginning of עמוד א, from the beginning of the משנה. The משנה starts, בא לו לכתוב את המגילה, when he came to write the מגילה, מאיזה מקום הוא כותב, from which place did he write? By the סוטה they had to write certain פסוקים on a piece of parchment, then they would erase these פסוקים into the water, and then the סוטה would drink that water. So the משנה asks, which פסוקים of the תורה did they write on this מגילה? And in the משנה we will have different opinions. And mainly we deal here with four פסוקים. This is in פרשת נשא, קאפיטל ה, פסוק י"ט, כ, כ"א, and כ"ב. פסוק י"ט starts with the words, והשביע אותה הכהן, the כהן should make her swear, ואמר אל האשה, he would say to the woman, אם לא שכב איש אותך, if a man didn't sleep with you, ואם לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך, and if you didn't turn away and become טמא under your husband, הנקי ממי המרים המאררים האלה, so you should be clean from the these bitter and these waters that curse others. Then פסוק כ says, ואת כי שטית תחת אישך, if you did turn away under your husband, וכי נטמאת, and you did become טמא, ויתן איש בך את שכבתו מבלעדי אישך, and a man slept with you other than your husband. So פסוק כ"א continues, והשביע הכהן את האשה, the כהן should make the woman swear, בשבועת האלה, in the oath of the curse, ואמר הכהן לאשה, and the כהן should say to the woman, יתן ה' אותך לאלה ולשבועה בתוך עמך, ה' should give you for a curse and for a oath amongst your nation, בתת ה', when ה' will give, את ירכך נופלת, your thigh would be falling, ואת בטנך, and your stomach, צבה, would swell up. Then פסוק כ"ב says, ובאו המים המאררים האלה במעיך, and these waters that curse will go into your stomach, לצבות בטן, to swell up the stomach, ולנפיל ירך, and to drop the thigh, ואמרה האשה אמן אמן, and the woman should say אמן אמן. Then we have another פסוק which is not נוגע in the משנה, but it will be important in the גמרא, the next פסוק which is פסוק כ"ג that says, וכתב את האלות האלה הכהן בספר, that the כהן should write these curses down on a ספר, ומחה, and he should erase it, אל מי המרים, into the bitter waters. And then the פסוק continues that the woman, the סוטה, should drink from the water that has the words of this מגילה erased into it. And this is what the משנה will discuss: from which of these פסוקים does he start writing the מגילה? So the

first opinion in the משנה is, מאם לא שכב איש וגומר, he starts from the first first פסוק that we mentioned before which is י"ט, not from the beginning of the פסוק, but from the words where it says, אם לא שכב איש אותך, that if a man did not sleep with you, etc., and you write this complete פסוק where it says that if you did not become טמא under your husband, you should be clean from these bitter waters that curse. And the reason we write this פסוק, even though this is not a curse, this is a ברכה, this is saying that if she is clean, she should be clean from the waters, she should not be punished. But nevertheless, since this פסוק seems to imply that if she did become טמא, then she should be cursed, so these are קללות, curses that come from the understanding of the ברכות. So therefore, you write this פסוק too. Then we continue with the next פסוק, ואת כי שטית תחת אישך, that you if you did turn away under your husband and you did become טמא. So you write that פסוק too till the end of the פסוק. Then he says, ואינו כותב והשביע הכהן את האשה. When you come to the third פסוק, you don't start by writing the first words of the פסוק where it says that the כהן should make the woman swear in the שבועת האלה, in the שבועה of the curse, and the כהן should say to the woman, יתן ה' אותך. You skip the beginning of the פסוק, וכותב, but you do write, you continue writing the rest of the פסוק where it says, יתן ה' אותך לאלה ולשבועה, that ה' should give you for a curse and for an oath. And he continues with the פסוק till the end of the פסוק. And then you continue with the next פסוק, ובאו המים המאררים האלה במעיך, that these waters that curse should come into your stomach, לצבות בטן ולנפיל ירך, to swell up your stomach and to have your thigh drop, and then ואינו כותב ואמרה האשה אמן אמן, and the end of the פסוק where it says that the woman should say אמן אמן you skip, that you do not write. And the reason for that is, because you only write the curses, but you do not write the part of the פסוק where the תורה tells the כהן what to do, or tells the woman what to do. And therefore, in the second the third פסוק, פסוק כ"א, where the פסוק starts off by saying that the כהן should make the woman swear, and the כהן should say to the woman, this is all not written in the מגילה. This is what the תורה tells the כהן to do. And therefore, too, at the end of the fourth פסוק, where it says that the woman should say אמן אמן, that is not written in the מגילה either, because that is something that the תורה commands the woman to say, but this is not part of the curses. This is the opinion of the first מאן דאמר in the משנה, and as we see later on in the גמרא, this is רבי מאיר, because whenever we do not have a name in the משנה, we assume that סתם משנה רבי מאיר, that the משנה that is written without a name is רבי מאיר, as the גמרא says in סנהדרין. So the opinion of רבי מאיר is that you write all the פסוקים, except those words that imply what the כהן should do, or what the woman should do.

רבי יוסי אומר, but רבי יוסי says, לא היה מפסיק, he didn't interrupt. He started from the first פסוק, as we said before, from the words, אם לא שכב איש אותך, and he continued all the way through all four פסוקים, including those words that tell the כהן what to do, and including the words that tell the woman what to do. In other words, he would go all the way through till the words ואמרה האשה אמן אמן, including these words too. רבי יהודה אומר, רבי יהודה says, כל עצמו אינו כותב אלא יתן השם אותך לאלה ולשבועה וגומר, and he wouldn't write the first and the second פסוק at all. He would only write beginning in middle of the third פסוק, where it says יתן השם אותך לאלה ולשבועה, because the first פסוק, where it says that if you are clean, you should be clean from these waters, that is not a curse. And therefore, רבי יהודה holds you didn't write that פסוק. You started from the curses themselves ממש, and that is in middle of the third פסוק, where the פסוק says השם should give you for a curse, and for a שבועה, etc., that your thigh should fall, and your stomach should blow up. And then you would continue to the next פסוק, where it says ובאו המים המאררים האלה במעיך וגומר, that these waters that curse should come into your stomach, etc. And you would go till the words ולנפול ירך, ואינו כותב ואמרה האשה אמן אמן, and he would not write the last words of that פסוק, where it says that the woman should say אמן אמן. In other words, according to רבי יהודה, you would start only from the middle of the third פסוק, and go to the middle of the fourth פסוק. גמרא continues, במאי קמיפלגי, what is the argument between these different opinions?

גמרא says, בהאי קרא קמיפלגי, their argument is based on this following פסוק. And this is that fifth פסוק that we mentioned before. The פסוק says, after it mentions all the curses, it says, וכתב את האלת האלה הכהן בספר, that the כהן should write these curses on a ספר. So רבי מאיר סבר, רבי מאיר, who is the first opinion of the משנה, he holds that we דרש it as follows: When it says you should write the curses, so the word אלת itself, without the ה׳, האלת, just the word אלת, curses, means אלת ממש, would refer to the curses themselves, would refer to only those words where the תורה says, יתן השם אותך לאלה ולשבועה, השם should give you for a curse, and the water should come into your stomach to blow up your stomach, and to drop your thigh, just these words, exactly as the opinion of רבי יהודה. But since the תורה says האלת, there's an extra ה׳ to the word curses, the curses, that comes to include more, לרבות קללות הבאות מחמת ברכות, that comes to include that you also have to write those curses that are understood from the ברכות. And therefore, he holds that you start from the first פסוק, where it says אם לא שכב איש אותך, that if you did not sleep with a man, and you are clean, so you should be clean from these waters, because this like implies that if you are not clean, you should not be clean from these waters. So these are קללות that come from ברכות. So if not for the extra ה׳, we wouldn't write them. But since it says האלת, the curses, so the ה׳ comes to include also the curses that come from the ברכות. Then the תורה says אלה. It says האלת האלה, you should write these curses. למיעוטי קללות שבמשנה תורה, that comes to exclude the curses of חומש דברים. If it wouldn't say the words האלה, these, if it would just say וכתב את האלת הכהן בספר, that the כהן should write the curses on a ספר, I would think that this also includes all the other curses, because in פרשת כי תבוא in חומש דברים, we find many curses that השם cursed the יידן if חס ושלום they will not keep the תורה ומצוות. So I would think that all those curses have to be written down in this מגילה. Therefore, the תורה says that you write these curses to exclude those curses. Then the תורה says האלה. If it would have just said וכתב וכתב את האלות אלה, these curses, I would already exclude the curses of חומש דברים. Since the תורה adds a extra ה to the אלה, to the word אלה, it says האלה, למעוטי צוואות וקבלות סמי. That comes to exclude something else: to exclude the command to the כהן and the acceptance of the woman. In other words, when you start writing from the first פסוק, from the words אם לא שכב איש אותך, so I would think you write straight through from there till the end where it says ואמרה האשה אמן אמן. By the letter ה to the word האלה, it comes to teach us that you have to skip those words that are only commands to the כהן and are the acceptance of the woman. And therefore we skip the words והשביע הכהן את האשה בשבועת האלה ואמר הכהן לאשה, we skip these words, and we also skip the words ואמרה האשה אמן אמן. That is the opinion of רב מאיר. That's where he comes out with his opinion that you start from the beginning of ואם לא שכב איש אותך till the words ולנפול ירך, skipping והשביע הכהן and not writing ואמרה האשה אמן אמן. רבי יוסי, what is the opinion of רבי יוסי? He holds כולו כדקאמרת, exactly as you say that you write everything. But what you said that the letter ה comes to exclude the commands and comes to exclude the acceptance of the woman, he says it doesn't come to exclude that. Since it says את, the תורה says וכתב את האלות, the extra word את, לרבות צוואות וקבלות, that comes to include, to add that you also have to write the commands and the acceptance of the woman. And even though from the ה of האלה we would think that you don't write the צוואות, the commands and the acceptance of the woman, comes the word את to teach us that you write them too. And therefore he holds that you write from the beginning אם לא שכב איש אותך till ואמרה האשה אמן אמן, including the words והשביע הכהן and including the words ואמרה האשה אמן אמן. But the question is with רב מאיר: why does רב מאיר say that you exclude those few words? Doesn't it say את? And as we just said, את comes to include that you write them too. And the גמרא answers: אתים לא דריש. רב מאיר does not דרש the את. He feels that the את is just a regular way of writing, the תורה doesn't mean to tell us any special דין with the word את. Then we go to the opinion of רבי יהודה. What does רבי יהודה hold? That you only start from the third פסוק יתן השם אותך לאלה ולשבועה till the middle of the next פסוק ולנפול ירך, because he says כולהו במיעוטא דריש להו. All these extra words that the תורה says in the פסוק וכתב את האלות in the fifth פסוק, he דרש'es it not like before we said we include certain פסוקים because of those words, he says that these words comes to exclude. When it says אלות, the תורה says you should write these curses, so if it would just say אלות, write the curses, we would say אלות ממש, just actually the curses from the words יתן השם אותך לאלה ולשבועה, השם should give you for a curse, etc., into the next פסוק that the water should come into you to swell up your stomach and to drop your thigh. But now that it says האלות with a ה, that comes למעוטי קללות הבאות מחמת ברכות, comes to exclude the קללות that are learned out from the ברכות. It doesn't come to include them, it comes to exclude them, to tell us that don't think that you should write the first פסוק too, where it says that if you are clean the water should not affect you, but it comes to exclude that we shouldn't write it. Then we have the word אלה. It says וכתב את האלות האלה, these curses, so he learns the same: למעוטי קללות שבמשנה תורה. Comes to exclude the curses of חומש דברים. But that would be if it would just say אלה. Now that it says האלה, למעוטי צוואות וקבלות, it comes to exclude the commands and the acceptance of the woman. So according to this way of learning the פסוק, all we're left with is the קללות ממש, the actual curses from the words יתן השם אותך לאלה ולשבועה through the middle of the next פסוק לצבות בטן ולנפול ירך. Then the גמרא asks a קושיא:

ולרב מאיר, according to רב מאיר, מאי שנא האי ה דמרבי ביה ומאי שנא האי ה דממעט ביה? Why is it that one ה he uses to include certain things, to add certain things, and the other ה he uses to exclude? As we said before, the ה of the word האלות he says comes to add, to include the קללות that are learned from the ברכות. Then he said later that the ה of האלה comes to exclude the commands to the כהן and acceptance of the woman. It's one of the two: is a ה מרבה, is the letter ה come to be מרבה to include, to add more, so then the letter ה from the word האלה should also come to include something. If we're going to say that the letter ה comes to exclude, then the letter ה of the word האלות should also comes to exclude. Why is it that the first one comes to include and the second one comes to exclude? And the גמרא answers: ה דגבי ריבוייא ריבוייא הוא. A ה that's written by a word that comes to add, so the ה comes to add even more. ה דגבי מיעוטא מיעוטא הוא. And A ה that's in the front of a word that the word itself comes to exclude something, so the ה comes to exclude even more. And therefore here, the word עולה we said before comes to tell us what we should do, which words we should write, we should write the curses. So when we have a ה in front of that word, that comes to add more to what we should do, what we should write. Therefore he learns that this comes to include the קללות that are learned from the ברכות. The word אלה we said before comes to exclude. It comes to exclude the קללות of חומש דברים. So the ה that's in front of the word אלה, האלה, comes to add to the exclusion, that we exclude even more. Therefore he learns that comes to exclude the ציווי and the קבלה. Then the גמרא asks a קשיא: ולית ליה לרבי מאיר מכלל לאו אתה שומע הן? Don't we know that רבי מאיר does not hold of this כלל that from the negative we understand the positive? רבי מאיר here is saying that the reason we write the first פסוק too, even though the פסוק tells us that if she did not do the עבירה, she should be clean, which is not a קללה, which is a ברכה, but nevertheless he says we write it because from the ברכה we understand the קללה. Since it says that if she didn't do the עבירה she is clean, that itself comes to imply that if she did do עבירה she is not clean. So so we see here that רבי מאיר accepts the סברא of מכלל לאו אתה שומע הן, that from saying no, we understand the yes. Even though the תורה doesn't say the positive part, doesn't say that if you did do עבירה you would get punished, but since it says if you didn't do you won't get punished, that itself comes to tell us that if you did do it, you will be punished. So the גמרא asks, but don't we know that רבי מאיר does not accept that סברא of מכלל לאו אתה שומע הן? And where do we see that רבי מאיר doesn't accept that סברא? So as רש״י brings that this is in the גמרא קידושין. In the גמרא קידושין, דף ס״א עמוד א׳, we find a משנה where it says that רבי מאיר holds that a תנאי must be made as the תנאי of בני גד ובני ראובן. Whenever you make a condition to anything, whether you give קידושין on condition of something, or you give a גט on condition of something, whatever the thing might be, if you give it on condition, רבי מאיר holds that the only time the condition is valid, which means that if you fulfill the condition, then the קידושין is קידושין or the גט is a גט. If you don't fulfill the condition, the גט is not a גט and the קידושין is not a קידושין. When do we say that we must keep the condition? Only if the condition was made similar to the condition given to the children of גד and the children of ראובן. And this is in חומש where we find that the שבט גד and שבט ראובן and half of the שבט of מנשה came to משה רבינו asking him that they want to take their part in ארץ ישראל on this side of the ירדן, not to cross over on the other side of the ירדן. And משה רבינו made a condition with them, that he's only ready to give it to them if they will first go and fight across the ירדן with the other אידן against the enemy, against the כנענים. Then he says, when you will come back you are allowed to have your share on this side of the ירדן. So we find in the תורה that the way משה רבינו made the condition was, he said to them, that if you are going to go over the ירדן, then you will get your share here. Then he said, but if you will not go over the ירדן, you will not get your share here. משה said the positive and the negative. So רבי מאיר says that anytime a person makes a condition, has to be made in the same way. You have to specifically clearly say that I'm giving this to you on condition that you do this and that, and if you do not do this and that, then I am not giving it to you. You have to clearly say the negative and the positive. And if you do not specify the negative and the positive, then רבי מאיר holds that condition is not valid. So we see that רבי מאיר does not accept the סברא of מכלל לאו אתה שומע הן, that from saying the no, you understand yourself the yes. You must specify the negative and the positive. So that seems to contradict the opinion of רבי מאיר in our משנה. Because in our משנה רבי מאיר holds that from the negative we do understand the positive. And therefore he says, that even though the פסוק says the negative, that if you didn't do the עבירה you will be clean, nevertheless we do write it down in the מגילה because this is considered a curse also, because we understand from that that if you did do the עבירה, you would be punished. So we see that רבי מאיר does hold from the סברא מכלל לאו אתה שומע הן in our משנה, while over there he holds that we do not accept the סברא of מכלל לאו אתה שומע הן. אמר רב תנחום, so רב תנחום said to answer this question, הנקי כתיב. When the תורה says that if you did not do the עבירה you will be clean, the expression of the תורה is הנקי ממי המרים המאררים האלה, you should be clean from the bitter waters that curse. But it uses the לשון הנקי, and in לשון קודש, in Hebrew, sometimes a ה and a ח are interchanged. So it's as if the תורה is saying חינקי. חינקי means you should be choked. So he דרש's the פסוק as if the פסוק would say, not ואם לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך הנקי, that if you did not do the טומאה under your husband you should be clean, but start from the word שטית, that if שטית טומאה תחת אישך, then חינקי, that if you did turn away and you did become טמא under your husband, you should be choked. So it's not only that we understand from the negative of the פסוק the positive, but as if the פסוק itself is saying that if you did do the עבירה you should be choked, and therefore he holds that you do write this פסוק down in the מגילה, too. Then the גמרא continues:

דרש רבי עקיבא, רבי עקיבא דרשנ'ד, רבי עקיבא taught: איש ואשה, a husband and a wife, זכו, if they merit, שכינה ביניהם, the שכינה is amongst them, because the word איש is made up of the three letters: אלף, יוד, שין. So you have the אלף, שין, and you have a יוד there. The word אשה is made up of אלף, שין, הא. So you have an אלף, שין, and you have a הא. So the word איש and the word אשה, two of the letters are the same. The difference is that the איש has another יוד, and the letter word אשה has a הא. יוד and a הא make up the word קה, which is part of the name of השם. And therefore he says that if everything works fine, they are זוכה, they live peacefully, and they are faithful to each other, so then the י-ק is amongst them, the שכינה is amongst them. לא זכו, but if they're not זוכה, they do not merit, they're not faithful, then אש אוכלתן, then the fire will eat them up, because if you take out the יוד from the word איש, from the man, and you take out the הא from the word אשה, in other words, you take out השם's name from both of them, you're only left with twice the word אש. אש means fire. So if they do not have the שכינה because they are not זוכה, then the fire will eat them up.

אמר רבא, רבא said, ודאשה עדיפא מדאיש, and the fire of the woman is worse, is stronger than of the man. And he gives the reason, because האי מצטרף, האי לא מצטרף. By the name איש, so the יוד is in between the אלף and the שין, so the word אש that is there is not so close, the אלף and the שין are not so close, they are not מצטרף, the word is not combined. But by the אשה, so the letter that is part of השם's name is at the end of the word, but the אלף and the שין which makes the word אש is together, is combined. So therefore, if the woman does not merit, if it's her fault, then the fire is stronger, it is even worse. אמר רבא, רבא said, מפני מה אמרה תורה, why did the תורה say הבא עפר לסוטה, you should bring sand to a סוטה? Because אם זכתה, if she is זוכה, if she merits, יוצא ממנו בן כאברהם אבינו, a son like אברהם אבינו will come from her, דכתיב ביה that by אברהם it says עפר ואפר, sand and ashes. אברהם said to השם that what am I? I am only sand and ashes. And the פסוק says by a סוטה that if she really is clean, so after she drinks the water, not only will she not be punished, but on the contrary, because of that, she will gain a lot. If she didn't have any children before, she will have children now. If she didn't have such good children, she will have better children. So drinking of the water is for the benefit of the woman, too, if she is זוכה, if she is clean. So therefore, we put עפר, sand, into the water to show that through this water she is able to merit to have a son like אברהם who said that what is he? He is עפר. And on the other hand, לא זכתה, if she is not זוכה, she does not merit, if she is not clean, then תחזור לעפרה, she will go back to the dust. In other words, she will die. So because of both sides, whether she is זוכה or not זוכה, because of both sides, we put sand into her water.

דרש רבא, רבא דרשנ'ד, רבא learned: בשכר שאמר אברהם אבינו ואנכי עפר ואפר, in the שכר, in the reward for what אברהם said that I am sand and ashes, זכו בניו לב' מצות, so his children were זוכה to two מצות which are connected to sand and ashes. They were זוכה to the מצוה of אפר פרה, of the ashes of the פרה אדומה, ועפר סוטה, to the מצוה of the sand by the סוטה. Then the גמרא asks, והאיכא נמי עפר כיסוי הדם, why only mention these two מצות? There is another מצוה which is with sand, that is the sand of covering of the blood, that when you שחט a bird, or you שחט a חיה, you must cover the blood with sand, which is a מצוה. So why didn't he mention that, too? And the גמרא answers, התם בכיסוי הדם, הכשר מצוה איכא, הנאה ליכא. It is a מצוה, but there is no benefit. And what רבא said was that because אברהם said אנכי עפר ואפר, his children got reward. Reward means that they get benefit. And since from the מצוה of כיסוי הדם we don't see any physical benefit, therefore, he didn't mention it. It is just a מצוה, but no physical benefit. But by the other two, we actually gain also. The case of the עפר סוטה, the sand of the סוטה, we gain because first of all, if she is clean, then she goes back to her husband, and she gains, as we mentioned before. If she is not clean, at least her husband gets rid of her problem. Plus we will know for sure that the children are not ממזרים. If she is clean, we know that her children are כשר children, not ממזרים. So there is a benefit for the יידן through the מצוה of עפר סוטה. And the same is concerning the מצוה of עפר פרה, of the ashes of the פרה אדומה, is also for the benefit of the יידן, because if a person is טמא, he becomes טהור, he becomes clean through the עפר פרה. And also, as רש״י says, the מצוה of פרה אדומה is to forgive for the חטא העגל, for the עבירה that the יידן made, the golden calf. So that is a שכר. But כיסוי הדם, even though it is a מצוה, but it is not a שכר. Then the גמרא continues: דרש רבא, רבא דרש'נט, רבא taught: בשכר שאמר אברהם אבינו אם מחוט ועד שרוך נעל, in reward of what אברהם אבינו said: 'If I will take from you, from a thread to a shoelace.' This he said to סדום after סדום fell into the hands of כדרלעומר, and along with them also לוט, the nephew of אברהם, fell into the hands of כדרלעומר. So אברהם went to rescue לוט. So when he rescued לוט, he also rescued the people from סדום and all the treasures from סדום. And the king of סדום told אברהם אבינו, 'Please give us the people, and all the treasures, all the money, you could keep.' So אברהם אבינו answered that 'I promise I will not take anything, not from a thread to a shoelace.' So in reward for אברהם אבינו saying that, and staying away from גזל, from stealing as much as possible, זכו בניו, his children were זוכה לב׳ מצות, to two מצות: חוט של תכלת, the thread of the blue wool that you put into the ציצית, that was a reward for what he said, 'I will not take a thread from you.' And then for what he said, 'I will not take a shoelace,' ורצועה של תפילין, they were זוכה to the רצועה, the strap of תפילין, because a strap is like a shoelace. So in the reward for what he said, 'I will not take a shoelace,' his children were זוכה to the strap of תפילין. And the גמרא asks: בשלמא רצועה של תפילין, מילא we understand why the מצוה of תפילין is considered a reward. The benefit that we get from it is because דכתיב, it says: וראו כל עמי הארץ כי שם ה׳ נקרא עליך, the פסוק says that all the nations of the world will see that השם'ס name is upon you, and the פסוק continues: ויראו ממך, and they will be afraid of you. ותניא, and we learned: רבי אלעזר הגדול אומר, רבי אלעזר הגדול said:

אלו תפילין שבראש, that this refers to the תפילין of the head. So we see that because we have the מצוה of תפילין, the גוים are afraid of us. So this is reward for what אברהם אבינו said. אלא חוט של תכלת מאי היא, but the thread of the blue wool from the ציצית, what kind of reward is it? And as we said before, we have to find some kind of benefit that we get from this שכר. We do not see any benefit. It is a מצוה, but what kind of benefit do we see that we get from the מצוה of ציצית from the thread of blue wool in the ציצית? But the גמרא answers: דתניא, because we learned: היה רבי מאיר אומר, רבי מאיר said: מה נשתנה תכלת מכל מיני צבעונים, why is תכלת, the blue wool, different than all other colors? Why did השם choose for the מצוה of תכלת of ציצית the color blue? And the answer is: מפני שהתכלת דומה לים, because the blue looks like the ים, like the ocean. והים דומה לרקיע, and the ים is similar to the skies. והרקיע דומה לכסא הכבוד, the רקיע, the sky, is similar to the כסא הכבוד, to the throne of glory. Where do we see that? שנאמר, because the פסוק says in שמות כ״ד, that after מתן תורה: ויראו את אלקי ישראל, they saw the God of the יידן, ותחת רגליו, and under His feet, כמעשה לבנת הספיר, it looked like a paved area of sapphire stone, וכעצם השמים לטהר, and as it were the very heaven for clearness. So we see here that the שמים is compared to לבנת הספיר, to sapphire stone. וכתיב, and there's another פסוק in יחזקאל that says: כמראה אבן ספיר דמות כסא, that the כסא, the כסא הכבוד, the chair of glory, the throne of glory, looks like אבן ספיר. So we see from these פסוקים that the רקיע looks like the כסא הכבוד. Now we don't need any פסוקים to show us that the תכלת looks like the ים and the ים looks like the רקיע, that we could see. So what do we see from here? That by putting in תכלת in the ציצית, it is similar to the כסא הכבוד. So really what that means is that by keeping the מצוה of ציצית, we have the כסא הכבוד amongst us, which means we have the שכינה amongst us. And this is what he said. We asked what kind of reward is it, the מצוה of תכלת? So he answered the reward is that by keeping the מצוה of תכלת, the מצוה of ציצית, we have השם amongst us. And now we will continue with the משנה. משנה says:

אינו כותב, you're not allowed to write the מגילה of the סוטה, לא על הלוח, not on a board, on a wooden board, ולא על הנייר, not on paper, as רש״י explains that they would take grass and they would stick them together and it would look like leather, and this really was called נייר, this is a kind of paper, ולא על הדיפתרא ולא על הדפתרא, and not on דפתרא. דפתרא, רש''י explains a kind of parchment. It is parchment, but it was not prepared 100%. Usually parchment, which is called קלף, was prepared through salt and flour, and then also through עפצים, as רש''י says, which means gallnut. דפתרא is when it's prepared partially. They only prepared it through the salt and through the flour, but they didn't use the עפצים. So you cannot write on that kind of parchment the מגילה of the סוטה. אלא על המגילה, only on a מגילה, which means on complete parchment, which is called קלף, שנאמר, because the פסוק says, you should write it בספר, on a ספר, which means it has to be like a ספר, which was made of קלף. ואינו כותב, and you're not allowed to write on the parchment, לא בקומוס ולא בקנקנתום, not with קומוס and not with קנקנתום, not with gum and not with vitriol. And as רש''י explains, קומוס was the juice that comes from a tree, and that could write, but that gets absorbed in the parchment when you write with it. And קנקנתום is, as רש''י says, it's called vitrioli or or dimant in his language. So you can't write with these, ולא בכל דבר שרושם, and not with anything else that leaves an indentation on the parchment that even if you erase it, you will still be able to tell that something was written on it. אלא בדיו, you only write with ink, ink that when you erase it, you will not be able to tell that it was written on it before. שנאמר, because the פסוק says ומחה, that when you write the מגילה, you have to afterwards erase it. So we learn out from there, it has to be a כתב שיכול להמחות, a כתב, a writing that could be erased. And therefore, these different things are פסול because they cannot be erased. And the only thing that could be erased is דיו, is ink. Then the גמרא says,

אמר רבא, רבא said, מגילת סוטה שכתבה בלילה פסולה. If you wrote the מגילה of the סוטה during the night, it is פסול. It must be done during the day. מאי טעמא? What is the reason? אתיא, we learn it out from a גזירה שווה of תורה תורה. כתיב הכא, it says by this סוטה, ועשה לה הכהן את כל התורה הזאת, the כהן should do to her as this תורה. וכתיב התם, it says in another פסוק in דברים י''ז, על פי התורה אשר יורוך, based on the תורה that they will teach you, ועל המשפט, and on the judgment that they will give you. In other words, you have to listen to the חכמים as they will teach you. But we learn out from there, since in that פסוק it says the word תורה, and in our פסוק it says the word תורה, so we compare the two, and we learn out from there, and we say, מה משפט, just like in that פסוק it mentions משפט together with תורה, so just like משפט is ביום, משפט means judgment, you cannot have a judgment of a בית דין at night, it must be during the day, as the גמרא learns out in סנהדרין דף ל''ד from the פסוק והיה ביום הנחילו, so אף מגילת סוטה ביום, so also when you write the מגילה of the סוטה, it must be done during the day, because by the סוטה it also says the word תורה. Then he continues: כתבה למפרע, if he wrote it backwards, פסולה, it's פסול. In other words, if he didn't write it in the proper order, but he wrote the last word first, and then the word before that, then the word before that, or even if one of the פסוקים were written backwards, so then the דין is that it is פסול, as long as the whole מגילה was not written in the proper order. דכתיב, because the פסוק says, וכתב את האלות האלה, you should write these curses, so we learn out, כי דכתיבא, as they are written. You should write them as they are written in the תורה, in that same order, but not in a different order. Then he continues: כתבה קודם שתקבל עליה השבועה, פסולה. If he wrote the מגילה before she accepted upon herself the שבועה, it is פסול, שנאמר, because the פסוק says, והשביע, he should make her swear, ואחר כך וכתב, then the תורה says he should write. And therefore, if you do it in a different order, it is פסול. כתבה איגרת, if he wrote it like a letter, פסולה, it's פסול. That means, as רש''י explains, that you wrote it without שרטוט. The דין is that when you write a ספר תורה, or whenever you write פסוקים from the תורה, you must have שרטוט first. שרטוט means you make an indentation on the parchment in order for you to write the words evenly. You make an indentation on top, and you start the letters that you're going to write from that indentation, so it'll come out that the line that you will be writing will be even. That's the דין by a ספר תורה. So he says, if you wrote the מגילה of the סוטה without שרטוט, without these lines, this this indentation, so then פסולה, it is פסול. Because בספר אמר רחמנא, the תורה says it should be written in a ספר, so it has to be written similar to a ספר תורה, which means it has to be written with שרטוט. Then he continues: כתבה על שני דפים, if he wrote it in two columns, פסולה, it is פסול. As רש''י says he wrote it like our ספר תורה's, that after you have finished one column, you continue to the next column. So if these פסוקים that he wrote, he wrote them in two columns, it is פסול, because ספר אחד אמר רחמנא, the תורה says that you should write it in a ספר, so we learn from here it should be one ספר, ולא שנים ושלשה ספרים, and not two or three ספרים. So if you write it in two columns or three columns, then it is not one ספר, but it's like two or three ספרים, that's why it's פסול. כתב אות אחת ומחק אות אחת, the דין is that you have to write the whole מגילה, and then you erase the whole מגילה into the water. What happens if he wrote one letter of the פסוקים and he erased it right away into the water? וכתב אות אחת ומחק אות אחת, then he continued, and wrote the second letter, and he erased it again, and that's how he went on till the end of the פרשה. In other words, he actually did write all the פסוקים, but he didn't first write them all and then erased them, but he wrote them one by one, wrote one letter and erased it, the next letter and erased it, the next letter and erased it, פסולה, it is פסול, דכתיב, because the פסוק says: ועשה לה הכהן את כל התורה הזאת, the כהן should do to her the whole תורה, this whole תורה, this whole דין. So since it says את כל התורה הזאת, so we learn out from here that you have to have the whole מגילה written at once and then you erase it. But if you don't have the whole מגילה written at once, it is פסול.

Concerning we learned before, that רבי עקיבא said that a איש and a אשה, husband and a wife, if they are זוכה, then the שכינה is between them, because the איש has the יוד of the name of השם in his word איש, and the אשה has the הא of the name of השם in the word אשה. So together, it turns into יוד קא, which is part of השם's name. So it says in חסידישע ספרים, in לקוטי תורה from the בעל התניא and in other ספרים, that the reason that השם's name is set up so that the יוד of the name is in the איש, and the הא of the name is in the אשה, is because the function of the איש is similar to the יוד, and the function of the woman is similar to the הא. The difference between a יוד and a הא is, is the יוד is a dot, while a הא is already with an אורך, רוחב and an עומק, which means it has a length, width, and depth. It is as if you would be saying that the יוד is stretched out to the length, width, and depth, that is the הא. The job of the man and the woman is explained in the גמרא יבמות דף ס״ג עמוד א. The גמרא says there: אדם מביא חיטין, חיטין כוסס? When a person brings home wheat, can you chew the wheat? What happens? He gives it to his wife, and she is the one that prepares it. And then it says, נמצאת מאירה עיניו, so it comes out she lights up his eyes, ומעמידתו על רגליו, she puts him on his feet. So we see from that גמרא that the job of the man is to bring home whatever it is supposed to be, and she is the one who is supposed to develop it, and prepare it such a way that it should be ready to be eaten, and ready to be used. And that is generally what it says in ספרים the difference between the husband and the wife. The husband is the one that is supposed to set the tone, and put down the point of what is supposed to be done, while the wife is supposed to develop what the husband brings home, and make it ready so it should be used, and find ways to apply it. As it says in תנא דבי אליהו רבה פרק ט, and similar to it in the גמרא נדרים דף ס״ו עמוד ב, that איזו היא אשה כשרה, what is considered a proper Jewish woman? העושה רצון בעלה, that she does the will of her husband. What it means is that the husband is the one that knows what is proper, but she is the one that is supposed to do it, which means she is the one that knows how to apply it, how to bring it down into practice. So it comes out that the difference between the husband and the wife is that the husband is the one that has the point, has the dot, he has the נקודה of what is supposed to be done. The התפשטות, the development of that נקודה, that is done through the wife. And as we see concerning אברהם and שרה, it says אברהם when he looked at ישמעאל, he said as the פסוק says, לו ישמעאל יחיה לפניך. He said to השם that he wants ישמעאל also to live. He didn't feel that ישמעאל should be chased out of the house. But the one that was able to apply what is proper, and to see what is actually to be done, it was שרה. She was the one that knew that it was right to chase ישמעאל out of the house. And השם said to אברהם, that כל אשר תאמר אליך שרה שמע בקולה, that you should listen to what שרה tells you. Because even though אברהם אבינו, he knew what was right and what was wrong, and he definitely set the tone in the house what is right and what is wrong, but שרה the wife, she was the one that knew how to apply the different ענינים that came from אברהם. And that is what the גמרא means, that if the husband and the wife are זוכה, each one does his job, so then you have the יוד קא, you have the יוד by the איש, יוד represents the dot, that he is the one that sets the tone, and you have the הא, the התפשטות by the woman, and then you have the שכינה between them, because they do what השם, what the שכינה wants them to do. Concerning we learned towards the end of the בלאט, That if they wrote the מגילה of the סוטה like an אגרת, like a letter, it is פסול because the תורה says בספר. And רש"י explained what it means is, if you wrote the מגילה of the סוטה without שרטוט, without the lines that you're supposed to indent in order to write even. So if you wrote it without the שרטוט, it is פסול. And the reason why it is פסול is because the תורה says בספר, it has to be written like a ספר תורה. So תוספות asks a קושיא, why do we need a special פסוק בספר to teach us that if you write the מגילה without שרטוט it is פסול, it would be פסול anyway? Because תוספות quotes the גמרא in גיטין דף ו' עמוד ב' that whenever you write פסוקים from the תורה, you must write it with שרטוט. And the גמרא says that if you write two words of a פסוק you don't have to have שרטוט, but if you write three or more words, you must have שרטוט. So since the מגילה is more than three words of the פסוקים, you would have to write שרטוט anyway. So why does the גמרא need here a special פסוק בספר to teach us that you must have שרטוט by the מגילה of the סוטה? Without that special פסוק, we would also know that you

cannot write the מגילה of the סוטה without שרטוט. And תוספות answers that it is true that without the פסוק בספר we would also know that you must make a שרטוט before you write the מגילה of the סוטה, but we wouldn't know that that מגילה is פסול. We would think that you did an עבירה, you wrote it without שרטוט, but nevertheless, the מגילה בדיעבד is כשר. Therefore, we have a פסוק בספר to teach us that if you didn't make it in the form of a ספר, then it is פסול. And תוספות adds that since it is פסול, then this water that would have the words of this מגילה in it, would not take effect on the סוטה, because the מגילה was פסול, so if you erase a פסול מגילה into the water, the water does not take effect. And then, תוספות asks an interesting שאלה: what would be the דין if he made שרטוט between the lines after the words were written already? On one hand you could say that since it was written באיסור, when it was written the מגילה was פסול, so now the מגילה remains פסול and you can't make it כשר again. On the other hand, you could say that since now the מגילה has שרטוט, the מגילה is כשר. And then

תוספות brings the פירוש of רבינו תם, that רבינו תם holds that even by a ספר תורה מצד הדין you don't have to have שרטוט by every line. You just must have שרטוט by every column on all four sides of the column, but not that every line needs שרטוט. And he brings ראיות from different גמרות to his opinion. And at the end, תוספות says that according to the opinion of רבינו תם, that באמת you don't have to have שרטוט by every line even by a ספר תורה, he doesn't understand the פשט in the גמרא that it says that if you wrote the מגילה of the סוטה without שרטוט it is פסול because the תורה says בספר, it has to be like a ספר תורה, and even a ספר תורה doesn't really have to have שרטוט by every line. So how could we say that a מגילה, if it doesn't have שרטוט by every line, should be פסול? Then תוספות brings from the ריב"א in the name of רבינו אליהו הצרפתי that this דין that you have to have שרטוט when you mention a פסוק, when you write at least three words of a פסוק, that is only if you're interested in explaining that פסוק. So then, when you quote the פסוק, it must be with שרטוט. But if you write a פסוק in a letter of greetings, and you're not interested in explaining, in דרשענען that פסוק, then you don't have to have שרטוט when you write that פסוק. And then תוספות asks that he doesn't know why when we write פירושים and we mention פסוקים in the פירושים, in the commentary that we write, why can we write them without שרטוט? לכאורה, the דין should be that every time you mention the פסוק, you should have to make שרטוט, and תוספות doesn't answer. It is

also interesting to note that the רמב"ם in his פירוש המשניות on the משנה in our גמרא asks a קושיא from the גמרא in יומא. He quotes the גמרא in יומא דף ל"ז עמוד א'. There it speaks about the mother of מונבז המלך, who was הילני. And the משנה says there that she made a טבלא של זהב, a plaque of gold, that she had the פרשה of סוטה written on it. So we see from there, it seems that you're allowed to write the פרשה of סוטה even on gold. In our משנה, it says that you're not allowed to write it on a piece of wood, you're not allowed to write it on anything else but on קלף, but on parchment. And there we see that they wrote the פרשה of סוטה on a plaque of gold. And the רמב"ם answers that there it wasn't the פרשה of סוטה that was written for a סוטה to be used as the פרשה of סוטה and to be erased into the water. When the כהן used to write the פרשה of סוטה for a סוטה, they had to bring a ספר תורה into the עזרה and he would copy out from the ספר תורה the פרשה of סוטה onto the מגילה, and then he would erase the מגילה into the water. So what she did was to save them from the trouble of bringing the ספר תורה and copying it out of the ספר תורה, she had the whole פרשה written on a plaque of gold in the בית המקדש. So whenever they needed to copy the פרשה of סוטה onto a מגילה, they would copy it off that plaque. But not that when they actually had to write the מגילה for a סוטה, were they allowed to use gold, but they had to use, as the משנה says here, קלף, they had to use regular parchment.