Sotah Daf 18 סוטה דַף 18

Rava inquired: כתב ב' מגילות לשתי סוטות ומחקן לתוך כוס אחד – If he wrote two sotah scrolls for two women and erased them into a single cup, what is the halachah? כתיבה לשמה בעינן והאיכא – Is only writing for her sake required, and there is in this case, או דילמא בעינן נמי מחיקה לשמה – or perhaps erasing for her sake is also required, and in this case it is not. (Rashi explains it must be recognizably hers, and in the cup it is not). He inquired further: If they must be erased into separate cups, מחקן בב' כוסות וחזר ועירבן מהו – if he erased them into two cups and then mixed them, what is the halachah? Is it valid, since the erasure was done separately, or do we say: הא לאו דידה קא שתיא והא לאו דידה קא שתיא – this one is not drinking her personal cup, and this one is not drinking her personal cup? If this is not valid, חזר וחלקן מהו – if he then redivided them, what is the halachah? יש ברירה או אין ברירה – is there the concept of bereirah (determination after the fact), or is there no concept of bereirah? [Tosafos notes this is not the usual application of bereirah, since they were determined before mixing]

The next Mishnah states: על מה היא אומרת אמן אמן – To what is she saying “Amen, amen,” (the double term)? אמן על האלה, אמן על השבועה – She is saying “amen” to accept the curse, and “amen” to accept the oath. אמן מאיש זה, אמן מאיש אחר - Furthermore, she is saying “amen” regarding this man (about whom she was warned not to be secluded with), and “amen” regarding another man, אמן שלא שטיתי ארוסה ונשואה ושומרת יבם וכנוסה – and “amen” that I did not stray while an arusah, nesuah, while waiting for a yavam, or while married through yibum. The ability to force an oath beyond its original cause is called גלגול שבועה – lit. rolling of an oath. The Tannaim disagree if she must swear that she will not sin with another man in the future, but all agree that she does not swear about the period before marriage or after divorce. In the Gemara, Rebbe Yermiyah asks if she must swear regarding a former marriage to this husband, or if a married yevamah must swear regarding her marriage to the deceased brother. This is resolved from the Mishnah’s rule, that any relations which would not forbid her to the husband are not included in the oath. Since her current marriage would be forbidden through illicit relations in the above two states, she must swear about them.

Rav Hamnuna said: שומרת יבם שזינתה אסורה ליבמה – A shomeres yavam who had relations with another man is forbidden to her yavam. He proves it from our Mishnah, which teaches that the sotah swears that she did not have relations as a shomeres yavam. If such relations would not prohibit her to the yavam, she would not swear about it, since the Mishnah taught that she only swears about relations which prohibit her to her husband. Still, in Eretz Yisroel they said: לית הילכתא כרב המנונא – the halachah does not accord with Rav Hamnuna. The Gemara deflects the proof from the Mishnah, because it is the opinion of Rebbe Akiva, who holds: אין קידושין תופסין בחייבי לאוין – kiddushin are not effective with those prohibited by negative commandments, ומשוי לה כי ערוה – and considers her like a full ervah (with a kares punishment). Therefore, Rebbe Akiva would hold that a shomeres yavam who has relations (prohibited with a lav) becomes forbidden to her yavam, like a fully married woman.