Sotah

R. Nahman can reply, [That which I stated above is a difference between] Tannaim, whereas I agree with the following Tanna. For it has been taught: R. Simeon b. Eleazar says: A woman incapable of conception does not drink and does not receive the marriage-settlement, as it is said: Then she shall be free and shall conceive seed  — i.e., one whose way is to conceive seed, thus excluding one whose way is not to conceive seed.  What, then, do the Rabbis make of the phrase 'Then she shall be free and shall conceive seed'? They require it in accordance with the following teaching: 'Then she shall be free and conceive seed' — so that if she had been barren, she now becomes visited.  Such is the statement of R. Akiba. R. Ishmael said to him, In that case, all barren women will seclude themselves and be visited, and since this one did not seclude herself she will be the loser!  If so, what is the purpose of 'Then she shall be free and shall conceive seed'? If she formerly bore children in pain she will now bear with ease; if formerly girls she will now give birth to boys; if formerly short she will now bear tall children; if formerly dark she will now have fair children. 'The legal wife of an illegitimate [either drinks or does not receive the marriage-settlement]' — this is self-evident!  — What you might have said was that disqualified [members of the Community] should not be multiplied.  Therefore he informs us [that such a marriage is treated like any other]. 'The wife of a proselyte or freed slave and a woman incapable of conception [either drink or do not receive the marriage-settlement]' — this is self-evident! — What you might have said was, Speak unto the children of Israel  — but not to proselytes. Therefore he informs us [that proselytes are included in the law]. Or as an alternative answer: And say  is to be interpreted as including [the wife of a proselyte, etc.]. THE WIFE OF A PRIEST DRINKS etc. This is self-evident! — What you might have said was, And she had not been violated  — then she is prohibited [to her husband];  hence if she had been violated she is permitted to him; but this woman [being the wife of a priest] is prohibited to him even if she had been violated, and consequently she does not drink. Therefore he informs us [that she does undergo the ordeal]. AND IS PERMITTED TO HER HUSBAND. This is self-evident! — R. Huna said: [This refers to a case where] she becomes ill.  But if she becomes ill, the water has proved her [guilty]! — [It refers to a case where] she becomes ill in other limbs.  What you might have said was that she had committed adultery, and the fact that the water did not affect her in the usual way was due to her having acted immorally under force and as such she is prohibited to a priest. Therefore he informs us [that she is permitted to her husband]. THE WIFE OF A EUNUCH DRINKS. This is self-evident! — What you might have said was, Besides thine husband  declared the All Merciful, and this man [being a eunuch] does not come within the category [of husband]. Therefore he informs us [that he is considered to be her husband for the law of the ordeal]. THROUGH [SECLUSION WITH] ALL PERSONS FORBIDDEN TO HER IN MARRIAGE JEALOUSY IS ESTABLISHED. This is self-evident!