Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

Although she claims innocence, she is still afraid of drinking the waters. See Chapter 4, Halachah 3.

As stated in Chapter 1, Halachah 2, from the time the woman enters into privacy with theman in question, her husband is forbidden to enter into relations with her. As such, if theyengaged in relations, the bitter water will not show her guilt, as indicated by Halachah 8.

Because it is her husband’s actions that prevent her from drinking the waters that canestablish her innocence, he must bear the financial responsibility.

The commentaries raise a question based on Hilchot Yibbum 2:20, which states thatwhen a yevamah engages in relations with another man, she does not become forbidden toher yavam. They explain that an exception is made when the yavam issues a warning andforbids the yevamah to enter into privacy with a particular man.

A person who has both male and female sexual organs.

If they violate a warning given by their husbands and enter into privacy with the man in question, they are to be divorced without receiving the money due them by virtue of their ketubah.

When a girl below majority was not consecrated by her father, the consecration is noteffective by Scriptural Law. Even when she was consecrated by her father, she is not requiredto drink the bitter water unless she is warned after attaining majority. (See Halachah 4.)Note the Kessef Mishneh, who quotes a different source from that mentioned by theRambam.

A woman consecrated by a minor is not considered consecrated at all (Hilchot Ishut 4:7).

As stated in Hilchot Ishut 4;11, when an androgynous consecrates a woman, the status ofthe kiddushin is in doubt.

Who could not see, even when the two did not act in secrecy (Sotah 27a).

The Ra’avad differs with the Rambam’s ruling, maintaining that a minor is never forbid-den to her husband because of adultery unless he is a priest, basing his opinion on Yevamot 33b, which states: ‘‘The seduction of a minor is always considered equivalent to rape.’’
In his gloss on Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah 3:2, the Maggid Mishneh substantiates the Rambam’sruling, citing Ketubot 9a, which states that the statements of a husband who claims that his wife is not a virgin are accepted and cause her to be forbidden to him. According to theRambam, this applies even when the girl is a minor. (See also the Kessef Mishneh.)

I.e., an orphan who was married off by someone other than her father. See Hilchot Ishut 4:8; Hilchot Gerushin 11:1.

Since according to Scriptural Law, her marriage is not binding, relations with another man are not considered adulterous. Even a priest who may not marry a woman who engaged in a forbidden intimate relationship may remain married to this girl.

Although these women are not required to drink if they enter into privacy with the manin question before the marriage is consummated, after its consummation the warningissued beforehand is effective.

I.e., the husband and the wife entered into a chuppah, effecting the stage of nisu’in. They did not, however, consummate the marriage. Before they did so, the wife entered intoprivacy with the man in question.

The words ‘‘who are permitted to remain married’’ are fundamental to the understandingof this halachah. All these women and/or their husbands mentioned are bound by differentlaws with regard to marriage from the Jewish people as a whole. Nevertheless, if they arepermitted to their husbands or to their wives, the laws of a sotah apply.
As such, an illegitimate man or woman must be married either to another illegitimateman or woman or to a convert, as stated in Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah, Chapter 15. With regardto an impotent man, the laws regarding whom he is permitted to marry and whom he isforbidden to marry are stated in Hilchot Issurei Bi’ah, Chapter 16.

We do not wait for her to give birth or for her to wean her child. Note Tosafot, Sotah 26a, who differ and maintain that we should wait for a pregnant woman to give birthbefore requiring her to drink.

For her husband is no longer alive.

For she did not prove her innocence by drinking the waters.

The term is taken from Numbers 5:18.

See Hilchot Ishut 10:1. The Ra’avad differs with the Rambam regarding this point, maintaining that Sotah 24b appears to indicate that the wife of a man who had relationswith the woman he consecrated while she was living in her father’s house must still drinkthe bitter water. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the Rambam’s ruling.

For by engaging in relations with his wife, the man has transgressed a prohibition, andhence the waters will not test his wife’s fidelity.

It is forbidden to marry such women, as stated in Hilchot Gerushin 11:25. Nevertheless, since the prohibition is not inherent to the couple’s relationship — as reflected in the fact that after the 24 months of nursing have passed, the couple may marry — but rather a result of the child’s presence, it is not considered a sinful relationship. See the gloss of the Kessef Mishneh and the Mishneh LaMelech.

Every Jew is commanded to be fruitful and multiply. For this reason, as the Rambamstates in Hilchot Ishut 15:7, the husband is obligated to divorce this woman. Therefore, sheis not given the opportunity to demonstrate her fidelity by drinking the bitter water.

Significantly, the Rambam’s ruling here reflects a change of mind from his ruling in hisCommentary to the Mishnah (Sotah 4:3) where he rules that such women may not drinkthe bitter water even when the husband has fathered children already.

It is not, however, an exclusion preventing a woman who is not capable of bearing children from drinking the waters. See Sotah 25b.

I.e., he was married to an aylonit and a woman capable of bearing children. The woman capable of bearing children became pregnant, he divorced her and then issued a warning to the aylonit.

See Halachah 2.

See Chapter 1, Halachot 10-11.

I.e., if her husband divorces her, it is forbidden for her to marry the man concerningwhom she was warned.

This principle applies not only with regard to a sotah, but with regard to every adulterous relationship. The passage in the Torah mentions the word v’nitma’ah (‘‘and she becamedefiled’’) twice, once in reference to the husband and once in reference to the adulterer. See Hilchot Gerushin 5:4-5. See also Halachah 15.

This indicates that someone was lying face up on the bed and could not turn to either side (Rashi, Yevamot 24a). See Hilchot Ishut 24:15 and notes, where these concepts are dis-cussed in greater detail.

He is not, however, compelled to divorce her. The matter is left to his initiative (Kessef Mishneh; Beit Shmuel 11:6).

Since there is no conclusive evidence that she is forbidden, she is allowed to remainmarried, so that the reputation of her children will not be sullied.

The Rama (Even HaEzer 11:1) differs and maintains that if there are both a rumor thatcontinues spreading throughout the city and witnesses who saw unsavory behavior, thehusband is required to divorce his wife if she has not borne him children [Shulchan Aruch(Even HaEzer 11:2)].

If, however, two witnesses testify to adultery, the adulterer is compelled to divorce her, as stated above.

Although the couple are forbidden to marry, since there were no witnesses to the act of adultery, and the second marriage interposed, a more lenient ruling is given than that stated in Halachah 13.

The Chelkat Mechokek 11:10 emphasizes that this law applies only when the womanwillingly committed adultery. If she was raped while married to her first husband, she doesnot become forbidden to him. Moreover, she also does not become forbidden to the rapist, and if she is widowed or divorced, she is permitted to marry him.

For it is her immodest conduct that caused her to be forbidden.