Sotah - Daf 15
- Why a מנחת חוטא and חטאת lack elements of standard korbanos
Rebbe Shimon said: בדין הוא שתהא מנחת חוטא טעונה שמן ולבונה – By rights, the minchah of a sinner (a minchah brought by a poor person in place of an animal for certain sins) should require oil and levonah (like an ordinary minchah), שלא יהא חוטא נשכר – so that a sinner should not profit (by his minchah being less expensive than a standard minchah). ומפני מה אינה טעונה – Why then does it not require them? שלא יהא קרבנו מהודר – So his korbon should not be beautified. ובדין הוא שתהא חטאת חלב טעונה נסכים – Similarly, by rights a chatas for eating forbidden fats (for example) should require libations like an olah and shelamim, שלא יהא חוטא נשכר – so that a sinner should not profit, but it does not,שלא יהא קרבנו מהודר – so that his korbon should not be beautified. The Baraisa adds that the chatas and asham of a metzora do require libations, because they are not brought for a sin. The Gemara asks that tzaraas befalls a person for several aveiros, and answers that they are atoned through the tzaraas itself, and the korbanos are to permit him to eat kodshim, not for atonement.
- Halachos of the earthenware vessel
The next Mishnah states: היה מביא פילי של חרס – [The Kohen] would bring an earthenware vial, ונותן לתוכה חצי לוג מים מן הכיור – and put into it a half-log of water from the kiyor. Rebbe Yehudah said a revi’is of water was used. Rebbe Yishmael says in a Baraisa that the vial must be new, which he derives from a metzora’s purification. Rava said: לא שנו אלא שלא נתאכמו פניו – [Although our Tanna does not require a new vial,] that was only taught when [the vial’s] face was not blackened from use, אבל נתאכמו פניו פסולין – but if it was blackened, it is invalid. He explains: דומיא דמים – It must be similar to the water, מה מים שלא נשתנו, אף כלי שלא נשתנה – just as the water was unchanged, the vessel must be unchanged. Rava inquired: נתאכמו והחזירן לתוך כבשן האש ונתלבנו מהו – If they became blackened, and they returned them to the furnace and they became whitened again, what is the halachah? מי אמרינן כיון דאידחו אידחו – Do we say since they were rejected, they remain rejected, או דילמא כיון דהדור הדור – or perhaps since they returned to their original state, they have returned to their validity?
- The source for the earth used for sotah waters
The Mishnah stated that there was a floorspace in the Heichal from which earth was taken for sotah waters. A Baraisa teaches: "ומן העפר אשר יהיה" – From the earth that will be, יכול יתקן מבחוץ ויכניס – one might think that [the Kohen] could prepare earth outside the Mikdash and bring it in, therefore the passuk says: "בקרקע המשכן" – on the floor of the Mishkan, indicating that it must be taken from the floor. אי בקרקע המשכן יכול יחפור בקרדומות – If it had stated only “on the floor of the Mishkan,” one would think he should dig with spades to procure earth, therefore the passuk says “that will be,” implying that it need not have originated there, as long as it was on the floor at some time. Therefore: יש שם הבא – If there is earth there, bring it; אין שם תן שם – if there is not earth there, place earth there to use. Another Baraisa brings an additional opinion: שהיה מתקן מבחוץ ומכניס – that he would prepare earth outside and bring it in. (Rashi explains that he holds it does not need to be placed on the floor). Isi ben Yehudah then explains that “on the floor of the Mishkan” is teaching (according to Rashi’s girsa) to include the Beis Hamikdash in the law of sotah waters (even though the passuk says Mishkan).
