Talmud - Sotah 32b סוטה ל״ב ב׳

to Gilgal and slept in their lodging place.

GEMARA: From where do we derive that the portion of the warning and the oath administered by the priest to a sota can be recited in any language? As it is written: “And the priest shall say to the woman” (Numbers 5:21), which indicates: In any language that he speaks.

The Sages taught (Tosefta 2:1): The priest informs the sota in any language that she can hear and understand for what reason she must drink the bitter water of a sota, and from what vessel she will drink, on account of what actions she is considered to be defiled and in what way she defiled herself.

For what reason must she drink the bitter water? She must drink it on account of the matter of the warning given to her by her husband, and her subsequent seclusion. And from what vessel does she drink? She drinks from a mekeida, a simple vessel, of clay.

On account of what actions is she considered to be defiled? It is on account of matters of levity and immaturity. And in what way did she defile herself? The priest must explain to her that there is a difference between whether she acted unwittingly or intentionally, and whether she acted due to circumstances beyond her control, or whether she acted willingly. And why does all of this need to be explained to her? In order not to cast aspersions on the bitter water of a sota, as, if she committed adultery unwittingly or due to circumstances beyond her control, the water will not affect her.

From where do we derive that the declaration of tithes may be recited in any language? As it is written: “Then you shall say before the Lord your God: I have put away the hallowed things out of my house” (Deuteronomy 26:13). And derive a verbal analogy from the saying mentioned in this verse, and the saying mentioned in the verse with regard to a sota (Numbers 5:21), that one is permitted to recite the declaration of tithes in any language that he speaks.

Rav Zevid said to Abaye: But let us derive a verbal analogy from the saying mentioned in the verse: “And the Levites shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 27:14). Just as there, the Levites recited the blessings and curses in the sacred tongue, so too here, one must recite the declaration of tithes in the sacred tongue.

Abaye answered: One derives a verbal analogy from the term saying in a verse where the word “say” appears alone and another instance where the word saying appears alone. And one does not derive a verbal analogy from the word saying when it appears alone, as it does in the verse about the declaration of tithes, and in a verse that mentions speaking and saying, such as the verse concerning the Levites.

The distinction between merely saying, and speaking and saying, is significant, as it is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Yoḥai says: A person should say his own praise in a soft voice, and say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice.

That one should say his praise in a soft voice is derived from the portion of the declaration of tithes, where one declares that he has acted appropriately, and the verse does not state: And you shall speak. That one should say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice is derived from the recitation of the first fruits, concerning which the verse states: “And you shall speak and say” (Deuteronomy 26:5), i.e., it should be recited loudly. The portion recited when bringing the first fruits details the hardships that the Jewish people suffered and denigrates Laban the Aramean, who is a progenitor of the Jewish people.

The Gemara asks: But should one really say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice? But didn’t Rabbi Yoḥanan say in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai himself: For what reason did the Sages institute that the Amida prayer should be recited in a whisper? So as not to embarrass transgressors who confess their transgressions during their prayer. There is proof that transgressors should not be embarrassed, as the verse detailing where different offerings are slaughtered does not differentiate between the place where a sin-offering is slaughtered and the place where a burnt-offering is slaughtered, so that it will not be recognized when one is bringing a sin-offering and the sinner will not be embarrassed. This shows that one should also say that which is to his discredit quietly.

The Gemara corrects the previous statement: Do not say that one should say that which is to his discredit in a loud voice; rather, say that one should publicize his pain in a loud voice. As it is taught in a baraita: It is derived from the verse: “And will cry: Impure, impure” (Leviticus 13:45), that a leper must publicize the fact that he is ritually impure. He must announce his pain to the masses, and the masses will pray for mercy on his behalf. And similarly, anyone to whom a painful matter happens must announce it to the masses, and the masses will pray for mercy on his behalf.

The Gemara returns to the aforementioned matter itself: Rabbi Yoḥanan said in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yoḥai: For what reason did the Sages institute that prayer should be said in a whisper? It is so as not to embarrass transgressors, as the verse does not differentiate between the place where a sin-offering is slaughtered and the place where a burnt-offering is slaughtered.

The Gemara asks: But is there really no differentiation between the places where a burnt-offering and a sin-offering are sacrificed? But isn’t there a difference with regard to the place where the blood is sprinkled, as the blood of a sin-offering is sprinkled above, on the upper half of the altar, and the blood of a burnt-offering is sprinkled below, on its lower half? The Gemara answers: There, the priest is the one who knows what offering it is, but other people who are not standing there do not know.

The Gemara asks: But isn’t there a visibly apparent difference between the two offerings, as a sin-offering is female and a burnt-offering is male? The Gemara answers: There, in the case of a sin-offering, its genitals are covered by the tail and therefore the gender of the animal is not plainly obvious.

The Gemara asks: That works out well if one brings a female lamb for a sin-offering, as its long tail covers its genitals. However, if one brings a female goat, which does not have a long tail, what can be said? The Gemara answers: If one brings a female goat, there he is the one who embarrasses himself, as he should have brought a female lamb if he wanted to hide the fact that he sinned, and instead he brought a female goat. It is therefore not necessary to be concerned about his embarrassment.

The Gemara asks: With regard to a sin-offering that is brought for idol worship, for which it does not suffice to bring any animal that is not a female goat, as it is explicitly stated that in that case one must bring a female goat as a sin-offering, what can be said? The Gemara answers: There, due to the severity of the sin, let him go and be embarrassed, so that his sin will be atoned for through his embarrassment as well.

§ The Gemara continues its discussion of the recitations that can be stated in any language. From where do we derive that Shema may be recited in any language? As it is written: “Hear, O Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4), which is homiletically interpreted to mean that it can be recited in any language that you can hear and understand.

The Sages taught (Tosefta 7:7): Shema must be recited in Hebrew as it is written; this is the statement of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi. And the Rabbis say: It may be recited in any language.

The Gemara asks: What is the reason for the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi? The verse states: “And these words, which I command you this day, will be upon your heart” (Deuteronomy 6:6). “Will be” means as they are, so shall they be. They should remain unchanged, in their original language.

The Gemara asks further: And what is the reason for the opinion of the Rabbis? The Gemara answers: The verse states: “Hear, O Israel” (Deuteronomy 6:4), which they explain to mean that Shema must be understood. Therefore, one may recite Shema in any language that you can hear and understand.

The Gemara asks: But according to the Rabbis as well, isn’t it written: “And these words will be”? The Gemara answers: From that it is derived that one may not recite it out of order. One may not begin reciting Shema from the end, but only in the order in which it is written.

The Gemara asks: And from where does Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi derive the halakha that one may not recite it out of order? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi derives it from an additional emphasis in the verse “And the words [hadevarim], which I command you this day, will be upon your heart.” The verse could have conveyed the same idea had it written: Words, without the definite article. However, it says the words, employing the definite article, teaching that it must be recited in the specific order in which it is written. And the Rabbis do not learn anything from the difference between “words” and “the words.”

The Gemara asks: But according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi as well, isn’t the word “hear” written? The Gemara answers: He requires that for the halakha that you must have your ears hear that which comes out of your mouth, i.e., one must recite Shema audibly so he hears it while reciting it. And from where do the Rabbis derive that one must recite Shema audibly? The Rabbis do not accept this literal interpretation of the word Shema. Rather, they hold according to the one who says: One who recites Shema in a manner inaudible to his own ears has fulfilled his obligation. The Rabbis therefore interpret the word “hear” as referring to the language that one uses.

The Gemara asks: Shall we say that Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi holds

Traduction : The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz.

Sotah 32b explores why the sota ritual’s warning and oath can be spoken in any language, alongside rules for the tithe declaration.