Commentaire sur Les Nombres 5:19

והשביע אתה וגו׳ AND [THE PRIEST] SHALL ADJURE HER etc. — and wherein does this adjuration consist? In that he says to the woman, “if no man hath lain with thee … הנקי, be thou free”, which implies: “if, however, a man hath lain with thee, חנקי, thou deservest to be suffocated”, because from a negative statement you may deduce its converse, the positive statement. It is true that in an adjuration it would be more appropriate to make this threat of punishment if guilty, and to allow the converse to be derived from it, but here it mentions first what will happen if she has not sinned, since it intends to suggest that it is a duty in capital cases to begin the proceedings with the statement of something that bears upon the innocence of the accused (Sotah 17a; Shevuot 36a; Sanhedrin 33a).

IF NO ‘ISH’ (MAN) HAVE LAIN WITH THEE, AND IF THOU HAST NOT GONE ASIDE TO UNCLEANNESS. These two conditions constitute [in reality] one. Thus the verse is stating: “If no man have lain with thee, and thus thou has not gone aside to uncleanness, be thou free from the water of bitterness; ” [for you cannot say that these are two separate conditions], since her husband lay with her and he is “a man” [thus the priest could not say to her, if no man have lain with thee; therefore both conditions must be one, as explained]. It is possible that the word ish (man) lacks the definite article [making it ha’ish — “the man”], and Scripture is stating: “If ‘the man’ has not lain with thee, and if thou hast not gone aside to uncleanness at all,” and he makes her swear specifically concerning the particular man about whom he [her husband] had warned her, and in general terms about others. And so have the Rabbis said:⁹⁴Sotah 18a. “And the woman shall say: ‘Amen, Amen. ’⁹⁵Verse 21. [The double utterance of the word ‘Amen’ signifies:] ‘Amen [that I have not committed adultery] with this man, and Amen [that I have not committed adultery] with any other man.’”

והשביע, the priest will tell her to accept the oath on condition that it (the procedure) will be the judge of her guilt or innocence.

אם לא שכב איש אותך ואם לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך, “if a man has not lain with you, and you have not strayed in defilement with someone other than your husband, etc.” Nachmanides writes that we are dealing here with what at first glance appear to be two conditions, whereas in reality they are one and the same condition. How so? 1) You did not have sexual relations with someone other than your husband. 2) In a manner that would make you defiled vis a vis your husband. The reason we have to explain the verse in this manner is that if it were not so, the word איש in the first part of the verse would include her husband, so that she could not possibly swear that she had never had sexual relations with her husband. The words:לא שטית טומאה תחת אישך, therefore must mean that by drinking these waters she swears that while married to her husband, i.e. תחת אישך, she had never done anything as a result of which she would have become defiled for her husband. It is possible that the fact that the word איש which lacks the prefix ה describing which man it refers to, is intended to mean that the woman is asked to swear that she had not lain with the man of whom she has been suspected and accused of having lain with. In that event, we would deal with two separate conditions, the first one speaking of a specific sexual misdemeanour with a specific person, whereas the second one broadens the area of her oath to include any other hitherto unsuspected sexual involvement that would make her defiled for her husband. Ibn Ezra explains the first condition as involving rape, sexual relations by her with another man against her will, whereas the second condition would speak of a sexual relationship with another man in which she had been a willing participant.

If no [man] laid. Meaning that one should not say that he adjures her by the Holy Name, like all other oaths where we explain that one swears with the Holy Name. Re’m explains: This is so that one should not say that the statement is one matter and the oath is another. If no [man] laid, הנקי (be absolved); but if he laid, לא תנקי (do not absolved). There are texts that read “but if he laid, חנקי (may you choke).” This is why the Torah wrote the word חנקי without a yud (with a chirik taking its place) in order to teach homiletically term חנק (strangulation) as if it had been written with the letter hei as part of the root [of the verb]. This is possible because the letters hei and ches are interchangeable and thus one can homiletically learn “may you choke” meaning that you shall die.

ואם לא שטית טמאה תחת אישך, the balance of the sentence is missing, the Torah meaning “then you will remain with your husband as his wife.” (Nachmanides, Kidushin 62).

V. 19. אם לא שכב וגו׳ ואם לא שטית וגו׳ .והשביע אתה וגו׳: diese umschreibende Wiederholung ואם לא שטית usw. dürfte einem nicht unwesentlichen Missverständnisse vorbeugen sollen. Hieße es nur: אם לא שכב usw. so könnte dies der Meinung Raum geben, als ob nur der vollendete Ehebruch vor dem Gesetze verwerflich wäre, sonstigen von dem Wege der Züchtigkeit abschweifenden Leichtsinn aber kein verwerfender Tadel treffe, so lange er nur nicht zum vollendeten Verbrechen geführt. Darum wird allerdings die verhängnisvolle Wirkung der Wasser der Bitterkeiten mit dem ואם לא שכב וגו׳ an die wirkliche Vollendung des Verbrechens geknüpft; allein es wird gleichzeitig ihre jedenfalls bereits offenliegende Aufführung durch die Umschreibung ואם לא שטית וגו׳ als ein Verlassen desjenigen Weges sittlicher Zucht gekennzeichnet, welchen das Gesetz dieses Heiligtums für die Ehen seines Volkes vorgezeichnet. Sie ist jedenfalls eine סוטה, sollte sie auch nicht zur vollendeten טומאה gelangt sein. So werden diese beiden Momente auch in der positiven Voraussetzung (V. 20) hervorgehoben: ואת כי תחת אישך שטית תחת אישך וכי נטמאת יתן וגו׳ תחת אישך —scheint das Verhältnis zu bezeichnen, in welchem die rechtschaffene Ehefrau zu ihrem Manne steht und dessen Vergegenwärtigung sie vor Fehltritten hätte schützen sollen. Vergl. ותחת כנפיו תחסה (Ps. 91, 4). ופרשת כנפך על אמתך (Ruth 3, 9), רק יקרא שמך עלינו (Jes.4, 1). Die Frau steht unter der Obhut und in Pflichtverhältnis zum Manne. Seine Eherechte an ihr sind ihr etwas Übergeordnetes. Sein Name ruht auf ihr. Sie trägt seinen Namen. Sie ist sein. In dieser Stellung, in welche sie mit der Ehe getreten, ist sie von den ihr damit überkommenen Pflichten der Sittlichkeit abgewichen, sie ist סוטה geworden. — הנקי, erwägen wir die Steigerung נקה ,נכה ,נגח ,נגע, so ergibt sich für letzteres die Bedeutung einer heftigen von sich abwehrenden Bewegung, und הנקי heißt: so bleibe unberührt von der Macht dieses Wassers.

If a man has not lain with you [conjugally]. It does not say עמך, but rather אותך, which implies even against her will. Even if he had relations with her against her will and she would be permitted to her husband, nonetheless, she is fitting to be punished, for she was a cause of the matter when she went with him into a secluded place.

ממי המרים, “from this water of bitterness;” according to our sages, the priest had added herbs that would make the water taste bitter.

אם לא שכב, now,

הנקי, your spirit and soul will depart from your body and the body will remain without a soul. [I believe the author means that, in line with Rashi, who uses a play on words saying חנקי, “suffocate!” as the alternative to the woman being free from guilt. The verse is open ended, leaving parts to our imagination. Ed.] We know of this meaning of the word הנקי from Psalms 24,4 נקי כפים the meaning there being “without sin, totally pure.” We find this word in a similar context in Amos 4,6 נקיון שנים. We also find this expression describing someone who has been deprived of all his possessions, remaining נקי, “completely devoid of.” (Baba Kamma 41) Compare also Isaiah 3,26 ונקתה לארץ תשב, “she shall be emptied, sit on the ground.”

And if you have not gone astray. If there were not even any unseemly things and the husband caused these matters for nothing, then: You shall be absolved. The kohein advises her to drink to absolve herself, and not be concerned about the erasing of Hashem’s name, for this is His will and His honor. Inferred from this blessing is a curse: If there were unseemly things that led to this, or she went into seclusion willingly but he had relations with her against her will, then the kohein would not advise her to drink. Nevertheless, she will not be cursed with the curse in the coming verse; she will be punished according to the extent of the sin.

ואם לא שטית טומאה, and if you have not been guilty of defiling yourselves on other occasions of which your husband was totally unaware, and did not suspect you;

הנקי, the reason why the Torah has to state something so obvious is that the Torah had already stated in Exodus 20,6 that no one causing the name of G’d to be mentioned needlessly will be completely innocent of that sin, and we might have thought that this woman, seeing she had sown doubt in the hearts of those who have to judge her had already become guilty of causing a needless oath, i.e. a needless mention of the holy name of G’d; the priest, i.e. the Torah, assures her that she has nothing to fear on that account.