June 10, 2006
Sota
Parshat Naso
If I told you that Moshe Shmendrik was a Jealous Husband, what would you think? What would you think of his wife?
This Parshah
in the triennial cycle includes discussion of the ritual for testing the wife
suspected of adultery , the Sotah. It also discusses the rules applying to the nazirite, and the priestly blessing. As a retired social worker, and a female, I
feel I must focus on Sotah the term used for the wife
suspected of adultery.
I found it relatively difficult
to find discussions on this topic because I think many people prefer to avoid
it. For people who are sensitive to
women’s issues, this parshah is an
uncomfortable one. Even the Torah has
trouble being consistent about it.
Briefly, the problem is this –
the husband suspects his wife of adultery and she is brought before the priests
and goes through the ordeal of drinking “bitter waters” to prove her
innocence. If she is guilty her belly
will descend and her thigh will fall. If
she is innocent she will be fruitful. The Torah waffles between describing her as
actually guilty and describing her husband as having unreasonable
jealousy. Is the ritual meant to test
her, or to satisfy him? If he’s the one
with the problem, why does she have to go through such an ordeal? I found myself reacting to some of the devarim because the writers were also ambivalent about who
had the problem – the wife or the husband and some assume she is guilty.
The Rabbis say that the
practice was abolished at the time of the second
Firstly – the bitter waters
had to be made with dirt from the floor of the Tabernacle which ceased to exist
when the first
Secondly, the woman must
first be warned by her husband in front of two witnesses, and must have been
seen by two witnesses entering a private place with the man in question.
By this logic, any woman
brought for the trial must at least have looked suspicious in a society where
women and men are kept apart. If you are
willing to accept this reasoning, then some of the Lessons might make sense
Part of the problem is that it
is usually difficult to prove – to have actual witnesses in the days before
private eyes, hidden cameras, etc. So
that is one explanation for having trial by ordeal. It is the only ordeal that is prescribed in
Jewish law.
Another problem is
interpreting what it means to say that her belly will swell. Is she pregnant? Is she miscarrying, having a prolapse? Will she
die? What is the curse?
Rabbi Friedman suggests that
she is pregnant and the point is to reassure her husband that the baby is
his.
People who focus less on the
literal questions about the procedure wax philosophical on the importance of
keeping peace between a man and woman because this is so much more important
than anything else. The point is made
that the husband could ask for a divorce, or the wife could, rather than go
through this procedure. The fact that he
or they would do this means he/they want to save the marriage. Or does he want to keep his property and not
have to pay for a divorce?
The Peaceniks say that continuity
of the Jewish people depends on the cohesiveness of the larger Jewish family
and the larger community depends on the strength of the individual families
within it.
A jealous husband might not be
convinced if a mere human court found his wife innocent.
Those with a mind for allegory
or mysticism relate the test to the relationship between
There is a lot of discussion
of the fact that God’s name is erased when the parchment is soaked in the
water. Some say this serious step is
taken to try to shake up the husband , others to
intimidate the wife. Some say that
erasing God’s name reinforces the fact that the husband is destroying his
wife’s name. Whoever shames another
person, it is as if he has spilled blood. God is crying that the husband would do this
to his wife.
One commentary says that if
God is even willing to have his name erased to save the marriage, how much more
must we be willing to help others even if it is embarrassing or costly.
It has also been pointed out
that the creation of the Golem echoes the sotah
ritual.
Another example of turning
this troublesome law on its head led to even more peculiar conclusions. The Mishnah states that if the accused woman
“has merit”, that merit causes the water to suspend its effect on her. Ben Assai concluded from this that a man is
obligated to teach his daughter Torah, her learning will protect her if she has
to go through this ordeal. But Rabbi Eliezer said No – teaching her torah, teaches her lewdness. The girl might feel she doesn’t have to worry
as she will feel protected.
The ones we would call
sensible say the proper conclusion is that torah study should not be done as
insurance but only to enhance our morality and relationship to God.
None of the commentaries I
have mentioned so far have too much to satisfy modern, liberal minds. They do not address the questions we ask
about the burden of guilt being put on the woman for the jealousy of the man. The text itself has trouble with this issue-
It first says if a woman has
gone astray and then speaks of her husband’s jealousy. The offering is described as an offering of
jealousy.
One commentary I enjoyed says
that Rabbi Elazar in Berachot
31b tells of
Hannah turning the test on its head and using it to solve her problem of
barrenness. She says she will
deliberately cause her husband to become jealous, by appearing to have
committed adultery, so that she will pass the test and be rewarded with
offspring.
The laws of Sotah are like many of the Torah laws that we find at best
puzzling, if not actually repulsive. We
can attempt to rationalize them, find hidden meanings in them,
And express gratitude that we
are no longer required to follow them.
Rabbi Toba
Spitzer says that the ritual though seemingly unfair, at least provides a
social mechanism which protects women from more violent actions on the part of
their husbands. The jealous husband is
not given license to kill his wife, but merely to humiliate her.
Rabbi Sara Levine is not
satisfied with this as she still sees this as a solution that inscribes itself
on the body of the victim. We know that
women today are still beaten or killed by husbands who think that they have the
right to control their wives, even in a society which no longer legally defines
women or children as property. Many of
these men keep their women isolated, are jealous, and often hurt women for the
first time when they are pregnant. So
perhaps the idea of a ritual does make sense. We know
that the Jewish community is not guilt free and that there are Jewish women’s
shelters in every community with a sizeable Jewish population. In smaller communities there are education
programs for the non-denominational shelters to help them understand Jewish
women’s special issues. One problem that
has been uncovered is that Jewish women often stay in abusive relationships
years longer than non-Jewish women because there is so much shame involved in
admitting there is a problem.
Rabbi Sterne
asks by what means can
we resolve this very real problem which costs women’s lives to this very day? And concludes It is
only when we can see each other and treat each other as full human beings will
the name of God ceased to be erased from the parchment.