Parsha Nasso: Numbers 4:21-Numbers 7:89

Parsha Nasso Day 4 (Part 1): (Numbers 5:11-31) (Study Notes)

(Numbers 5:11-31)

This section of our Parsha Study discusses the "ritual case of jealousy" when a man is overcome with jealousy when his wife has "gone astray" by having sexual relations with another man. We learn that if a man's wife has committed adultery, then his wife has "broken faith" with her husband. The language used here is the same language that is used when Hashem discussed how a Jew breaks faith with Him whenever we harm another human being, especially another Jew.

From this parallel use of language, we can understand how the relationship between a husband and a wife parallels the relationship that Hashem has with every Jew: He is our Ishi. When we go astray and worship other gods, we commit spiritual adultery against hashem and "break faith with Him".

(Numbers 5:13)

We learn that the adulterous relations discussed in this section of our Parsha study are willful. The woman was not "being forced." Meaning she was not raped. This type of adulterous relationship can be thought of in terms of spiritual adultery as well. It is like the Jew who has grown up in synagogue and going to yeshiva all of his life and then chooses to leave hashem for the strange husband of a false god--Baali. Like the woman discussed here, a telltale sign that a person has gone astray is their secretive behavior. Here the wife keeps her relations secret from her husband in the same manner that a person who commits spiritual adultery might attempt to hide their deeds in the dark as well. This secrecy is another form of sin, wherein the wife lies to her husband about being defiled.

(Numbers 5:14)

Harsh as the above sections may seem, we also learn that the fits of jealousy may come upon the husband for no reason at all. The wife may be perfectly innocent of his accusations. Meaning, the husband may have laid false charges against her--perhaps hiding his own actions and transferring the blame on his wife. This form of false accusations often happens in situations of domestic violence and can be a stark warning sign that the wife is actually the victim of a larger set of sins perpetrated against her by her husband.

(Numbers 5:15)

Thus, since the case of a man's jealousy can be either founded in truth OR founded on lies, the case is brought to the priests, and Hashem decides the matter through a ritual series of "tests."

To begin, the man who is jealous of his wife for the assumed adulterous misconduct (whether founded or not in truth) must bring his wife to the priest. The bringing of the wife to the priest seems to use parallel language to the restitution monies brought to the Priests when a person is harmed (as we learned in our last section of study). We learned in our day #3 study that when a person is harmed and the one who was harmed dies but has no redeemer or kinsman to whom restitution can be made, then the perpetrator is to bring restitution to the priests.

If the woman is brought to the priest in the manner of a "restitution offering," then her valuation would be calculated according to the Laws discussed in Leviticus chapter 27. In that chapter, the valuation paid to the priest is for anyone who made a vow to Hashem and then chose not keep the vow (out of will or necessity). Here, the wife took vows with her husband in a manner that was a vow taken in Hashem's name. If she did break her marriage vows with her husband, than she would also break her vows with Hashem. In such a case, restitution would be needed. Rashi and other sages discuss the woman being brought to the Priests as a "prized possession" of the husband. Our sages seem to insinuate that they believe the wife is guilty, without question. When commenting on verse 5:12, Rashi state:

On Verse 5:10, Rashi comments:

These comments seem to indicate that the wife is brought to the priests as an object or a possession, not as a person or beloved child of Hashem.

We see our sages treat the woman in like manner in their interpretations of the grain offering that is to be brought when she is brought to the priest by her husband. We learn that along with the woman, the husband is to bring "for her" 1/10th of an epha of Barley flour. This flour is specifically different than the "choice flour" that is commanded to be brought for the typical sin offering of a poor person (see Leviticus 5). It is also expressly different than a normal meal offering (see Leviticus 2).

Rashi and other sages say that this bringing of the Barley in place of wheat flour is (essentially) because the woman acted as an animal and so her grain offering that she is to bring to Hashem is to be the type of grain that is typical of animal feed.

Respectfully, however, we must remember that this ritual is a test. The woman is not necessarily guilt. So, Hashem does not command that she brings the typical sin offering. The woman might actually be guilty, in such a case, Hashem would not command that she brings the typical meal burnt offering--for if she was guilty, she would defile herself further by offering a meal offering in an unclean state. So, Hashem commands that a different type of grain be brought that is specific to the "ritual of jealousy" so that the woman is not bringing a sin offering if she did not sin and she is not bringing the meal offering if she is indeed in an unclean state. The Barley acts as the hedge that keeps the woman away from breaking two sacred mitzvot regarding the sacred offerings to Hashem.

Additionally, we learn that no oil shall be poured on the flour nor should any frankincense be placed on the meal offering. Again, Rashi takes this as a sign of the woman's guilt noting:

And continues,

If the woman had committed adultery, then she could not bring a meal offering in her unclean state. Again, as we have learned previously, the meal offering is the only grain offering that is brought with BOTH oil AND frankincense. If the oil and the frankincense are left off of the meal offering, then it becomes a sin offering. Yet, as mentioned above, the barley grain keeps the husband's offering for her from being a sin offering as well. The exclusion of the oil would hold true to Rashi's argument, IF the woman had indeed gone astray. This is because oil anoints and consecrates--adultery is antithetical to both sacred acts.

If she did not sin and her grain had no oil, then (like the grain offerings of a poor sinner), her grain would be placed on the altar with the other burnt meal offerings. In so doing, the dry grain would absorb the excess oil from the meal offerings (with oil) allowing her grain offering to turn to smoke in a pleasing manner, without her flour actually being directly anointed.

In the case of the frankincense, Rashi's comments also insinuate that the woman is guilty as he assumes she has "strayed from her path". But, again, if the woman was guilty without question, there would be no need for the "test." If she was guilty without question, she should simply bring the necessary sin offering without performing the "ritual of jealousy". If she was guilty, then, of course, as Rashi states frankincense would not be placed on her offering, since her actions would not be a "pleasing aroma" to Hashem.

(Numbers 5:16)

After the husband has brought the woman and the grain to the priest, the priest is to then bring the woman forward and have her stand before Hashem. Now, we know from our previous studies that when the Tabernacle stood, Hashem dwelled in the Holy of Holies. To "stand before Hashem" could mean that the woman is brought into the tent. However, we also know from our previous studies that only the priests are allowed into the Tent of Meeting. Because of these prohibitions, it is likely that the Priest had the woman stand in the courtyard (possibly near the burnt offering altar--remember our studies of Leviticus 9: The presence of Hashem lit the fire on the burnt offering altar. So, if the woman stood in front of the altar, she would indeed be standing before a spark of Hashem.)

(Numbers 5:17)

When the woman was in place, the Priest then is to take some of the sacral water (from the copper wash basin that sat between the altar and the Tent of Meeting) and place the water into an earthenware vessel.

We have learned previously that an earthenware vessel is a type of vessel that is able to be defiled when it comes in contact with anything that is unclean--think of the examples we learned about in Leviticus 11. Since the woman is being tested for uncleanness, an earthenware vessel is a fitting vessel to use. If she was unclean, her uncleanness could make the earthenware vessel unclean upon her drinking from the vessel (later in the ritual). This uncleanness of the vessel could then transfer to the water that she would then ingest--initiating the curse. If a copper vessel was used for the ritual, such transference could not happen because copper or metal vessels do not become unclean by remnants of unclean objects like earthenware containers do.

We must also note that the "sacral water" is here referring to the water with which Moshe and Aaron were to wash their hands and feet prior to performing any of the tasks of the daily offering ceremonies. Rashi notes that this wash basin was made with the copper from the women's mirrors in Exodus 38:8, and so the woman was to take the water an in essence look at herself in the mirrors that represented women who truly loved their husbands while in Egypt.

Finally, we learn that into the vessel with the water, the Priest is to put some of the earth that is on the floor of the Tabernacle. When we gather the information from our other studies, we can understand that the dirt that is on the flood of the Tabernacle could have contained blood of the communal sin offering and/or the priesthood sin offering as these two sacrifices had their blood splattered on the screed that is before the LORD in The Tent of Meeting. Also, the priests would always go into the tent of meeting and change their clothing after any sacrifice. It is possible that drops of blood got on the dirt.

BUT, all Jews are prohibited from consuming blood! Is this part of the test?

If the woman was clean, Hashem would have to miraculously make the blood in the water dissipate or turn the blood into water so that the woman would not become unclean by consuming blood. Or, the blood would be changed in some other miraculous fashion that would allow any part of blood that was consumed to cleanse the inners of the woman in the same way that blood cleanses the altar when blood is placed on its sides and horns.

If she was indeed unclean, such miracles would occur with the blood, and any blood consumed would mark her innards for death, not life (the opposite of what occurred on Pesach).

The dirt could also have drops of consecrated oil in it--think of the anointing oil on the Priests and the oil used to light the lamps every day. Could such oil consecrate the woman's innards if she was truly clean?--like a ceremony of the person who was a leper but had then become clean? He or she had blood placed on their right ear, thumb, and toe with oil placed on top. Could a similar ritual be at play here in some way (with the woman's innards)?

Conversely, if the woman was unclean the holy oil would act in a negative fashion if contacting an unclean person.

Facts to ponder as we continue learning about the "ritual of jealousy."

(Numbers 5:18)

After the priest makes the woman stand before the LORD, he is then to "dishevel her hair." This is commonly translated "uncover her head." In Judaism, only a married woman covers her head. Bearing the wife's head, again, was part of the test: was the wife unfaithful by acting as an unmarried harlot? If so, she not only uncovered her head, but her own nakedness to another man besides her husband. Too, she would have bore her nakedness before Hashem. In breaking the vows of her marriage with her husband, she would have also broken vows with Hashem. Standing before Hashem with a naked head would indicate that she acted as if she was not married to Him--indicating spiritual harlotry.

But, if her head was uncovered before the LORD and she was innocent, this would also not be favorable, but if we remember Havah and Adam prior to sin entering the world, they both were completely naked before Hashem and were unashamed. If the woman was not guilty, she had nothing to worry about standing naked before Hashem. For, she could trust that Hashem knew what was in her heart, which was more important than what was on her head.

It is interesting to note that the same phrase וּפָרַע֙ אֶת־רֹ֣אשׁ הָֽאִשָּׁ֔ה is used to describe the priests in Leviticus 10:6 when Moshe Rabbeinu was commanding Aaron and his sons not to mourn for their two brothers that had died for getting too close to the presence of Hashem. The same phrase, however, is not used to require priests to always wear their turbans on their heads, as it is used to necessitate that a married woman always cover her head.

With her head uncovered, the priest is to place the barley offering in her hands while the priest holds the "water of bitterness," which had "the spell placed on it." This order of steps is much like the offering of the thanksgiving and well-being offerings that we learned about in our studies of Leviticus chapter 7, yet slightly off, just as will the sin/not sin, meal/not meal grain offering so as to create a hedge to keep the woman from sinning in a most holy offering if she was indeed guilty.

(Numbers 5:19-22)

We learn in these verses what the "curse" is that was placed on the waters of bitterness that the woman was to drink. The curse stated that if the woman did go astray, the water would cause her "thigh to sag and her belly extend." Meaning, if she was not faithful to her husband and she did commit adultery, she would not be able to conceive children, she would become a curse, and her body would manifest physical signs so the entire community would know.

If the woman was faithful and she had been falsely accused by her husband, then the wife would be immune to the waters of bitterness. Meaning, she would be immune from the curse. Her body would not become disfigured, and she would be able to bear children.

(Numbers 5:23)

The priest is to write the curse down in writing and then rub off the writing into the waters of bitterness. This seems an innocuous event, yet we must remember that prior to anything being created, Hashem wrote out His blueprints for all of creation in the Aleph-Bet. Thus, nothing happened, happens, or will happen without Hashem (the Holy One, Blessed be He) first writing out a decree. The washing the words into the water is like washing them away in the floods of Noah. If The woman was guilty, she would be washed away like all of the evil on earth. If she was innocent, she would be immune to the effects of the waters--like Noah and all who were in the ark with him.

(Numbers 5:25-31)

The next step in the "ritual of jealousy" was that the priest was to make the woman drink the water of bitterness while he took from her hands the meal offering of Jealousy and elevated the offering before Hashem. Again, this action is much like the wave offering or elevation offering, which is only performed with thanksgiving offerings.

Then meal offering is presented on the burnt offering altar, and a token portion is removed (this is the portion of the priests), and the rest is turned to smoke--these are the actions that atone for sin. Next, the woman is to drink the water of bitterness.

The test would show signs of the curse immediately. If she was unfaithful, the water would bring on bitterness within her. Her thigh would sag and her belly would distend and she would be unable to bear children ever again.

BUT, if she did not defile herself, the woman will be unharmed, and she will be able to bear children (arguably immediately, in direct contrast to the signs of the curse).

Am Yisrael Chai!

Kimberly Davis

Partial Notes for 5/27/2026