Sotah 037

2:
The woman was to bring her offering of coarse barley in a wicker basket, which only later was replaced by a container of precious metal that was part of the stock of the Bet Mikdash. Our present mishnah deals with the procedure to be followed if some mishap occurs during the ceremony whose effect is to invalidate the cereal-offering.

3:
The invalidation could occur in either of two stages: while the offering was still in the wicker basket or after it had been transferred to the sacred service-basin. In the former case the barley has lost its sacred nature, may be used for any other secular purpose, and should be sold and fresh barley bought with the proceeds of the sale. This is the meaning of the 'redemption' mentioned in our mishnah. However, when it comes into contact with the service-basin the barley becomes consecrated; therefore, if the mishap occurs from that time onwards the barley must be destroyed by fire since it can no longer revert to its secular status but neither is it fit for sacred purposes any longer.

4:
Our mishnah now gives a list of situations which also require the incineration of the barley: If, at this point the woman admits her infidelity, or witnesses to her infidelity who were not available previously are now suddenly available to testify; or it the woman simply refuses to drink (see on 3:3 for circumstantial details); or if her husband suddenly relents and wishes to stop the ceremony; or if the couple had copulated on the journey from their home town to Jerusalem (see on 1:3); a sixth situation mentioned by our mishnah is different from the others. If the woman concerned is the wife of a priest the remaining barley must be burned in all cases. (From the basin the officiating priest would take a fistful of barley and offer it on the altar; everything remaining in the basin was now a priestly perquisite and could be eaten by a priest. However, this is only so when the husband is no a priest; if he is a priest another regulation of the Torah [Leviticus 6:15] prohibits the consumption of a cereal-offering belonging to another priest and requires it to be completely incinerated.)

Would you please clarify further: you have used the word "licentiousness" to mean both infidelity and "wild sexual abandon" within the context of marriage. Is the underlying Hebrew word the same in both instances? Is a distinction made between the two interpretations, or is conjugal enjoyment of sexual congress seen as indicative of a propensity toward infidelity? As for the sages valuing "sexual ascetiscism," that would seem to vary with the sage. For example, Judith Hauptman, in her book Rereading the Rabbis (p. 162) cites a discussion about strategies for producing sons: "We learn from a baraita … if a woman gives forth seed first [i.e., if she reaches orgasm before he does], the outcome will be a son. If a man gives forth seed first, the outcome will be a daughter… "Said R. Katina: I could have made all my children males. "Said Rava: If someone wants only sons, he should engage in repeated intercourse [in the same night]" (BT Niddah 31a-b)" Ms Hauptman points out that much of the Talmudic discussion of sexual behavior seems to indicate a great deal of sexual insecurity on the part of the sages.

I respond:

The Hebrew word used by Rabbi Eli'ezer in his (in)famous statement is open to several explanations, and I have given the one that seems most appropriate to me in the context. That context seems to me to suggest that the woman who becomes proficient in Torah will learn how to get away with licentious marital infidelity. We have already seen that Rabbi Eli'ezer himself was sexually abstemious. This is also the trait approved by Rambam. However, when Rambam codifies the law he has to admit [Mishneh Torah, Issurei Bi'ah 21:9]: