(R. Elazar): If a Chasan claims Pesach Pasu'ach (there were no Besulim blocking Bi'ah with the Kalah, i.e. she was not a virgin) he is believed, and she becomes forbidden to him (we suspect that she had Bi'ah with someone after Kidushin).

Question: She should be permitted due a Sefek-Sefeka (two doubts)!

Perhaps the Bi'ah was before Kidushin;

Even if the Bi'ah was after Kidushin, perhaps she was forced against her will.

Answer #1: R. Elazar's law applies to a Kohen's wife, who becomes forbidden to her husband even if she was forced.

Answer #2: His law applies to a girl who became Mekudeshes (through her father) before the age of three (Bi'ah was definitely after the Kidushin, for otherwise the Besulim would have grown back).

Question: A Mishnah already teaches this (that if one says that something is forbidden to him, he is forbidden, even if he is contradicted)!

(Mishnah): If one says to a woman 'I was Mekadesh you to me' and she denies it, he may not marry her relatives, but she may marry his relatives.

Answer: In that Mishnah he certainly knows the truth. We cannot learn from it R. Elazar's law, for one might have thought that a man cannot tell whether or not the Pesach was Pasu'ach.

Question: R. Elazar taught otherwise!

(R. Elazar): A woman becomes forbidden to her husband only through Kinuy (warning not to be secluded with a particular man) and seclusion, like the episode (of David and Bas Sheva).

Objection: This cannot be correct. There was no Kinuy and seclusion in that episode! Also, she did not become forbidden!

Correction: R. Elazar meant, we learn that a woman becomes forbidden only through Kinuy and seclusion from the episode, in which there was not Kinuy and seclusion, and she did not become forbidden.

Summation of question: How can R. Elazar say that a claim of Pesach Pasu'ach forbids? This is not Kinuy and seclusion!

Counter-question: Do you think that R. Elazar says (she can become forbidden) only through Kinuy and seclusion, but not through witnesses (of Bi'ah)?!

Retraction: R. Elazar's other teaching says 'a woman becomes forbidden through two witnesses. If there were (two witnesses about) Kinuy and seclusion, even one witness (of Bi'ah forbids her permanently, and she may not drink the Sotah water);

A claim of Pesach Pasu'ach is like two witnesses.

Question: Why didn't Bas Sheva become forbidden in the episode?

Answer #1: She was forced.

Answer #2 (Rav Shmuel bar Nachmani): Everyone who went to war in David's army wrote a Get (document of divorce) to his wife.

(Rav Yosef): "Take Arubasam" - these are things between man and wife (i.e. marriage, which is taken (removed) through a Get).

Support (for R. Elazar - Abaye - Mishnah): A virgin is married on Wednesday.

Inference: She is not married on Thursday. We are concerned lest the Chasan calm down (and not come to Beis Din).

Question: If we are concerned lest he pay a Kesuvah (which she does not deserve), let him pay it! (It is his fault for calming down!)

Rejection: Rather, the enactment was in order that he come to Beis Din and we will rule that she is forbidden to him.

Suggestion: The case is, he claims Pesach Pasu'ach!

Rejection: No, he claims that there was no blood. (Only this claim forbids, for one does not err about this.)

(Rav Yehudah): One who claims Pesach Pasu'ach is believed to deprive her of her Kesuvah.

Question (Rav Yosef): We already know this from a Mishnah!

(Mishnah): One who eats by his father-in-law in Yehudah without witnesses cannot claim later that the Kalah is not a virgin, since he was secluded with her.

Inference: In Galil (where they are not secluded) he may make such a claim.

If the claim is to forbid her to him, it should apply also in Yehudah!

Rather, the claim is to deprive her of her Kesuvah.

Suggestion: He claims Pesach Pasu'ach.

Answer: No, the claim is that there was no blood.