Question: Why is the law different in the two cases?

Answer #1 (Abaye): Really, only one witness says that she is Mekudeshes or divorced, and one contradicts him;

In the Reisha, both testify that she was single. Only one of them says that she became Mekudeshes. One is not believed against two.

In the Seifa, both testify that she was married. Only one of them says that she was divorced. One is not believed against two.

Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): Really, there are two witnesses on each side, but we must switch the laws of the two cases to say as follows:

If two witnesses say that a woman accepted Kidushin and two say that they did not see it, she may not marry (anyone else). If she married, she may not remain married;

Interjection: This is obvious. Not seeing something does not prove that it didn't happen!

Answer: The case is, they live in the same courtyard;

One might have thought that since Kidushin is publicized, they certainly would have known (and we consider the testimonies to be contradictory).

The Beraisa teaches that this is not so. Some people have Kidushin quietly.

(Corrected version of Seifa): If two say that she was divorced and two say that they did not see her divorced, she may not remarry. If she remarried, she may remain married.

Question: Does this teach that even if they live in the same courtyard, (b'Di'eved) we are not concerned for the witnesses who did not see? We learned this from the Reisha! (It is not a Chidush that l'Chatchilah she may not remarry. Surely, one must avoid accusations!)

Answer: One might have thought that Kidushin is done quietly, but divorce is publicized, so certainly they would have known;

The Seifa teaches that also divorce can be done quietly.

(Mishnah): If witnesses come after she was married, she may remain married.

R. Oshaya learned that this applies to the Reisha (a woman who said she was married and divorced); Rabah bar Avin learned that it applies to the Seifa (a woman who says that she was captured but not defiled).

The one who says that it applies to the Reisha, all the more so it applies to the Seifa. We are lenient about a captured woman.

The one who says that it applies to the Seifa holds that it would not apply to the Reisha.

Suggestion: They argue about Rav Hamnuna's law (if a woman told her husband 'you divorced me', she is believed):

The one who permits her to remain married even when she says that she was married and divorced holds like Rav Hamnuna. The one who argues disagrees with Rav Hamnuna.

Rejection: All agree with Rav Hamnuna. The first opinion says that the law applies even when she is not in front of her husband. The other holds that it applies only in front of him.

(Mishnah): If witnesses come after she was married...

(Shmuel's father): This does not literally mean after she married. Rather, it is after Beis Din permitted her to marry, even if she didn't marry yet.

Question (Mishnah): She does not leave (her husband, if she already remarried. If she was still permitted to remarry, it should have taught this bigger Chidush!)

Answer: It means, she does not leave her permission to remarry.

(Beraisa): If a woman says 'I was captured but I am Tehorah, and witnesses know this', we do not wait for them to come. She may marry immediately;

If we permitted her to marry and later the witnesses came, and they did not know whether or not she was defiled, she does not leave;

If witnesses say that she was defiled, even if she has several children from her husband (a Kohen), she must leave him.

A case occurred in which captive women arrived in Nehardai. Shmuel's father put guards by them so they would not be defiled.

Objection (Shmuel): Who guarded them until now?! (Guarding now will not permit them to a Kohen!)

Shmuel's father: If they were your daughters, would you treat them so lightly?!

This response prompted this to happen.

Shmuel's daughters were captured and taken to Eretz Yisrael. They asked the captors to remain outside while they entered the Beis Medrash of R. Chanina. Each said 'I was captured but I am Tehorah.'

R. Chanina permitted them to marry Kohanim. The captors walked in.

R. Chanina: These must be the daughters of a brilliant Chacham (to know how to permit themselves in this way)!

It became known that they were Shmuel's daughters.

R Chanina (to Rav Shemen bar Aba, a Kohen): Go marry one of your relatives (Shmuel's daughters).

Rav Shemen: There are witnesses overseas (who know they were captured)!

R. Chanina: They are not here now. Will we forbid a woman because we heard that there are witnesses in the north?!

Inference: If the witnesses were here, the girls would be forbidden.

Question: This is unlike Shmuel's father, who said that if witnesses come after Beis Din permitted them to marry, the permission stands!

Answer (Rav Ashi): Rav Shemen heard that there were witnesses that they had been defiled.

(Mishnah): If two women were captured and each says 'I was captured but I am Tehorah', they are not believed;

If each testifies that the other is Tehorah, they are believed.

(Gemara - Beraisa): If a woman says 'I am Temei'ah but my friend (who was also captured) is Tehorah', she is believed;

If she says 'I am Tehorah and my friend is Temei'ah', she is not believed;

If she says 'both of us are Temei'os', she is believed about herself, but not about her friend;

If she says 'Both of us are Tehoros', she is believed about her friend, but not about herself.

(Second clause): If she says 'I am Tehorah and my friend is Temei'ah', she is not believed.

Question: What is the case?

Suggestion: There are no witnesses that they were captured.

Rejection: If so, she would be believed about herself!

Mishnah (22a): A woman is believed to say that she was captured but is Tehorah.

Answer: We must say that there are witnesses.

(Third clause): If she says 'both of us are Temei'os', she is believed about herself, but not about her friend.

Question: If there are witnesses, why is she not believed about her friend?

Answer: We must say that in this clause there are no witnesses.

(Fourth clause): If she says 'Both of us are Tehoros', she is believed about her friend, but not about herself.

Question: If there are no witnesses, she should be believed about herself!

Answer: We must say that in this clause there are witnesses.

Question: Do the he second and fourth clauses discuss when there are witnesses, and in the third clause there are no witnesses?!

Answer #1 (Abaye): Yes!

Answer #2 (Rav Papa): No. In the entire Beraisa there are witnesses that they were captured, and one witness who contradicts her claims of who is Tehorah:

(Reisha): If she says 'I am Temei'ah but my friend is Tehorah', she is believed;

She admitted that she is forbidden (one is believed to forbid himself). Her testimony permits her friend. (One witness who says that a captive is Tehorah is believed like two.)

(Second clause): If she says 'I am Tehorah and my friend is Temei'ah', she is not believed;

Since witnesses know that she was captured, she cannot permit herself. Her friend is permitted through the witness;

(Third clause): If she says 'both of us are Temei'os', she is believed about herself, but not about her friend;

She admitted that she is forbidden. The witness permits her friend.

Question: Why was this taught? The Reisha teaches this!

Answer: One might have thought that really, both are Tehoros. She claimed that they are both Temei'os to forbid her friend, even though she knew that it would also harm herself.

(Fourth clause): If she says 'Both of us are Tehoros', she is believed about her friend, but not about herself.

Since witnesses know that she was captured, she cannot permit herself. She permits her friend.

Question: Why was this case taught? (The first point is known, and) we already know (the second point) from the first clause!

Answer: One might have thought that she is believed to permit her friend only when she admits that she is Temei'ah. This case teaches that even when she tries to permit herself, she is believed.

(Mishnah): Similarly, if each of two men says 'I am a Kohen', they are not believed. If they also testify about each other, they are believed;

R. Yehudah: We do not establish one to be a Kohen based on one witness.

R. Elazar: This applies when there are protests. When there are no protests, one witness suffices.

R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, we establish a Kohen through one witness.

(Gemara - Question): Why do we need all these Mishnayos (teaching that ha'Peh she'Asar Hu ha'Peh she'Hitir)?

Answer: All are needed;