THE POWER OF CHAZAKAH [line 1]
Question: If so (there is no concern), why did R. Yosi say that Chazakah is great?
Answer #1: In Bavel, they ate only Terumah mid'Rabanan. Now, they may eat Terumah mid'Oraisa.
Answer #2: Also now they may eat only Terumah mid'Rabanan; lineage is established only by eating Terumah mid'Oraisa. Chazakah is great, for even though now (in Eretz Yisrael) there is reason to decree against Terumah mid'Rabanan, lest they eat Terumah mid'Oraisa, no decree was made.
Question: They did eat Terumah mid'Oraisa!
"They will not eat from Kodesh ha'Kodoshim" - from Kodshei Kodoshim they will not eat, but they will eat Terumah mid'Oraisa!
Answer: Expound the verse to say "They will not eat something called Kodesh (Terumah), nor something called Kodshim (Kodshei Kodoshim)."
CAN WE ESTABLISH LINEAGE FROM BIRKAS KOHANIM? [line 26]
Answer #2 (to Question 3:g, 24b - Beraisa): Any of the following is a Chazakah (of Kehunah):
Birkas Kohanim in Bavel;
Eating Chalah in Surya;
Receiving Matanos (the foreleg, jaw and stomach from a slaughtered animal) in big cities.
Suggestion: Birkas Kohanim is a Chazakah of Kehunah for lineage.
Rejection: No, it is for Terumah.
Question: Presumably, Birkas Kohanim in Bavel is a Chazakah just like eating Chalah in Surya (which is taught with it). The latter must be for lineage. (Chalah is just like Terumah, so we would not say that eating Chalah is a Chazakah for Terumah.)
Answer: The Tana holds that Chalah is mid'Rabanan nowadays, but Terumah is mid'Oraisa. Eating Chalah mid'Rabanan is a Chazakah for Terumah mid'Oraisa.
This is like Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua will say below.
Answer #3 (Beraisa): Any of the following is a Chazakah (of Kehunah):
In Eretz Yisrael, Birkas Kohanim or receiving Terumah at the granaries;
In Surya or any place where Sheluchim arrive to inform which day was declared Rosh Chodesh, Birkas Kohanim is a Chazakah, but receiving Terumah is not.
Bavel is considered like Surya.
R. Shimon ben Gamliel says, even Alexandria used to be like Surya, since Beis Din was Kavu'a there.
Suggestion: Birkas Kohanim is a Chazakah for lineage.
Rejection: No, it is for Chalah.
Question: Presumably, it is a Chazakah like receiving Terumah, and there it must be for lineage!
Answer: The Tana holds that Terumah is mid'Rabanan nowadays, but Chalah is mid'Oraisa. Eating Terumah mid'Rabanan is a Chazakah to eat Chalah mid'Oraisa;
Rabanan: Even the opinion that says that Terumah is mid'Rabanan nowadays agrees that Chalah is mid'Oraisa. We find that during the seven years of conquering Eretz Yisrael, and the seven years of dividing it among the tribes, there was an obligation to take Chalah, but not Terumah.
Rejection (Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua): Just the opposite! Even the opinion that Terumah is mid'Oraisa today says that Chalah is only mid'Rabanan!
(Beraisa): "When you (plural) will come to the land" - when all of you come, not when a minority comes.
Only a minority of those exiled to Bavel returned with Ezra to Eretz Yisrael.
Answer #4 (Beraisa): Any of the following is a Chazakah of Kehunah: Birkas Kohanim, receiving Terumah at the granaries, and testimony.
Question: Testimony is not a Chazakah!
Suggestion: The Beraisa teaches that Birkas Kohanim is like testimony, i.e. it establishes lineage!
Rejection: No, it teaches that testimony that is based on a Chazakah is like a Chazakah (like we will now describe).
A CHAZAKAH BASED ON READING IN THE TORAH [line 5]
A man (to R. Ami): I know that Ploni is a Kohen, because he read first in the Torah.
Question (R. Ami): Perhaps he is not a Kohen, but he was the greatest person in the Shul!
Answer: A Levi read after him.
R. Ami established Ploni to be a Kohen based on this.
A man (to R. Yehoshua ben Levi): I know that David is a Levi, because he read second in the Torah.
Question (R. Yehoshua ben Levi): Perhaps he is not a Levi, but he is a great person!
Answer: A Kohen read before him.
R. Yehoshua ben Levi established David to be a Levi based on this.
A man (to Reish Lakish): I know that Reuven is a Kohen, because he read first in the Torah.
Reish Lakish: Did you see him receive Terumah at the granaries?
R. Elazar: Do you hold that if there are no granaries, we cannot establish anyone to be a Kohen?! (Certainly, it suffices that he read first in the Torah!)
A similar episode occurred when they were in front of R. Yochanan.
Reish Lakish: Did you see him receive Terumah at the granaries?
R. Yochanan: If there are no granaries, can no one be established to be a Kohen?!
Reish Lakish (angrily, to R. Elazar): You heard these words from R. Yochanan, and did not say them in his name?!
ESTABLISHING A PERSON THROUGH RELATIVES [line 25]
Rebbi or R. Chiya established Shimon to be a Kohen from Shimon's father's testimony. The other (of Rebbi and R. Chiya) established Yakov to be a Levi from Yakov's brother's testimony.
We must say that t Rebbi established Shimon to be a Kohen from his father's testimony:
(Beraisa - Rebbi): If one said 'This is my son. He is a Kohen', he is believed for Terumah, but not for lineage;
R. Chiya: If he is believed for Terumah, he should also be believed for lineage. If he is not believed for lineage, he should not be believed for Terumah!
Rebbi: I believe him for Terumah, since he can feed to his son Terumah. I do not believe him to let his son marry, since this is not in his control (perhaps the son is a Mamzer)!
Since Rebbi established a man to be a Kohen based on his father's testimony, it must be that R. Chiya established a man to be a Levi from his brother's testimony.
Question: What is the difference? Just like one cannot testify about his son, the same should apply to his brother!