(Rav Yehudah): If a Kohen Gadol has Bi'ah with a widow, he is lashed twice (two sets of 39), for "he will not take" and "he will not profane".

Question: He should also be lashed for "he will not profane his seed"!

Answer: The case is, he did not complete Bi'ah. ("He will not profane his seed" applies only to Bi'ah that could impregnate a woman.)

Question (Rava - Beraisa): (If a Kohen Gadol had Bi'ah with) a widow who is a divorcee, he is lashed for each of these Isurim.

Suggestion: He is lashed once for each Isur.

Answer: No, he is lashed twice for each (for "he will not take" and "he will not profane")

Question (Seifa): (For Bi'ah with) a divorcee who is a Chalutzah, he is lashed only once.

Answer: It means, he is lashed only for one Isur, but he gets two sets for it.

Inference: This implies that the Isur of a Chalutzah is only mid'Rabanan.

Question (Beraisa): "And a woman divorced from her husband (a Kohen may not take)" includes a Chalutzah.

Answer: That is only an Asmachta mid'Rabanan.

(Abaye): If a Kohen was Mekadesh a woman forbidden to Kohanim, he is lashed once for "he will not take";

If he had Bi'ah with her, he is lashed once for "he will not profane".

(Rava): He is lashed only if he has Bi'ah with her;

"He will not take... he will not profane" - taking is forbidden only so he will not profane.

Abaye agrees that one who remarries his divorcee is not lashed for Kidushin without Bi'ah. "To take her for a wife" is fulfilled only through Bi'ah.

Rava agrees that a Kohen Gadol who has Bi'ah with a widow is lashed, even without Kidushin. "He will not profane his seed among his nation" - Bi'ah alone profanes.

Both agree that one who remarries his divorcee is not lashed for Bi'ah without Kidushin. The Torah forbade only through marriage.

(Mishnah - Rebbi Yehudah): The daughter of a male convert is like a Chalal's daughter.

(Beraisa - Rebbi Yehudah): We learn from a Kal va'Chomer that a male convert's daughter is like a Chalal's daughter:

A Chalal was fathered by a Yisrael, yet his daughter is disqualified (from Kehunah). A convert was fathered by a Nochri, all the more so his daughter is disqualified!

Question: We cannot learn from a Chalal, for he (or one of his ancestors) was conceived through sin!

Answer #1: A Kohen Gadol's daughter from a widow is disqualified, even though the Kohen Gadol was not conceived in sin. (This shows that this is not the determining factor.)

Question: We cannot learn from a Kohen Gadol's daughter from a widow, for the Bi'ah that led to her was forbidden!

Answer: We learn from a Chalal (his daughter is disqualified, even though the Bi'ah that led to her was permitted) that this is not the determining factor;

Summation: A Chalal and a Kohen Gadol (married to a widow) each have different problems. The Tzad ha'Shavah (what is common to them) is that they are different from the Kahal (they were formed through Isur or have Bi'as Isur), and their daughters are disqualified;

Also a convert is different from the Kahal (he was fathered by a Nochri), so his daughter is disqualified!

Rejection: We cannot learn from a Chalal and a Kohen Gadol. A transgression was involved in each of them!

Answer #2: We learn from a Mitzri Rishon (he himself converted). Even though he was not formed through sin, his daughter is forbidden.

Question: We cannot learn from a Mitzri Rishon, for he may not marry a Bas Yisrael!

Answer: We learn from a Chalal (his daughter is disqualified, even though he is permitted to a Bas Yisrael) that this is not the determining factor.

Summation: Chalal and a Mitzri each have different problems. What is common to them is that they are different from the Kahal (one was formed through sin and one cannot marry a Bas Yisrael), and their daughters are disqualified;

Also a convert is different from the Kahal (he was fathered by a Nochri), so his daughter is disqualified!

Objection: We cannot learn from a Chalal and a Mitzri. Both of them disqualify a woman (from Kehunah) by having Bi'ah with her!

Answer: Indeed, Rebbi Yehudah learns that a convert also disqualifies a woman by having Bi'ah with her, from this Tzad ha'Shavah!

(Mishnah - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): If a convert...

(Beraisa - R. Shimon): If a girl converted before three years old, she is permitted to Kehunah. Pinchas (a Kohen) was among the soldiers who took captives from Midyan, and they were told "keep all the young girls alive for yourselves (they are permitted to you)";

Chachamim say, "keep them alive" for slaves.

The different opinions among the Tana'im were learned from "they (Kohanim) will not marry a widow or divorcee, rather virgins from the seed of Yisrael".

Rebbi Yehudah expounds that (a girl may marry a Kohen if) all the (primary) seed (i.e. the father's) must be from Yisrael;

R. Eliezer ben Yakov expounds "from the seed of Yisrael" - it suffices if one parent is a Yisrael;

Rebbi Yosi expounds that she must be seeded in Yisrael (her parents are Yisre'elim);

R. Shimon expounds that she must be a Yisre'elis when her Besulim (tokens of virginity) finish growing (at the age of three).

Question (Rav Nachman): The Reisha of the verse discusses a Kohen Gadol (a widow is forbidden), but the Seifa ("a widow... they will marry") discusses a regular Kohen!

Answer (Rava): Yes!

Question (Rav Nachman): Do verses change like that?

Answer (Rava): Yes! "The lamp of Hash-m did not yet go out, and Shmuel was lying down in the Heichal";

Question: Only kings from the line of David may sit in the Mikdash!

Answer: Rather, the verse means 'the lamp of Hash-m did not yet go out in the Heichal, and Shmuel was lying down (elsewhere).

Question: Why does it say "a widow who will be a widow from a Kohen, they (Kohanim) may marry"? A Kohen may marry also a widow from a Yisrael!

Answer #1: It means, from the Kohanim (i.e. Hedyotim, but not a Kohen Gadol), they may marry a widow.

Answer #2 (Rebbi Yehudah): Kohanim may marry widows of men whose daughters are permitted to Kohanim.

This is like Rebbi Yehudah's opinion that a male convert's daughter is like a Chalal's daughter;

A Kohen may marry Reuven's widow only if he may marry Reuven's daughter.

(Mishnah - Rebbi Yosi): Even if a convert married a convert (his daughter is permitted to Kehunah).

(Rav Hamnuna): The Halachah follows Rebbi Yosi.

(Rabah bar bar Chanah): The Halachah follows Rebbi Yosi, but after the Churban, Kohanim conduct stringently like R. Eliezer ben Yakov.

(Rav Nachman): If a Kohen asks, we tell him that the Halachah follows R. Eliezer ben Yakov. If he married the daughter of converts, he may stay married, like Rebbi Yosi.

(Mishnah): If Reuven said 'my son Shimon is a Mamzer', he is not believed;

Even if Reuven and his wife say that she is pregnant with a Mamzer, they are not believed;

Rebbi Yehudah says, they are believed.

(Gemara) Question: Why does it say 'Even if they both say'?

Answer: This teaches a bigger Chidush. Not only if he says, for he is not sure if she is pregnant from him, but even if she also says (and she is sure), they are not believed;

Further, not only when the child has a Chezkas Kashrus (i.e. they did not say that he is a Mamzer until after he was born), but even regarding a fetus, which has no Chazakah, they are not believed.

(Mishnah - Rebbi Yehudah): They are believed.

(Beraisa - Rebbi Yehudah): "Yakir" - the father will make known whom is his firstborn;

This teaches that a man is believed to say which son is his firstborn. Similarly, he is believed to say that a certain son was born from a divorcee or Chalutzah (so the son is a Chalal);

Chachamim say, he is not believed to say that his son is a Chalal.

Question (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): This shows how Rebbi Yehudah expounds "Yakir". What do Chachamim learn from it?

Answer (Rava): When we do not know who is the firstborn, the father is believed.

Question: Is he believed so that the son inherits a double portion? Even without a verse, since the father could give his son an extra portion for a gift, he is believed to say that he inherits a double portion!

Answer: This would not suffice to give the son an extra share in property that came to the father afterwards.

Question: R. Meir holds that a man can transfer ownership of something not yet in the world (e.g. property that he will later receive). If so, the father could give an extra share of all property he will receive. Why must the Torah teach that he is believed about the firstborn?

Answer: Such a gift would not help for property that falls to the father when the father is Goses (dying, and unable to give a gift).