Question: The Beraisa says 'he is (i.e. may remain) married'!

Answer (Rav Acha bar Yakov): (If an enticer does not marry the girl, he pays a fine.) He is married regarding exemption from the fine (but he must divorce her).

Question (Rav Ashi): Rav and R. Yochanan say that he may not marry a Bogeres or Mukas Etz. If he married one of them, he is married!

He may stay married because any girl he marries will eventually become a Bogeres and Mukas Etz (i.e. lose her Besulim) anyway.

Here also he should be allowed to stay married, for any girl he marries will eventually have Bi'ah with him!

This question is left difficult.

(Beraisa): He may not marry a woman raped or enticed by another man;

If he married her, R. Eliezer ben Yakov says that the son is a Chalal;

Chachamim say, he is Kosher.

Version #1 (Rav): The Halachah follows R. Eliezer ben Yakov.

Version #2 - Question (Rav): What is the reason of R. Eliezer ben Yakov?

Answer #1 (Rav): He holds like R. Elazar (who says that a woman becomes a Zonah for Zenus).

Objection: This cannot be!

We hold that the teachings of R. Eliezer ben Yakov are Kav (few; R. Chananel - 102, the Gematriya of Kav) and clean (the Halachah always follows him).

(Rav): The Halachah does not follow R. Elazar.

This is left difficult.

Answer #2 (Rav Ashi): R. Eliezer ben Yakov holds that a Chalal results from Chayavei Aseh. Chachamim say that it does not.

R. Eliezer ben Yakov learns from "A widow, divorcee, Chalalah or Zonah, these he will not marry, but rather a virgin... he will not profane his seed". All these Isurim profane his seed;

Chachamim say, the word "these" interrupts. Only Isurim listed before this word profane his seed.

R. Eliezer ben Yakov says, "these" excludes a Nidah (she does not profane his seed).

Question: Like whom is the following?

(Beraisa): A Chalal results from these, but not from a Nidah.

Answer: It is like R. Eliezer ben Yakov.

Question: According to R. Eliezer ben Yakov, the word "these" should have been written at the end (since all the Isurim mentioned make a Chalal)!

This is left difficult.

(Beraisa - R. Meir and R. Yehudah): A Kohen makes himself Tamei to bury his sister if she was Mekudeshes;

R. Yosi and R. Shimon say that he does not.

If she was raped or enticed, all agree he is not Metamei himself for her.

R. Shimon says, if she is a Mukas Etz he is not Metamei himself, for a Kohen is Metamei himself for a sister only if she was permitted to a Kohen Gadol.

All say that he is Metamei himself for a Bogeres.

Question: What is the reason of R. Meir and R. Yehudah?

Answer: "For his virgin sister" excludes one who was raped or enticed.

Suggestion: We should exclude even a Mukas Etz!

Rejection: "Asher Lo Haysah l'Ish" - one whose Havayah (loss of virginity) was through a man. This excludes a Mukas Etz.

"Who is close" includes an Arusah. "To him" includes a Bogeres.

Question: Why must a verse include Bogeres? R. Meir holds that "Besulah" includes one who has even some Besulim!

Answer: One might have thought that a Gezeirah Shavah "Besulah-Besulah" from there (Rashi - a virgin that is raped; Tosfos - from a girl fit for a Kohen Gadol) teaches that she must be a Na'arah;

The verse teaches unlike this.

Question: How do R. Yosi and R. Shimon learn?

Answer: "For his virgin sister" excludes one who was raped or enticed and a Mukas Etz;

"Who was not (married)" excludes an Arusah; "that is close" includes an Arusah who was divorced;

"To him" includes a Bogeres.

Question: How can "who is close" include an Arusah who was divorced? R. Shimon says that he is Metamei himself for a sister only if she may marry a Kohen Gadol!

Answer: This case is different. The Torah said "close" to include it.

Question: We should say that "close" also includes Mukas Etz!

Answer: It comes to include one case, but not two.

Question: Why do we say that it includes an Arusah who was divorced, and not a Mukas Etz?

Answer: A physical act happened to the latter, but not to the former.

Question: R. Yosi did not say the law of Mukas Etz with his partner (R. Shimon), so he must hold like R. Meir. How does he expound?

Answer: "Who was not to a man" includes a Mukas Etz.

Objection: He already used that verse (to exclude an Arusah)!

Answer: "Was not" excludes an Arusah. "To a man" includes a Mukas Etz.

"To him" includes a Bogeres.

Question: R. Shimon said (regarding a Kohen Gadol) that "Besulah" connotes having all the Besulim! (Tosfos Yeshanim - he should learn from here that Besulah connotes even some Besulim, for a Bogeres is included!)

Answer: He learned that from our verse;

Since the Torah needed to write "To him" to include a Bogeres, we infer that "Besulah" connotes all the Besulim.

(Beraisa - R. Shimon): A girl who converted before three years old may marry a Kohen. (Moshe told the soldiers who defeated Midyan) "Keep alive for yourselves all Taf (young girls) who did not have Bi'ah." Pinchas (a Kohen) was among those who were permitted!

Chachamim: No. "Keep alive for yourselves" for slaves (it does not discuss marriage).

Question: If so, even girls above three should be kept alive!

Answer - Question: "Kill every Ishah who had Bi'ah with a man" implies that we keep alive (mature) women who did not have Bi'ah, and Taf even if they had Bi'ah;

Contradiction: "And all Taf who did not have Bi'ah, keep alive for yourselves" implies that if they did have Bi'ah, they are killed!

Answer (Rav Huna): Both verses obligate killing any female old enough to have Bi'ah.

Support (Beraisa): "Every Ishah who had Bi'ah with a man" refers to women old enough to have Bi'ah;

Question: Perhaps it means that actually had Bi'ah!

Answer: It also says "And all Taf that did not have Bi'ah" (implying that we do not distinguish among older women). This shows that the Torah discusses being fit for Bi'ah.

Question: How did they know which girls were fit for Bi'ah?

Answer (Rav Huna bar Bizna): They passed the girls in front of the Tzitz (an ornament of the Kohen Gadol). A girl's face would turn green only if she was fit for Bi'ah.

(Rav Nachman): Hidrokan (a sickness in which the stomach swells, and the face green) is a sign of sin.

Question: "Among the dwellers of Yavesh Gil'ad were found 400 virgin Na'aros that did not have Bi'ah" - how did they know?

Answer (Rav Kahana): They sat each on a barrel of wine. The smell of the wine would pass through (to the mouth) only if she was not a Besulah.

Question: Why didn't they pass them in front of the Tzitz?

Answer (Rav Kahana brei d'Rav Noson): The Tzitz is "L'Ratzon Lahem", but not for punishments.

Question: If so, it should not have been used for the captured Midianites!

Answer (Rav Ashi): "Lahem (for Yisrael)" it is not for punishments. For Nochrim, it is even for punishments.

(R. Yakov bar Idi): R. Yehoshua ben Levi said that the Halachah follows R. Shimon.

R. Zeira: Did you hear this explicitly, or did you derive it?

Question: How could this be derived?

Answer: R. Yehoshua ben Levi said that protests were made (about the primary family of Kohanim) in a city in Eretz Yisrael. Rebbi sent R. Rumnus to check; he found a girl that converted before three [married into the family]. Rebbi permitted her.

R. Yakov bar Idi: I heard it explicitly.

Question: Had it been derived, what objection could be raised?

Answer: Perhaps once she was married, we would be lenient.

Support (Rav and R. Yochanan): A Kohen Gadol may not marry a Bogeres or Mukas Etz. If he married her, he is married.

Rejection: That is no support. There, whomever he will marry is destined to become a Bogeres and a non-virgin during the marriage. A Kohen's wife is not destined to become a Zonah during the marriage! (Therefore, we could derive the Halachah from the episode.)

Rav Safra derived the Halachah (from the episode), asked the question, and answered like we did.

A Kohen married a girl who converted before three years.

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak: Why did you marry her?

The Kohen: R. Yakov bar Idi said that R. Yehoshua ben Levi said that the Halachah follows R. Shimon bar Yochai!

Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak: Divorce her, or I will remove (your reliance on) R. Yakov bar Idi from you (i.e. I will excommunicate you, and you will be forced to divorce her)!