Question: This teaches about a Bas Kohen. What is the source for a Bas Levi or Bas Yisrael?

Answer: We learn like R. Aba taught, since it says "U'Vas".

Suggestion: This is only like R. Akiva, who expounds extra Vavim!

Rejection: No, even Chachamim could agree here, since the entire verse ("U'Vas Kohen...") is extra.

Suggestion: We should say that when she leaves a man from whom she can be widowed or divorced, she eats only if she has no children from him. If she leaves a man from whom she cannot be widowed or divorced, she eats even if she has children from him!

Rejection: If so, why does it say "U'Vas" to disqualify also a Bas Levi and Bas Yisrael? (If a slave or Nochri does not disqualify a Bas Kohen, surely he does not disqualify a Bas Levi or Bas Yisrael!)

Question: R. Akiva holds that Ein Kidushin Tofsin b'Chayavei Lavin. "Ki Sihyeh l'Ish Zar" refers to Bi'as Isur (it cannot mean Kidushin). If so, why does it say "widow or divorcee" (since they do not apply)?

Answer: This teaches a stringency for a widow (a Bas Kohen from a Yisrael; if she has children, she may not eat) and a leniency for a divorcee (if she has no children, she may eat). It is necessary to teach both:

Had it taught only about a widow (that if she has no children, she may eat), one might have thought that this is because she is still permitted to Kohanim, but a divorcee does not eat even if she has no children;

Had it taught only about a divorcee (that if she has children, she may not eat), one might have thought that this is because she is forbidden to Kohanim; but a widow eats even if she has children.

Suggestion: Perhaps even Machazir Gerushaso (after she married someone else) disqualifies her!

Rejection: "L'Ish Zar" connotes one who is foreign (forbidden) to her from birth.

Question: If so, a Chalal, who is permitted to her, should not disqualify her!

Answer: "(A Kohen Gadol) will not disqualify his seed..." equates his (Pasul) seed (a Chalal) to him:

Just like he disqualifies, also his seed disqualifies.

Suggestion: Perhaps his seed disqualifies through Kidushin alone!

Rejection: He is equated to a Kohen Gadol who disqualifies a widow;

Just like a Kohen Gadol disqualifies only through Bi'ah, also a Chalal.

Suggestion: Perhaps (we learn from "Ki Sihyeh" that) a Chalal disqualifies only through Bi'ah amidst Kidushin!

Rejection: No, he is equated to a Kohen Gadol who disqualifies a widow.

Just like a Kohen Gadol disqualifies a widow through Bi'ah alone, also, a Chalal.

(Beraisa - R. Yosi): One disqualifies only if his seed is forbidden.

Question: How does he argue with the first Tana?

Answer (R. Yochanan): They argue about a second generation (i.e. the son of a converted) Mitzri or Edomi. Both of them learn from a Kohen Gadol:

The first Tana learns, just like a Kohen Gadol is forbidden to a widow and he disqualifies her through Bi'ah, also a Mitzri or Edomi Sheni (disqualifies a Yisraelis through Bi'ah).

R. Yosi learns, since a Kohen Gadol's children from a widow are Pesulim, he disqualifies her. Children of a Mitzri (or Edomi) Sheni are Kesherim - "Dor Shelishi Yavo Lahem bi'Khal Hash-m" - therefore he does not disqualify

(Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Gamliel): A man's widow may marry a Kohen only if his daughter may marry a Kohen.

Question: How does R. Shimon ben Gamliel argue with R. Yosi?

Answer (Ula): They argue about a convert from Amon or Mo'av (who has Bi'ah with a Bas Yisrael). Both of them learn from a Kohen Gadol:

R. Yosi learns, just like a Kohen Gadol's children from a widow are Pesulim and the Kohen Gadol disqualifies her, also whenever a man's children through a woman are Pesulim (including a converted Amoni or Mo'avi who marries a Bas Yisrael), he disqualifies her.

R. Shimon ben Gamliel learns, just like all children of a Kohen Gadol from a widow are disqualified, also whenever all a man's children from a woman are Pesulim, he disqualifies her;

This excludes a converted Amoni or Mo'avi, since only his sons are Pesulim, but not his daughters.

(Mishnah): A rapist, enticer, and a lunatic neither disqualify nor permit eating Terumah. If he is forbidden to marry a Bas Yisrael, he disqualifies.

If he was a Yisrael who had Bi'ah with a Bas Kohen, she continues to eat Terumah;

If she became pregnant, she may not eat. If the fetus was cut up inside her, she may eat.

If he was a Kohen that had Bi'ah with a Bas Yisrael, she may not eat Terumah;

If she became pregnant, she may not eat; if she gave birth, she may eat.

The child is able to permit her more than his father can!

A slave disqualifies through Bi'ah, but not due to seed:

If Reuven was born (1) to a Bas Yisrael from a Kohen or (2) to a Bas Kohen from a Yisrael and Reuven fathered a child from a Shifchah, the child is a slave;

In case (1) (Reuven was born to a Bas Yisrael from a Kohen), she may not eat Terumah (if Reuven died. Her slave grandchild is not considered seed of a Kohen.)

In case (2) (a Bas Kohen from a Yisrael) she may eat Terumah (if Reuven died).

A Mamzer can disqualify or permit eating.

If Leah was born (1) to a Kohen from a Bas Yisrael or (2) to a Yisrael from a Bas Kohen, and Leah had a child from a Nochri or slave, the child is a Mamzer;

In case (1) (a Bas Yisrael from a Kohen), she may eat Terumah (even if Leah died. Her grandchild, the Mamzer, is considered seed from a Kohen);

In case (2) (a Bas Kohen from a Yisrael) she may not eat Terumah (even if Leah died).

Sometimes a Kohen Gadol can forbid eating.

If Leah was born to a Yisrael from a Bas Kohen, and Leah had a child from a Kohen, the child could be appointed to be Kohen Gadol. He permits his mother to eat Terumah, and forbids his mother's mother.

His grandmother laments 'There should not be (many) like my grandson the Kohen Gadol, who forbids me to eat Terumah.'

(Gemara): Our Mishnah teaches like the following Beraisa:

(Beraisa): A woman widowed from a lunatic or minor is exempt from Chalitzah and Yibum (because Ein Kidushin Tofsin).

(Mishnah): If a Yisrael had Bi'ah with a Bas Kohen, she continues to eat Terumah. If she became pregnant, she may not eat.

Question: Since if she is pregnant she may not eat, [for three months after the Bi'ah] we should be concerned lest she is pregnant!

(Mishnah): (If two women were switched at the Chupah and had Bi'ah with each other's husband,) we separate them from their husbands for three months, lest they are pregnant.

Answer #1 (Rabah bar Rav Huna): We are concerned only regarding lineage, but not for Terumah.

Objection: We are also concerned for Terumah!

(Beraisa): If a man gave a Get to his wife to take effect a moment before he dies, she is immediately forbidden to eat Terumah.

Answer #2 (Rabah bar Rav Huna): Rather, we are concerned only for Bi'ah through marriage, but not for Bi'as Zenus. (After Zenus, a woman turns over to avoid pregnancy.)

Question: We are not concerned for Bi'ah through marriage!

(Beraisa): If a Bas Kohen married a Yisrael and he died (that day), she may immerse (from Tum'ah due to Bi'ah) and eat Terumah at nightfall.

Answer (Rav Chisda): She may eat for 40 days:

If she is not pregnant, there is no problem;

If she is pregnant, until 40 days the fetus is (considered to be) mere water.

Question (Abaye - Seifa): If the fetus becomes recognizable, retroactively she transgressed (and must pay the fine for a Zar who ate Terumah. This shows that she was forbidden to eat!)

Answer (Rav Chisda): She transgressed retroactively up to 40 days (i.e. if she ate after then).

Version #1 (Rav): If a Chasan has Bi'ah with his betrothed in her father's house, the child is a Mamzer;

(Shmuel): The child is a Shtuki (i.e. of uncertain lineage).

(Rava): Presumably, Rav's law when she is suspected of Bi'ah with others. If not, we attribute the child to her husband.

Support (Rava, for himself - Mishnah): If she gave birth (after being raped or enticed by a Kohen), she may eat.

Question: What is the case?

If she is suspected of Bi'ah with others, why may she eat (perhaps the child is not from the Kohen)!

Answer (Rava): We must say, she is not suspected of Bi'ah with anyone else.

Even though she is forbidden (mid'Rabanan) to the Kohen and to all men (without Kidushin), we assume that the child is from him;

Here, [mid'Oraisa an Arusah is permitted to her husband and forbidden to all others. All the more so we should assume the child is from her husband!

Objection (Abaye): Perhaps Rav disqualifies the child even when she is suspected only of him, and not of others;

We say, just like she freely had Bi'ah with her betrothed, she freely had Bi'ah with others.

Our Mishnah discusses when she was locked in a jail cell with the Kohen (and she could not have had Bi'ah with anyone else).

Version #2: If we know that the Chasan had Bi'ah with his betrothed, Rav and Shmuel agree that we attribute the child to him. They argue about an Arusah who is pregnant (nothing else is known).

(Rav): The child is a Mamzer.

(Shmuel): The child is a Shtuki.