Ask A Question on the daf

Previous daf

1) WHEN A BAS KOHEN IS BURNED

(a) (Continuation of Beraisa) Question: This is only if she married a Kohen (this will be explained) - how do we know, even if she married a Levi, Yisrael, Nochri, Chalal, Mamzer, or Nesin?
(b) Answer: 'U'Vas Ish Kohen" - even if she is not a Kohenes.

1. "Hi" - she is burned, not the adulterer, and not Zomemim witnesses who testified about her.

(c) R. Eliezer says, "Es Aviha" is burned, but her father-in-law is stoned (this will be explained).
(d) Question: The Beraisa suggested, perhaps she is burned for Chilul Shabbos - but one is stoned for that!
(e) Answer (Rava): The Beraisa is R. Shimon, who says that burning is more severe than stoning;

1. The Torah is stringent with Kohanim, they have extra Mitzvos - one might have thought that a Bas Kohen gets a harsher Misah than someone else that was Mechalel Shabbos.

(f) Question: Why would she be punished more severely than her father?
(g) Answer: Male Kohanim are permitted to Mechalel Shabbos to do Avodah, the Torah is not extra stringent if they Mechalel Shabbos without permission;

1. The Torah teaches that we are not more stringent for a Bas Kohen, even though she is never permitted to Mechalel Shabbos.

(h) Question: The Beraisa suggested that perhaps even a single girl is burned - but it says "Liznos"!
(i) Answer: The Tana holds like R. Eliezer, who says that if a single man and woman have relations without intent for Kidushin, she becomes a Zonah (and is forbidden to Kohanim, i.e. this is called Zenus).
(j) Question: The Beraisa suggested that perhaps "Aviha" teaches that she is burned only if she was Mezanah with her father - but even a Bas Yisrael is burned for this!

1. (Rava): We learn from Gezeros Shavos "Henah-Henah" and "Zimah-Zimah" (that a man is burned for relations with his daughter).

(k) Answer: One might have thought, by teaching that a Bas Kohen is burned, the Torah teaches that a Bas Yisrael is not burned, i.e. not to learn from the Gezeros Shavos;

1. The Tana teaches, this is not so.

(l) (Beraisa) Question: This is only if she married a Kohen - how do we know, even if she married a Levi, Yisrael, Nochri, Chalal, Mamzer, or Nesin?
(m) Answer: 'U'Vas Ish Kohen" - even if she is not a Kohenes.
(n) Question #1: If a Bas Kohen married one of these people, does she cease to be a Kohenes?!
(o) Question #2: What suggests that the verse discusses when she married a Kohen?
(p) Answer: One might have thought, "Ki *Sechel* Liznos" - when this was the Haschalah (beginning) of her sin, but if she already married someone forbidden to her, she is not burned.

1. It was taught, "U'Vas" - once she had relations with someone forbidden to her, she is disqualified (permanently from marrying a Kohen or eating Terumah).
2. Even when she was married to a Levi or Yisrael, "Vshav (to eat Terumah)" - implying that during the marriage, she is forbidden to eat Terumah.
3. Therefore, one might have thought that she (is not considered a Kohenes, and) is not burned for Zenus - the Tana teaches, this is not so.

(q) This is not like R. Meir.

1. (Mishnah - R. Meir): If a Bas Kohen was married to a Levi or Yisrael, and she ate Terumah, she pays its value, she does not add a fifth, she is burned (for Zenus):
2. If she was married to someone forbidden, she pays its value and adds a fifth (like a non-Kohen), she is not burned.
3. Chachamim say, in both cases she does not add a fifth, she is burned.
4. R. Eliezer says "Es Aviha" she is burned, 'Es Chameha (her father-in-law)', she is stoned.

(a) Question: What does R. Eliezer mean?

1. Suggestion: She is burned for relations with her father, she is stoned for relations with her father-in-law.
2. Rejection: That applies even to a Bas Yisrael!

(b) Answer: Rather, if she was (living) by her father (Arusah, and was Mezanah) she is burned, if she was by her father-in-law (Nesu'ah) she is stoned.
(c) Question: As whom is this?

1. If like Chachamim - they say that an Arusah is stoned, not burned!
2. If like R. Shimon - he says that also a Nesu'ah is burned!
3. If like R. Yishmael (who says that only an Arusah is burned, not a Nesu'ah), a Nesu'ah is choked!

(d) Answer #1 (Ravin): Really, it is like Chachamim; it means, any Zenus (i.e. of a Nesu'ah) for which a Bas Yisrael is killed less severely (choking) than for Zenus with her father (burning), a Bas Kohen is burned for it;

1. Any Zenus (i.e. of an Arusah) for which a Bas Yisrael is killed more severely (stoning) than for Zenus with her father (burning), a Bas Kohen is killed as one who was Mezanah with her father-in-law (stoning).

(e) Objection (R. Yirmeyah): The Mishnah does not discuss more or less severe Misos!
(f) Answer #2 (R. Yirmeyah): Really, it is like R. Yishmael;

1. If she was Mezanah while by her father (Mekudeshes) she is burned, if she was (Nesu'ah and was) Mezanah *with* her father-in-law, she is stoned;
2. If she was Mezanah with anyone else, she is choked.

(g) Objection (Rava): The Mishnah says 'Es Aviha...Es Chameha' - either both refer to the adulterer, or both refer to location!
(h) Answer #3 (Rava): Really, it is like R. Shimon;

1. R. Shimon equates a Nesu'ah to an Arusah - just as the Misah of an Arusah Bas Kohen (burning) is one level greater than that of a Bas Yisrael (stoning), also the Misah of an Nesu'ah Bas Kohen is one level greater than that (choking) of a Bas Yisrael (the Bas Kohen is stoned).

(i) Objection (R. Chanina): R. Shimon explicitly said that a Bas Kohen is burned, whether Arusah or Nesu'ah!
(j) Answer #4 (Ravina): Really, it is like Chachamim; we must switch the laws - "Es Aviha" (when she is by her father, i.e. Arusah) she is *stoned*, 'Es Chameha', she is *burned*;

1. Version #1 (Rashi): The Tana did not directly say 'Arusah' or Nesu'ah, for he uses the language of the Torah.
2. Version #2 (Tosfos): The Tana taught it reversed because this is the law of Zenus *with* them (burning for the father, stoning for the father-in-law).

(k) (Rav Nachman): The Halachah follows Ravin's explanation of the Mishnah.
(l) Objection (Rav Yosef): This has no bearing until Mashi'ach will come (and the Sanhedrin and Misas Beis Din will be restored)!
(m) Question (Abaye): Also Korbanos will not apply until Mashi'ach comes - should we not learn this now?!
(n) Answer (Abaye): Rather, we study it and receive reward - likewise, Rav Nachman teaches a Halachah about Misas Beis Din!
(o) Rav Yosef: I objected because Rav Nachman said that the Halachah follows Ravin - Ravina does not argue with him about Halachah, just about how to explain the phrasing of the Mishnah.

(a) Question: What is R. Yishmael's opinion?
(b) Answer (Beraisa - R. Yishmael): 'U'Vas Ish Kohen... - the verse discusses a Mekudeshes Na'arah.

1. Suggestion: Perhaps it also discusses a Nesu'ah!
2. Rejection: "Mos Yumas ha'Noef veha'Noafes" refers to all adulterers (and Mos Yumas connotes choking);

i. The Torah taught two exceptions - an Arusah Bas Yisrael is stoned, and that a Bas Kohen is burned;
ii. The exception of stoning only applies to an Arusah Bas Yisrael, not a Nesu'ah - likewise, the exception of burning only applies to an Arusah Bas Kohen, not a Nesu'ah.

3. "Ka'asher Zamam" teaches about her Zomemim (lying witnesses that testified about a Bas Kohen) and the adulterer...
4. Objection: How does this teach about the adulterer?!
5. Correction: It means, her Zomemim receive the Misah of the adulterer - "Ka'asher Zamam La'asos *l'Achiv*", not as he plotted to do to his 'sister' (i.e. the Bas Kohen).

(c) R. Akiva says, the Torah teaches that a Bas Kohen is burned, whether Arusah or Nesu'ah;

1. Suggestion: Perhaps she is burned even if she is single!
2. Rejection: It says here "Aviha", like it says regarding a Mekudeshes Na'arah;

i. Just like there she has a husband, also here.

3. R. Yishmael: If it must be like it says there, it should only apply to a Mekudeshes Na'arah!
4. R. Akiva: I expound the extra 'Vov' to include a Nesu'ah - "*U*'Vas Kohen".
5. R. Yishmael: Is this a reason to burn? If the verse includes a Nesu'ah, you should also include a single girl; if it excludes a single girl, you should also exclude a Nesu'ah!
6. R. Akiva: The Gezerah Shavah excludes a single girl, "U'Vas" includes a Nesu'ah.
7. R. Yishmael thought that when R. Akiva said that he expounds the extra 'Vov', he retracted from the Gezerah Shavah.

(d) Question: How does R. Yishmael expound "U'Vas"?
(e) Answer: He expounds like the father of Shmuel bar Avin.

1. (Shmuel bar Avin's father): Regarding males, the Torah gave different laws for blemished and unblemished Kohanim;
2. Suggestion: Perhaps we also distinguish among Benos Kohanim (blemished ones are like Benos Yisrael, they are not burned)!
3. Rejection: "*U*'Vas" (even if she is blemished).

(f) R. Akiva knows not to distinguish from "Hem Makrivim v'Hayu Kodesh" (blemished Kohanim are only disqualified for Avodah, but they have Kedushas Kehunah).

1. R. Yishmael says, one might have thought, that only applies to males, but a blemished Bas Kohen has no Kedushah.