Previous daf

1)

(a) We initially assume that Sekilah is more stringent than Hereg for the same reason that it is more stringent than Sereifah. Nevertheless, we might have thought otherwise - because of Ir ha'Nidachas, which constitutes Poshet Yad be'Ikar too, yet it is punishable by Hereg (and not Sekilah).

(b) The stringency that is peculiar to Ir ha'Nidachas is - the fact that the residents property must be destroyed.

(c) We arive at the conclusion that Sekilah is more stringent than Hereg after all - since it is obvious that the Madichin (who enticed the residents of the Ir ha'Nidachas to sin) are worse than the residents themselves, and *they* receive Sekilah.

(d) We know that the Madichin are sentenced to Sekilah - from a Beraisa, which specifically says so.

(a) We initially assume that Sekilah is more stringent than Chenek for the same reason as it is more stringent than Sereifah. On the other hand, we then suggest that perhaps Chenek is at least as stringent as Sekilah (see Tosfos DH 'Adraba'), because it is given to someone who strikes his parents (whose honor is compared to that of Hashem).

(b) So we attribute the stringency of Sekilah over Chenek to the fact that a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah receives Sekilah, whereas a Nusu'ah receives only Chenek. What makes an Arusah more stringent than a Nesu'ah is - the fact that her change of status from a Besulah to a Be'ulah comes about through Z'nus (causing a stain to both her nd her family), which Z'nus with a married woman (who is already a Be'ulah, does not do).

(a) Initially, we are unsure which is more stringent, Sereifah or Sayaf (Hereg). We might think that the more stringent of the two is ...

1. ... Sereifah- because it is given to a bas-Kohen who commited adultery.
2. ... Sayaf - because it is given to the residents of an Ir ha'Nidachas.

(b) We ultimately conclude from a 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "es *Avihah* Hi Mechaleles (by Sereifas bas Kohen) from "li'Zenos Beis *Avihah* (from a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah) - that just as Sekilah is more stringent than Sayaf, so too, is Sereifah.

(c) And we learn that Sereifah is more stringent than Chenek from a Nesu'ah bas Kohen - who receives Sereifah, instead of the Chenek that a bas Yisrael receives.

(d) Initially, we are unsure which is more stringent, Hereg or Chenek. The stringency of ...

1. ... Hereg over Chenek is - the fact that it is given to the residents of Ir haNidachas.
2. ... Chenek have over Hereg is - the fact that it is given to someone who strikes his father or mother.

(e) We conclude that nevertheless - the former is more stringent, since it constitutes 'Poshet Yado ba'Ikar'.

(a) Rebbi Shimon considers Sereifah more stringent than Sekilah. He agrees with the principle of 'Poshet Yado be'Ikar' - but maintains that when the Torah sentences a bas Kohen to Sereifah, it incorporates an Arusah, in which case, we have no choose but to declare Sereifah more stringent than Sekilah (since a Na'arah bas Yisrael receives Sekilah)?

(b) And he derives that Sereifah more stringent than Chenek, in spite of the fact that someone who strikes his father or mother receives Chenek - from the fact that the Torah takes a Nesu'ah bas Kohen from Chenek to Sereifah.

(c) According to Rebbi Shimon, the Madichei Ir ha'Nadachas receive Chenek (a proof that Chenek is more stringent than Hereg, which is what the residents receive).

(d) Based on this fact, we know that Sereifah is more stringent than Sayaf (despite the fact that Sayaf is given to the residents of Ir ha'Nidachas) - because if, as we proved earlier, Sereifah is more stringent than Chenek, it is certainly more stringent than Sayaf (which as we just proved, is less stringent than Chenek).

5) We already learned according to the Chachamim, that Sekilah is more stringent than Chenek, from the fact that a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah receives Sekilah, whereas a Nusu'ah receives only Chenek. Rebbi Shimon learns that Sekilah is more stringent than Sayaf from a 'Kal va'Chomer' - from the fact that it is more stringent than Chenek (which, in his opinion, is more stringent than Sayaf). That in turn, he knows from the fact that the Madichei Ir ha'Nidachas receive Chenek, whereas the residents receive only Sayaf, as we explained earlier.

6)

(a) Rebbi Yochanan would often say that according to the Rabbanan, a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah bas Kohen who commits adultery remains Chayav Sekilah, whereas according to Rebbi Shimon, she is Chayav Sereifah. The basis of their Machlokes is - whether Sekilah is more stringent than Sereifah (the Rabbanan) or vice-versa (Rebbi Shimon).

(b) In a case where she has relations with her father, Rebbi Yochanan say that, according to ...

1. ... the Rabbanan - she receives Sekilah.
2. ... Rebbi Shimon - she receives Sereifah?

(c) Rebbi Yochanan add this second Machlokes - to demonstrate the application of the Machlokes, since it is in such a case that, according to each Tana, she is Chayav two punishments, of which she receives the more stringent one.

(a) The Pasuk in Kedoshim "Mos Yumas (meaning via Chenek) ha'No'ef ve'ha'No'afes" refers - both to a bas Yisrael and a bas Kohen.

(b) The two 'K'lalim' to which Rebbi Shimon refers are - the above Chiyuv by a Nesu'ah and the second Pasuk in Ki Seitzei which takes an Arusah out of the Din of Nesu'ah, giving her a Chiyuv Sekilah.

(c) When he says ...

1. ... 'Ne'emru be'Bas Kohen', he means even a bas Kohen, who initially appears to have the same Din as a bas Yisrael (since the Torah makes no distinction between the two).
2. ... 've'Hotzi ha'Kasuv Nesu'ah mi'Chelal Nesu'ah, va'Arusah mi'Chelal Arusah', he means that the Torah does indeed give a bas Kohen an independant Din, both as regards a Nesu'ah and as regards an Arusah (who both receive Sereifah, and who, in his opinion, are both a Chumra over a bas Yisrael).

(d) And Rebbi Shimon concludes by comparing the Zomemin of ...

1. ... a Nesu'ah bas Kohen - to a Nesu'ah bas Yisrael (who receives Chenek).
2. ... an Arusah bas Kohen - to an Arusah bas Yisrael (who receives Sekilah).

(a) The Torah writes "u'Vas Ish Kohen Ki Seichel ... , es Avihah Hi Mechaleles". The Pasuk does not refer to a bas Kohen who desecrates Shabbos, says the Berasia - because the Torah adds the word "Ki Seichel *li'Zenos*".

(b) And the Tana learns from the 'Gezeirah-Shavah' "Avihah" "Avihah" (from Na'arah ha'Me'urasah) - that like a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah, a bas Kohen is only Chayav Sereifah, if she has a husband, but not if she is single.

(c) We refute the suggestion that the Torah writes "Avihah" to confine the Din of a bas Kohen to where she committed adultery with her father (but not with anybody else) - because "es Avihah Hi Mechaleles" implies that *she* desecrates *him*, but *he* does not desecrate *her*, clearly indicating that it is with other men, and not with her father, that she committed adultery.

(a) We suggest that perhaps the 'Gezeirah-Shavah', from Na'arah ha'Me'urasah also serves to confine the Din of bas Kohen to a Na'arah ha'Me'urasah exclusively - to preclude, besides an old woman, a married Na'arah, a betrothed Bogeres and a married Bogeres.

(b) We include them however - from the extra 'Vav' in "u'Vas Kohen".

(c) We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "u'Vas Ish Kohen" - to include a bas Kohen who is married to a Levi, a Yisrael, a Nochri (see Rashash), a Chalal, a Mamzer or a Nasin) in the Din of bas Kohen.
2. ... "es Avihah *Hi* Mechaleles" - to preclude the Bo'el and her Zomemin from the special Din of bas Kohen.

(d) They, in fact - receive Chenek (as if she was a bas Yisrael).

(a) A bas Kohen who is married to a Mamzer or a Nasin is considered married, in spite of the fact that they transgress a La'av - because we rule that Kidushin take effect by Chayvei La'avin.

(b) Granted we will shortly establish this Beraisa like Rebbi Akiva, who holds that Kidushin do not take effect by Chayvei La'avin - but this Beraisa holds like those who establish Rebbi Akiva by La'avin di'She'er (milder cases of incest), such as Anusas Aviv (for which there is no Kareis), but not by other La'avin.