Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Yevamos, 59

59b

QUESTIONS: The Gemara discusses the view of Rav, who says that if a woman has relations she'Lo k'Darkah, she becomes Pesulah l'Kehunah. The Gemara cites a Beraisa that implies that she is *not* Pesulah l'Kehunah. The Gemara answers that whether she is Pesulah to a Kohen Gadol depends on the Machlokes Tana'im (mentioned on 59a) between Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Elazar. Rav is ruling like Rebbi Elazar who is more stringent and holds that Bi'ah she'Lo k'Darkah makes her Pesulah l'Kehunah [Gedolah].

The Gemara asks that if Rav rules like Rebbi Elazar, then why does he say that she may not marry a Kohen Gadol because she is a Be'ulah? According to Rebbi Elazar, she is also Pesulah to a normal Kohen because she is a Zonah, for Rebbi Elazar holds that any Bi'ah out of wedlock ("Panuy ha'Ba Al ha'Penuyah") makes her into a Zonah!

There are two questions on this Gemara.

(a) First, why did the Gemara assume that Rav rules specifically like Rebbi Elazar? Rebbi Elazar is not the only Tana who is stringent with regard to Bi'ah she'Lo k'Darkah -- Rebbi Shimon is also of that opinion! As such, the Gemara should have said that Rav rules like *Rebbi Shimon*. That way it would have had no question that she is Pesulah because she is a Zonah, because Rebbi Shimon does not say that Bi'ah out of wedlock makes a woman into a Zonah!

(b) Second, why does the Gemara ask why *Rav* says that she is Pesulah l'Kehunah because she is a Be'ulah, when the reason should be because she is a Zonah? The Gemara should have asked this question according to Rebbi Elazar himself! Rebbi Elazar says that there is a verse that teaches that Bi'ah she'Lo k'Darkah makes a woman into a Be'ulah and thus invalidates her to a Kohen Gadol. Why does Rebbi Elazar need a special verse for this? We already know that she is a Zonah and for that reason she is Pesulah l'Kehunah!

ANSWERS:

(a) The Rishonim suggest a number of answers to the first question.

1. The RASHBA (here, and in Teshuvos 1:1231) first answers that the Gemara prefers to say that Rav rules like *both* Rebbi Elazar and Rebbi Shimon, rather than saying he rules like only one of them (Rebbi Shimon). That is why the Gemara goes out of its way to explain Rav's ruling according to Rebbi Elazar.

2. The RASHBA (Teshuvos) adds that if Rav holds like Rebbi Shimon, then he would not be teaching us anything; he would merely be telling us that the Halachah follows the view of Rebbi Shimon. Therefore, the Gemara prefers to say that Rav holds like Rebbi Elazar, because then Rav is teaching us something new. He is teaching that even though a Bi'ah out of wedlock makes a woman into a Zonah, nevertheless it is possible to do Bi'ah with a woman she'Lo k'Darkah which will *not* make her into a Zonah (such as Bi'ah with a Behemah, or with a Mema'enes, as the Gemara concludes).

3. The TOSFOS HA'ROSH suggests that it would not help to say that Rav holds like Rebbi Shimon, because Rebbi Shimon also holds that a Bi'ah out of wedlock makes a woman a Zonah, as is evident from the Gemara in Sanhedrin (51a).

(b) Regarding why the Gemara does not ask the question on Rebbi Elazar himself, the RASHBA answers that Rebbi Elazar interprets the verse to be saying that *in addition* to the Isur of Zonah, there is also an Isur of Be'ulah which invalidates her to a Kohen Gadol. The verse is just teaching that there is an additional Isur. Rav's statement, though, implies that the *only* reason she is not valid to a Kohen Gadol is that she is a Be'ulah (since in his Halachic statement he mentions only that she is Asurah because she is a Be'ulah and does not mention that she is Asurah because she is a Zonah).