Halakhah for Yevamot 168:18

אי מההיא הוה אמינא לאו השוה בכל אבל לאו שאינו שוה בכל לא

[Reverting to] the main text, 'Rab Judah reported in the name Of Rab: Women of legitimate [priestly] status were not forbidden to be married to men of tainted birth'. Might it be suggested that the following provides support for his view? [It was stated], A HALAL WHO MARRIED A WOMAN OF LEGITIMATE STATUS; does not [this refer to] a priestess (who was fitting unto him);<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though he may marry the daughter of an Israelite he should preferably marry the daughter of a priest. Cf. Pes. 49a. [The bracketed words are rightly omitted in MS.M]. ');">³⁴</span> and is not the meaning of<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and what'. ');">³⁵</span> LEGITIMATE STATUS eligible for priesthood!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' To marry a priest. Which is in agreement with the opinion of Rab. ');">³⁶</span> — No; [it might refer to] the daughter of an Israelite, and LEGITIMATE STATUS means<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'and what'. ');">³⁵</span> eligible for the assembly.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., to marry an Israelite. ');">³⁷</span> If so, HAD A BROTHER OF LEGITIMATE STATUS would also [mean] 'eligible for the assembly', from which it would follow that he himself is ineligible for the assembly!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Surely not! ');">³⁸</span> Consequently it must refer to a priest; and since he is a priest she also must be a priestess.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., since the term 'legitimate status in the case of the man has reference to a priest, so the reference in the case of the woman must be to a priestess which shews that a priestess may marry one of tainted birth. ');">³⁹</span> What an argument! Each phrase may bear its own peculiar interpretation.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'that as it is and that as it is'. ');">⁴⁰</span> Rabin b. Nahman raised an objection: They shall not take&nbsp;… they shall not take<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXI, 7. ');">⁴¹</span> teaches<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since the expression was repeated. ');">⁴²</span> that the prohibition was addressed to the woman through the man!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is now assumed to mean that as the untainted priest may not marry a halalah so may not the untainted priestess marry a halal. An objection against the opinion of Rab. ');">⁴³</span> — Raba replied, [This is the meaning]: Where the prohibition is applicable to him it is also applicable to her, but where it is not applicable to him it is also inapplicable to her.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The halalah whom an untainted priest is forbidden to marry is herself forbidden to marry such a priest. The untainted priestess however, whom a halal is not forbidden to marry, may also marry the halal. ');">⁴⁴</span> Is this,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The equality of men and women in respect of prohibitions ');">⁴⁵</span> however, deduced from this text? Surely it was deduced from a text which Rab Judah expounded in the name of Rab! For Rab Judah stated in the name of Rab and so it was taught at the school of R. Ishmael: When a man or woman shall commit any sin that men commit;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. v, 6. ');">⁴⁶</span> Scripture compared the woman to the man in respect of all the punishments in the Torah!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whether flogging or kareth. ');">⁴⁷</span> — If deduction had been made from that [text]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. v, 6. ');">⁴⁶</span> it might have been assumed [to apply only to] a prohibition that is equally applicable to all, but not to a prohibition that is not equally applicable to all.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That of the priesthood does not apply to Israelites. Hence it was necessary to have the text of Lev. XXI, 7. ');">⁴⁸</span>

Sefer HaChinukh