Kiddushin 156

האי קרא רישא בכהן גדול וסיפא בכהן הדיוט אמר ליה אין

This verse, the first part refers to a High Priest and the second to an ordinary priest?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For the first half prohibits marriage to a widow, while the second half 'and a widow that is a widow of a priest they shall take' permits it.');">¹</span> - Yes, he replied. And is a verse thus written? - Even so, he replied, for it is written, and the lamp of God was not yet gone out, and Samuel was laid down [to sleep] in the Temple of the Lord.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I Sam. III, 3.');">²</span>

וכתב קרא הכי אמר ליה אין דכתיב (שמואל א ג, ג) ונר אלהים טרם יכבה ושמואל שוכב בהיכל ה' והלא אין ישיבה בעזרה אלא למלכי בית דוד בלבד אלא נר אלהים טרם יכבה בהיכל ה' ושמואל שוכב במקומו

But sitting was [permitted] in the Temple only to the Kings of the Davidic dynasty?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And the same applies. of course, to lying.');">³</span> Hence [it must mean:] and the lamp of God was not yet gone out in the Temple of the Lord, and Samuel was laid down in his place.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The sense of the verse is to be divided though the text itself does not indicate this.');">⁴</span> And a widow that is the widow of a priest they shall take.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezek. XLIV, 22.');">⁵</span>

(יחזקאל מד, כב) והאלמנה אשר תהיה אלמנה מכהן יקחו מכהן אין מישראל לא הכי קאמר מכהן יקחו משאר כהנים יקחו תניא נמי הכי מכהן יקחו משאר כהנים יקחו

Only of a priest, but not of an Israelite? - This is the meaning of 'of a priest they shall take:' those of the other priests<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., but not a High Priest, of whom the first half of the verse speaks. Thus of (n) is understood as a partitive preposition.');">⁶</span> may take. It was taught likewise:.

רבי יהודה אומר מן המשיאים לכהונה יקחו רבי יהודה לטעמיה דאמר בת גר זכר כבת חלל זכר כל שאתה נושא בתו אתה נושא אלמנתו וכל שאי אתה נושא בתו אי אתה נושא אלמנתו

of a priest they shall take': [i.e.,] those of the other priests may take. R'Judah interpreted: of those who ca give [their daughters] in marriage to the priesthood they may take.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., they may take the widow of a man whose daughter was fit for the priesthood, thus excluding the widow of a proselyte.');">⁷</span> R'Judah is in harmony with his view, for he said: THE DAUGHTER OF A MALE PROSELYTE IS AS THE DAUGHTER OF A MALE HALAL: when you may marry his daughter, you may marry his widow; and when you may not marry his daughter, you may not marry his widow.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 75a.');">⁸</span>

ר' יוסי אומר אף גר שנשא גיורת אמר רב המנונא משמיה דעולא הלכה כרבי יוסי וכן אמר רבה בר בר חנה הלכה כרבי יוסי ומיום שחרב בית המקדש נהגו כהנים סילסול בעצמן כרבי אליעזר בן יעקב

R'JOSE SAID: ALSO IF A MALE PROSELYTE MARRIES A FEMALE PROSELYTE. R'Hamnuna said on 'Ulla's authority: The halachah is as R'Jose. And Rabbah B'Bar Hanah said likewise: The halachah is as R'Jose; but since the day that the Temple was destroyed, the priests have insisted on<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'practised'.');">⁹</span>

אמר רב נחמן אמר לי הונא בא לימלך מורים לו כרבי אליעזר בן יעקב נשא אין מוציאים אותה ממנו כרבי יוסי

a superior status, in accordance with R'Eliezer B'Jacob.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Perhaps because the fall of the Temple robbed them of their higher dignity in respect to the sacrificial service, they found it necessary to safeguard it in other ways.');">¹⁰</span> R'Nahman said: Huna told me: If he [a priest] comes to take counsel, we give him a ruling in accordance with R'Eliezer B'Jacob; but if he marries,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The daughter of proselytes.');">¹¹</span> we do not compel him to divorce her,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'we do not withdraw her from his hand.'');">¹²</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> האומר בני זה ממזר אינו נאמן ואפילו שניהם מודים על העובר שבמעיה ממזר הוא אינם נאמנים רבי יהודה אומר נאמנים

in accordance with R'Jose. <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF A MAN DECLAREs, 'THIS SON OF MINE IS A MAMZER,' HE IS DISBELIEVED. AND EVEN IF BOTH [THE HUSBAND AND WIFE] ADMIT THAT THE CHILD WITHIN HER IS MAMZER,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it was conceived in adultery.');">¹³</span>

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מאי ואפילו שניהם לא מיבעיא קאמר לא מיבעיא איהו דלא קים ליה אלא אפילו איהי דקים לה לא מהימנא ולא מיבעיא היכא דאית ליה חזקה דכשרות דלא מהימני אלא אפילו עובר נמי דלית ליה חזקה דכשרות לא מהימני

THEY ARE DISBELIEVED. R'JUDAH SAID: THEY ARE BELIEVED. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Why [state], EVEN IF BOTH [etc.]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This appears to add nothing to the first clause.');">¹⁴</span>

רבי יהודה אומר נאמנים כדתניא (דברים כא, יז) יכיר יכירנו לאחרים מכאן אמר רבי יהודה נאמן אדם לומר זה בני בכור וכשם שנאמן אדם לומר זה בני בכור כך נאמן אדם לומר זה בן גרושה וזה בן חלוצה וחכמים אומרים אינו נאמן

- He leads to a climax.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'he states: " it="" is="" unnecessary="" (to="" teach="" this)="" '.');"="">¹⁵</span> It goes without saying that he [the father], who cannot be certain thereof<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The child's paternity.');">¹⁶</span> [is disbelieved]; but even she [the mother], who is certain, is [also] disbelieved.

אמר ליה רב נחמן בר יצחק לרבא בשלמא לרבי יהודה היינו דכתיב יכיר אלא לרבנן יכיר למה לי

And it goes without saying that they are disbelieved where he [the child] enjoys the presumption of fitness; but even [in the case of] an embryo, who does not enjoy the presumption of fitness, they are [still] disbelieved. R'JUDAH SAID: THEY ARE BELIEVED. As it was taught: He shall acknowledge [the firstborn]:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 17.');">¹⁷</span>

בצריך הכירא למאי הלכתא (דברים כא, יז) לתת לו פי שנים פשיטא למה לי קרא מגו דאי בעי מיתבא ליה מתנה מי לא יהבי ליה

[i.e.,] h shall acknowledge him before others. Hence R'Judah said: A man is believed when he says: 'This son is my first born.' And just as he is believed when he says: 'This son is my firstborn,' so is he also believed when he says, 'This is the son of a divorced woman'; 'this is the son of a haluzah.'

בנכסים שנפלו לאחר מיכן

But the Sages say: He is not believed.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 74a.');">¹⁸</span> R'Nahman B'Isaac asked Raba: As for R'Judah, it is well: for that reason it is written: 'he shall acknowledge'. But on the view of the Rabbis, what is the purpose of, 'he shall acknowledge'? - Where acknowledgment is necessary.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.g., if the son was overseas and his status unknown.');">¹⁹</span>

ולרבי מאיר דאמר אדם מקנה דבר שלא בא לעולם יכיר למה לי שנפלו לו כשהוא גוסס

In respect of what [is he believed]? to give him a double portion?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXI, 17,');">²⁰</span> That is obvious, and what is the need of a verse; for if he desired to make him a gift, could he not do so? - This refers to property which he [the father] inherits [only] subsequently.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'which falls to him afterwards', i.e., after declaring that this is his firstborn. - Now, when he declares thus, he cannot gift this legacy, which, as far as he is concerned, is non-existent; and yet he is believed in respect of a double portion for the son recognised by him as his firstborn.');">²¹</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> מי שנתן רשות לשלוחו לקדש את בתו והלך הוא וקדשה אם שלו קדמו קידושיו קידושין ואם של שלוחו קדמו קידושיו קידושין ואם אינו ידוע

But according to R'Meir, who maintained: One can transmit property that is non-existent, what is the purpose of 'he shall acknowledge'? - Where he inherits it while he was dying.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though he could not make a gift just then, his previous recognition is valid. Tosaf. observes that a dying man's gift is valid, but that he is physically unable to make one. For fuller notes v. B.B. (Sonc. ed.) pp. 530ff');">²²</span> <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>IF A MAN AUTHORIZES HIS AGENT TO GIVE HIS DAUGHTER IN BETROTHAL,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., accept kiddushin on her behalf.');">²³</span> AND THEN HE HIMSELF GOES AND GIVES HER IN BETROTHAL TO ANOTHER, IF THE [BETROTHAL] BY HIM WAS FIRST, HIS BETROTHAL IS VALID; IF THE AGENT'S WAS FIRST, THE LATTER'S BETROTHAL IS VALID. BUT IF IT IS UNKNOWN,