Shavua Tov
Bkvod Harav
When the gemara brings the argument that a Chalalah refers to a woman born from a flawed lineage, and then uses the case of machzir Gerushaso, I am confused:
1.Are we bringing the case of a non-kohen taking back his divorcee? In which case, what's the proof, chalalim can only be generated from a kohen?
2. Are we bringing a case of a Kohen being machzir Gerushaso? In which case, why isn't the child (and mother) chalalim for the simple fact that a Kohen cannot marry a Gerusha ever (at all), whether it his Gerusha or someone else's?
Thank you.
Besuros Tovos
Daniel Sheinfil , Pomona NY USA
Reb Daniel, Shalom!
You absolutely grasped the content of the Gemora and all of your assumptions are correct, but your question is rooted in the process of the Gemora.Let's take a look:
The Gemora brings a Baraisa that says that a Chalala is a woman born from any union with "Pesulim".The term "Pesulim" is general and not well defined, so the question before the Gemora is, to which of the Pesulim are we referring. Obviously not to Mamzer, Nasin, Eved etc, because these are Pasul to every Jew and not just Cohanim. So, the Gemora (in the "Hava Amina") offers a solution: perhaps "Machzir Gerushaso", although his daughter is permitted to marry a regular Jew, but perhaps since she was born from an illicit union, she is prohibited to a Cohane, and is a Challala. On that the Gemora answers that we learn out from a Pasuk that there is no such stigma on the children of "Machzir Gerushaso". Therefore, the Gemora explains that "Pesulim" means "Pesulei Kehuna".
I hope this answers your question adequately
Shimon Brodie
Bkvod Harav
I thank you for your response.
I did some further learning on this point and I believe I found answers that distinguish and differentiate between a Kohen machzir Gerushaso and a Kohen that marries an other's Gerusha and even a difference if a Kohen is machzir Gerushaso but the ex-wife was an almanah from her second husband.
What I think I understand from meforshim on the Rambam is that a Kohen Machzir Gerushaso is different from a regular Gerusha in that while there is a separate isur for anyone to remarry his Gerusha (the entire lav in this separate pasuk as it relates to a Kohen is a fascinating topic to me separately in that the gemara doesn't seem to count it when determining how many lavim a Kohen is oiver), the relationship between a Kohen and his Gerusha is not as bad somehow as a Kohen marrying an other's Gerusha.
Meaning, since the Kohen was once married to his Gerusha, and now that she has severed ties with her second husband, the re-marriage to his ex-wife is a reunion of sorts, where the marriage is not required to be severed, and therefore the children from this machzir Gerushaso are not chalalim.
Whereas, a Kohen machzir Gerushaso where the ex-wife is an almanah from the second husband, the re-marriage must be severed due to the fact that the ex-wife is still somewhat bound to the second husband since he died but never gave a get. Somehow, the couple (ex and second husband) may be reunited in olam habah?
Thank you.
Kol Tuv
Besuros Tovos
Reb Daniel
I was not able to make any progress on the above questions from the citations you sent. I think that there is a bit of a misunderstanding. When we say that the child of a Machzir Gerushaso is Kasher to Kehuna we are discussing marriage to a Yisroel (or Levi for that matter) and NOT a Kohane. Under no circumstances may a Kohane marry a Gerusha. How ever, if a Kohane does marry a Gerusha, in his first union with her he will be Oiver only the Lav of Gerusha; the second time he will be Oiver Gerusha AND Chalala.
The other question is what is required to be Oiver the Lav: just Kiddushin, just Biah or Kiddushin and Biah together. This is a Machlokes in the Gemora and the subsequent Rishonim. However, here there is a difference between Almana and Gerusha: Almana will become a Chalala after Biah without Kiddushin according to all opinions. This is a very short (sorry sort of "bare bones" as well) summary of the sources you sent. I don't think that any of the interesting aspects you mentioned above can be revealed from these sources.
As always, I am open for further discussion if I have missed a point.
Sincerely
Shimon Brodie
Shavua Tov. A lot of yiddische nachas to you and your family.
Thank you for response and clarification.
So if I am understanding correctly, the gemara is discussing a case of a Levi or Yisrael machzir Gerushaso and that the daughter of that union is kasher to marry a Kohen.
Since there is a distinction of a Kohen machzir Gerushaso of an almanah which will be a Chalalah even without kiddushin, I was highlighting that distinction to maybe explain it by the difference a woman has to her husband (in this case her second husband).
When a woman is divorced from her husband, the union is severed completely, however, an almanah may still have some relationship to her deceased husband.
This may explain why a Kohen machzir Gerushaso is not a Chalalah without kiddushin (first biyah), whereas a Kohen machzir Gerushaso (that is an almanah) is a Chalalah even without kiddushin (first biyah).
One other point.
I think the reason I was confused originally is because I don't think the lashon in the gemara of trying to determine from what union a Chalalah is created is coherent (to me) outside of the union of a male Kohen with a female.
As you stated, unions with male Leviim and Yisraelim create pesulos, not chalalim, but maybe I read that into the lashon hagmara.
Besuros Tovos
Kol Tuv
Daniel
Q: So if I am understanding correctly, the gemara is discussing a case of a Levi or Yisrael machzir Gerushaso and that the daughter of that union is kasher to marry a Kohen.
A: Absolutely!
Q: When a woman is divorced from her husband, the union is severed completely, however, an almanah may still have some relationship to her deceased husband.
A: True, but I am not knowledgeable on the details. Here is what I came up with on a basic search:
(9) ??? ???"? ????? - ??? ????? ????? - ???? ?? ??? ???? ??? (?)
??????? ???? ???? ?? ?? ??? ???? ??? ?????, ?? ?? ??? ???? ??? ????? ??? ??????, ????? ????? ??? ???? ????. ????? ??"? ????? ????????, ??? ?????? ????? ????? ???? ????? ??????. ??? ???? ???? ?? ??? ???? ????? ??????, ??? ??? ???? ??? ??, ???? ?????? ???????? ??? ?? ???? ???? ?? ????.
Q: This may explain why a Kohen machzir Gerushaso is not a Chalalah without kiddushin (first biyah), whereas a Kohen machzir Gerushaso (that is an almanah) is a Chalalah even without kiddushin (first biyah).
A:I don't agree, but I really don't know so perhaps I should just sign off, "No Comment".
Thanks for your warm Berachos,
Shimon Brodie