ONE WHO WAS MEKADESH TOO EARLY [line 3]
Question (Rav Ashi): (Rava taught that we were lenient about a Kohen who married a Safek Shomeres Yavam.) If Reuven married a woman pregnant from or nursing a baby from David, did we enact a leniency for a Kohen (that he need not give her a Get, so she may return to him after she finishes nursing)?
Answer (R. Hoshaya brei d'Rav Idi): No, this is not comparable!
Regarding a Safek Nefel, Chachamim argue with R. Shimon ben Gamliel and assume that a baby was viable even if he died within 30 days. Since there is no solution for a Kohen to keep his wife if she does Chalitzah, we rely on Chachamim (to be lenient).
Question: Here, on whom can we rely?
We cannot rely on R. Meir. He says that Reuven must divorce her and may never remarry her!
We cannot rely on Chachamim. They said that he must give her a Get!
Rav Acha and Rafram argued about a man who was Mekadesh a woman within three months (after she was widowed or divorced) and fled.
Opinion #1: We put him in Niduy (until he divorces her);
Opinion #2: It suffices that he fled.
A case occurred, and Rafram said that it suffices that he fled.
A SAFEK ABOUT WHO IS THE FATHER [line 14]
(Mishnah): If we are unsure whether it is a nine-month baby from the deceased...
Question (Rava): Why don't we follow most women, who give birth after nine months?
Answer (Rav Nachman): Our women give birth after seven months.
Objection (Rava): Are your women the majority of the world?!
Clarification (Rav Nachman): Most women give birth after nine months. A minority give birth after seven. Every woman who gives birth after nine months is noticeably pregnant after a third of the term. Since this woman was not visibly pregnant after a third, this weakens the majority (that give birth after nine).
Objection: If all are noticeably pregnant after a third (and she was not), this baby is surely from the Yavam!
Correction: Most women who give birth after nine are noticeably pregnant after a third. Since this woman was not, this weakens the majority.
DOUBTFUL MAMZERIM [line 28]
(Beraisa): The first child (the one in doubt) is fit to be Kohen Gadol. The second (a future child from the Yavam) is a Safek Mamzer;
R. Elazar ben Yakov says, he is not a Safek Mamzer.
Question: What do they mean? (Why is the second not a Safek?)
Answer #1 (Abaye): Chachamim say that the first child is fit to be Kohen Gadol, and the second is a Safek Mamzer, and he may not marry a Mamzeres;
R. Elazar ben Yakov says, he is not a Safek Mamzer, rather a Vadai Mamzer, so he may marry a Mamzeres.
Answer #2 (Rava): Chachamim say that the first child is fit to be Kohen Gadol, the second is a Vadai Mamzer from Safek, and he may marry a Mamzeres;
R. Elazar ben Yakov says, a Safek does not make a Vadai Mamzer. The child is forbidden to marry a Mamzeres.
Abaye and Rava disagree about R. Elazar's teaching.
(Mishnah - R. Elazar): Vadai Mamzerim may marry Vadai Mamzerim. Safek Mamzerim may not marry Safek or Vadai Mamzerim;
The Sefekos are a Shetuki (a child born to a single woman), an Asufi (a baby found abandoned in the street), and Kusim.
(Rav Yehudah citing Rav): The Halachah follows R. Elazar.
Question (Shmuel): Hillel taught that 10 classes of lineage came (with Ezra) from Bavel - Kohanim, Leviyim, Yisraelim, Chalalim, converts, freed slaves, Mamzerim, Nesinim, Shetukim, and Asufim, and all the classes (within certain groupings) may intermarry. How can you say the Halachah follows R. Elazar (who forbids Sefekos to each other)?!
Abaye holds like Shmuel, that the Halachah follows Hillel. He establishes R. Elazar ben Yakov to be like the Halachah, for the Halachah always follows him;
Rava holds like Rav, that the Halachah follows R. Elazar. He likewise establishes R. Elazar to be like the Halachah.
(Abaye): The following proves that R. Elazar ben Yakov treats a Safek Mamzer like a Vadai Mamzer:
(Beraisa - R. Elazar ben Yakov): "U'Mal'ah ha'Aretz Zimah" - this is when a man has Bi'ah with many women, and doesn't know which, or a woman has Bi'ah with many men, and doesn't know from which she became pregnant. A man might marry his daughter, or siblings might marry, and the world is full of Mamzerim! (Really, they are Safek Mamzerim, but he calls them Mamzerim!)
Rejection (Rava): They are considered Safek Mamzerim - "ZiMaH" alludes to Zo Mah Hi (what is this)?
(Continuation of Beraisa - R. Elazar ben Yakov): Further, a man should not marry women in different cities, lest his children marry each other.
Question: When Rav traveled to another city he would request to marry a woman for the days [he will stay there]! Rav Nachman did the same!
Answer: Great Chachamim are not subject to this concern, since they are famous (the mother would tell her child who his father is).
Question: Rava taught that a woman must wait seven clean days after she is asked to have Nisu'in (lest her excitement caused her to become Nidah. How could Rav and Rav Nachman marry women the same day?)
Answer #1: They would send messengers a week before.
Answer #2: They would only be secluded with the women (but would not have Bi'ah. The women knew this, so they did not need seven clean days.)
One who has bread in his basket is unlike someone that does not. (Since they could have Bi'ah if they wanted, they were not beset by thoughts about this.)
(Beraisa - R. Elazar ben Yakov): A man should not marry a woman with intent to divorce her - "Do not plot evil on your companion, when he sits confident with you."
WHEN DOES A SAFEK INHERIT? [line 25]
A Safek (nine-month baby from the deceased or a seven-month baby from the Yavam) and the Yavam (Shimon) came to inherit Reuven (the deceased).
The Safek: I am Reuven's son, so I inherit him!
Shimon: No, you are my son. I inherit Reuven (alone, for I did Yibum)!
Verdict: The property is in Safek; they divide it.
The Safek and Shimon's children came to inherit Reuven's property.
The Safek: I am Reuven's son, so I inherit him alone!
Shimon's children: No, you are our brother. You have only a portion with us!
(Rabanan): This is like a Mishnah!
(Mishnah): (A child who is unsure which of two men is his father) does not inherit them, but they inherit him.
There, the Vadai children (of the deceased) tell the Safek 'prove that you are his son, then you may receive'. Here, the Safek tells Shimon's children 'prove (that I am not Reuven's son,) then you may receive.'
Rejection (Rav Mesharshiya): The cases are different! There, the Vadai children surely inherit, and the Safek is unsure. A Safek cannot take from a Vadai. Here, all are Safek (even though the Safek surely inherits something, he is unsure why he inherits).
Rather, the following case is like that Mishnah. The Safek and Shimon's children came to inherit Shimon's own property. Shimon's children say 'prove that you are our brother, then you may receive.'
The Safek and Shimon's children came to inherit Shimon, after Shimon had divided Reuven's property with the Safek.
Shimon's children: Bring a proof that you are our brother and receive a share.
The Safek: In any case I receive!
If I am your brother, I get a share with you.
If I am Reuven's son, give me the half of his property your father took (I should have inherited Reuven's alone)!
Opinion #1 (R. Aba): The previous ruling (that Shimon gets half of Reuven's property) stands. (The Safek cannot say 'if you say that I am Reuven's son, return that property.').
Opinion #2 (R. Yirmeyah): The previous ruling is reopened (the Safek's claim is honored).
Suggestion: R. Aba and R. Yirmeyah argue as Admon and Chachamim do.
(Mishnah - Admon): If Levi went overseas, and the path to his field was lost, he receives a short path to his field;
Chachamim say, he must pay whatever his neighbor charges for a path, or else he must fly (i.e. he may not walk) to his field.
Question: We understand Admon (surely, Levi used to have a path, and the neighbor took it). Why do Chachamim argue?
Answer (Rav Yehudah): The case is, he was surrounded by four neighbors on the four sides of his field.
Question: If so, what is Admon's reason? (He has no Vadai claim against any neighbor!)
Answer (Rava): If every neighbor owned his land (when Levi left), or if all bought from one person who used to own all the property surrounding the field, all agree that they can push off Levi;
They argue when Levi was surrounded by four neighbors, and one person bought all their land.
Admon says, in any case the path to his field is by the buyer!
Chachamim say, the buyer says "if you will be quiet, very good (Rashi - I will sell you a path for a reasonable sum. If you protest, I will return the deeds to the original owners (undo the sales), and you will be unable to force them to give you a path. Tosfos - he need not give him anything.)
Suggestion: R. Aba holds like Chachamim, and R. Yirmeyah holds like Admon.
Rejection #1: R. Aba's law is even like Admon.
Admon said that Levi gets a path because he has a definite claim (your property includes my path). The Safek child does not have a definite claim.