1)

(a)A deaf-mute who is ...

1. ... a Yisrael invalidates a bas Kohen from eating Terumah - because the Rabanan instituted Kidushin on his behalf, so he acquires her mid'Rabanan.

2. ... a Kohen does not feed a bas Yisrael Terumah - because he does not acquire her min ha'Torah, in which case she is not "Kinyan Kaspo".

2)

(a)A Yavam who is ...

1. ... a Katan (under the age of nine) invalidates his Yevamah bas Kohen from eating the Terumah of her father's house - because she is bound to him, and the Pasuk "v'Shavah el Beis Avihah" does not apply to her.

2. ... both a Gadol and a Kohen does not feed his Yevamah Yisraelis Terumah - because she is his brother's Kinyan Kaspo, and not his.

(b)When the Tana includes a nine-year old boy in his list of those who are 'Posel v'Eino Ma'achil', Abaye initially thinks - that he is referring to a nine-year old who acquired his Yevamah with Bi'ah.

(c)Nevertheless, he does not feed her Terumah - because Chazal gave the Bi'ah of a nine-year old the Din of Ma'amar (see Tosfos DH 'Kanya Lei').

(d)According to Abaye - 'Posel' does not refer to this case, only to the other cases in the Mishnah.

3)

(a)The problem Rava has with Abaye's explanation is why the Tana then inserts 'Safek ben Tisha Shanim' - if a Vaday ben Tisha does not feed his Yevamah, how much more so a Safek!

(b)So he establishes the case of a nine-year old by Pesulei Kahal or Kehunah, such as Amoni, Mo'avi, Chalal and Mamzer - who invalidate a Kohenes, Leviyah or Yisraelis through Bi'ah, and 'ben Tisha Shanim' in our Mishnah pertains to Poslin. 'Ein Ma'achilin' refers to the other cases, but not to a ben Tisha Shanim.

(c)The Kashya that we just asked from Safek is no longer difficult - because, since the Tana is referring to 'Poslin', he needs to add Safek ben Tisha, to inform us that the Bi'ah of a Safek ben Tisha invalidates too.

(d)We reconcile this with the Seifa (on the following Daf) 'Im Einan Re'uyin la'Vo b'Yisrael, Poslin' (inferring that the Reisha [our Mishnah] is not speaking about Pesulim) - by establishing that by Pesulei Kehunah (such as Gerushah and Zonah); whereas the Reisha speaks about Pesulei Kahal.

4)

(a)The Tana Kama of the Beraisa on which Rava bases his interpretation of our Mishnah, invalidates a Kohenes, a Leviyah and a Yisraelis through the Bi'ah of any of the Pesulei Kahal or Kehunah invalidates a Kohenes, a Leviyah and a Yisraelis through the Bi'ah of any of the P'sulei Kahal or Kehunah. He ascribes to ...

1. ... a Mitzri and an Edomi the status of Chayavei Aseh, who are forbidden as far as two generations, but no more.

2. ... Kutim, the status of Nochrim (seeing as they are Gerei Arayos [Gerim who only converted out of fear of a plague of lions, but not with any sincerity]). Consequently, their conversion was not accepted.

(b)The ramifications of a Leviyah or a Yisraelis becoming Pasul through a Bi'ah Pesulah - are that they are forbidden to marry a Kohen.

(c)In explaining the Tana Kama, Rav Yehudah Amar Rav learns from the Pasuk in Emor ...

1. ... "u'Bas Kohen Ki Siheyeh l'Ish Zar Hi bi'Serumas ha'Kodshim Lo Sochel" - that the Bi'ah of someone who is Pasul to a bas Kohen invalidates her from eating Terumah.

2. ... "v'Shavah el Beis Avihah ... mi'Lechem Avihah Tochel" - that there is an Aseh forbidding a bas Kohen who marries a Zar to eat Terumah.

3. ... "v'Chol Zar Lo Yochal Bo" (the conclusion of the previous Pasuk) - that there is a Lav, too.

(d)The basic Din forbidding a Zar to eat Terumah - we learn from the Pasuk "v'Chol Zar Lo Yochal Kodesh".

5)

(a)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Chanina learns from the 'Vav' "v'Chol Zar Lo Yochal Kodesh ... " - that a Kohen is forbidden to eat Terumah when he is an Onen.

(b)And Rav Chisda Amar Ravina bar Rav Shilo learns from "u'Bas Kohen Ki Siheyeh l'Ish Zar Hi bi'*Serumas* ha'Kodashim Lo Sochel" - that although a bas Kohen who becomes widowed, may return to her father's house to eat Terumah, she is no longer allowed to eat 'Moram min ha'Kodshim' (the chest and the right calf which the owner must give every Kohen from his Korban Shelamim, and which was permitted to her before she got married).

6)

(a)Rebbi Aba Amar Rav learns from the 'Vav' in the Pasuk "U'Bas Kohen Ki Siheyeh l'Ish Zar ... " - that a Leviyah and a Yisraelis become invalidated too, through the Bi'ah of one of the Pesulim.

(b)This Derashah is not exclusive to Rebbi Akiva, who Darshens 'Vavin' - because it is not just from the 'Vav' that we Darshen it, but from the fact that the two words ("U'Bas Kohen") is superfluous (seeing as the Torah already wrote "v'Kohen Ki Yikneh ... ", it could have just continued "v'Chi Siheyeh l'Ish Zar ... ")

(c)we initially establish this Derashah with regard to Pesul Kehunah', but not to prohibit them from eating Terumah - seeing as a Leviyah and a Yisraelis are not allowed to eat Terumah anyway.

(d)But we refute this suggestion - by establishing the case where she married a Kohen, who died leaving her with a son (in whose honor she would otherwise be permitted to eat Terumah).

7)

(a)We suggest that a bas Levi or a bas Yisrael who had relations with a P'sul Kahal and who had a son from him, should be Asur to eat Terumah from a 'Kal va'Chomer' - from a bas Kohen, who previously ate in her own right, yet she becomes invalidated through a Bi'ah with someone who is Pasul, then certainly a bas Yisrael, who did not previously eat, should certainly become invalidated through a Bi'ah with someone who is Pasul.

(b)We dismiss this contention however, on the grounds that - if not for an independent Pasuk by a bas Yisrael, we would say the opposite: that it is precisely due to the intrinsic Kedushah of a Kohenes that becomes desecrated through a Bi'as Pesul, but not a bas Yisrael, who only eats on account of her son.

8)

(a)So we switch the Derashos, to learn the prohibition of a bas Yisrael eating Terumah from the Pasuk "u'Bas Kohen", and that of marrying a Kohen from a 'Kal va'Chomer' from a Gerushah - who is permitted to eat Terumah, yet she is forbidden to marry a Kohen, then a Bi'as Pesul, which invalidates a bas Yisrael from eating Terumah, should certainly invalidate her from marrying a Kohen.

(b)The problem with the application of this 'Kal va'Chomer is - the principle 'Ein Mazhirin min ha'Din' (that one cannot learn a punishment (e.g. Malkus) from a 'Kal-va'Chomer').

(c)We solve the problem - by pointing out that this is not really a 'Kal va'Chomer' at all - but a 'Giluy Milsa' (an indication), because Terumah is the essence of the Kehunah, so it stands to reason that any woman who is forbidden to eat Terumah, is forbidden to marry a Kohen.

9)

(a)When the Tana of the Beraisa, based on the Pasuk "u'Bas Kohen, Ki Siheyeh l'Ish Zar", says Niv'alah l'Pasul Lah Paslah', he must be referring to Chayavei Lavin, and not to Chayavei Kares - because the Lashon 'Ki Siheyeh' implies that the Kidushin is effective.

(b)Based on a statement by Rebbi Yochanan in the name of Rebbi Yishmael, we learn from the Pasuk "u'Bas Kohen Ki Siheyeh Almanah u'Gerushah v'Shavah el Beis Avihah" - that the Bi'ah of a Nochri and of an Eved Kena'ani, with whom Kidushin are not effective, also prevent a bas Kohen from returning to the Terumah of her father's house, since his Bi'ah do not make her an Almanah or a Gerushah.

(c)Despite the fact that the Pasuk "u'Bas Kohen, Ki Siheyeh l'Ish Zar" is confined to someone with whom Kidushin is effective, we know that Chayavei Kares invalidate her, too -from the same source as Nochri and Eved, which we just explained (see also Tosfos DH 'Oved Kochavim').

10)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk in ...

1. ... Vayera "Shevu Lachem Poh im ha'Chamor" - that an Eved is not subject to Kidushin, and from the Pasuk in ...

2. ... Kedoshim "Eishes Re'eihu" - that a Nochri is not either (only Be'ilah [i.e. when a Nochri takes a woman as his wife, the bond is created when he becomes intimate with her, but not through Kidushei Kesef or Shtar]).

(b)The She'iltos learns this from the Pasuk "v'Hi Be'ulas Ba'al".

(c)He extrapolates from there that even the Kidushei Bi'ah of a Nochri is not effective on a Jewish woman - because the three ways of acquiring a woman are compared to each other. Consequently, whenever the one does not apply (Kidushei Kesef or Shtar in this case), the other does not apply either.