(Mishnah): If they grew up and freed each other, [the following laws apply to each]:

He marries a woman proper for Kehunah;

He may not become Tamei Mes. If he did, he does not get 40 lashes;

He may not eat Terumah. If he ate, he does not pay the principal, nor an added fifth;

He does not receive a share of Terumah at the granaries. He sells Terumah that he separates from his own produce, and keeps the money;

He does not get a share of Kodshim of the Mikdash. We do not give to him Kodshim [to offer. If he comes to offer a Korban], we do not take his [Korban] from him;

He is exempt from giving [Matanos when he slaughters a Chulin animal, i.e.] the foreleg, jaw and stomach;

His Bechor (firstborn Tahor animal) grazes until it gets a blemish (and then he eats it like Chulin).

We put on him the stringencies of a Yisrael and stringencies of a Kohen.

(Gemara) Question: [Our Mishnah connotes that] it is b'Di'eved (for them to free each other), but l'Chatchilah one may not! (There was an enactment to free a half-slave, to enable him to marry. The same should apply here!)

Answer: Our Mishnah means that it is permitted to free l'Chatchilah.

Even R. Yosi ha'Gelili, who says that it is forbidden to free [an Eved Kena'ani without need, for the Torah says "they will work for you forever"], he agrees here, in order to fix the child (enable them to marry).

Note: Seemingly, even without this there is no reason not to free each other, for neither can force the other to work for him! (PF)

What is 'proper [for Kehunah]'? They are not Pasul.

Question: What is the source that a Kohen offers Korbanos in (i.e. at the time of) any Mishmar that he wants? (The Kohanim were divided into 24 divisions. They take turns serving in the Mikdash according to a fixed rotation.)

Answer: "U'Va b'Chol Avas Nafsho... v'Sheres."

If he was old or sick [and cannot offer his Korban], he gives it to any Mishmar that he wants, and the skin and meat is his.

If he was Tamei and a Ba'al Mum, he gives it to the Mishmar [serving at the time], and the skin and meat is theirs.

Question: These mixed-up children (who cannot offer due to Safek) - do you consider them like old or sick, or like Tamei or Ba'al Mum?

Answer: Presumably, we should make them like a Tamei or Ba'al Mum (for they cannot serve or eat). However, our Mishnah considers them like old or sick, for we learned that we do not take [his Korban] from him.

(Mishnah): If a woman remarried without waiting three months after [leaving] her husband and gave birth (almost nine months after leaving him), we do not know if the baby was born after nine months from the first husband; or after seven months from the second husband;

If she had (definite) sons from both husbands, (if the Safek dies) they do Chalitzah, not Yibum. If a definite son dies, the Safek does Chalitzah, but not Yibum.

If he had brothers from both possible fathers, from a different mother, he may do Chalitzah or Yibum to their widows. (He may do Yibum only if there is no other brother. If he died,) a brother from one possible father does Chalitzah, and a brother from the other possible father may do Yibum.

If one [possible father] was a Yisrael and one was a Kohen, [the son has the following restrictions]:

He marries a woman fit for a Kohen;

He may not become Tamei Mes. If he did, he does not get 40 lashes;

He may not eat Terumah. If he ate, he does not pay the principal, nor an added fifth;

He does not receive a share of Terumah at the granaries. He sells Terumah that he separates from his own produce, and keeps the money;

He does not get a share of Kodshim of the Mikdash. We do not give to him Kodshim [to offer. If he comes to offer a Korban], we do not take his [Korban] from him;

He is exempt from giving the foreleg, jaw and stomach;

His firstborn animal grazes until it gets a blemish;

We put on him the stringencies of a Kohen and of a Yisrael.

If both possible fathers are Kohanim, [the child] is an Onen for them (when they die), and they are Onenim for him (when he dies).

He does not become Tamei to engage in burying them, and they do not become Tamei to engage in burying him. He does not inherit them, but they inherit him. He is exempt if he hits or curses either of them;

He ascends with the Mishmar of this [possible father] and of this, but he does not receive a portion of the Korbanos;

If they are from the same Mishmar, he receives only one portion.

(Gemara) Question: What is the case (how did she remarry)?

If it is after death [of her first husband] - this cannot be, for we taught 'he is an Onen when either of them dies, and they are Onenim when he dies'!

Answer: Rather, [her first husband] divorced her.

Question: Granted, [he does not become Tamei] for the second husband, for I can say that he is the first's son. However, why does [he does not become Tamei] for the first? No matter what you will say, [he should be permitted]!

If he is [the first's] son, he should become Tamei for him (a Kohen is commanded to become Tamei for his close relatives);

If he is not [the first's] son, he is a Chalal (he is the latter's son from a divorcee)! What is wrong if he becomes Tamei?

Answer: The case is, [the first did not marry his mother, rather,] he raped her. (She was never divorced, so the latter was permitted to marry her. Our Mishnah said 'without waiting three months after Ba'alah.' This is not her husband, rather, Bo'alah, i.e. the one who had Bi'ah with her.)

Question: (Our Mishnah connotes that she should have waited.) Didn't R. Ba say in the name of Aba bar Yirmeyah that a raped woman need not wait three months?!

Answer: We wanted to say that [our Mishnah] is like Rabanan, and [R. Ba] holds like R. Yosi.

(R. Chiyah): We observe Aninus and become Tamei for a Safek [Nefel, i.e. an eight month baby].

Support (R. Yosi - Mishnah): [The child] is an Onen for them (when they die), and they are Onenim for him [amidst Safek].

A case [of a Safek Nefel] occurred with R. Ashi'an bar Yakum. He asked R. Yosah. He told him, you need not [be an Onen or be Metamei for him].

Question (R. Ashi'an, to R. Yosah): Our Mishnah and R. Chiyah taught that we observe Aninus and become Tamei for a Safek!

Answer: Simanim were recognized. (Our Mishnah and R. Chiyah discusses when there are Simanim of viability, i.e. the hair and fingernails were finished. In R. Ashi'an's case, they were not finished, which is a Siman of a Nefel.)

Question: Didn't Talmidim say in the name of R. Yochanan that [even if a baby has] Simanim that it is an eight month baby, we do not do an action [to consider it a Nefel]?

Answer: [R. Yochanan discusses] when we [also] have a Siman [that it is a nine month baby, e.g. her husband] had Bi'ah with her and went away.

A Ben Shemoneh is [Muktzah] like a rock. One may not move him on Shabbos, but his mother bends down and nurses him (i.e. lets him nurse by himself. She may not pick him up.)

Question (R. Yosi): These Safek babies (Safek Nefalim) - may one be Mechalel Shabbos for them (circumcise them on Shabbos)?

Answer (R. Yosi bei R. Bun): One may, no matter what you will say. If he is a Ben Tesha, he should be circumcised [on day eight, even if it is Shabbos]. If he is a Ben Shemoneh, this is like cutting [dead] meat without a need.

(Rabanan of Kisarin): R. Yakov bar Dasai asked, who said that one may cut meat [that one may not eat] without a need? (It is Muktzah!)

(Beraisa - R. Shimon ben Gamliel): Among people, any [baby] that survived 30 days is not a Nefel - "u'Fduyav mi'Ben Chodesh Tifdeh." (Presumably, we redeem after 30 days, for then it is Vadai viable.)

An animal [that survived] eight days is not a Nefel - "umi'Yom ha'Shemini v'Hal'ah Yeratzeh l'Korban Isheh la'Shem."

There (in Bavel) they say in the name of Shmuel, the Halachah follows R. Shimon ben Gamliel.

(R. Ba): When do they argue? It is when he was not born after his [proper number of] months (nine or seven), but if he was born after his months, R. Shimon ben Gamliel agrees [that a Stam baby is assumed to be viable. It is not a Safek.]

(Beraisa): If [it is a Safek which man is Ploni's father, and] he hit this one and then hit this one (the other possible father), or he cursed this one and then cursed this one, he is exempt.

Question (R. Chananya): Is this [Beraisa] not unlike R. Yochanan?!

They argued about the two days of Yom Tov of Chutz la'Aretz (it is a Safek which is Yom Tov mid'Oraisa). R. Yochanan said, one can receive Safek warning [before doing forbidden Melachah on both days, and he is lashed]. Reish Lakish said, one cannot receive Safek warning.

Answer (R. Chanina citing Rebbi): It does not argue [with R. Yochanan]. There (Yom Tov of Chutz la'Aretz), it is possible to clarify [the Safek afterwards]. However, here (a Safek which is his father) it will never be resolved.

Note: Surely, Rebbi did not discuss the argument of R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish. Rather, he said that one cannot derive that the Tana holds that Safek warning is invalid, therefore our Gemara says that he said that it does not argue with R. Yochanan.