Yevamos - Daf 69
- Machlokes whether relations with second generation Mitzri and Edomi converts disqualify
The Baraisa on Daf 68a brought a machlokes, where the Tanna Kamma stated that relations with Mitzri, Edomi, Ammoni, geirim or a Kusi, nasin, challal or mamzer disqualify a woman from terumah and the Kehunah. Rebbe Yose said: כל שזרעו פסול פוסל – Anyone whose offspring is disqualified, disqualifies the woman he had relations with, וכל שאין זרעו פסול אינו פוסל – and anyone whose offspring is not disqualified, does not disqualify the woman. Rebbe Yochanan says that the point of dispute between them is מצרי שני ואדומי שני – the case of a second generation Mitzri or Edomi geirim that had relations with a woman, and they both derive their position from the case of a Kohen Gadol to an almanah. The Tanna Kamma holds that just as ביאתו שבעבירה ופוסל – the Kohen Gadol’s biah with her is prohibited, and it disqualifies her, so too the second generation Mitzri and Edomi ger’s biah which is prohibited, disqualifies her. Whereas Rebbe Yose holds that just as זרעו פסול ופוסל – the Kohen Gadol’s offspring from the almanah are passul, and it disqualifies the almanah as well, so too anyone whose offspring are passul will disqualify, which excludes the offspring of second generation Mitzri and Edomi geirim, for the passuk states: "בנים אשר יולדו להם דור שלשי יבא להם בקהל ה'" – Children who shall be born to them in the third generation, they may enter the congregation of Hashem.
- Why a violated bas-Kohen may eat terumah and there is no concern of pregnancy
The next Mishnah states: ישראל שבא על בת כהן תאכל בתרומה – If a Yisroel had illicit relations with a bas-Kohen, which Rashi clarifies is either through violation or seduction not for the sake of Kiddushin, she may still eat terumah. If she becomes pregnant by him, she may not eat terumah, because a fetus of a non-Kohen disqualifies its mother from eating terumah. The Gemara asks ליחוש שמא עיברה – let us be concerned that she might be pregnant, and prohibit her immediately from eating terumah, for we learned in a Mishnah, that in a case where two kallahs were accidentally exchanged at the chuppah, that they must wait three months before remarrying, שמא מעוברת הן – in case they might be pregnant. Why do we not have the same concern here? After the first explanation is rejected, Rabbah bar Rav Huna answers, בנשואין חששו בזנות לא חששו – The Rabbis were concerned in the case of marriage, but they were not concerned in the case of a z’nus. Rashi explains that when it comes to z’nus, a woman is careful to invert herself to prevent pregnancy (Daf 35a), but a woman who was not aware she had relations with the wrong man will not do so. Therefore, she must wait three months.
- Machlokes regarding the mamzer status of a child born from an arusah
It was stated: הבא על ארוסתו בבית חמיו – If one had relations with his arusah while she is living in his father-in-law’s house, and she gives birth to a child, Rav said: הולד ממזר – the child is a definite mamzer. Rashi explains that even though they both confessed to having relations, we suspect that since she is promiscuous, she had relations with others, and the child is likely from one of those relationships. Shmuel said: הולד שתוקי – The child is a shetuki, a safek mamzer, since we do not know if it is the child of the arus or of someone else. Rava said that it is logical that Rav’s words are meant דדיימא מעלמא – where the woman is suspected of having relations with men from the world at large, but if she is not suspected, then we attribute the child to the arus. Abaye says Rav’s position applies even if she is not suspected of being with other men. The Gemara will analyze the machlokes.
