Study Yevamot folio 44B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
שהולד פגום לכהונה. מאן הכל מודים — שמעון התימני, דאף על גב דאמר שמעון התימני: אין ממזר מחייבי לאוין, נהי דממזר לא הוי, פגום מיהא הוי,
that the offspring, even if not a mamzer, has flawed lineage and, if the offspring is a girl, is unfit to marry into the priesthood. The Talmud clarifies: Who is included by saying: All agree? It is Shimon HaTimni, as although Shimon HaTimni said that the offspring of sex for which one is liable for violating a prohibition is not a mamzer, nevertheless, granted that Shimon HaTimni holds that he is not a mamzer; he would agree, however, that he is of flawed lineage.
מקל וחומר מאלמנה. ומה אלמנה לכהן גדול, שאין איסורה שוה בכל — בנה פגום, זו, שאיסורה שוה בכל — אינו דין שבנה פגום?
This is derived through an a fortiori inference from the halakha pertaining to a widow, as follows: Just as in the case of a widow who is married to a High Priest, where the prohibition that pertains to her is not equally applicable to all, i.e., only a High Priest is prohibited from marrying a widow, and nevertheless her child from that union will have flawed lineage, then so too with regard to this divorcée, who married another man and is therefore prohibited from marrying her original husband, where the prohibition that pertains to her is equally applicable to all Jews, as the prohibition to remarry one’s divorcée after she was married to another man applies to all Jews, isn’t it logical that her child from that union will have flawed lineage?
איכא למיפרך: מה לאלמנה שכן היא עצמה מתחללת.
The Talmud raises a number of objections: The logic of this a fortiori inference can be refuted: What is true with regard to a widow, where her union with a High Priest is what makes her herself disqualified from subsequently marrying any priest and, if she is the daughter of a priest, from eating teruma, is not true with regard to a remarried divorcée, where her remarriage to another man is permitted and is not the cause of any further disqualification. Therefore, one case cannot be deduced from the other.