Study Yevamot folio 101A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
§ It is stated in the Mishnah that if both uncertain fathers were priests, the son is exempt from punishment for striking and for cursing them. A baraita states: If he struck this uncertain father, and then struck that one, or if he cursed this one and then cursed that one, or if he cursed both
The Talmud asks: But isn’t it taught in a baraita that R' Yehuda says: He is exempt even if he struck or cursed them simultaneously? The Talmud answers: These are the opinions of two tanna’im, and they each expressed their opinion in accordance with that of R' Yehuda.
The Talmud asks: What is the reasoning of the one who exempts the son from punishment? R' Ḥanina said: Blessing is stated below (Leviticus 20:9), with regard to cursing parents, and blessing is stated above (Exodus 22:27), with regard to cursing God. The rabbis used the word blessing as a euphemism
§ It is stated in the Mishnah: And he ascends to the Temple service with the priestly watch of both uncertain fathers. However, he does not receive a share of the offerings of either watch. The Talmud asks: Since he does not receive a share, why does he ascend? The Talmud is puzzled by this questio
Why is he under obligation to serve in the Temple? Rav Aḥa bar Ḥanina said that Abaye said that R' Yoḥanan said: He is obligated due to the potential family flaw, i.e., harm to the family name. If he does not serve with these watches, people will infer that both families are unfit for the priestho