Asking because it is not answered here:
If, as suggested in the linked question, a Cohen may b'dieved (but not l'chatchila) marry a woman whose father is a non-Jew, will the sons from such a marriage be full Cohanim?
Answer
See Shut Maharshal at the end of siman 17
לפי מה שהוכחתי בראיות ברורים בפרק החולץ דבת גוי ועבד מן הישראלית אינה פגומה אלא לכתחילה אבל נשאת לא תצא. ...,
I already demonstrated with clear proofs in Perek Hacholets[1] (see Yam Shel Shlomo no 38[2]) that a daugther from a non Jewish or a Slave and a Jewish women is dammaged only lechatechila but if she is already spoused [to a Cohen], she has not to divorce.
This Shut is cited in Chelkat mechokek (sk 26) and in Bet Shmuel (sk 39), Baer Heitev (sk 47) Even Haezer Siman 7, Sayf 17. And also the sons may not be Chalalim.
[1] Gemara Yebamot 45a:
רבי יהושע בן לוי אומר הולד מקולקל למאן אילימא לקהל הא אמר רבי יהושע הולד כשר אלא לכהונה דכולהו אמוראי דמכשרי מודו שהולד פגום לכהונה
... for all Amoraim who declare the child fit admit that he is ineligible for the priesthood.
[2]
אבל אם נשאת אותה הבת לכהן אין הבן מהן חלל.
IF THIS DAUGHTER MARRIED TO COHEN THEIR SON IS NOT CHALAL.
EXPLANATIONS: It may be helpful to explain a little more the topic through Gemara. The first step is to read this Mishna (in Gemara Yebamot daf 49b):
Mishnah:
Who is deemed to be a bastard? [the offspring of a union with] any consanguineous relative with whom cohabitation is forbidden; this is the ruling of Rabbi Akiba. Simeon the from Timnata said: [the offspring of any union] the penalty for which is kareth at the hands of heaven; and the halachah is in agreement with his view, ... etc.
Gemara 44b:
Rabbah Bar Bar Hana said in the name of Rabbi Johanan: All agree that where a slave or an idolater had intercourse with a daughter of an Israelite the child is a bastard. Who is meant by 'All agree'? - Simeon from Timnata. For although Simeon from Timnata stated that the offspring of a union forbidden under the penalty of flogging is not a bastard, his statement applies only to the offspring of a union forbidden under the penalty of flogging, since the betrothal in such a case is valid but here, in the case of an idolater and a slave, since betrothal in their case is invalid, they are like those whose union is subject to the penalty of kareth. (Diverse opinion are cited, ... " the 'Elders of the South') - who stated that if an idolater or a slave had intercourse with a daughter of an Israelite, the child born is untainted!" ... "Rabbi Joshua Ben Levi said: The child is tainted." ... for all Amoraim who declare the child fit admit that he is ineligible for the priesthood. "And Rab also ruled that the child is legitimate." ... "Rab Mattena also ruled that the child is legitimate. Rab Judah also ruled that the child is legitimate." ... "Rav Shesheth said: Rav Gaza told me that it was not Rabbi Jose Bar Abin but Rabbi Jose son of Rabbi Zebida, and that he declared the child to be legitimate, both in the case of the married, as well as in that of the unmarried woman. " "Go and conceal your identity or marry one of your own kind." ... " Either go abroad or marry one of your own kind."
There is an apparent contradiction between the fact that they say that the children are "damaged" (pegumim) and the fact that the advice is to marry "go to a place where you are unknown and where you might in consequence pass as a legitimate Israelite and be allowed to marry a Jewess!" In such case, if the daughter marry a Cohen, the offspring would be Chalal. Some Rishonim discern here a Machloket. Ramban and Rashba here are in doubt, and do not decide what opinion will be retained and Bedieved the son will be Safek Chalal (see also Magid Mishne issure Bia, 15, 3). ( Maharshal is expressly opposed to Ramban and says that the stringency of Rabbi Yehoshua Ben Levi is Miderabanan and Lechatechila only. So the son is not Safek Chalal. {We can answer the kushia of Shaar Hamelech, how does Ramban allow safek deOrayta bedieved, perhaps the Ramban also think that the stringent opinion is a stringency miderababan.} ). But Rif, Rambam (and Shulchan Aruh itself) in Issure Bia 15, 3 retains the last opinion. He allows to the daughter to marry a Cohen. The offspring will be considered as Kasher. See Shut Hayim Shaal Chelek 2, 42, 16
No comments:
Post a Comment