- ראוה מדברת עם אחד בשוק
The next Mishnah states regarding Beis Din: ראוה מדברת עם אחד בשוק ואמרו לה מה טיבו של איש זה – They saw an unmarried woman speaking with someone, and they asked her, “What is the nature of this man?” And she replied, "איש פלוני וכהן הוא" – He is Ploni, and he is a Kohen. Rabban Gamliel and Rebbe Eliezer say: נאמנת – she is believed, but Rebbe Yehoshua says: לא מפיה אנו חיין – We do not live by her mouth, אלא הרי זו בחזקת בעולה לנתין ולממזר עד שתביא ראיה לדבריה – Rather, she has a chazakah of having relations with a nasin or mamzer until she brings proof to her claim. The Gemara brings a machlokes regarding what is meant by “speaking”. Zeiri says: נסתרה – It means she was in seclusion with him, and Rav Assi says: נבעלה – It means she had relations with him. The Gemara says that while it is understandable according to Zeiri that it means she was secluded, for that is what is meant by “speaking,” but according to Rav Assi, how does speaking connote having relations? The Gemara answers that the Mishnah is using לישנא מעליא – a euphemism, as it is written in Mishlei regarding the ways of an adulterous woman, "אכלה ומחתה פיה ואמרה לא פעלתי און" – She eats and wipes her mouth and says, “I have done no wrong.” Rashi explains that “eats” is a euphemism for having relations.
- Ruins in a city vs. ruins in a field
The Gemara brings several challenges to Rav Assi’s position. It was stated in a Baraisa: ראוה שנכנסה עם אחד לסתר או לחורבה – They saw her enter with a man into a secluded place or a ruin, and they asked her what is nature of this man, and she replied, כהן הוא ובן אחי אבא הוא – He is a Kohen, the son of my father’s brother. Rabban Gamliel and Rebbe Eliezer say that she is believed and permitted to marry a Kohen, and Rebbe Yehoshua says that she is not believed until she brings proof. The Gemara says that it is understandable according to Zeiri, who holds “speaking” means secluded, for that is why the Baraisa brought the two cases of a secluded place and a ruin, one for seclusion and the other case where she had relations. But according to Rav Assi, who holds “speaking” is having relations, what is the need for two cases? The Gemara answers that the Baraisa is speaking of two types of ruins, חורבא דמתא וחורבא דדברא – the ruins in a city and ruins in a field. If the Baraisa only brought the case of ruins in the city, we would say that that is a case where Rabban Gamliel believes her, since rov men in a Jewish city are fit for her. And if it only taught the case of a ruin in the field, we would say that perhaps it is only there where Rebbe Yehoshua disagrees, but in a Jewish city he would agree. The Gemara eventually refutes Rav Assi’s position.
- Machlokes whether the daughter of the woman is passul as well
Rebbe Yochanan said: לדברי המכשיר בה מכשיר בבתה לדברי הפוסל בה פוסל בבתה – To the ones who rule her fit, referring to Rabban Gamliel and Rebbe Eliezer, they rule her daughter is fit as well, and according to the one, Rebbe Yehoshua, who rules her passul, he rules her daughter is passul as well. But Rebbe Elazar says: לדברי המכשיר בה פוסל בבתה – To the one who rules her fit, he rules her daughter is passul. Rabbah said that Rebbe Elazar’s reason is: בשלמא איהי אית לה חזקה דכשרות בתה לית ליה חזקה דכשרות – It is well that the mother is fit, for she has a chazakah of kashrus, but her daughter does not have a chazakah of kashrus. Rashi explains that before the woman was secluded or pregnant, she had a chazakah that she was fit to a Kohen. Now, because of a safek we do not remove the chazakah from her.