Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Even ha-Ezer/3
Laws of a son, when it is doubtful that he is a Cohen[edit]
(contains 9 paragraphs)
Paragraph 1- Someone who comes in our time and says, "I am a kohen," we don't believe him and we don't raise him to Priesthood by his own word and he does not read (the) first (Aliyah) from the Torah and he does not raise his hands (for the Priestly blessing of the congregation). [Rama: There are those who say that he is believed in order to read first from the Torah and to raise his hands (for the blessing) in our time since we don't have biblical tithing , about which we should be concerned that perhaps they would raise him (inappropriately) to (one who accepts holy) tithings. Thus, it is established as our universal custom not to accept tithings in our time and thus, we have no concern for this practice (of allowing him to read first from the Torah and raising his hands)] We do not feed him from the kodshim of Israel unless there is at least one witness (that his is in fact a Priest). Nonetheless, he would make himself forbidden to marry a divorcee a zonah or a Hallal and he would not be allowed to defile himself by the dead, and if he did marry or defile himself, he would suffer lashes and the woman whom he married (improperly) [who is for him pasula for kohanim] a safek H'llala. If he was questioned in a way as to not reveal the purpose of the discussion (L'fi Tumo and reveals that he knows for sure that he is a kohen) he would be believed. How is it possible to question him in a way that does not reveal the intent of the question? Ask him to recall the time when he was a child that "I would ride on my father's shoulders and he would remove me from school, take off my clothes and immerse me in the mikveh so I would eat terumah after sunset and my friends wand his friends would distance from him and call him “Yochanan who eats challah," Here, our holy sages would raise him to priesthood status by himself.
Paragraph 2- If there was one witness that testified (that he is a kohen), he is believed in order to feed him (the kohen) tithes in these times, and he can read the first Aliyah from the Torah and to raise his hands (for the congregation). We would even elevate one nowadays to the priesthood from a document. How so? If the document stated, “So-and-so Kohen borrowed a maneh from so-and-so,” and witnesses are signed on the document, the individual is assumed to be a kohen like any other contemporary kohen. Similarly, we would elevate him to perform birchas kohanim and we would have him read first from the Torah, so that he would be like a contemporary kohen. [Rama: There are those who say that even if he signed the document himself "I am Ploni the Cohen" this counts as a witness in these times.]
Paragraph 3- If one of the "Anusim" (Jews who were forced to convert) bears witness that one of them is Muchzak (known by Hazaka) in priesthood, he may be raised to read (First Aliyah) from the Torah and we are not concerned that he is a Kuti (gentile).
Paragraph 4- Even if two came and they each give witness to the other as being a priest, they are believed and we are not concerned that they are acting together to reward each other.
Paragraph 5- We believe an adult who says "I remember when I was a child that I saw this Ploni (guy) immerse (in a mikveh) and eat tithings." We raise him to read first from the Torah by his words and he will be a kohen (priest) like other kohanim of our time.
Paragraph 6- Someone who comes and says "I am a kohen" and a single witness testifies that he knows his father that he is a kohen, we do not raise him to priesthood by his word lest he is really a Hallal (ineligible for priesthood by his mother) until there is testimony (from at least one witness) that he (himself) is a kohen. But, if his father is known by hazakah to be a priest or if two witnesses testify that his father is a priest, that would suffice to make his father known as a priest. [Rama: In all instances, we follow the Hazakah, we even burn and stone based on (the principle of) Hazakah].
Paragraph 7- Someone who's father is established as a kohen but a rumor emerged that he is the son of a divorcee or the son of a Halutzah (so he would be disqualified for priesthood, even if his father was a priest), we are concerned for him and we take him down (to disallow him as a kohen). If one witness came afterwards and testified that he is Kosher, we raise him up again to Priesthood by this testimony. If 2 more witnesses then came to testify together that he is a Hallal (disqualified), we take him down again. Then, if one more witness came to testify that he is Kosher, we raise him up once again since this last witness combines with the first witness and we have two witnesses that testify that he is Kosher versus two who testify that he is disqualified. These two witnesses (for Kashrut) push off two (who would disqualify him) and the voice against him since these two are like 100 and he remains a kohen based on these two witnesses and the establishment of his father.
Paragraph 8- A woman who did not wait 3 full months after she was (last) with her husband and she gave birth and she does not know if the baby is a 9 month baby from the first husband or a 7 month baby from the second husband and the first one was a Kohen and the second was from a Yisrael, the child would be an uncertain Kohen. The same would be true for a baby kohen who was confused with a yisrael baby and they grew up, each of these are an uncertain kohen and we impose on them the sthe stringencies of a yisrael as well as the stringencies of a kohen; They can only marry a woman who is fit to marry a priest and they may not be Metamei from the dead and they cannnot eat Trumot (priestly tithes) and if he married a divorcee, he must divorce her but he does not get whiplashes for marrying her.
Paragraph 9- Two kohanim whose babies got mixed up or the wife of a kohen who did not wait after her husband 3 months before marrying another ohen and we don't know if the baby is a 9 month baby from the first husband or a 7 month baby from the second husband, in any case, he is a Cohen and we impose on him the strictures of both fathers; he would be required to be an onen for all the possible relatives (from both fathers' relatives when they die) and they would be in onenus for him and he would not be allowed to be metamei from either of the family members and they would not be allowed to be metamei for him. In which cases do these apply? where the marriage was proper. If the child was born out of wedlock, however, we would silence him from the status of priesthood given that we do not know with certainty who the father is. What is this case? For example, one of them left the group and had relations, even though the father is certainly a kohen. If the child defiles himself with a dead body or marries a divorcee, he would receive lashes. He cannot work in the temple nor eat terumah. [Rama: If a woman had relations with one kohen and married another kohen within three months, the child is disqualified from the priesthood. If a kohen has relations with a single girl and admits the child is his son, the son would be a kohen for all matters. We would not suspect the woman was free with others as well.