Halakhah su Levitico 21:15

That He prohibited a high priest from taking (marrying) a widow. And that is His saying, "A widow, a divorcee, etc." (Leviticus 21:14). Moreover, He repeated the prohibition of the high priest with a divorcee, a desecrated woman and a zonah on account of the content that is written in Kiddushin (Kiddushin 77a). And that is when it happens that the same woman is a divorcee, a widow, a desecrated woman and a zonah, and a high priest has sexual relations with her - he is lashed four [sets of] lashes; and if he is an ordinary priest, three. And there they said, "'A widow, a divorcee, a desecrated woman and a zonah' - when they are in order - he is liable for each and every one." And they explained that that is with one woman; and the matter of their saying, "in order," is that they [happened to] her in the order of the verse - that she first be a widow, and afterwards a divorcee, and after that a desecrated woman and afterwards a zonah. However we required this on account of her being one woman and it being one intercourse, since we wanted to obligate him with four [sets of] lashes. And the principle with us is that one prohibition cannot take effect on top of [another] prohibition, unless it is a [more] comprehensive prohibition, an additive prohibition or a prohibition that came together [with it], as we explained in [various] places in Keritot in our commentary (on the Mishnah). So when they are in this order, each one of them will be an a additive prohibition, as is explained there. But if there are several women - such as if he had sexual relations with a widow, with another woman who is desecrated, with another woman who is a divorcee and with another woman who is a zonah - there is no doubt that he would be lashed for each and every one. But it is possible that you will ask and say, "Since it is a principle with us that we do not give lashes for a general negative commandment, in what way can we give lashes for each and every one?" Know that it is for this matter that the prohibition of a divorcee, a zonah and a desecrated woman were repeated for a high priest - so that it would teach us that his law about them is the same as that of an ordinary priest: Lashes for each and every one. Indeed, the ordinary priest is liable for lashes for each and every one on account of one of them being separated as a [separate] negative commandment, such that they were all differentiated. And that is His saying, "and they shall not take a woman divorced from her husband" (Leviticus 21:7) - that since the divorcee was separated as a negative commandment, he is lashed for the divorcee on its own. And this is the content of their saying in the Gemara, Kiddushin (Kiddushin 77b), "Just like a divorcee, a desecrated woman and a zonah are differentiated for an ordinary priest, so too are are they differentiated for a high priest." And there, it is [also] explained that when the women are different entities (four distinct women), he is lashed for each and every one - whether they are in order or whether they are not in order. Behold it has already been made clear to you that the prohibition about each one of them is a separate commandment, and therefore he is lashed for each one. And there, it is explained that an ordinary priest is not liable for lashes until he marries and has sexual relations. And they said (Kiddushin 78a), "If he has sexual relations, he is lashed; if he does not have sexual relations, he is not lashed. [The verse] is saying what is the reason. What is the reason of, 'he shall not take?' That 'he shall not desecrate' (Leviticus 21:15)." And the regulations of this commandment - meaning to say, these four commandments - have already been fully explained in Yevamot and Kiddushin. (See Parashat Emor; Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 17-19.)

He prohibited a high priest - that he not have sexual relations with a widow, even without marriage. And that is His saying, "And he shall not desecrate his seed among his people" (Leviticus 21:15). And its explanation is that an ordinary priest is forbidden to marry [various categories of women], as He said, "they shall not take" (Leviticus 21:7)" - and that is a prohibition of marriage. However he is not lashed until he has sexual relations, as we explained previously. Nevertheless, if he has sexual relations without marriage - even though it is forbidden, he is prohibited about her and he disqualifies her from the priesthood - he is not lashed on account of this, because the prohibition is not explicit here. But behold [in the case of] the high priest, two negative commandments are explicit: One is, "he shall not take" - which is the prohibition about marriage. And the second is, "And he shall not desecrate his seed" - and that is the prohibition about sexual relations even without marriage. And in the Gemara, Kiddushin (Kiddushin 78a), they said about a high priest with a widow, that if he has sexual relations and he did not marry, he is lashed: "What is the reason? The [Torah] said, 'And he shall not desecrate.' And behold, he desecrated." Indeed, this is limited to a widow because the negative commandment is specific to the high priest, whereas she is fit [to marry an ordinary priest] - but with this intercourse, he disqualifies her to the priesthood. However the law of a divorcee, a zonah and a desecrated woman is like the law of an ordinary priest - meaning to say, that each and every one [of these] is disqualified to the priesthood from the beginning. (See Parashat Emor; Mishneh Torah, Forbidden Intercourse 17-19.)

That a high priest not have intercourse with a widow: That a high priest not have intercourse with a widow - and even without designation (kiddushin), as it is stated (Leviticus 21:15), "And he shall not profane his seed among his people." And they said in Kiddushin 78a, "A high priest with a widow is lashed two [sets], on account of 'he shall not take,' and on account of 'he shall not profane'" - meaning that if he married her and had intercourse with her, he is lashed two [sets of] lashes. But if he had intercourse with her without having designated her, he is lashed on account of "he shall not profane"; and like Rava says there: "Rava concedes in [the case of] a high priest with a widow, that if he had intercourse and did not designate [her], he is lashed. What is the reason? As [the Torah] states, 'And he shall not profane his seed,' and behold, he profaned." If he designated her and did not have intercourse with her, he is not lashed on account of 'he shall not take' - as behold, we say there, "For what reason is he commanded 'he shall not take?' On account of 'he shall not profane.'" It is implied that the whole time that he does not profane, he is not lashed.