Don’t dough there. It’s complicated. TB Ketubot 14

In the previous mishnayot Rabbi Yehoshua held the more stringent opinion that women’s testimony about her status was not acceptable or in his words “It is not based on the statement emerging from her mouth that we conduct our lives;” (Sefaria.org translation while Rabban Gamliel deemed her testimony reliable. Today’s daf TB Ketubot 14 cites a Mishna from Eduyot where Rabbi Yehoshua was lenient and Rabban Gamliel was strict. “Rabbi Yehoshua and Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira testified concerning the widow (almanat ’issa-אַלְמְנַת עִיסָּה) whose late husband was a member of a priestly family of questionable lineage [issa], that she is fit to marry into the priesthood. Since the matter is uncertain, the woman retains her presumptive status of fitness.” (Sefaria.org translation)

The literal translation of ’issa (עִיסָּה) is dough. Dough is a mixture of different ingredients like flour, water, and eggs. When dough is mixed, the ingredients become undistinguishable. In our case the widow is part of a mixed family, a family suspected of containing an alien admixture. The Gemara never gives a clear definition of an almanat ’issa. The only thing the commentators agree upon is this alien admixture, a ḥalal-חָלָל, deals with the priesthood. 

Rashi explains that the case here deals with the widow whose husband was a son of a priest that married a woman who was a doubtful widow or a doubtful divorcee. For instance the priest threw a bill of divorce to his wife and people couldn’t determine whether it landed closer to the husband or closer to the wife. Then the husband died. That is why we don’t know whether she is a widow or divorcee. Remember a priest may not marry a divorcee. If they do, she and her offsprings become ḥalallim. Rebbeinu Hannaniel also explains our text like Rashi. He also provides a second interpretation. This widow was the child of a doubtful priest. In the “hospital nursery” the children, one a son of a priest and other the son of an Israelite (just a regular Jew) were mixed and nobody knew which child belong to which couple.

The Gaonim, Tosefot, and Rambam explain that were talking about a family or a whole city that is known for having doubtful cases of ḥalallim, but nobody knows who they are. Here we have a double doubt. The essential fear springs forth from a doubt. Secondly, we also don’t know whether the person she married was a ḥalal at all. This best fits the definition of a almanat ’issa. Everybody is all mixed up and indistinguishable.