A HHHUUUUGEEEE question on the Imrei Noam was asked by his descendent and present Rebbe of Djikov Mo"V HaGaon Rebbe Chaim Meir Horowitz Shlita:
The Gemara in Sanhedrin [87a] says:
דבר זה הלכה זו הלכות אחד עשר דאיתמר עשירי ר' יוחנן אמר עשירי כתשיעי ור"ש בן לקיש אמר עשירי כאחד עשר
“A matter”; this is a halacha transmitted to Moses from Sinai. This is a matter involving karet in the case of the halachos of eleven days, which is the minimal number of days between one menstrual period and another, when if a woman experiences a flow of blood on three consecutive days during those eleven days, she assumes the status of a greater zava, with regard to whom there are unique halachos, e.g., the passage of seven clean days before purification by Torah law. When the woman experiences a discharge of blood for one or two days, she is a lesser zava, and if she observes the third day clean from the discharge of blood she may immerse immediately and she is ritually pure. As it was stated that there is an amoraic dispute with regard to a woman who experiences a discharge of blood on the tenth of those eleven days. Rabbi Yochanan says: The status of the tenth day is like that of the ninth day, and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish says: The status of the tenth day is like that of the eleventh day.
רבי יוחנן אמר עשירי כתשיעי מה תשיעי בעי שימור אף עשירי בעי שימור
The Gemara elaborates: Rabbi Yochanan says: The status of the tenth day is like that of the ninth day: Just as a discharge on the ninth day requires the woman to examine herself the following day and requires the observance of a day clean from discharges, so too does a discharge on the tenth day require observance of a day clean from discharges on the eleventh day before immersing in a ritual bath. According to Rabbi Yochanan, a woman who experiences a discharge on the tenth day assumes the status of a woman who observes a clean day for one or two days after she experiences a discharge.
ר"ל אמר עשירי כאחד עשר מה אחד עשר לא בעי שימור אף עשירי לא בעי שימור
And Reish Lakish says: The status of the tenth day is like that of the eleventh day: Just as a discharge on the eleventh day does not require observance of a day clean from discharge before immersing in a ritual bath, so too does a discharge on the tenth day not require observance of a day clean from discharges on the eleventh day. Even if she were to experience a discharge of blood on the days that follow, the eleventh and the twelfth days, she would not assume the status of a greater zava, as in that case the blood that she saw on the twelfth day would be the blood of menstruation and not the discharge of a zava. According to Reish Lakish, she does not assume that status. Therefore, if the Sanhedrin issued a ruling in accordance with Rabbi Yochanan’s opinion, one who engages in intercourse with that woman before her purification is liable to receive kares. If the rebellious elder issued a ruling in accordance with the opinion of Reish Lakish, then one who intentionally engaged in intercourse with the woman is liable to receive kares. If he did so unwittingly, he is liable to bring a sin-offering.
Says Tosfos:
Question: According to Resh Lakish, even if the Zaken Mamrei rules like Rebbi Yochanan, why should he be Chayav, seeing as he [R' Yochanan] is Machmir, and this is not not a case of Chiyuv Kares?
וי"ל, דמשכחת לה אי נגעה בככר של תרומה וקידש בו את האשה, דאי טמא הוא, אין בו שוה פרוטה דלא חזי אלא להסקה ואינה מקודשת; ואי טהור הוא, יש בו שוה פרוטה דחזי לאכילה, ומקודשת.
Answer: Kares is applicable there where she touches a loaf of Terumah bread with which a man then betroths a woman. If the loaf is Tamei (like Rebbi Yochanan), then it is worth less than a Perutah, since it is only fit to be burned, and the Kiddushin is not valid. Whereas if it is Tahor (like Resh Lakish), then it is worth a Perutah and the Kiddushin is valid.
Now according to the Imrei Noam, why don't we just see what people are saying. If the "oilam" follows the זקן ממרא and considers it Tahor, then even according to the Beis Din she won't be married [even according to Reish Lakish]. And if the "oilam" follows the psak of Beis Din then she is not married even according to the זקן ממרא [and R' Yochanan].
We see that we follow the actual psak even vis a vis the Kiddushin [and don't follow the "oilam"] and therefore according to Reish Lakish, the loaf will be Tahor and that will impact the Kiddushin. If the זקן ממרא follows R' Yochanan and renders the loaf Tamei, according to Reish Lakish a married woman will be ruled single. BIG TIME kares issue?!!
HaGaon Ha-Rav Shlita answered for the Imrei Noam as follows: Tosfos is talking about a Kohen marrying a Bas Kohen who can eat תרומה and we need not consider it worth a פרוטה because of it's market value [the "oilam"] but rather he is marrying her with the value of the benefit she will receive from consuming the loaf. If the זקן ממרא paskened against the Beis Din that it is טמא and she is not מקודשת, according to Reish Lakish [who says it is טהור] she will be liable to כרת if she is intimate with another man. She is an אשת איש!!!
HaGaon Ha-Rav Shlita answered for the Imrei Noam as follows: Tosfos is talking about a Kohen marrying a Bas Kohen who can eat תרומה and we need not consider it worth a פרוטה because of it's market value [the "oilam"] but rather he is marrying her with the value of the benefit she will receive from consuming the loaf. If the זקן ממרא paskened against the Beis Din that it is טמא and she is not מקודשת, according to Reish Lakish [who says it is טהור] she will be liable to כרת if she is intimate with another man. She is an אשת איש!!!
