Leviticus 21:2

but for a woman who is of kin to his flesh, for his daughter, and for his father, and for his son, and for his daughter, and for his brother,

except for his nearest kin We might think that this is a general category, which is then followed by particulars (e.g., for his mother, for his father , etc.), as in the phrase “No one shall come close to his near kin” [18:6].

Furthermore, we might think that the phrase “a master among his people” [:4] means that the husband may not bury his wife. However, we know the law as the Sages have transmitted it: a kohen does bury his wife (the Sages used the word “his nearest kin” as a means of deriving this exegetically [Yevamot 22b], as I explained in the case of “to other people” [Exodus 21:8]). Furthermore, the word “master” denotes not a husband, but a man of substance, with many people in his household (as in, “its master was not with it” [Exodus 22:13]). Therefore, the original explanation must be invalid. His mother is mentioned before the father, because normally the male of the species outlives the female.

כי אם לשארו הקרוב אליו, “except for his kin that is close to him;” according to Torat Kohanim, the word הקרוב אליו, excludes a girl only betrothed to him who has not yet become his wife in the full meaning of the word. Seeing that the priest may not defile himself on account of a woman only betrothed to him, it is clear that he may defile himself on account of a sister who is betrothed but not married yet. Concerning the words הקרובה אליו, Rashi explains that they include a sister who is betrothed. This makes sense, as seeing that an ordinary priest may not defile himself in order to bury a woman betrothed to him, it is logical that he should be allowed to defile himself for a sister who is only betrothed. If his sister’s husband to be had been a priest, he would not have been permitted to busy herself with her funeral. The Talmud in tractate Yevamot folio 22, understands the word שארו as referring to the priest’s properly married wife. This is also in agreement of what is written in verse 4: לא יטמא בעל בעמיו להחלו, “a husband shall not defile himself for his wife’s corpse if she had not been legally permitted to be the wife of a priest.” Unless the clause להחלו, “to disgrace him,” applied to his “wife,” he would, of course, be permitted to defile himself on her corpse. Furthermore, the fact that the Torah makes a distinction between a sister who has remained a virgin, (verse three) and it describes such a sister as הקרובה אליו, “who is close to him seeing that she had not been married,” by adding: “he may defile himself on her account,” it is clear that if she had been married already, her brother the priest, would not be permitted to defile himself at her funeral. The reason is simply that in that event her husband is considered as closer to her than her brother, though the former is a blood relative. The degree of relationship through marriage has been spelled out in the Torah already in Genesis 2,24, where the Torah described the bond of marriage as making “one flesh” out of husband and wife. There is no greater degree of קרובה, physical intimacy, than that.