(R. Elazar): Chalitzah done with the left foot or at night does not permit her to remarry, but it disqualifies her from doing Yibum;

Chalitzah of a minor Yavam or with a sock does not permit her to remarry, and does not disqualify her from doing Yibum.

(Ze'iri and Rav Asi): Only the Get in the last clause disqualifies from Kehunah.

(R. Yochanan): Even the last case does not disqualify her.

This is consistent with another teaching of R. Yochanan.

(Rav Asi citing R. Yochanan): Brothers who divide an inheritance (of land) are considered like buyers. Every Yovel, they return the portions they received, and divide the property again. (If he held that Yesh Breirah, he would say that each brother inherited the portion destined for him, and they need not divide again in Yovel.)

R. Yochanan needed to teach that Ein Breirah in both cases.

Had he taught that Ein Breirah only regarding a Get, one might have thought that this is because it says "for her", i.e. Lishmah, but the Torah requires only a sale to return in Yovel, and not inheritances;

Had he taught only about inheritance, one might have thought that this is only a stringency (and we are also stringent about a Get to say that it disqualifies from Kehunah);

Alternatively, one might have thought that inheritances return in Yovel in order to return to the original status (undivided), even though there is Breirah.

Question (Rav Hoshaya): If a man told a scribe to write a Get for whichever of his wives will leave the door first, is this valid?

Answer (Rav Yehudah - Mishnah): Even further, if Reuven told a scribe to write a Get for one of his wives, and later he will decide which one , he cannot use it to divorce either wife.

This shows that Ein Breirah. Such a Get is Pasul.

Objection (Rav Hoshaya - Mishnah): If a man told his children 'I slaughter the Korban Pesach on behalf of whichever of you comes first to Yerushalayim', once the first child enters, he acquires his portion, and his siblings acquire through him.

Answer (Rav Yehudah): You cannot ask from there! R. Yochanan said that the father was only training them to be zealous in Mitzvos. (Really, the father gave a share directly to each child at the time of slaughter)!

Support #1 (Mishnah): Once the first child enters, he acquires his portion, and his siblings acquire through him.

We understand this if they already owned their shares at the time of slaughter.

Question: If they did not, how could they acquire their shares later?!

(Mishnah): One may be appointed on (acquire a share of) a Korban Pesach, or withdraw from it, until it is slaughtered.

Support #2 (Beraisa): A case occurred, and the daughters came to Yerushalayim before the sons. The daughters were zealous, and the sons were lowly. (This shows that the intent was to make them zealous. It does not say that the daughters acquired!)

Question (Abaye): I do not understand! Rav Hoshaya asked a case of Breirah in which one made a Get contingent on what others will do (which wife will leave first). Rav Yehudah answered from a case of Breirah contingent on the man's own will (which wife he will decide to divorce)!

Further, Rav Hoshaya challenged the answer from a case contingent on the will of others!

Answer (Rava): Perhaps no one distinguishes between Breirah contingent on his own will and Breirah contingent on others' will!

Question #1 (Rav Mesharshiya): R. Yehudah holds that Yesh Breirah when it is contingent on the will of others, but not when it is contingent on his own will!

(Beraisa - R. Meir): If one bought (100 Lugim of) wine from Kusim (and cannot separate the tithes before drinking), he says 'the two Lugim that I will separate later should be Terumah. The 10 Lugim (that I will separate) are Ma'aser Rishon; and nine Lugim are Ma'aser Sheni.

He is Meichal (Rashi - redeems the Ma'aser Sheni; Tosfos - mixes the wine) and may drink immediately;

R. Yehudah, R. Yosi and R. Shimon say, he must separate the tithes before drinking.

This shows that R. Yehudah holds that Ein Breirah when it is contingent on his own will. The following shows that he holds that Yesh Breirah when it is contingent on the will of others.

(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): (If a man gave a Get, to take effect immediately, if he will later die from his sickness,) in the meantime, we consider his wife to be fully married. When he dies (of the sickness), the Get takes effect retroactively.

Question #2 (Rav Mesharshiya): Also R. Shimon holds that Yesh Breirah when it is contingent on the will of others, but not when it is contingent on his own will!

The Beraisa of tithing wine shows that he holds that Ein Breirah when it is contingent on his own will. The following shows that he holds that Yesh Breirah when it is contingent on others' will:

(Beraisa): If a man told a woman 'I will have Bi'ah with you now, to make Kidushin on condition that my father agrees', even if his father does not agree, she is Mekudeshes;

R. Shimon bar Yehudah says, R. Shimon says that she is Mekudeshes only if his father agrees.

Answer (to both questions - Rava): Both R. Yehudah and R. Shimon hold that Yesh Breirah, even when it is contingent on his own will;

The Beraisa says why they do not allow relying on Breirah to tithe wine, lest the barrel break before he separates the tithes, and retroactively, he drank Tevel.

R. Meir is not concerned lest the barrel break.