Question (Rava): Why does R. Gamliel say that a Get does not take effect after a Get, nor a Ma'amar after a Ma'amar?

Answer #1 (Rava): R. Gamliel is unsure whether or not a Get repels (Zikah), and whether or not a Ma'amar acquires;

If the first Get repelled, there is nothing left for the second Get to do. If the first Get did not repel, neither does the second!

If the first Ma'amar acquires, the second Ma'amar cannot acquire. If the first Ma'amar does not acquire, neither does the second!

Objection (Abaye - Beraisa): R. Gamliel admits that a Get takes effect after a Ma'amar, and a Ma'amar after a Get. A Get takes effect after Yibum that followed a Ma'amar, and a Ma'amar takes effect after Yibum that followed a Get.

If R. Gamliel was in doubt, when Yibum is in the middle (it should acquire if possible, i.e. if the Ma'amar did not acquire or the Get did not repel. In any case no Zikah remains after the Yibum, so) it should be like Yibum at the beginning, i.e. nothing should take effect after it!

(Mishnah): When Bi'ah is at the beginning, nothing takes effect after it.

Answer #2 (Abaye): R. Gamliel is certain that Get repels and that Ma'amar acquires. However, it was enacted that Get repels one 'side' (part of the Zikah), and Ma'amar acquires one (the 'other') side;

A second Get doesn't work, since the first Get already repelled as much as a Get can;

A second Ma'amar doesn't work, since the first already acquired as much as a Ma'amar can.

A Get after a Ma'amar takes effect, and also a Ma'amar after a Get, since one acquires (one side), and one repels (the other side).

Chachamim say that we enacted that each Yavam has a power to acquire or repel with a Ma'amar or Get (therefore, a Get after a Get or a Ma'amar after a Ma'amar takes effect).

(According to R. Gamliel,) a Pasul Yibum is better than a Ma'amar in one respect, and in one respect it is inferior;

In one way it is better. Ma'amar does not take effect after Ma'amar, but Yibum takes effect after Ma'amar;

In one way it is inferior. Ma'amar acquires everything that a Get leaves over (i.e. so a subsequent Ma'amar does not take effect), whereas Yibum after a Get does not acquire all the remaining Zikah (so Ma'amar takes effect after the Yibum).

(Beraisa): In what case did R. Gamliel say that a Get does not take effect after a Get? If two Yevamos fell to one Yavam, and he gave a Get to each (e.g. to Leah and then to Chanah);

R. Gamliel says, he does Chalitzah to Leah and he is forbidden to her relatives. He is permitted to Chanah's relatives;

Chachamim forbid him to the relatives of both of them. He does Chalitzah to one of them.

The same applies when there are two Yevamim and one Yevamah.

In what case did R. Gamliel say that a Ma'amar does not take effect after a Ma'amar? If two Yevamos fell to one Yavam, and he gave a Ma'amar to Leah and then to Chanah;

R. Gamliel says, he gives a Get and does Chalitzah to Leah and is forbidden to her relatives. He is permitted to Chanah's relatives;

Chachamim say that he gives a Get to each and is forbidden to the relatives of both of them. He does Chalitzah to one of them.

The same applies when there are two Yevamim and one Yevamah.

Question: R. Gamliel says that he does Chalitzah [only] to Leah. This refutes Shmuel!

(Shmuel): If one does Chalitzah to Ba'alas ha'Get, her Tzarah is not exempted.

Answer: Shmuel's law is like the opinion that Yesh Zikah. R. Gamliel holds that Ein Zikah.

Inference: If R. Gamliel holds that Ein Zikah, Chachamim hold that Yesh Zikah.

(Seifa): The same applies to two Yevamim and one Yevamah.

Question: This refutes Rabah bar Rav Huna!

(Rabah bar Rav Huna): A Yevamah who did a Chalitzah Pesulah (i.e. Yibum was forbidden) must do Chalitzah with all the brothers.

Answer (and Rejection of Inference): No, Chachamim agree that Ein Zikah. They argue about a Get after a Get and a Ma'amar after a Ma'amar. (Rabah bar Rav Huna's law is like the opinion that Yesh Zikah.)

(Beraisa - R. Gamliel): If he gave a Ma'amar to Leah and then to Chanah, he gives a Get and does Chalitzah to Leah and is forbidden to her relatives. He is permitted to Chanah's relatives.

Question: Since R. Gamliel holds that a Ma'amar doesn't take effect after a Ma'amar, he should be allowed to do Yibum with the first (Leah)!

Answer: There is a decree not to, lest people come to do Yibum with Chanah.

(R. Yochanan): R. Gamliel, Beis Shamai, R. Shimon, Ben Azai, and R. Nechemyah all hold that Ma'amar fully (i.e. significantly) acquires.

We learned about R. Gamliel above (a Ma'amar after a Ma'amar does not take effect).

(Mishnah - Beis Shamai): Reuven and Shimon were married to sisters, and their brother Levi was single. Reuven died; Levi gave the Yevamah a Ma'amar, then Shimon died. Levi may keep his wife (the Ma'amar is full Kidushin). Her sister is exempt, for she is Achos Ishto.

(R. Shimon and Chachamim argue (96b) about two minors above nine years old who had Bi'ah with their Yevamah.)

(Beraisa - R. Shimon to Chachamim): If the first Yibum (e.g. of Levi) is considered Yibum, Reuven's Yibum is not Yibum (to forbid her to Levi). If Levi's Yibum is not Yibum, neither is Reuven's!

We equated the Yibum of a nine-year-old to a Ma'amar, and R. Shimon says that the second Yibum does not take effect after the first!

(Beraisa - Ben Azai): A Ma'amar takes effect after a Ma'amar when there are two Yevamim and one Yevamah, but not when there is one Yavam and two Yevamos.

(Mishnah - R. Nechemyah): Yibum and Chalitzah have the same law. Whether they come at the beginning, middle, or end, nothing takes effect after them.

A Pasul Yibum is like a Ma'amar, and he says that nothing takes effect after it!