Question: Rav does not hold that it becomes mid'Oraisa only if they have Bi'ah!

(Rav): If a minor did not do Mi'un, and she married another man after she matured, she does not need a Get from the second man;

(Shmuel): She needs a Get from the second man.

Suggestion: They argue about when she did not have Bi'ah with her first husband after maturing.

Answer: No, the case is, they had Bi'ah.

Question: If so, why doesn't Shmuel require a Get?

Answer: He holds that when the husband has Bi'ah, he relies on the initial Kidushin (and does not intend to Mekadesh through Bi'ah).

Objection: Rav and Shmuel already argued about this!

(Rav): If a man was Mekadesh a woman on condition, and did Nisu'in without mentioning the condition (and the condition was not fulfilled), she needs a Get.

(Shmuel): She does not need a Get.

Rav requires a Get. Since he did Nisu'in, he pardoned his condition;

Shmuel does not require a Get. When he has Bi'ah, he relies on the initial Kidushin.

Answer: It was necessary for them to argue in both cases.

Had they argued only about the condition, one might have thought that only there Rav holds that she is married, since he pardoned the condition, but regarding a minor who matured, he would agree with Shmuel;

Had they argued only about a minor who matured, one might have thought that only there Shmuel holds that she is not married to the first husband, but regarding a condition, he would agree with Rav!

Question: Did Rav really say that she is married only if they had Bi'ah?!

A case occurred in which David was Mekadesh Leah (mid'Rabanan), she matured, and she was sitting by the Chupah. Levi grabbed her (and was Mekadesh her). Rav Beruna and Rav Chananel, Talmidim of Rav, were there, and they did not require her to get a Get from Levi.

Answer (Rav Ashi): Since Levi acted improperly, Chachamim acted improperly to him (and uprooted his Kidushin).

Question (Ravina): We understand this if he was Mekadesh her with money (Chachamim can transform the money to be a gift);

If he was Mekadesh her through Bi'ah, how can Chachamim uproot his Kidushin?

Answer (Rav Ashi): They make his Bi'ah an act of Bi'as Zenus.

(Rav Yehudah and R. Elazar): The Halachah follows R. Eliezer.

(Mishnah): If a man was married to two orphaned minors and he died, Yibum or Chalitzah of one of them exempts the other. The same applies if he was married to two Chershos (deaf-mute women).

If he was married to an orphaned minor and a Chereshes, Yibum or Chalitzah of either does not exempt the other.

If he was married to a Pikachas (healthy woman) and a Chereshes, Yibum of the Pikachas exempts the Chereshes, but Yibum of the Chereshes does not exempt the Pikachas.

If he was married to an adult and an orphaned minor, Yibum of the adult exempts the minor, but Yibum of the minor does not exempt the adult.

(Gemara) Question: A Chereshes cannot do Chalitzah!

(Mishnah): If the Yavam was deaf, or the Yevamah was deaf, or the Yavam was a minor and they did Chalitzah, it is invalid.

Answer #1 (Rav Gidal): The Mishnah says 'and similarly' (regarding two Chershos) only regarding Yibum (Yibum of one exempts the other).

Answer #2 (Rabah): It refers even to Chalitzah. We distinguish between a Chereshes from the start of marriage and a Pikachas who later became deaf.

If she was deaf from the start of marriage, just like she married (mid'Rabanan) through gesturing, she leaves (Zikah through Chalitzah) through gesturing.

If she was a Pikachas and later became Chereshes, she is married mid'Oraisa. She cannot do Chalitzah mid'Oraisa, because she cannot recite the verses.

Question (Abaye): Also a Chereshes from the start of marriage cannot do Chalitzah!

(Mishnah): If a Cheresh was married to a Chereshes, and his Pike'ach brother was married to a Pikachas not related to the Chereshes, and the Cheresh died, his wife does Yibum. The Yavam may divorce her if he wants;

If the Pike'ach died, the Yavam does Yibum, and he can never divorce her.

Suggestion: She was deaf from the start, and the Mishnah says that she can do only Yibum, but not Chalitzah!

Answer: No. She was Pikachas and went deaf.

Question (Mishnah): If two brothers Pikchim were married to two unrelated women, one Pikachas and one Chereshes, and the husband of the Chereshes died, the Yavam does Yibum. Later, he may divorce her if he wants.

If the husband of the Pikachas died, the Yavam may do Chalitzah or Yibum.

Suggestion: Just like the Yavam was Pike'ach from the start, also the Yevamah was deaf from the start, and it says that she may do only Yibum, but not Chalitzah!

Answer: No, each case is different. He was Pike'ach from the start, but she was Pikachas and went deaf.

Question (Mishnah): If a Cheresh was married to a Chereshes, and his Pike'ach brother was married to her Pikachas sister, and the Cheresh died, his wife is exempt from Chalitzah and Yibum, due to Achos Ishto;

If the Pike'ach died, the Cheresh must divorce his wife, and the Yevamah is forbidden forever (until the Yavam dies).

Suggestion: Here also the Yavam was Pike'ach and went deaf!

Rejection: If so, he could not divorce her!

(Mishnah): If she went deaf he may divorce her, but not if she went insane. If he went deaf or insane, he can never divorce her.

Rather, he was deaf from the start.

Suggestion: Just like he was deaf from the start, so was the Yevamah. Since in the case of sisters they were deaf from the start, also in the case of the unrelated women;

Regarding unrelated women, it says that she may do only Yibum, but not Chalitzah!

Rabah had no answer.

Rav Yosef (to Abaye): Why did you ask from that case? Rabah could answer that the sisters were deaf from the start, but the unrelated women were Pikchos and went deaf! You should have asked from the following case!

(Mishnah): If two brothers were married to two sisters, and both men or both women (including when three or all four of them) were deaf, and one man died, his wife is exempt from Chalitzah and Yibum;

If the wives were unrelated, the Yavam may do Yibum. Afterwards, if he wants he may divorce her.

Question: What is the case?

Suggestion: The men were Pikchim and later went deaf.

Rejection: If so, they could not divorce!

(Mishnah): If she went insane, he may not divorce her. If he went deaf or insane, he can never divorce her.

Answer: Rather, the men were deaf from the start. Since they were deaf from the start, so were the women, and it says that the Yavam may do Yibum but not Chalitzah!

Rabah is refuted.

(Mishnah): If an (orphaned) minor and a Chereshes (were Tzaros, Yibum or Chalitzah of either does not exempt the other).

(Rav Ada bar Ahavah and Rav Chana): This is only if their husband was Pike'ach, and we do not know which wife he preferred.

Perhaps he preferred the minor, because she will (mature and) have understanding;

Perhaps he preferred the Chereshes, because she is an adult and is (more) fit for Bi'ah;

However, if he was deaf, surely he preferred the Chereshes, because she was fit for Bi'ah and was like him!

(Rav Nachman): Even if their husband was deaf, the Tana is unsure.

Question: What is the solution? (A Chereshes cannot do Chalitzah. Chalitzah with the minor (after she matures) would forbid the Chereshes to him.)

Answer (Rav Chisda citing Rav): He does Yibum with the Chereshes, then divorces her. The minor does Chalitzah when she grows up.

(Rav Chisda): Rav holds that a Chereshes is partially married, and a minor is married and not married (i.e. Safek married. We cannot say that both of them are partially married, for then Bi'ah of one would exempt the other. We cannot say that both are Safek, for then if both did Bi'ah, the latter would not forbid the former.)

Question: Perhaps a minor is partially married, and a Chereshes is Safek!

Answer: If so, he would not need to divorce the Chereshes after Yibum. In any case, he could remain married to her!

If a Chereshes is married, the Yibum is valid, so he may keep her;

If a Chereshes is not married, she is like a stranger (i.e. not a Yevamah) who married the Yavam, so she may remain with him!