1)

(a)We suggest that perhaps according to Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah, "Ervas bas Eishes Avicha" comes to preclude Chayavei Lavin, teaching us that Kidushin will not be effective on them. We refute this suggestion however, on the basis of the Pasuk "Ki Siheyenah l'Ish Shtei Nashim, ha'Achas Ahuvah, v'ha'Achas Senu'ah ... ", which cannot be understood literally - because it is obvious that a man cannot transfer the birthright of the son of the wife whom he hates in favor of the one whom he loves.

(b)What the Pasuk is therefore coming to tell us is - that he cannot transfer the birthright from the son of a woman whose marriage is hated (a Chayavei Lavin), in favor of the son whose marriage is loved ...

(c)... and the Torah writes "Ki Siheyenah" - implying that the Kidushin is effective.

2)

(a)Rava learns that even a sister from Chayavei Kares is subject to incest, from the Pasuk "Ervas Achoscha ... Moledes Bayis O Moledes Chutz" - which implies that a woman is considered a sister whether one tells the father to remain with his wife or one tells him to send her away (because she is a Chayavei Kares).

(b)We opt to include a sister from Chayavei Kares - since Kidushin is effective regarding other people, and to preclude one from a Shifchah or a Nochris - with whom it is not.

(c)We do not include the latter, seeing as Kidushin will take effect on her mother after she converts (and preclude the former, which will never take effect) - because, when the mother converts, she will be a new person, but in the meantime, Kidushin is not effective, any more than Chayavei Kerisus.

3)

(a)The Rabanan learn from the Pasuk "ha'Ishah vi'Yeladehah Tiheyeh la'Adonehah" - that the daughter of a Shifchah goes after the mother; she belongs to her master, and is neither considered the daughter of her biological father, nor the sister of her biological siblings (what Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah learns from "bas Eishes Avicha").

(b)Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah - learns the same from this Pasuk as the Rabanan, only he uses the previous Pasuk ("Bas Eishes Avicha") for a Nochris, and this one for a Shifchah.

(c)Having told us that Kidushin is not effective by ...

1. ... Shifchah, the Torah nevertheless finds it necessary to tell us that it is not effective by a Nochris either - because a Nochris has Yichus (she goes after her father, whereas a Shifchah, like a donkey (to which Avraham compared Eliezer in this regard) does not.

2. ... a Nochris, the Torah nevertheless finds it necessary to tell us that it is not effective by a Shifchah - because a Shifchah is obligated to observe certain Mitzvos (like a Jewish woman), whereas a Nochris is not.

(d)Rebbi Yochanan quoting Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai explains that according to the Rabanan Kidushin is not effective on a Nochris from the Pasuk "Ki Yasir es Bincha m'Acharai" - implying that it is the Nochri husband who leads his Jewish wife's children astray (to serve idols), but that this would not apply to the Nochri wife leading her Jewish husband's children (because they are not Jewish anyway).

4)

(a)Ravina extrapolates from Rebbi Yochanan quoting Rebbi Shimon bar Yochai - that the son of a bas Yisrael and a Nochri is Yisrael.

(b)We refute the proof that Ravina concurs with those who hold that a child who is born from the relationship between a Nochri and a bas Yisrael is Kasher (and not a Mamzer) - because even though he says nothing about the child being a Mamzer, he may however, declare him Pasul (and if it is a daughter, she will be disqualified from marrying a Kohen).

(c)The Pasuk of "Ki Yasir ... " (which teaches us that a woman's baby is like her) basically refers to the seven nations of Canaan. We extend it to other nations - from the words "Ki Yasir" - 'to include all those who lead astray'.

(d)The author of the Beraisa then be Rebbi Shimon, who Darshens automatically the reasons of the Torah; according to the Rabanan, the Pasuk teaches us the reason why the Torah forbids the seven nations to intermarry with us, but not other nations (who are less attached to Avodah-Zarah).

(e)The Rabanan of Rebbi Shimon know that children who are born to mothers of other nations are also like them - from "Ervas bes Eishes Avicha ... " (as we learned above), because the Rabanan of Rebbi Shimon are actually Rebbi Yosi b'Rebbi Yehudah.

5)

(a)If someone betrothed one of two women, and he doesn't know which one he betrothed - our Mishnah requires him to give each one a Get.

(b)He cannot divorce one of them and remain with the other one - in case she is his wife's sister (who does not become permitted through divorce).

6)

(a)In the event that he dies, leaving behind one brother, that brother must perform Chalitzah with both of women. If he leaves behind two brothers - one of them makes Chalitzah with one of the women, permitting the other one to perform Yibum with the second one ...

(b)... because 'Mah Nafshach', if the first brother made Chalitzah with the correct woman, then having removed the Zikah, the sister is permitted to his brother; whereas if it was the wrong woman, then the second one's Yibum is valid anyway.

(c)If they both perform Yibum - they are permitted to remain with them ...

(d)... because a. each on can say that he took the correct Yevamah, and b. even if the first one took Achos Zekukaso (be'Isur), the moment the second one performed Yibum with the other one, the Isur dissipates.

7)

(a)If two men betrothed two sisters, and neither can remember which one he betrothed - then each one must give a Get to each sister, in case she is his wife.

(b)If each one has a brother and they both die, then each brother must perform Chalitzah with each of the Yevamos. If one of them has one brother and the other, two - then l'Chatchilah, after the single brother has performed Chalitzah with both sisters, one of the two brothers performs Chalitzah with one of the sisters (to remove the Zikah [and the Isur of Achos Zekukaso from his brother]), who may perform Yibum with the other sister.

(c)The one brother may not perform Yibum with the one Yevamah ...

1. ... before his brother has performed Chalitzah with the other one - in case she is Achos Zekukaso.

2. ... after performing Chalitzah with the other one - in case she is Achos Chalutzaso.

8)

(a)If each of the deceased men leaves behind two brothers - then one brother from each pair must perform Chalitzah with one of the Yevamos, after which his brother may perform Yibum with the sister (because he is performing Yibum either with his own Yevamah or with the sister of his brother's Chalutzah, who is permitted to him).

(b)Even if the first pair of brothers performed Chalitzah on the two women, the second pair cannot just perform Yibum, one with each woman - because the Chalitzah of the first pair only removes the Zikah of the one sister who fell to them, leaving the Zikah of the second one intact. Consequently, each Yevamah is a Safek Achos Zekukaso of each brother.

(c)In this latter case - one of the latter performs Chalitzah, then the other one is permitted to performs Yibum.

(d)In this case and the previous cases where there are two brothers, if both brothers performed Yibum with one of the Yevamos, they are permitted to retain them - because even if the first one performed an Isur, when he married Achos Zekukaso, the moment his brother performs Yibum on the Zekukah, he removes the Zikah from her, and there is no longer an Isur for the brother to remain with her sister (as we already explained).

9)

(a)We try to prove from our Mishnah that 'Kidushin she'Ein Mesurin l'Bi'ah' - (Kidushin which cannot lead to Bi'ah) are not valid.

(b)We ...

1. ... try to prove it - from the fact that person who betrothed one of two sisters even needs to give a Get.

2. ... refute the proof however - by establishing the Mishnah (non where the Mekadesh failed to specify which sister he was betrothing, but) where he forgot afterwards which one he had betrothed (in which case it was a 'Kidushin ha'Mesurin l'Bi'ah').

(c)This answer is inherent in the Lashon of our Mishnah - which says, not 'v'Eino Yadu'a' ('it was not known'), but 'v'Eino Yode'a ('he does not know) Eizeh Mehen Kidesh'.

(d)It is indeed obvious that someone who betrothed one of two women, and he doesn't know which one he betrothed, must give each woman a Get - and the Chidush of the Mishnah lies in the Seifa, where he teaches us that if the Mekadesh dies and leaves behind two brothers, the one must make Chalitzah before his brother may perform Yibum, in order to remove the Zikah (to prevent him from transgressing the Isur of 'Achos Zekukaso').

10)

(a)The second case, where two men betrothed two sisters, teaches us two things that we did not know from the first one. One of them is that we do not decree, forbidding the second of the two brothers to perform Yibum at all, because of the single brother (who might follow suite) - the second, that even if one of the two brothers did perform Chalitzah first, the other brother is forbidden to perform Yibum before the single brother has made Chalitzah on both of them, to avoid transgressing the Isur of Yevamah l'Shuk (in case she is the single brother's Yevamah).

(b)The third case, when each of the two deceased men has two brothers, and the first of each pair performs Chalitzah and the second, Yibum, does not seem to be teaching us anything new. In fact, the Tana is coming to teach us - that, even though each one will be permitted to perform Yibum, we do not decree that they might forget and dispense with the Chalitzah altogether.

(c)There is more reason to decree in this case than in the previous one (when one of the deceased men has only one brother) - because there, seeing as only one of the brothers will ultimately be permitted to perform Yibum, there is less likelihood that they will dispense with the Chalitzah; and besides, the single brother has to perform Chalitzah first, so how can the first brother forget to follow suit?

11)

(a)If two out of four brothers who are married to two sisters, die - the Mishnah in 'Arba'ah Achim' says that the other two brothers must perform Chalitzah.

(b)Should they perform Yibum instead of Chalitzah, they are obligated to divorce their Yevamos immediately.

(c)They are forbidden to remain with their Yevamos, whereas in the last case in our Mishnah, when each of the two brothers performed Yibum without waiting for his brother to perform Chalitzah, they are permitted to remain married to their Yevamos. The reason for this distinction, if we hold ...

1. ... 'Yesh Zikah', and the reason that the two (out of four) brothers must perform Chalitzah and not Yibum, is - because since each sister is Achos Zekukaso, the second sister will remain Asur to the second brother, even after his brother has performed Chalitzah with her sister (because once a Zekukah is intrinsically forbidden, she remains forbidden forever); whereas in the latter case, where only one of the sisters is intrinsically forbidden, as soon as the brother has performed Chalitzah with one sister, the other one is automatically permitted (as we explained above).

2. ... 'Ein Zikah', and the reason that the two out of the four brothers must perform Chalitzah and not Yibum is because, should the one brother perform Yibum, the other brother may die before he has had a chance to perform Yibum or Chalitzah, then, should this happen, the second sister will be free to marry l'Shuk, because she is the sister of the remaining brother's wife, and the Mitzvah of Yibum will have been nullified (which we want to avoid). This does not apply in the latter case however, because the two Yevamos did not fall from two brothers. Consequently, only one of the sisters fell to each brother, though we do not know which one, and the only Isur is that of Achos Zekukaso, which falls away with the Yibum or with the Chalitzah of one of the brothers with her sisters (even if we hold 'Yesh Zikah').

12)

(a)Shilo quoted a Beraisa that when, in the previous case, the Tana permits the second pair who performed Yibum to remain with their Yevamos, that applies even to Kohanim, despite the fact that the two women are Safek Chalutzos - because Chalutzah is only an Isur d'Rabanan, and Chazal did not decree on a Safek.

(b)The Tana of the Beraisa learns from the Pasuk "v'Ishah Gerushah m'Ishah Lo Yikachu" - that Kohanim are forbidden to marry a Chalutzah.

(c)We nevertheless refer to a Chalutzah l'Kohen as an Isur d'Rabanan - because the Pasuk is only an Asmachta.