1)

(a)Rebbi Shimon, who exempts the sister of a Zekukah from Yibum altogether, nevertheless requires the sister who is an Isur Mitzvah to one of the brothers, to receive Chalitzah from the other brother - because of a decree on account of a regular case of Isur Mitzvah.

(b)And he requires her sister (who is not an Isur Mitzvah) to perform Chalitzah too (not exempting her because she is Achos Zekukah) - on account of her.

(c)He do not make a similar decree by Isur Ervah (to require Chalitzah from the Ervah because of the Tzarah) - because everyone knows that the Ervah (who is not a Zekukah) does not require Chalitzah, and that her Tzarah is not Achos Zekukah, and requires Chalitzah.

2)

(a)Our Mishnah cites a case of two of Reuven and Shimon who married two sisters, Reuven died and Levi, who is unmarried, made Ma'amar with the Yevamah. According to Beis Shamai, should Shimon die, Levi remains with the Ba'alas Ma'amar, and the sister is free to marry l'Shuk - because Ma'amar is Koneh like marriage (see Sugya, Amud Beis), in which case Shimon's widow is forbidden to Levi because of Achos Ishto.

(b)Beis Hillel say - that, since each Yevamah is Achos Zekukaso, Levi is obligated to send away the Ba'alas Ma'amar with a Get and Chalitzah, and her sister with Chalitzah alone.

(c)Beis Hillel comment - that this is what Chazal meant when they said 'Woe to his wife and woe to his brother's wife'.

3)

(a)Beis Hillel preceded his last statement with the words 'Zu Hi she'Amru ... ', which comes to preclude a similar statement made by Rebbi Yehoshua in Perek Beis Shamai - with reference to two brothers who married two sisters, one, a Gedolah, the other, a Ketanah, and the husband of the Gedolah died.

(b)The Tana of our Mishnah holds either like ...

1. ... Rebbi Eliezer - who says that we teach the husband of the Ketanah to make Mi'un.

2. ... Raban Gamliel - who says that if she makes Mi'un of her own accord, well and good, but if not, we wait until she grows up, whereupon the Yevamah will be free to marry l'Shuk, because she is the Yavam's wife's sister.

(c)Rebbi Elazar explains that, in the opinion of Beis Shamai, Ma'amar does not effect a complete Kinyan. According to him ...

1. ... it is Koneh - with regard to pushing away the Tzarah (meaning that the latter does not forbid her because of Achos Zekukaso).

2. ... it is not Koneh - with regard to removing the Zikah from the Yevamah (to permit her to marry l'Shuk with a Get alone, without Chalitzah).

4)

(a)Rebbi Avin attempts to prove from the Mishnah at the beginning of the Perek 'Beis Shamai Omrim Yekaymu' (but not l'Chatchilah) that Ma'amar is not completely Koneh - because if it would be, let each Yavam first perform Ma'amar with one of the Yevamos, and then he will be able to perform Yibum with her!

(b)We counter however - that, even if Ma'amar was Koneh completely - each Yavam should be able to perform Ma'amar, to push away the Tzarah, and then Yibum.

(c)So we are forced to say that, that it is only a Ma'amar of Heter (where the Yavam has the option of performing Yibum [like in our Mishnah, when the brother performed Ma'amar before the Yevamah's sister fell to Yibum]) that acquires, but not one of Isur. And that also explains why the Mishnah says 'Beis Shamai Omrim Yekaymu' (b'Di'eved, but not l'Chatchilah).

5)

(a)According to Rav Ashi too, Beis Shamai, in the opinion of Rebbi Elazar, holds that Ma'amar is not completely Koneh. He quotes Rebbi Elazar as saying 'Do not think that Ma'amar is completely Docheh (the Tzarah), even to absolve the Tzarah from Chalitzah. It is Docheh her (from Yibum), but leaves a little over (to require Chalitzah)'.

(b)Once again, we cite Rav Avin's proof from Beis Shamai's 'Yekaymu' at the beginning of the Perek. We reconcile it with Beis Shamai's statement here ('Ishto Imo, v'Halezu Teitzei Mishum Achos Ishah', implying l'Chatchilah) - by pointing out that, whereas the latter speaks in a case when the Yavam had the option of performing Yibum, the former (which is a case of Achos Zekukaso) did not.

6)

(a)Rabah (or Rava) asks whether Ma'amar creates marriage or betrothal. Abaye proves that the ramifications of this She'eilah cannot concern inheritance, burial and the annulment of vows - from the Beraisa of Rebbi Chiya, from which we learn that even Kidushin d'Oraisa does not acquire in these three regards, so it is unlikely that Ma'amar d'Rabanan, will.

(b)The Beraisa discusses the Halachic relationship between a man and his Arusah, starting with the Din of Aninus - based on the fact that an Onen is forbidden to eat Kodshim.

(c)The Tana rules, in the event ...

1. ...Arusah dies - that the Arus is not an Onen (and he is permitted to eat Kodshim).

2. ... Arus dies - the Arusah receives her Kesubah (provided the Arus gave her a Sh'tar Kesuvah at the engagement).

(d)When the Tana says ...

1. ... 'Lo Mitamei Lah', he means - that, if he is a Kohen, he is not permitted to bury her (see Tosfos DH 'Lo').

2. ... 'Lo Mitam'ah Lo', he means (besides that she is not obligated to bury him) - that on Yom Tov (when even Yisraelim [both men and women] are prohibited from becoming Tamei Mes) she is forbidden to bury him.

(e)The ramifications of Rabah's She'eilah are - with regard to Chupah; if Ma'amar creates Kidushin, then she will still require Chupah, otherwise not.

7)

(a)Abaye asks Rabah that if without Ma'amar, the Torah writes "Yevamah Yavo Alehah" - 'Afilu Ba'al Korchah', how much more so, with it (in which case, it seems obvious that Chupah ought not to be necessary). To which Rabah replied - that if Ma'amar creates Erusin, it means that it removes the Zikah of Yibum, creating in its place, a Zikah of Erusin.

(b)Abaye then cites the Beraisa (which discusses the rights of one or two Yevamin to annul the Nedarim of his betrothed) 'Shomeres Yavam, Bein Yavam Echad, Bein Shnei Yevamin, Rebbi Eliezer Omer, Yafer'; Rebbi Yehoshua Omer, l'Echad v'Lo li'Shenayim; Rebbi Akiva Omer, Lo l'Echad v'Lo li'Shenayim.' The reason of Rebbi ...

1. ... Akiva is - because he holds 'Ein Zikah Afilu l'Chad.

2. ... Yehoshua is - because he holds 'Yesh Zikah l'Chad, v'Lo li'Trei'.

(c)Rebbi Eliezer holds - 'Yesh Zikah, vaAfilu li'Shenayim'.

(d)To explain why Rebbi Eliezer's uses the singular ('Yafer') - Rebbi Ami - establishes the case where one of the Yevamim made Ma'amar, and the author of the Beraisa is Beis Shamai, who holds that Ma'amar is Koneh completely.

8)

(a)Abaye now tries to resolve Rabah's She'eilah from Rebbi Eliezer, based on a Mishnah in Nedarim - which requires both the father of an Arusah and the Arus to annul her Nedarim ...

(b)... a proof that Ma'amar must create Nisu'in (and not Erusin).

(c)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak rejects Abaye's proof - by establishing the Beraisa where the father did indeed annul the Arusah's Nedarim too.

9)

(a)Despite the fact that Rebbi Elazar holds in Perek Beis Shamai, that Ma'amar acquires only with regard to rejecting the Tzarah, but not with regard to exempting the Yevamah from Chalitzah - he agrees that, in every other respect, Ma'amar is fully Koneh according to Beis Shamai (including annuling her vows).

(b)Alternatively, Rebbi Elazar counters that, even if Beis Shamai holds that Ma'amar is completely Koneh, Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak should not have established the case where the father annuled the Arusah's Nedarim too - because then Rebbi Eliezer ought to have said 'Lo Yaferu' (and not 'Lo Yafer').

10)

(a)So Rebbi Elazar establishes the case - where they went to Beis-Din, who obligated the Yavam to sustain the Yevamah out of his own pocket (as we will learn in Perek ha'Choletz), in which case he adopts the Din of a husband and is permitted to annul her vows on his own, even if Ma'amar creates Erusin.

(b)This is based on the principle of Rav Pinchas quoting Rava - that when a woman makes a Neder, it is on the assumption that her husband gives his consent.

(c)According to Rebbi Elazar, the Beraisa speaks even if the Yavam did not make Ma'amar, according to Rav Ami, it speaks when he made Ma'amar and refuses either to perform Yibum or Chalitzah with her (see also Tos. DH 'K'gon').