1)

(a)The Beraisa obligates a Yevamah with whom one of the brothers performed Chalitzah to wait three months - from the death of the Yevamah's husband (rather than from the time of the Chalitzah).

(b)According to Rav, a divorced woman is obligated to wait three months before marrying from the time she receives her Get. Shmuel says - from the time her husband wrote it (i.e. from the date on the Get).

(c)We have to say that, even according to Rav, the husband was not secluded with his wife from the time that he wrote the Get - because otherwise, the Get would be Pasul because of 'Get Yashan' (which will be explained in Gitin).

(d)In spite of Rav's stringent opinion by Get - a Chalutzah is not obligated to wait three months from the time of the Chalitzah, because, if we permit a Yevamah to perform Yibum after three months from her husband's death (involving a possible Isur Kares), how can we forbid a Chalutzah to get married l'Shuk (which is merely an ordinary Lav), once three months from her husband's death have passed?!

2)

(a)Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel learns from the Pasuk in Lech-Lecha "Liheyos Lecha l'Elokim ul'Zar'acha Acharecha" - that it is a Mitzvah to distinguish between the seed of one man and another (to know exactly who the father of the baby is), because the Shechinah only rests on Klal Yisrael when their Yichus is clearly established).

(b)Rava queries this from a Ger and Giyores who were married and converted (who are obligated to separate, even though their seed is clearly established anyway). Havchanah is applicable even to them however - to distinguish between a baby that was sown bi'Kedushah and one that was not.

(c)According to Rava, the reason for the three-month period is that a man might otherwise marry his paternal sister, perform Yibum with his maternal sister, and that he might cause his mother or his brother's wife to believe that she is exempt from Yibum (when really she is obligated). He will ...

1. ... marry his paternal sister - by believing that, since he was born in the house of the second husband, he must be his son, and then by marrying the daughter of his mother's first husband (who is really his father) who was born to him from another wife.

2. ... perform Yibum with his maternal brother's sister - by performing Yibum with the wife of a brother (a son who is born to his mother from her second husband - whom he believes to be his father, but who is not).

3. ... cause his mother to believe that she is exempt from Yibum - should she have no more children from her second husband up to the time that he dies.

4. ... cause his brother's wife to believe that she is exempt from Yibum - should his mother's first husband (his real father) die leaving behind one other son, whom he tells that he is not his brother (even though he is).

(d)Only the second of these reasons apply to a Ger and a Giyores too (maybe he will perform Yibum with his maternal brother's sister) - should he really have been born after nine months, in which case he was conceived before his mother converted, making it probable that his father was another man (due to the fact that Nochrim tended to lead extremely promiscuous lives). His mother, on the other hand, believes that he was conceived after seven months, (after her conversion) and is therefore her husband's son. Should they later have another son who dies, his (maternal) brother will perform Yibum with his widow.

3)

(a)Rav Chananya queries Rava from a Beraisa, which states that whereas all the women that Chazal forbade to perform Yibum or to marry are to avoid incest, the decree of waiting three months is because of the child. This conforms easily with Rav Nachman Amar Shmuel. According to Rava it means - that it is in order to prevent the child from transgressing any of the Arayos (whereas all the other cases concern the woman and her husband directly, and have nothing to do with the child).

(b)Waiting two months before marrying certainly leaves us with the Safek whether the baby is a ninth-month baby from the first husband or a seventh-month baby from the second one. On what grounds do we suggest that, it should not be necessary to wait three months, only ...

1. ... one - because if the baby is born seven months later, he must be the son of the second husband (because had he been the son of the first, he would be an eighth-month baby who could not survive); whereas if he is born after eight months, he must be the son of the first husband.

2. ... two and a half - because if the baby is born seven months later, he must be the son of the second husband (since we currently believe that a ninth and a half month baby cannot live), and if he is born six and a half months later, he must be the son of the first (since we now assume that a baby cannot be born in the middle of the seventh month).

(c)We refute the suggestion ...

1. ... that one month will suffice - on the grounds that, even if he is born after eight months, he could be the seven-month son of the second husband, who was born one month late (Note, that by the same token, we could also have answered that even if he is born after seven months, he could be a ninth-month baby of the first husband, who was born one month late).

2. ... that two and a half months are sufficient on the basis of "Vayehi li'Tekufos ha'Yamim" - from which Mar Zutra learns that a woman can give birth after six months and two days. Consequently, even if he is born six and a half months later, he could still be the son of the second husband.

4)

(a)It would be possible to ascertain whose baby the pregnant woman is carrying, by waiting a week or two before allowing her to marry, and then, three months from the death of her first husband, examining her (breasts) to see if she is pregnant. Assuming that her pregnancy was then recognizable, this would prove that she was pregnant from her first husband, seeing as a fetus becomes recognizable only after three months (not before and not later). By the same token, if her pregnancy was not recognizable yet, we would know that, when she would become pregnant, the father of the baby must be the second husband.

(b)We do not do so (to spare her waiting unnecessarily) - because examining a woman in this way, causes her to become despicable in her husband's eyes.

(c)Neither is measuring the depth of her footsteps in the sand a reliable gauge - because we suspect that she will deliberately make herself light, so as let us believe that her baby is the son of her second husband (since he is the one with whom she is currently living), to ensure that he ultimately inherits his property.

5)

(a)Chazal forbade a man to marry a woman during her period of pregnancy and whilst she is feeding. If he did - he must divorce her and never take her back.

(b)We initially ascribe the former decree to the fact that she might cause the baby's death should she become pregnant again. We reject this however - on the grounds that if that is so, why do we not forbid every woman's husband to have relations with her during her period of pregnancy? And if you will answer that she is permitted to use a cloth (as we learned above in the first Perek, according to Rebbi Meir), or that Hash-m will have mercy on her (according to the Chachamim there), then, by the same token, we ought even to allow her to get married whilst she is pregnant.

(c)And we reject the contention that it is because she might squash the baby to death during Tashmish - for the same reason (because if so, we ought to forbid relations with her husband); and, if you say he will be careful not to squash his own baby, then he will also be careful not to squash somebody else's (because a ben Yisrael is not suspect of destroying a living soul).

(d)The real reason for the decree is - because when a woman is pregnant, it means that shortly she will be feeding, and we are afraid that she will become pregnant from her husband, causing her to lose her milk, and the baby will die.

6)

(a)In spite of the fact that Chazal were concerned about causing the death of the feeding baby with regard to marrying a pregnant woman, they did not decree, forbidding Tashmish whenever one's wife becomes pregnant - because her husband will ensure that the baby receives eggs and milk instead.

(b)Not so if she marries whilst she is still feeding - because her new husband will not be willing to sustain someone else's baby.

(c)We do not allow her to go ahead and marry, and, if necessary, claim eggs and milk from her first husband's heirs - because women are generally shy of going to Beis-Din to claim money, with the result that her baby will die.

7)

(a)Seeing as the Tana has already mentioned 'Besulos' and 'Be'ulos', says Rav Yehudah - when he mentions 'Arusos' and 'Nesu'os', he means whether the divorce or the widowhood occurred to a woman who was betrothed or to one who was married.

8)

(a)Rebbi Asi told Rebbi Elazar that Rebbi Yochanan ruled like Rebbi Yosi in our Mishnah. What caused Rebbi Elazar to extrapolate from there that it must be an individual who argues with him was - the principle that we always rule like Rebbi Yosi is restricted to where he argues with an individual, but not when he argues with a majority opinion.

(b)Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa says that a woman who is angry with her husband, or if he or she could not have children, or if she was obviously not pregnant, for whatever reason - is nevertheless forbidden to get married within three months of her husband's death ...

(c)... a proof that he is the individual with whom Rebbi Yosi argues.

(d)The Beraisa mentions both Aylonis and a woman who cannot have children. The former is born an Aylonis, whereas the latter became afflicted only afterwards, due to something that she took or to an illness.

(e)Rebbi Yosi - permits all of the above to become betrothed and to marry immediately.

9)

(a)According to Rebbi Chiya bar Aba, Rebbi Yochanan retracted from his previous ruling. Rav Yosef ascribes that statement to a Beraisa that was learned in Kerem b'Yavneh. The Sanhedrin are called by that name - because they sat in rows, resembling the rows of trees in a vine-yard.

(b)Rebbi Yishmael the son of Rebbi Yochanan ben Berokah, the Tana who is quoted in the Beraisa - rules that all women are obligated to wait three months.

(c)Rav Yirmeyahu asked Rebbi Zerika to find out from Rebbi Avahu how Rebbi Yochanan could possibly rule like Rebbi Yosi in our Mishnah - seeing as he always follows the opinion of a Stam Mishnah, and our Mishnah states Stam that all women are obligated to wait three months.

(d)Rebbi Avahu dismissed the Kashya out of hand however - on the grounds that it is a Stam followed by a Machlokes, seeing as Rebbi Yehudah and Rebbi Yosi subsequently disagree with the Tana Kama.

10)

(a)Rebbi Avahu's ruling was based on the set of principles learned by Rav Papa or Rebbi Yochanan, who ruled that ...

1. ... 'Stam v'Achar Kach Machlokes - Ein Halachah ki'Stam'.

2. ... Machlokes v'Achar Kach Stam - Halachah ki'Stam' ...

(b)... irrespective of whether the Stam is learned in the same Masechta or in a different one - as long as it comes after the Machlokes and is in the same Seder (e.g. Nezikin).

(c)In the case of ...

1. ... a Stam Mishnah and Machlokes in a Beraisa - the Halachah is like the Stam Mishnah.

2. ... a Machlokes in the Mishnah and a Stam Beraisa - the Halachah is not like the Stam ...

(d)... because, if Rebbi did not insert it as a Stam Mishnah, where did Rebbi Chiya (his Talmid, and the compiler of the Beraisos), get it from?