(Mishnah): If one did Chalitzah to his Yevamah, he is like a regular brother regarding inheritance. If the father is alive, the father gets the [Mes'] property;

If he did Yibum, he acquired his brother's property;

R. Yehudah says, in any case, if the father is alive, the property is the father's.

(Gemara) Explanation: Do not say that Chalitzah exempts, and Bi'ah exempts; just like one who does Yibum acquires his brother's property, similarly one who does Chalitzah to his Yevamah acquires his brother's property;

Therefore, [our Mishnah] needed to say that [a Choletz] is like a regular brother for inheritance.

(Rav Yehudah citing Shmuel): One who gives a Ma'amar to his Yevamah does not acquire his brother's property. Even Beis Shamai [who say that Ma'amar acquires fully] agree to this, and even R. Shimon [who is unsure whether Ma'amar acquires fully] agrees to this;

This is unlike R. Lazar ben Arach, for R. Lazar ben Arach says that Ma'amar acquires a Yevamah fully [and she is totally like one who did Yibum].

If there were two Yevamos, and one gave a Ma'amar to this one and had Bi'ah with this, no matter what you will say [he acquires his brother's property]. Either he acquires through Ma'amar, or he acquires through Bi'ah.

Rebuttal (R. Yosah): Since he cannot keep either one (he must divorce both), he did not acquire his brother's property.

(R. Yitzchak bar Tavlai): R. Yehudah learns from "v'Hayah ha'Bechor Asher Teled". This equates [the Yavam] to a Bechor. Just like a Bechor does not inherit in his father's lifetime, [a Yavam] does not inherit in his father's lifetime.

Suggestion: Just like a Bechor inherits [an extra portion] after his father dies, [a Yavam] inherits after his father dies!

Rejection (R. Ze'orah): We learn from there. Just like a Bechor who does not inherit [an extra portion] when it was proper to inherit (when his father died, e.g. the property was Ra'uy, but the father was not Muchzak in it) does not inherit [later, when it comes to his father], so [a Yavam] who does not inherit [his brother] when it was proper to inherit (when he did Yibum, for his father was alive - CHESHEK SHLOMO) does not inherit it [later, after his father dies].

(R. Aba bar Kahana citing R. Chiya bar Ashi citing Rav): The Halachah follows R. Yehudah.

(R. Yehoshua ben Levi): The Halachah follows R. Yehudah.

(R. Avahu citing R. Lazar citing R. Hoshayah): The Halachah follows R. Yehudah.

R. Yochanan: Many times I sat in front of R. Hoshayah, and I never heard this! (ALEI TAMAR, citing SEDEI CHEMDAH - he holds that for matters that arise often, not hearing is a proof.)

R. Lazar: Does it not occur that someone hears something that his colleague did not hear?!

(Mishnah): If Shimon died and Reuven did Chalitzah to Leah, he is forbidden to her relatives, and she is forbidden to his;

He may not marry her mother, grandmothers, daughter, granddaughters, and not her sister in her lifetime;

The brothers are permitted to her relatives. She is forbidden to Reuven's father, his father's father, his son, his son's son, his brother, and his brother's son;

A man is permitted to the relative of the Tzarah of his Chalutzah, but forbidden to the Tzarah of the relative of his Chalutzah.

(Gemara) Inference: He is forbidden because he did Chalitzah to her. Had he not, and she died, he would be permitted to her mother.

Support (R. Avina): This is like R. Yakov bar Acha taught in the name of R. Lazar - if a Shomeres Yavam died, [the Yavam] may marry her mother. He had Zikah to the Yevamah (it was as if she was Mekudeshes to him). Once she died, her Zikah to him is Batel.

And here, once he died, his Zikah is Batel. (This applies in Perek 2. It was copied here without need.)

R. Avun inferred this from the Seifa. He may not marry her sister in her lifetime, and the brothers are permitted. Is not her sister to the brothers as if she died (through Chalitzah, her Zikah to them is Batel)?!

(Mishnah): She is forbidden to Reuven's father, his father's father, his son, his son's son, his brother, and his brother's son.

Inference: This teaches that [Chachamim] gave (forbade) Sheniyos to one who did Chalitzah.

Question: Where was this taught? (Her Isur to Reuven's father is mid'Oraisa (daughter-in-law), to his father's father is a Sheniyah (his son's daughter-in-law) not dependent on Chalitzah!)

Answer: [We learn from] his son, his son's son, his brother, and his brother's son. (These are forbidden mid'Rabanan, for his Chalutzah is like his divorcee.) This teaches that they gave Sheniyos to a Choletz.

The text of our Mishnah says 'one is permitted to the relative of the Tzarah of his Chalutzah, and forbidden to the Tzarah of the relative of his Chalutzah.' (Some texts of our Mishnah said oppositely.)

This supports what R. Heila said in the name of R. Avina - there is a Kal v'Chomer. Achos Chalutzaso is [forbidden] mid'Rabanan, and [even so, Chachamim] gave an Isur to the Tzarah (even after Chalitzah uprooted the Zikah). Here (when sisters fell to Yibum from different brothers,) there is an Isur of sisters (and the Zikah is intact). All the more so [they forbade the Tzaros]!