Previous daf

1)

(a) Raban Gamliel holds 'Ein Get Achar Get, ve'Lo Ma'amar Achar Ma'amar, ve'Lo Be'ilah Achar Be'ilah ve'Lo Chalitzah Achar Chalitzah'. 'Ein Get Achar Get' means - that, if the Yavam gave a Get first to one Tzarah, then to the other, he is subsequently permitted to marry the relatives of the second Tzarah, because the Get is not valid.

(b) His reason for saying ...

1. ... 'Ein Get Achar Get, ve'Lo Ma'amar Achar Ma'amar' is - because he is not sure whether the Get of a Yevamah is Docheh or not, and whether her Ma'amar is Koneh. If they *are*, then the first one has already done its job and there is no room for the second one to take effect; and if they are *not*, then there is nothing to talk about. Note: We will see later in the Sugya, that this is one of two explanations.
2. ... 've'Lo Be'ilah Achar Be'ilah' is - because, once the Yavam makes Bi'ah with one of the Yevamos, he acquires her, and any subsequent Bi'ah is nothing more than a Bi'as Z'nus, in which case, her relatives remain permitted to him (a fact with which the Rabbanan do not argue).
3. ... 've'Lo Chalitzah Achar Chalitzah' is - because Chalitzah removes the Zikah from all the Yevamos, in which case, any subsequent Chalitzah with another Yevamah is meaningless (Here again, the Rabbanan agree with this).

(c) The Chachamim say 'Yesh Get Achar Get, ve'Yesh Ma'amar Achar Ma'amar' - because the first Get is not Docheh completely, and Ma'amar is not Koneh completely; both leave over half a Zikah. Consequently, either of them can come and take effect on the remaining half Zikah.

(d) The Rabbanan agree with Raban Gamliel that 'Ein Be'ilah Achar Be'ilah' and 'Ein Chalitzah Achar Chalitzah'.

(a) The significance of the Tana's question 'Keitzad' is - to explain the Din of one Yavam and one Yevamah, rather than the Machlokes between Raban Gamliel and the Chachamim, with which the Tana began.

(b)

1. Chalitzah - cannot remove Ma'amar.
2. A Get - cannot remove the Zikah.

(c) If the Yavam ...

1. ... made Ma'amar with the Yevamah and gave her a Get - he requires Chalitzah for the Ma'amar.
2. ... made Ma'amar and Chalitzah - he requires a Get for the Ma'amar.
3. ... made Ma'amar and Be'ilah - he has done the right thing.

(d) And if he gave her a Get and made Ma'amar ...

1. ... according to the Rabbanan - he requires a Get for the Ma'amar and Chalitzah.
2. ... according to Raban Gamliel too - he requires a Get for the Ma'amar and Chalitzah.

(a) If he gave her a Get and performed Be'ilah, he requires a Get for the Be'ilah and Chalitzah for the remaining Zikah. A Get alone is not sufficient, despite the fact that, once he performs Be'ilah, the Yevamah becomes his wife - because Bi'ah after a Get is a Bi'ah Pesulah.

(b) Even though the author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Akiva (as we shall soon see), she requires Chalitzah. In spite of having given a Get, the Yevamah is not like a Chalutzah, on whom Kidushin does not take effect - because the Get of a Yevamah is only valid mi'de'Rabbanan.

(c) If he gave her a Get and performed Chalitzah, 'Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum' - means that the Ma'amar or the Bi'ah that he makes with her after that is not valid.

(d) The reason for this is - because the author of our Mishnah is Rebbi Akiva, who holds 'Ein Kidushin Tofsin be'Chayvei La'avin'.

(a) If after Chalitzah, the Yavam made Ma'amar, gave a Get or performed Be'ilah - 'Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum'.

(b) This only goes according to Rebbi Akiva - in whose opinion Kidushin do not take effect on Chayvei La'avin; according to the Rabbanan, Yesh Ma'amar u'Bi'ah Achar Chalitzah'.

(c) The Tana inserts the case of Get after Chalitzah (despite the fact that he is forbidden to marry her relatives anyway) - on account of Get Achar Bi'ah, which he *does* need to insert.

(d) If after Bi'ah, he made Ma'amar, gave a Get (for his Zikah) or performed Chalitzah - 'Ein Achar Bi'ah K'lum'. The Tana, who follows this with the words 'Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum' - is referring to the previous set of cases (this will be discussed further in the Sugya).

5)

(a) There is no basic difference between the above (which speaks by one Yavam and one Yevamah) and when one Yavam does the same with two Yevamos.

(b) If the Yavam made Ma'amar with each Yevamah, Raban Gamliel will say 'Ein Ma'amar Achar Ma'amar'. According to the Rabbanan - they will require two Gitin and Chalitzah.

(c) If he made Ma'amar with one of them, and (with) the other ...

1. ... he gave a get - the Ba'alas Ma'amar requires a Get, and one of them, Chalitzah. He cannot perform Yibum with the Ba'alas Ma'amar, because, having given a Get to one of the Tzaros, they are all forbidden due to the Pasuk "Lo Yivneh" ('Keivan she'Lo Banah, Shuv Lo Yivneh').

2. ... he performed Be'ilah - they both require a Get and one of them, Chalitzah. A Get will not suffice for the Ba'alas Bi'ah - because the Bi'ah was a Bi'ah Pesulah.

3. ... he performed Chalitzah - the Ba'alas Ma'amar requires a Get.

(a) If he gave both Yevamos a Get, both require Chalitzah (because the Rabbanan hold 'Yesh Get Achar Get'). If, after the Get, he made ...

1. ... Bi'ah or Ma'amar with the other Yavam - the latter requires a Get, and he must make Chalitzah with one of them.
2. ... Chalitzah with the other - 'Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum'.

(b) The significance of the statement (by one Yavam and two Yevamos) ...

1. ... 'Chalatz ve'Chalatz, Ein le'Achar Chalitzah K'lum' means - that the relatives of the second Yevamah are permitted to him.
2. ... 'Chalatz , ve'Asah Ma'amar ... u'Ba'al, Ein le'Achar Chalitzah K'lum' that the Ma'amar and the Be'ilah after the Chalitzah are totally ineffective.

(c) The Din by 'Ba'al u'Ba'al, O Ba'al ve'Asah Ma'amar, Nasan Get ve'Chalatz' - is 'Ein Achar Be'ilah K'lum'.

(d) The Din in all of the above cases by two Yevamin and one Yevamah - will be the same as that of one Yavam and two Yevamos.

(a) The Tana repeats 'Chalatz, ve'Asah Ma'amar, ve'Nasan Get u'Ba'al, Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum' (by one Yavam and one Yevamah), even though he has already taught us this - in order to then make a distinction between Chalatz and Ba'al, and to cite the Machlokes between Rebbi Nechemyah and the Rabbanan (as we shall now see).

(b) The basic distinction between Chalitzah and Yibum in all of these cases - is that, whereas the principle 'Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum' applies even in the middle and at the end, that of 'Ein Achar Yibum K'lum' is confined to Yibum that is performed at the beginning.

(c) Rebbi Nechemyah says - that also the principle of 'Ein Achar Be'ilah K'lum' applies to the middle and the end, just like that of 'Ein Achar Chalitzah K'lum'.

(a) From our Mishnah, it is evident that both a Get and Ma'amar are effective by a Yevamah. Chazal instituted ...

1. ... a Get - because Get is generally effective, and, were a Get not to be effective by a Yevamah, people would confuse Get with Chalitzah, and say that, just as a Get is ineffective by a Yevamah, so is Chalitzah (and they will go on to perform Yibum after Chalitzah).
2. ... Ma'amar - because, in a similar fashion to Get (bearing in mind that Kidushin is generally effective), people would confuse Ma'amar with Bi'ah (of Yibum) and go on to perform Bi'ah after Bi'ah.

(b) They instituted that Bi'ah Pesulah should not be final ('Bi'ah Pesulah Yesh Acharehah K'lum') in the case of ...

1. ... Bi'ah Achar ha'Get - on account of Bi'ah after Chalitzah (which is definitely forbidden).
2. ... Bi'ah Achar Ma'amar - on account of Bi'ah after Bi'ah (which is not only forbidden, but also carries with it an Isur Kareis.

(c) They did not institute a similar decree with regard to Chalitzah ...

1. ... after Get on account of Chalitzah after Chalitzah - because what can be wrong with performing Chalitzah after Chalitzah?
2. ... after Ma'amar on account of Chalitzah after Bi'ah - because Chalitzah after Ma'amar certainly requires a Get for his Ma'amar, in which case, he will do likewise by Chalitzah after Bi'ah (and there is no other reason to decree).