Answer #3 (to Question 2:f, 38a - Abaye): In the Reisha, the property fell after she fell to Yibum. In the Seifa, it fell when she was still married.

(Regarding property that falls to her,) Abaye holds that her husband's Yad (power to acquire) is like her Yad.

Objection (Rava): If the property fell to her when she was married, all agree that his Yad is stronger than hers!

Answer #4 (Rava): Rather, in both cases, the property fell after she fell to Yibum. In the Reisha, no Ma'amar was given. In the Seifa, a Ma'amar was given.

Rava holds that Beis Shamai hold that Ma'amar makes Vadai Kidushin and Safek Nisu'in.

It makes Vadai Kidushin to exempt the Tzarah, and Safek Nisu'in to split her property.

R. Elazar holds like Rava. R. Yosi bar Chanina holds like Abaye.

Question: R. Elazar disagrees with Rava!

(R. Elazar): Beis Shamai says that a Ma'amar acquires only to exempt the Tzarah.

Answer #1: We must switch the opinions (R. Elazar holds like Abaye and R. Yosi bar Chanina holds like Rava).

Answer #2: The opinions need not be switched.

R. Eliezer said only that Ma'amar does not fully acquire, to say that if he divorces her, Chalitzah is also required; he did not say that it does not acquire to share her property.

(Rav Papa): Scrutiny shows that the Mishnah is like Abaye, but it is difficult why it discusses the case in which she died.

'Property that enters and leaves with her' suggests property that enters her husband's Reshus, and leaves to return to the father.

Question: Why does the Mishnah discuss who gets the property itself after her death? It could discuss who eats the Peros during her lifetime!

Conclusion: There can be no rebuttal of this.

(Mishnah): If he does Yibum, she is like his wife in all respects...

Question: What does this teach?

Answer (R. Yosi bar Chanina): He may divorce her with a Get and remarry her.

Question: Obviously he may divorce her with a Get!

Answer: Since it says "He will take her as a wife and do Yibum to her", one might have thought that she is still considered a Yevamah, and he expels her through Chalitzah, and not with a Get;

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

Question: Obviously, he may remarry her!

Answer: One might have thought that he did the Mitzvah incumbent on him, and now the Isur of Eshes Ach applies to her;

The Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

Question: Why don't we say so?

Answer: "He will take her as a wife" - once he takes her, she is like a wife in all respects.

(Mishnah): Her Kesuvah is paid from the property of the deceased.

This is because Shamayim gave her to the Yavam (he did not choose to put a lien on his property in order to marry her).

If the deceased did not leave enough property for a Kesuvah, Chachamim enacted that she has a Kesuvah from the Yavam, so divorcing her will not be trifling matter to him.

(Mishnah): The Mitzvah is for the oldest brother to do Yibum. If he does not want, we see if the other brothers want. If they don't, we tell the oldest 'it is your Mitzvah. Do Chalitzah or Yibum.'

If he says that we should wait for a (minor) brother to grow up, or for the oldest brother to return from overseas, or for a deaf or insane brother to do Yibum, we do not hearken. We tell him to do Chalitzah or Yibum.

(Gemara) Version #1: R. Yochanan and R. Yehoshua ben Levi argued about which is preferred, Yibum of a younger brother or Chalitzah of the oldest.

Opinion #1: Yibum of the younger is preferred, because the Mitzvah is to do Yibum;

Opinion #2: Chalitzah of the oldest is better, for Yibum of a younger brother when there is an older brother is not the Mitzvah.

Support (for Opinion #1 - Mishnah): If the oldest does not want, we ask the others...

Suggestion: The oldest did not want to do Yibum, rather Chalitzah. We prefer that a younger brother do Yibum!

Rejection: No, he did not want to do Yibum nor Chalitzah.

Question: Presumably, this is like 'if they do not want'. If also that means that they did not want to do Yibum nor Chalitzah, why do we force the oldest? We should force a younger brother!

Answer: Since the Mitzvah is on the oldest, we force him.

Question (against Opinion #1 - Mishnah): If the oldest says to wait for a brother to grow up, we do not hearken.

If Yibum of a younger brother is preferred, we should wait. Perhaps he will do Yibum!

Counter-question (Seifa): ...Or for the oldest brother to return from overseas (we do not hearken).

If we always prefer the older brother, we should wait for him. Perhaps he will return and do (Yibum or) Chalitzah!

Answer to both questions: You must say that we do not delay the Mitzvah.

Version #2: Both agree that Yibum of a younger brother is preferred. R. Yochanan and R. Yehoshua ben Levi argue about Chalitzah of the oldest and of a younger brother. One says that Chalitzah of the oldest is preferred; the other says that they are equivalent.

Opinion #1: Chalitzah of the older is preferred, because the Mitzvah is on him.

Opinion #2: This is only regarding Yibum. Regarding Chalitzah, they are equivalent.

Support (for Opinion #1 - Mishnah): If they did not want, we return to the oldest....

Suggestion: They did not want to do Yibum, rather Chalitzah, and we prefer that the oldest do Chalitzah!

Rejection: No, they did not want to do Yibum nor Chalitzah.

Question: If so, we must say that also the oldest did not want to do either. Why do we force him? We should force a younger brother!

Answer: Since the Mitzvah is on the oldest, we force him.

Question (against Opinion #1 - Mishnah): If the oldest says to wait for the oldest to return from overseas, we do not hearken.

If Chalitzah of the oldest is preferred, we should wait. Perhaps he will do Chalitzah!

Counter-question: Why don't we wait for a minor to grow up? Perhaps he will do Yibum (all agree that this is better)!

Answer to both questions: You must say that we do not delay the Mitzvah.

(Mishnah): The Mitzvah of Yibum is preferable to the Mitzvah of Chalitzah. This was initially, when people intended for the Mitzvah. Now that people do not intend for the Mitzvah, Chalitzah is preferable.

(Rav): We do not force (rather, he decides).

When a Yavam and Yevamah would come in front of Rav, he would tell the Yavam 'It is your choice. Do Chalitzah or Yibum.'

"If he does not want" - if he wants, he may do Chalitzah or Yibum.

Also Rav Yehudah holds that we do not force.

Rav Yehudah enacted to write in a document of Chalitzah 'The Yavam and Yevamah came... it became known to us... we told him 'If you want, do Yibum. If not, stick out your right foot... she took his shoe off, and she spit at him. Beis Din saw the spit on the ground.'

R. Chiya bar Avya says, Rav Yehudah concludes 'We read what is written in the Torah'.

Rav Acha and Ravina argue about if 'It became known to us' must be through witnesses, or even through a relative or a woman.

The Halachah is, this is a mere Giluy Milsa (a matter such that knowledge of it is not limited to people who witnessed a certain event), so a relative or woman suffices.

(Mishnah): Initially, Yibum took precedence. Now that people do not intend for the Mitzvah, Chalitzah takes precedence.

(Rami bar Chama): They returned to say that Yibum takes precedence.

Question (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): Did the generations improve?!

Answer: Initially, they (the majority of Chachamim) held like Aba Sha'ul. Later, they held like the Chachamim who argue with him:

(Beraisa - Aba Sha'ul): If one did Yibum for (her) beauty, or to be known as a married man, or for another reason (other than the Mitzvah), it is as if he transgressed Arayos. In my eyes, the child is nearly a Mamzer;

Chachamim say "Yevamah Yavo Aleha" - for any motivation.

(Beraisa): "Yevamah Yavo Aleha" - (l'Shem) Mitzvah;

Initially, she was permitted to Shimon. She became forbidden (when she married his brother Reuven), and became permitted again (when Reuven died);

Suggestion: Perhaps she returns to her initial Heter!

Rejection: "Yevamah Yavo Aleha"- (l'Shem) Mitzvah.

Question: Who is the Tana?

Answer #1 (R. Yitzchak bar Avdimi): It is Aba Sha'ul. The Beraisa says as follows:

"Yevamah Yavo Aleha"- l'Shem Mitzvah. Initially, she was permitted to him - he could marry her for beauty, or for the sake of marriage. She became forbidden, and became permitted again;

Suggestion: Perhaps she returns to her initial Heter!

Rejection: "Yevamah Yavo Aleha"- (l'Shem) Mitzvah.

Answer #2 (Rava): The Beraisa can be like Chachamim. "Yevamah Yavo Aleha"- Mitzvah. Initially, she was permitted to him - he could marry her or not. She became forbidden, and became permitted again;

Suggestion: Perhaps she returns to her initial Heter, and he marries her only if he wants!

Objection: Surely, he may not choose not to marry (or do anything else to) her. She is tied to him (to do Yibum or Chalitzah), can she leave him without anything?!

Correction: Rather, perhaps he may do Yibum or Chalitzah, whichever he prefers!

Rejection: "Yevamah Yavo Aleha"- (this is the) Mitzvah.