(Rami bar Chama): Yesh Chupah l'Pesulos depends on the dispute between R. Meir and R. Elazar and R. Shimon:

R. Meir holds that Kidushin disqualifies, so also Chupah disqualifies;

R. Elazar and R. Shimon hold that Kidushin does not disqualify, so neither does Chupah.

Objection: This is not necessarily true!

Perhaps R. Meir says that Kidushin disqualifies, since it acquires. Chupah does not acquire!

Perhaps R. Elazar and R. Shimon say that Kidushin does not disqualify because it is not close to Bi'ah. Chupah is close to Bi'ah, so it disqualifies!

Rather, the following Tana'im argue about this.

(Beraisa): If a woman married (a Kohen), whether she is Kosher or Pasul (to Kehunah), or if she had Chupah without Bi'ah, she is fed by her husband and she may eat Terumah.

Question: 'She had Chupah (without Bi'ah)' implies that (the Reisha,) 'she was married' means with Bi'ah. (However, this cannot be, for then she could not eat Terumah!)

Answer: The Seifa explains the Reisha, that 'She was married' means Chupah without Bi'ah, and she eats Terumah;

R. Yishmael, the son of R. Yochanan ben Berokah says, Chupah permits a girl to eat Terumah only if Bi'ah permits her to eat Terumah.

Objection: Perhaps they do not argue about Yesh Chupah l'Pesulos!

Suggestion: Perhaps R. Yishmael holds like R. Meir, that she does not eat during Kidushin.

Objection: If so, why does he say that Chupah permits a girl to eat only if Bi'ah permits her? He should say that (Kidushin) money permits a girl only if Bi'ah permits her!

Answer: Since the first Tana discussed Chupah, also R. Yishmael did.

(Rav Amram): Rav Sheshes taught that Yesh Chupah l'Pesulos, and a Mishnah supports this.

(Mishnah): (A Sotah answers) "Amen", that I was not Mezaneh when Mekudeshes, married, Shomeres Yavam (when awaiting Yibum), or after Yibum.

Question: What is the case of Mekudeshes?

Answer #1: He warned her and took her to drink during Eirusin.

Rejection: An Arusah does not drink!

(Mishnah): An Arusah or a Shomeres Yavam does not drink or receive her Kesuvah.

Answer #2: Rather, he warned her and she was secluded during Eirusin, and he took her to drink after Nisu'in.

Rejection: (It was forbidden to have Nisu'in with her after seclusion, so) the water would not test her!

(Beraisa): "The man will be clean from sin" - the water tests her only if her husband is clean from sin.

Answer #3: Rather, he warned her and she was secluded during Eirusin, and he had Chupah without Bi'ah. This teaches that Chupah takes effect on Pesulos.

Objection (Rava): The Mishnah cannot be correct!

(Beraisa): "Other than your husband" - the water tests her only if her husband had Bi'ah with her before the adulterer.

Answer #1 (Rami bar Chama): Her husband had Bi'ah with her in her father's house during Eirusin.

Objection: The corresponding case of a Shomeres Yavam is when the Yavam had Bi'ah with her in her father-in-law's house (i.e. while awaiting Yibum). If so she is not called Shomeres Yavam. She is a full wife!

Rav said that Bi'ah (without intent for Yibum) acquires in all respects; Shmuel said that it acquires only for what is written in the Parashah.

This Mishnah was brought to support Rav. He cannot explain why it calls her Shomeres Yavam!

Answer: The case is, he gave her a Ma'amar. The Mishnah is like Beis Shamai, who say that a Ma'amar fully acquires. (It makes her an Arusah, so Bi'ah does not automatically make her a Nesu'ah.)

Question: If so, that is the same as Arusah! (The Mishnah listed them as separate cases.)

Counter-question: You must admit that 'Nesu'ah' and 'Kenusah (after Yibum)' are the same!

Answer: You must say that 'married' refers to his own wife, and 'after Yibum' refers to his brother's wife;

Answer: Similarly, 'Arusah' refers to his own wife, and 'Shomeres Yavam' to his brother's wife.

Answer #2 (Rav Papa): The Tana of our Mishnah is the Tana of the following Beraisa.

(Beraisa): We do not warn an Arusah in order to make her drink during Eirusin, but we warn her to make her drink after Nisu'in.

Answer #3 (Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak): The oath (that she was not Mezaneh at any of these times) includes the period of Eirusin through Gilgul. (Once she must swear about the seclusion after Nisu'in, we make her swear also about during Eirusin.)

(R. Chanina citing R. Yochanan): If Reuven gave a Ma'amar to his Yevamah, and he has a brother, even if he and she are Kohanim, he disqualifies her from Terumah. (She is like one awaiting forbidden Bi'ah, i.e. with Reuven's brother.)

Objection: According to whom is this?

Suggestion #1: It is like R. Meir.

Rejection: R. Meir forbids a woman awaiting Bi'ah forbidden mid'Oraisa. We have no source when the Bi'ah is Asur mid'Rabanan!

Suggestion #2: It is like R. Elazar and R. Shimon.

Rejection: They permit a woman awaiting Bi'ah forbidden mid'Oraisa, and all the more so, if the Bi'ah is forbidden mid'Rabanan!

(Ravin): Rather, if he gave to her a Ma'amar, all (R. Yochanan and Reish Lakish) permit her to eat. If he has a brother who is a Chalal, all forbid her to eat;

They argue about when he gave to her a Get - R. Yochanan permits her to eat, and Reish Lakish forbids.

R. Yochanan permits, for even R. Meir forbids only when she is forbidden mid'Oraisa. When the Isur is mid'Rabanan, even he permits!

Reish Lakish forbids, for even R. Elazar and R. Shimon permit only when the husband can permit others to eat. Here, he cannot permit (a woman to whom he gave a Get) to eat!

Question: He permits a Bas Kohen (whom he divorced) to return to eat Terumah in her father's house!

Answer: That is because she is detached from him and close to her father. A Yevamah is tied to the Yavam!