Question: According to the opinion that contorting one's mouth is an action, how can we exclude reciting [the verses]?

Answer #1: In any case, it is a weaker action than spitting.

Answer #2: It is unlike leading an animal through one's voice, which is a great action.

Explanation #1: It disqualifies her to the brothers, since it teaches "Pesulah".

Implied question: One opinion (Gitin 24b) says that whenever Chachamim taught "Chalitzah Pesulah", it does not disqualify her to the brothers!

Answer: Here, we infer because it did not teach "there is nothing to be concerned for" [like it taught in the Seifa].

Explanation #2 (Rashi): [We say that she is Pesulah to the brothers] according to the opinion that whenever Chachamim taught "Chalitzah Pesulah", it disqualifies her.

Rejection: If so, without any inference we could have established it like this opinion!

Implied question: The Yerushalmi says that Chalitzah is with the right hand!

Answer: That is merely a Mitzvah [l'Chatchilah]. It is not Me'akev.

The text: The text says "Rabah", for Rava was not a Kohen, like it says in Chulin (133a) that Rava said to his servant (a Kohen) "acquire Matanos (a Yisrael who slaughters a Behemah gives the foreleg, jaw and stomach to a Kohen) for me."

However, Rabah was a Kohen, for it says in Bechoros (27a) that Rabah would be Mevatel [Terumah of Chutz la'Aretz] in a majority [of Chulin, and eat it when he was Tamei].

Support - Citation (Mo'ed Katan 28a - Rava): Life[span], children and income do not depend on merit, rather, on Mazel (dispositions determined at birth)... Rabah lived 40 years, and Rav Chisda lived 90 years.

This is like we said here, that Rabah lived 40 years.

Question (R. Elchanan): Also Rabah engaged in Chesed! It says in Sanhedrin (98b) "may [Mashi'ach] come, and I will not see him" (for there will be great afflictions at the time);

Citation (98b - Abaye): Why do you say so?... You have Torah and Chesed [to protect you]!

Answer (Ri): He did not engaged in Chesed so much to be saved from the decree of Beis Eli, but he had enough to be saved from the afflictions at the time of Mashi'ach, for also other merits help for this.

Question: How did [Rava] derive in Mo'ed Katan (28a) [that they] do not depend on merit, rather, on Mazel, from that Rabah lived only 40 years?

Perhaps this is because he was from Beis Eli!

Answer #1: Rava holds that Torah alone atones [and annuls the decree against Beis Eli], like Rabah held.

Answer #2: Also Rabah engaged in Chesed, like it says in Sanhedrin (98b. All agree that Torah and Chesed annul the decree.)

Explanation: Initially, they sent to him the above teaching (if a Yevamah spat, she takes off the shoe, and she need not spit again);

Afterwards, they sent to him that even if she spat blood, she must do Chalitzah. (She may not do Yibum.)

Question: Why wasn't a Ketanah taught together with a Cheresh, Chereshes and Katan?

Answer: It is because R. Yosi argues about a Ketanah in the Gemara.

Question #1: Even so, since he taught that it is Pesulah, why did he [need to] teach that she does Chalitzah [again] when she matures?

Question #2: He did not teach about a Katan [that he does Chalitzah again when he matures]!

Answer: Had he not taught so about a Ketanah, one might have thought that her Chalitzah is Pesulah mid'Rabanan, for this that we equate the woman (Yevamah) to the man (Yavam) is only mid'Rabanan;

Therefore, it taught that she does Chalitzah when she matures. This is extra, to teach that Chalitzah of a Ketanah is nothing, just like Chalitzah of a Katan.

Alternate text: However, the Yerushalmi's text of our Mishnah is "she does Chalitzah when she matures. If she did not, her Chalitzah is Kosher."

Inference: It holds that R. Meir equates the woman to the man mid'Rabanan, but R. Yosi holds that she can do Chalitzah l'Chatchilah, like in the episode below.

Also the Yerushalmi establishes it (our Mishnah) like R. Meir.

Explanation: This (Aba Yudan) is the text in the Yerushalmi. "Avdan" is a contraction.

Implied question: It says in Sanhedrin (7b) that a judge is warned not to [appear] to step on the heads of Bnei Yisrael!

Answer #1: That is when he did not leave for a need of Bnei Yisrael.

Answer #2: Even if he left for a need, he should shorten his path as much as he can, like it says in Kidushin (32b), that a Chacham is warned not to burden others [to stand for him] from "v'Yareisa".

Citation (Horiyos 13b - Beraisa): Bnei Chachamim and Talmidei Chachamim, when the Tzibur needs them, they may [appear] to step on the heads of people;

If he left for a need, he enters and sits in his place. This refers to a need of the people.

Support: The Tosefta explicitly says "if he left for a need of the people."

Question: In Nidah (46a), Rava says that when a Ketanah reaches her years [of adulthood], we need not check her [for two hairs]. The Chazakah is that she brought Simanim!

[The Gemara] concludes that Rava discusses [to forbid] Mi'un, but for Chalitzah, she must be checked.

Inference: A Ketanah may not do Chalitzah!

Answer (R. Tam): Here, Rava teaches according to R. Yosi. He himself holds that she must bring two hairs.

Implied question: The conclusion here "the Halachah is [she may not do Chalitzah] until she brings two hairs" is the conclusion of his (Rava's) words;

In Gitin (65a), Rava says that there are three stages of a minor. Once he reaches Onas ha'Nedarim, his vow is a vow and his Hekdesh is Hekdesh. Correspondingly, a girl [at the age of vows] can do Chalitzah!

Answer #1: There, he teaches according to R. Yosi.

Answer #2: The Ri proved there (in Gitin), based on Bava Basra (155a), that the text says Rabah, and not Rava.

Inference: This (Rav Nachman's teaching) shows that we do not need five even l'Chatchilah;

However, to publicize the matter, we [have a custom to] do it with five.

Explanation: We do not actually require [that the Chalitzah be] in front of two. It mentions two only so there will be testimony about it.

Rashi (on the Mishnah) says that the text does not say "Shenayim" (for they address the first Tana, who discussed in front of two).

Question: The Mishnah explicitly says that she did Chalitzah in jail! It says "a case occurred in which she did Chalitzah alone with him in jail, and it came in front of R. Akiva"!

Answer: In many Seforim, the text says "the episode came in front of R. Akiva" without a Vov. [Not only the phrase "the episode came...", rather,] also [the previous words] "in jail" refers to R. Akiva.

Question: How did we resolve that the episode came in front of R. Akiva in jail, and not outside?

Answer: The Gemara knows that it came in front of him in jail, like it says in the Yerushalmi that R. Yochanan ha'Sandlar passed in front of the jail in which R. Akiva was incarcerated.

Citation (Yerushalmi): (R. Yochanan pretended to be a peddler, so they would not notice that he asks a Halachah.) He announced "who wants needles? Who wants spindles? If she did Chalitzah alone with him, what is the law?"

Citation (cont.): He (R. Akiva) stuck his head out of the window [of his cell], and said to him "do you have Kushin (spindles)"? [I.e. he hinted that] you have a Kosher Chalitzah.