Halakhah for Yevamot 168:1
וכי תימא קסבר האי תנא נישואין הראשונים מפילין הרי חלל שנשא כשרה ולא אמרינן נישואין הראשונים מפילין
And should you reply that this Tanna holds the opinion that the original marriage<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the deceased brother. ');"><sup>1</sup></span> causes the subjection;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Of the woman to the levirate marriage, i.e., the widow's status at the time of her husband's death is determined by the status in which she found herself when he married her, not by that in which his death placed her, consequently if at the time of the marriage she was a virgin she would not have been regarded as a widow and would, therefore, have been permitted to marry a priest. ');"><sup>2</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Kiddushin 78a) that there is no liability for lashes until he has intercourse. But [if] he married her and did not have intercourse, he is not lashed - as there is no liability for lashes without intercourse. And [both] he and her are lashed; and that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Yevamot 84b), "Fitting women are not [prohibited] from marrying disqualified men," is not from this matter at all - and we will explain the thing below on this page. As this one who has had intercourse with someone to whom she is forbidden, is also included in the obligation - and like the matter that they, may their memory be blessed, said that there is no difference between a woman and a man regarding all of the punishments of the Torah, except for the designated maidservant, [about] which I have written above in the Order of Vayikra in the commandment of a definite guilt-offering (Sefer HaChinukh 129).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy