Torah Community Connections

Week 56- Thursday - 21 December 2000

YEVAMOT: CHAPTER 12: MISHNAH 2

If she performed halitzah with a sandal that is not his, or with a wooden sandal, or with the left one on the right -- her halitzah is valid. If she performed halitzah with a large one in which he can walk, or with a small one which covers most of his foot -- her halitzah is valid. If she performed halitzah at night, her halitzah is valid; but Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid. On the left, her halitzah is invalid; but Rabbi Eliezer declares it valid.

Kehati

If she performed halitzah with a sandal that is not his -- the yavam's, i.e., he borrowed it from another person, or with a wooden sandal -- which is covered with leather (Gemara), or she performed halitzah with the left one -- the left sandal, that was on the right -- his right foot -- her halitzah is valid -- the Gemara states, that lekhathilah, the sandal should be his, as it is written, "and loose his shoe"; bedi'avad, however, her halitzah is valid even with a sandal that is not his. A baraita teaches: "'And loose his shoe' teaches only his shoe; from where do we learn that the shoe of any person is valid? The Torah teaches us, 'shoe' ('The house of him that had his [lit., 'the'] shoe loosened') -- any shoe. If so, what does the Torah teach by stating, 'his shoe'? It teaches the shoe that is fit for him, but not if it is too large for him to walk in it, or a small shoe that does not cover most of his foot, or a sandal that has no heel."

If she performed halitzah with a large one -- a sandal larger than his foot size, in which he can walk -- and does not fall off his foot, or with a small one -- a sandal too small for his foot, which covers most of the sole of his foot -- her halitzah is valid -- lekhathilah, however, she may lekhathilah not perform halitzah with a large sandal, lest she perform halitzah with a shoe completely loose, and her halitzah will be invalid, nor with one that is too small, lest she perform it with a sandal that does not cover most of his foot, and her halitzah will thereby be invalid.

If she performed halitzah at night, her halitzah is valid -- for halitzah is as the conclusion of a lawsuit, and it has been taught, "Monetary lawsuits are judged during the day and terminated during the night" (San. 4:1), and halitzah involves monetary matter, since she collects her ketubah (Nimukei Yosef); but Rabbi Eliezer declares it invalid -- the halitzah which was performed during the night, since in his opinion, halitzah is comparable to the beginning of a lawsuit. The halakhah follows Rabbi Eliezer (Rambam, Hil. yibum 4:16).

If she took off the sandal On the left -- from the left foot of the yavam, her halitzah is invalid -- we learn this through a gezerah shavah of ("his foot") from the leper: just as, regarding the leper, this refers to his right foot, as it is written, "and upon the great toe of his right foot" (Lev. 14:14), so does it also here refer to the right foot; but Rabbi Eliezer declares it valid -- halitzah performed on the left foot, for he does not learn this from the passage referring to the leper. The halakhah does not follow Rabbi Eliezer.

YEVAMOT: CHAPTER 12: MISHNAH 3

If she loosed and spat, but did not recite -- her halitzah is valid. If she recited and spat, but did not loose -- her halitzah is invalid. If she loosed and recited, but did not spit -- Rabbi Eliezer says, Her halitzah is invalid. Rabbi Akiva says, Her halitzah is valid. Rabbi Eliezer says, "So shall it be done" (Deut. 25:9) -- whatever is an action impairs. Rabbi Akiva said to him, From there proof? "So shall it be done to the man" -- anything done to the man.

Kehati

If she loosed -- the shoe of the yavam, and spat -- as it is written, "and she shall loose his shoe from off his foot, and spit before him,"but did not recite -- the statutory verses (as detailed below in mishnah 6), her halitzah is valid -- bedi'avad, for the lack of the recitation, which is only speech and not a deed, does not invalidate the halitzah.

If she recited -- the verses, and spat, but did not loose -- his shoe from his foot, her halitzah is invalid -- this is not considered halitzah to exempt her from yibum, since it lacked the act of removing the shoe from the foot.

If she loosed -- his shoe, and recited -- the verses, but did not spit -- the Tannaim disagree regarding this case: Rabbi Eliezer says, Her halitzah is invalid -- for every action in the halitzah ceremony is indispensable.

Rabbi Akiva says, Her halitzah is valid -- for the lack of spitting does not invalidate the halitzah.

Rabbi Eliezer says, "So shall it be done" -- it is written in reference to halitzah, "so shall it be done to the man that does not build up his brother's house," which implies: "so shall it be done", whatever is an action -- whether loosing the shoe or spitting, impairs -- in halitzah, and if one of the acts is lacking, her halitzah is invalid.

Rabbi Akiva said to him, From there -- this text, you wish to bring as proof -- for your opinion? It is stated there, "So shall it be done to the man" -- to teach that the halitzah is invalidated only by anything done to the man -- which was done to the man's body, i.e., taking off the shoe from his foot, unlike spitting, which is not an act connected to the man's body; therefore, even if she did not spit, her halitzah is valid, bedi'avad. According to one interpretation, "From here a proof!" is in the affirmative, i.e., Rabbi Akiva said to Rabbi Eliezer that the verse serves as proof for his opinion as well. The halakhah follows Rabbi Akiva (Rambam, Hil. yibum 4:12).

Return to Mishna Yomit Index

Visit the Mishna Yomit Archives