## Yevamot Daf 106b

###### Yevamot 106b:1
[Yevamot 106b:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:1)

**מַתְנִי׳** מִצְוַת חֲלִיצָה: בָּא הוּא וִיבִמְתּוֹ לְבֵית דִּין, וְהֵן מַשִּׂיאִין לוֹ עֵצָה הַהוֹגֶנֶת לוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְקָרְאוּ לוֹ זִקְנֵי עִירוֹ וְדִבְּרוּ אֵלָיו״,

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **The mitzva of *ḥalitza*** is performed as follows: **He and his *yevama* come to the court, and** the scholars of the court **give him advice appropriate for him,** whether to enter levirate marriage or to perform *ḥalitza*, **as it is stated: “And the Elders of his city shall call him and speak to him”** (Deuteronomy 25:8).


###### Yevamot 106b:2
[Yevamot 106b:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:2)

וְהִיא אוֹמֶרֶת: ״מֵאֵן יְבָמִי לְהָקִים לְאָחִיו שֵׁם בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל לֹא אָבָה יַבְּמִי״, וְהוּא אוֹמֵר: ״לֹא חָפַצְתִּי לְקַחְתָּהּ״. וּבִלְשׁוֹן הַקֹּדֶשׁ הָיוּ אוֹמְרִים. ״וְנִגְּשָׁה יְבִמְתּוֹ אֵלָיו לְעֵינֵי הַזְּקֵנִים וְחָלְצָה נַעֲלוֹ מֵעַל רַגְלוֹ וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו״, רוֹק הַנִּרְאֶה לַדַּיָּינִים. ״וְעָנְתָה וְאָמְרָה כָּכָה יֵעָשֶׂה לָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר לֹא יִבְנֶה אֶת בֵּית אָחִיו״. עַד כָּאן הָיוּ מַקְרִין.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If they decide to perform *ḥalitza*, **she says: “My brother-in-law refused to establish a name for his brother in Israel, he did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage”** (Deuteronomy 25:7), **and** afterward **he says: “I do not wish to take her”** (Deuteronomy 25:8). **And they would say** these statements **in the sacred** Hebrew **language** and not in any other language. Afterward, the shoe is removed and she spits before him, as is written: **“His *yevama* shall approach him, before the Elders, and remove his shoe from on his foot and spit before him”** (Deuteronomy 25:9), which indicates that **this spittle** must be **visible to the judges. “And** she shall **respond and say: So shall it be done to the man who does not build his brother’s house”** (Deuteronomy 25:9). **Up until this point** the judges **would prompt** the parties **to recite** the text that they are required to say.


###### Yevamot 106b:3
[Yevamot 106b:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:3)

וּכְשֶׁהִקְרָא רַבִּי הוּרְקָנוֹס תַּחַת הָאֵלָה בִּכְפַר עֵיטָם, וְגָמַר אֶת כׇּל הַפָּרָשָׁה, הוּחְזְקוּ לִהְיוֹת גּוֹמְרִין כׇּל הַפָּרָשָׁה. ״וְנִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל בֵּית חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״. מִצְוָה בַּדַּיָּינִין, וְלֹא מִצְוָה בַּתַּלְמִידִים. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: מִצְוָה עַל כׇּל הָעוֹמְדִים שָׁם לוֹמַר ״חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And when Rabbi Hyrkanus once prompted** the participants in *ḥalitza* **under the *ela* tree in the village** of **Eitam, he** prompted them to **finish reciting the whole** Torah **passage,** after which **they established the custom of completing the whole** Torah **passage.** Therefore, they continue and say the following verse: **“And his name shall be called in Israel: The house of he who had his shoe removed”** (Deuteronomy 25:10). **This mitzva** of saying: The house of he who had his shoe removed, applies **to the judges, but not to the students,** i.e., the students of the judges and other onlookers who are present. **Rabbi Yehuda says: It is a mitzva upon all those present to say: He who had his shoe removed.**


###### Yevamot 106b:4
[Yevamot 106b:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:4)

**גְּמָ׳** אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה, מִצְוַת חֲלִיצָה: קוֹרְאָה וְקוֹרֵא, וְחוֹלֶצֶת וְרוֹקֶקֶת וְקוֹרְאָה. מַאי קָמַשְׁמַע לַן? מַתְנִיתִין הִיא! הָא קָמַשְׁמַע לַן מִצְוָה הָכִי, וְאִי אָפֵיךְ, לֵית לַן בַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** **Rav Yehuda said:** This is the correct order for **the mitzva of *ḥalitza*: She recites** the sentence beginning with “My brother-in-law refused” (Deuteronomy 25:7), and afterward **he recites** “I do not wish to take her” (Deuteronomy 25:8). Then **she removes** the shoe, **and spits, and recites:** “So shall it be done to the man who does not build his brother’s house” (Deuteronomy 25:9). The Gemara asks: **What is** Rav Yehuda **teaching us? This is** already explicit in **the mishna.** The Gemara answers: **This teaches us** that **the mitzva is like this,** i.e., this is the proper order, **but if one switched the order, we have no** problem **with it,** as even though he did not fulfill the mitzva properly, the *ḥalitza* is still valid, since the order is not indispensable.


###### Yevamot 106b:5
[Yevamot 106b:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:5)

תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: בֵּין שֶׁהִקְדִּים חֲלִיצָה לִרְקִיקָה, וּבֵין שֶׁהִקְדִּים רְקִיקָה לַחֲלִיצָה — מַה שֶּׁעָשָׂה עָשׂוּי.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara comments: **This is also taught** in a *baraita*: **Whether the removal of the shoe preceded the spitting, or whether the spitting preceded the removal of the shoe, what he did is done,** i.e., the *ḥalitza* is valid.


###### Yevamot 106b:6
[Yevamot 106b:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:6)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הַאי מַאן דְּמַקְרֵי גֵּט חֲלִיצָה, לָא לַיקְרֵי לְדִידַהּ ״לֹא״ לְחוֹדֵיהּ וְ״אָבָה יַבְּמִי״ לְחוֹדֵיהּ, דְּמַשְׁמַע: ״אָבָה יַבְּמִי״. אֶלָּא: ״לֹא אָבָה יַבְּמִי״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Abaye said** concerning the details of these *halakhot*: **The one who prompts** the *yavam* and the *yevama* **to read** the text for the **bill of *ḥalitza* should not prompt her** by reciting **“He did not”** (Deuteronomy 25:7) **by itself, and “wish to consummate the levirate marriage”** (Deuteronomy 25:7) **by itself, because** such a way of reading **sounds** to one who hears only the second phrase **like** he is saying: **My *yavam* does wish to consummate the marriage. Rather,** he should prompt her all at once consecutively: **“He did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage”** (Deuteronomy 25:7), which will ensure that the intended meaning is clear.


###### Yevamot 106b:7
[Yevamot 106b:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:7)

וְלָא לַיקְרֵי לְדִידֵיהּ ״לֹא״ לְחוֹדֵיהּ ״חָפַצְתִּי״ לְחוֹדֵיהּ, דְּמַשְׁמַע ״חָפַצְתִּי לְקַחְתָּהּ״, אֶלָּא ״לֹא חָפַצְתִּי לְקַחְתָּהּ״. רָבָא אָמַר: אַפְסוֹקֵי מִילְּתָא הִיא, וְאַפְסוֹקֵי מִילְּתָא לֵית לַן בַּהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**And he should not read to the** *yavam*: “I **do not” by itself,** followed by: **“Wish to** take her” **by itself, as it sounds** to one who heard only the second phrase **like: I do wish to take her. Rather,** he should read together at once: **“I do not wish to take her.” Rava said: It is a** mere **interruption in the matter. And we have no** problem with regard to **an interruption in the matter** as it is basically just a pause for taking a breath**.**


###### Yevamot 106b:8
[Yevamot 106b:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:8)

רַב אָשֵׁי אַשְׁכְּחֵיהּ לְרַב כָּהֲנָא דְּקָמִצְטַעַר וּמַקְרֵי לַהּ ״לֹא אָבָה יַבְּמִי״, אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָא סָבַר לֵיהּ מָר לְהָא דְּרָבָא?

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
It is told: **Rav Ashi found Rav Kahana painstakingly trying to prompt** a certain *yevama*, so that she would recite: **“He did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage”** all at once, but the *yevama* did not understand and was distorting the meaning by not reciting the words together. Rav Ashi **said to him: Does the Master not hold that which Rava said,** that the proper pausing during the recitation is not indispensable?


###### Yevamot 106b:9
[Yevamot 106b:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:9)

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מוֹדֵה רָבָא בְּ״לֹא אָבָה יַבְּמִי״. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: הַאי מַאן דְּכָתֵב גִּיטָּא דַּחֲלִיצְתָּא — לִיכְתּוֹב הָכִי: אַקְרֵינוּהָ לְדִידַהּ מִן ״מֵאֵן יְבָמִי״ עַד ״אָבָה יַבְּמִי״, וְאַקְרֵינוֹהִי לְדִידֵיהּ מִן ״לֹא״ עַד ״לְקַחְתָּהּ״, וְאַקְרֵינוּהָ לְדִידַהּ מִן ״כָּכָה״ וְעַד ״חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**He said to him:** Although Rava disagreed with Abaye about interruptions in the recitation of: “I do not wish to take her,” **Rava concedes concerning** the recitation of: **“He did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage,”** as this recitation is essential and must be recited properly. Rav Kahana added that **Abaye** also **said: One who writes a bill of *ḥalitza* must write as follows: We prompted her to recite from “My brother-in-law refused” until “he did not wish to consummate the levirate marriage”** (Deuteronomy 25:7); **and we prompted him to recite from** “I do **not” until “take her”** (Deuteronomy 25:8). **And we prompted her to recite from “So shall”** (Deuteronomy 25:9) **until “he who had his shoe removed”** (Deuteronomy 25:10).


###### Yevamot 106b:10
[Yevamot 106b:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:10)

מָר זוּטְרָא מְשַׂרְטֵט וְכָתֵיב לְכוּלַּהּ פָּרָשָׁה. מַתְקֵיף לַהּ מָר בַּר אִידִי: וְהָא לֹא נִיתַּן לִיכָּתֵב! וְהִלְכְתָא כְּווֹתֵיהּ דְּמָר זוּטְרָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Mar Zutra would score** lines of a parchment **and write the whole** *ḥalitza* **passage** on it as a bill of *ḥalitza*, so it would be displayed before the *ḥalitza* participants. **Mar bar Idi strongly objected to this: But it is unable to be written** like this on its own, as the Torah may be written only in a complete state, and it is prohibited to write parts of the Torah when there is no mitzva to write them separately. The Gemara comments: Even so, **the *halakha* is in accordance with** the opinion of **Mar Zutra,** because there is an aspect of a mitzva here, as it is being written as part of a bill of *ḥalitza*, not for its own purpose.


###### Yevamot 106b:11
[Yevamot 106b:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:11)

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: רָקְקָה וּקְלָטַתּוּ הָרוּחַ — לֹא עָשְׂתָה וְלֹא כְּלוּם. מַאי טַעְמָא — ״וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו״ בָּעֵינַן. הִלְכָּךְ, הוּא אָרוֹךְ וְהִיא גּוּצָה, קְלָטַתְהוּ הָרוּחַ — אִיכָּא ״בְּפָנָיו״. הִיא אֲרוּכָּה וְהוּא גּוּץ — בָּעֵינַן עַד דְּמָטֵי לַהֲדֵי אַפֵּיהּ וַהֲדַר אָזֵיל.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ **Abaye said:** If the *yevama* **spat, but the wind seized** her saliva and it never landed in front of the face of the *yavam*, **she did nothing,** and her actions have no halakhic significance. **What is the reason** for this? **We require** that **“she spit before him,”** as is mentioned in the verse. **Therefore, if he is tall and she is short and the wind seized it,** the requirement of **“before him” is satisfied,** because the moment the saliva left her mouth it was in front of the face of the *yavam*. **But if she is tall and he is short, we require that the saliva reach the space across from his face, and afterward it may go** with the wind; i.e., if she was taller than him and the saliva was taken by the wind before it reached the height of his face, she did not fulfill her obligation.


###### Yevamot 106b:12
[Yevamot 106b:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:12)

אָמַר רָבָא: אֲכַלָה תּוּמָא וְרָקַת, אֲכַלָה גַּרְגִּישְׁתָּא וְרָקַתה — לֹא עָשְׂתָה וְלֹא כְּלוּם. מַאי טַעְמָא — ״וְיָרְקָה״ מֵעַצְמָהּ בָּעֵינַן, וְלֵיכָּא. וְאָמַר רָבָא: צְרִיכִי דַּיָּינֵי לְמִיחְזֵי רוּקָּא כִּי נָפֵיק מִפּוּמַּהּ דִּיבָמָה. דִּכְתִיב: ״לְעֵינֵי הַזְּקֵנִים ... וְיָרְקָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rava said:** If **she ate garlic and spat,** or if **she ate *gargishta* clay,** i.e., a type of clay once chewed for medicinal purposes, **and spat, she did nothing** and her actions have no halakhic significance, for this is not called spitting. **What is the reason** for this? **We require that “she shall spit” on her own, and this is not** satisfied here, for in this case she spits only on account of another thing that causes a pooling of saliva in her mouth. **And Rava said: The judges must see the spittle when it leaves the mouth of the *yevama*,** and the mere fact that she spat on the ground is insufficient, **as it is written: “Before the Elders…and spit,”** indicating that the spitting must take place before the eyes of the judges.


###### Yevamot 106b:13
[Yevamot 106b:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:13)

״וְנִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל בֵּית חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״ — מִצְוָה בַּדַּיָּינִין וְלֹא בַּתַּלְמִידִים. תַּנְיָא, אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: פַּעַם אַחַת הָיִינוּ יוֹשְׁבִים לִפְנֵי רַבִּי טַרְפוֹן, וּבָאתָה יְבָמָה לַחְלוֹץ, וְאָמַר לָנוּ, עָנוּ כּוּלְּכֶם: ״חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״, ״חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״, ״חֲלוּץ הַנָּעַל״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ It was taught in the mishna: With regard to the verse **“And his name shall be called in Israel: The house of he who had his shoe removed,” there is a mitzva upon the judges to recite this but** it is **not** a requirement **for the students** or onlookers. It **is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi Yehuda says: Once we were sitting before Rabbi Tarfon and a *yevama* came to perform *ḥalitza*. He said to us: You must all answer: “He who had his shoe removed,” “He who had his shoe removed,” “He who had his shoe removed,”** stating that portion of the verse three times.


###### Yevamot 106b:14
[Yevamot 106b:14](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Yevamot/r/106b:14)

**הֲדַרַן עֲלָךְ מִצְוַת חֲלִיצָה**