Yevamos - Daf 102
- Who can a ger judge judge?
Rava said: גר דן את חבירו דבר תורה – A ger can judge his fellow ger according to Torah law, as it is stated: "שום תשים עליך מלך אשר יבחר ה' אלקיך בו" – You shall surely place over yourself a king, whom Hashem, your G-d, will choose, "מקרב אחיך תשים עליך מלך" – from the midst of your brothers shall you place over yourself a king. This implies that is only “over yourself”, meaning born Jews, that we require a king to be someone who is "מקרב אחיך" – from the midst of your brothers, אבל גר דן את חבירו גר – but a ger can judge his fellow ger. And if his mother is a born Jew, he can even judge a born Jew. But with respect to chalitzah, עד שיהא אביו ואמו מישראל – one is not permitted to judge unless both his father and mother are born Jews, as it is written: "ונקרא שמו בישראל" – And his name shall be called “in Israel.”
- How we know that chalitzah means removal of the shoe, not putting it on
Rav Kahana said to Shmuel: From what source do we know that the term chalitzah used in the passuk, "וחלצה נעלו מעל רגלו" מישלף הוא – She shall perform chalitzah with his shoe upon his foot, means removal? We seem to derive its meaning from the passuk about tzaraas on a house, "וחלצו את האבנים אשר בהן הנגע" – And they shall remove (ve’chiltzu) the stones that contain the affliction. ואימא זרוזי הוא – But why not say it means “readying”, for it is written in another passuk, "החלצו מאתכם אנשים לצבא" – Ready (heichaltzu) men from among yourselves for the legion. This would imply that the yevamah should do chalitzah by putting a shoe on the yavam’s foot, not by taking the shoe off his foot? The Gemara answers that there, too, the term heichaltzu can mean “removing” as if to say, the men should remove themselves from their homes to prepare to go to war. When the Gemara demonstrates that chalitzah can also mean strengthening, it concludes that if it meant strengthening with chalitzah, it should have written, “במעל רגלו” – on that which is upon his foot. Instead, the passuk says, "מעל רגלו" – from upon his foot, which implies removal.
- באנפיליא חליצתה פסולה
The Mishnah had stated: באנפיליא חליצתה פסולה – If chalitzah was performed with a sock, her chalitzah is invalid. The Gemara infers, דאנפיליא לאו מנעל הוא – that a sock is not a shoe. This was learned in a Mishnah in Shekalim, as well: The one who separates the terumah from the treasury funds may not enter לא בפרגוד חפות ולא באנפיליא – neither with a hemmed garment nor with a sock, and needless to say, he may not enter with a min’al or sandal, לפי שאין נכנסין במנעל וסנדל לעזרה – because one may not enter the azarah wearing a min’al or sandal. Since wearing a sock is not permitted on the grounds of suspicion, and not because of the general prohibition of wearing shoes in the azarah, we can see from this Mishnah as well that a sock is not in the category of a shoe. The Gemara questions this, based on a Baraisa which discusses the laws of Yom Kippur, that states: אחד מנעל וסנדל ואנפיליא לא יטייל בהן – A person may not walk about with a min’al a sandal or a sock לא מבית לבית לא ממטה למטה – neither from house to house nor from bed to bed. This implies that socks do have the same status as shoes? Rava answered that the Baraisa regarding Yom Kippur is referring to a leather sock, whereas our Mishnah and the Mishnah in Shekalim is referring to a fabric sock.
