1) You need three judges by Chalitza, even if they're really laymen, as long as they could read. [Tosfos says: all other questions that come up, they could ask experts afterwards whether it was done correctly. However, you can't ask them if they read it correctly, since they wouldn't be able to remember exactly how it was read.]

2) R' Yehuda originally said that you need five, but he reversed his decision. Therefore, the Halacha is like the Tanna Kama. However, for a Beis Din for Mee'un (husband refusal), it's enough to have two.

3) It's not a Kosher Beis Din if the people are blemished.

4) Rava requires Beis Din to see the spit coming out of the Yevama [Tosfos: but he's Kosher if he's blind in one eye.] You need a Beis Din of natural Jews, and not converts.

5) All who are standing there needs to say “Chalutz Hanual” (take off the shoe). You need to have the brother personally there, and not his agent. They also give him good advice that he shouldn't do Yibum if there's an age gap.

6) Rava says: the Beis Din need to prepare an area for Chalitza. Even though you only need three judges, but you should have five to publicize the Chalitza (so that everybody should know she's Pasul for a Kohein, and that she's free and she's available now).

7) A Ger can judge another Ger from the Torah. If he's a son of a Ger, but his mother was a natural Jewess, he may judge everybody. However, to be a judge for Chalitza, he needs to have his father a Yisrael [Tosfos: and then he's Kosher even if his mother was a convert]. This is true even for a Chalitza of another Ger family, and even if the parties accept him as a judge, (where, usually, he can be a judge for other cases, since it's not a problem appointing the Ger to a position unless he can force himself on them.)

8) If a judge knows for sure that a certain person never lies, the person is believed to say that a document is paid to the point that it makes us assume there is something wrong with the document. [Rashi in Kesuvos says: you don't rip, nor can you collect, from this document. Tosfos argues: that the person with the document needs to swear that it wasn't paid. We must say the Chiddush is that the trusted person is generally invalid to be a witness in this case, like a woman or relative. After all, we always need the person with the document to swear that a document wasn't paid up if it contradicts any valid single witness. However, R' Chananel explains, (and Ri explains his explanation): we refer to a case where it's written in the document that the borrower accepts that the lender should be believed against a single witness; however, he still needs to swear against such a believable single witness.]

9) Everybody holds that, even if Eliyahu would show up and say that you shouldn't do Chalitza with a sandal, (but with a shoe); you don't listen to him since we are already accustomed too do so. Rabbah quotes Rav: if Eliyahu would come and say to do Chalitza with a shoe, we'll listen to him. R' Yosef quotes Rav: if Eliyahu comes and says that you shouldn't do Chalitza with a shoe, we listen to him. The practical difference between them; if you can L'chatchila do Chalitza with a shoe. (As Rabbah says not to unless Eliyahu tells you to do it, and R' Yosef held that you may L'chatchila do it until Eliyahu tells you not to. This is also a Tannaic argument.

10) You can't say the reason for those who say you shouldn't do Chalitza with a shoe since the laces on the shoe is considered as “a shoe upon another shoe,” for, if so, it would be a Pasul Chalitza even B'dieved if that would be the case. Rather, it's a decree since you might use a ripped shoe, or a half of shoe. (However, a sandal is made from hard leather, and you won't be able to fasten a ripped sandal, or half a sandal on his foot, so it will never be used.) [Tosfos says: although the Gemara in Shabbos says that you shouldn't do Chalitza with a ripped shoe, but if you did, it's a Kosher Chalitza; that's only when it wasn't ripped too badly and is still wearable.]

11) Rav says: if it wasn't for R' Chiya who allows Chalitza with a sandal with straps, he would have only done Chalitza with a certain sandal worn by merchants that is more snug on the foot. Regarding our sandals, although they're tied from side to side and you can keep it on your foot without tying the straps, we should tie the straps anyhow to make sure that the Chalitza would be better (since you remove it from being tighter on the foot.) [Tosfos says that the Yerushalmi says to tie it with a slipknot in order that the Yevama can untie it with one hand, i.e., the right hand, and holds the sandal in her left hand. Then she pulls the sandal off his heal with her right hand, and only use her left hand to help and drag off the shoe. However, Tosfos concludes: our custom is to make a complete tie. However, we should be stringent to pull off the shoe with her right hand like the Yerushalmi. Even though we don't find a P'sul of the left side by Chalitza but by taking off the sandal from the left foot. Also, we see the Gemara says that a woman whose missing her hands takes off the sandal with her teeth, so we see you don't need a right hand.]

12) She personally needs to untie the sandal and to pull off the sandal, and the Heter to marry out happens when she exposes most of his heal.

13) R' Yanai has an unresolved inquiry: if she didn't pull off the shoe, but ripped it off, or burned it off with coals, is she permitted to marry out or not? After all, she didn't take off the shoe, but she did expose his foot.

14) There's another unresolved inquiry: if there's an outer shoe over an inner shoe (as we see that there are those who walk with such “Mooki” shoes [Tosfos: for if it's not the way to wear shoes like this, it wouldn't be considered a Chalitza]; if she rips the outer shoe to access the inner ones to pull it off, is it a good Chalitza since she did the action of pulling off the shoe, or not since it doesn't expose his foot (since it's still covered with the outer shoe).

15) Both the brother and the Yevama need to intend that the Chalitza to be what permits the lady to marry out, but if one didn't intend for this, it won't work.

16) Although we say that, even if the Yevama lives with the brothers, we don't need to worry that, perhaps, once she took the shoe off one of them and became forbidden to them, implying if she did take the shoe off, it's a Chalitza even without intent; we must say that it means, even if you see her take the shoe off one of them, you don't need to worry that it forbids her. Alternatively, you need intent for the Chalitza to allow her to marry out; but she becomes forbidden to the brothers with a Chalitza without intent.

17) Rav says: you can't do Chalitza with a shoe sewn with linen. (Either a linen cloth was sewn to the inside of the shoe, or the stitching of the shoe was made with linen thread.) After all, the Pasuk calls shoes only to those made out of leather, as it says “shoes of the animal Tachash,” [Tosfos says: but its not probable to say that the leather must come from a Kosher animal like a Tachash, and not like R' Tam who says so.] However, the straps don't need to be made from leather, and it doesn't ruin it from being a shoe. [Tosfos says: this is like the Rabanan who argue with R' Meir regarding a man who's missing a leg and says he can't go out with his false leg on Shabbos since it's not a shoe since it's not made of leather. However, R' Meir considers all materials shoes as long as it protects the foot.]

18) You can't do Chalitza with cloth socks, and you may wear them on Yom Kippur. However, leather socks are considered like shoes, and you can do Chalitza with it, but you can't wear it on Yom Kippur.

19) It's not prohibited to wear something on your feet on Yom Kippur for pleasure, as long as it's not a shoe. Therefore, Rabbah b. R' Huna wrapped a handkerchief around his feet on Yom Kippur.

20) We learned: you can do Chalitza with a ripped shoe as long as it covers most of his foot, or a ripped sandal, as long as it holds most of his foot. You may do Chalitza with a grass or blast shoe, or to a man who's missing a leg with his false leg. Or a lame man who needs to drag himself by his hands, and drags his feet behind him, with the supports for his feet. Also, he may have Chalitza done to him while standing, sitting, or leaning. [Tosfos adds: but he should L'chatchila stand, as we say later, since it's like the end of a judgment (when all should stand), or because the Pasuk says “and he stands.”] A blind man can have Chalitza done to him [Tosfos: and we only explain “before the eyes” to refer to Beis Din. Also, when it says “she spits before him,” we don't say that it connotes “before his eyes.”] However, only an adult can have Chalitza done to him, and not a minor.

21) This is only according to R' Meir who permits a man who's missing a leg to go out with his false leg on Shabbos since it's a shoe since it protects his stump. However, R' Yossi forbids it. [Tosfos explains: since he holds that it can only be considered a shoe if it's made like a regular shoe. However, Tosfos asks: in Yuma, it says that everybody considers it a shoe, and R' Yossi is only concerned on Shabbos that it might fall off and he'll come to retrieve it and carry it four Amos in a Reshus Harabim. Also, it's difficult: since we're comparing a shoe for Yom Kippur to a shoe for Chalitza, and we permit here a grass shoe for Chalitza, and in Yuma, we permit to wear it on Yom Kippur.] R' Yossi admits that you can use the false leg if it's covered with leather. R' Meir admits that you can't use cloth socks since it doesn't protect the foot.

22) When receiving Chalitza, you need to push your foot on the ground.

23) If somebody has a deformity that his feet are overturned and the top of the foot is facing the ground, he can't have Chalitza. (Earlier, when we allowed doing Chalitza with the foot supports of the lame person pulling himself by his hands, it's only if his feet are facing the right way. [Rashi explains: since you need to remove the shoe from “the leg that's above the foot,” and the leg above the overturned foot can't have that definition. Although we allowed doing Chalitza with a man who has part of his leg cut off, that's only because, when his foot existed, the leg was above his foot, so, even after his amputation, it keeps the status. R' Chananel explains the reason: since he can't press his foot against the floor, but an amputee can push his stump against the floor. From these answers: they're assuming that an amputee can have Chalitza. However, the Ri says that it's not so simple, since the Yerushalmi implies that he can't. Although we say later that the Chalitza is Kosher from anyplace below the knee, that refers to the tie of the sandal. Although we say that you can do Chalitza with a false leg, that may refer to a regular person who puts it on his foot.]

24) [Tosfos explains: that, which is says in Shabbos, that this false leg is not susceptible to Tumas Medris if it doesn't have pads; that's because it's not common to walk in them. However, you still may use it for Chalitza since it's no worse than the sandal of an idol or of Beis Din, which is not too common to walk in either.]

25) It's Kosher from the knee and below. Although we exempt an amputee from going to the Mikdash on the Regel since the Pasuk says “from his foot,” and his leg is not considered his foot; but by Chalitza, it says from “above his foot,” which is the leg. We don't consider the ankle as “above his foot” and its separates the foot from the leg and make it “above what's above the foot.” After all, the ankle is on the same level as the foot, so it's not considered as above the foot.

26) You can have Chalitza with a sandal that's not his, or with a left sandal placed on the right foot. However, L'chatchila, you need the right sandal, and if he doesn't own a sandal, you gift one to him.

27) The sandal can't be too big that he can't walk in it, and it can't be too small that it doesn't surround most of his foot. [Tosfos says: this is even if it covers his heal, since it's not considered covering his foot without it. However, the Chalitza takes effect when it's removed from most of the heel.] The sandal must also have a heel.

28) R' Pappi quotes Rava: you shouldn't do Chalitza with a sandal with a Tzaras that needs to be locked up for further observation, but it's not yet a definite determined Tzaras; but if you do, then it's a valid Chalitza. However, if it was already determined to be a Tzaras, the Chalitza is invalid. Since it's designated to be burned, we consider it as if it's already burnt. R' Pappa quotes Rava: even if it's a determined Tzaras, it's B'dieved a valid Chalitza.

29) A house with a determined Tzaras makes one Tamai when entering, or when touching it's outside (and a locked up one only makes one Tamai from the inside) [Tosfos: Ri had a Safeik if it's only when entering, or even if he sticks his hand in and touch the walls.]) According to R' Pappi,, the reason that it's considered entering a house even though it's destined to be demolished since the Pasuk says “you demolish the house,” inferring that it has the status of a house when you demolish it.

30) A Kazayis of a cloth that has Tzaras that enters a house (even if it's not the majority of the cloth) makes the house Tamai. It must refer to a case where it's a determined Tzaras since the Shiur of Kazayis is learned from having a Hekish to a corpse, (which has Tumah with a Shiur Kazayis) and only a determined Tzaras has a Hekish to a corpse. According to R' Pappi, the reason why we still consider it as a cloth to make Tamai although it's destined to be burnt; since the Pasuk says “you burn the clothes,” that it still has the status of clothes when it's burnt. However, you can't extrapolate that it still has the status of a sandal for Chalitza, since we don't extrapolate from Tumah to prohibitions. (However, R' Pappa holds that we're not extrapolating, but it's just revealed to us that the Torah considers it as a valid article of clothing.)

31) A cloth that's three fingers squared that has Tzaras makes a house Tamai when most of it enters a house (even if it's not a Kazayis). [Tosfos says: this implies even if it didn't stay in at all. Even though the Gemara in Kiddushin says that if someone carries a Tzaras item underneath a tree, it doesn't make underneath the tree Tamai unless he stops; that's only by a tree that doesn't have walls surrounding it. However, if it's within the walls of a house, it's as if it stopped there. Although the Mishna in Keilim says that only a corpse makes things Tamai under a tent, and not a Metzorah; it only refers to making under a tree Tamai when carrying the Tumah without stopping. Alternatively, only a corpse's Tumah can spread from one house to another with a window in between, but a Metzorah only makes the house it's in Tamai.]

32) You shouldn't use a sandal used as an idol for Chalitza, but B'dieved, the Chalitza is valid. [Rashi says: we refer to an idol owned by a non-Jew before you get a non-Jew to cancel it. It's not considered as designated to be burned since it can be fixed when a non-Jew cancels its deity. Although it's presently forbidden to partake pleasure from it, but we say that Mitzvos weren't given to have pleasure from. Tosfos says: the Gemara in Chulin that says you can't blow with a Shofar of an idol, and if you do, you're not Yoitza since it's designated to be burned and it's viewed if it doesn't have the proper Shiur; that refers to an idol of a Jew. We must establish our Gemara where he picked up the sandal not to acquire it, or else it would become an idol of a Jew and it can't be canceled. R' Tam says: both Gemaras refer to idols of non-Jews, and you're only Yoitza after it's canceled. Even so, you shouldn't L'chatchila use it since it was once used as an idol, it's disgusting to use it for a Mitzvah. However, we don't have such a care for covering blood, so you may L'chatchila cover the blood with dirt of an Ir Hanidachas.]

33) However, you can't use a sandal that was use for a gift for an idol (that can never become canceled), or an Ir Hanedachas. Also, you can't use a sandal made to go with shrouds for a corpse since it's not made for anyone to walk in. Although, we allow him to do Chalitza with the Beis Din's sandal even though it's also not made for walking in, but since, if the Beis Din's agent walks in it, they don't care, it's considered made for walking in.

34) The Tanna Kama says: if he does Chalitza by night, it's a good Chalitza, since he compares it to the end of a judgment that's Kosher at night. R' Elazar Pasuls since he considers it like the beginning of the judgment that's Pasul by night.

35) Tanna Kama says: it's Pasul to do Chalitza on the left foot since he learns a Gezeira Shava from the 'Regel' of the Metzorah that's the right foot. R' Elazar says it's Kosher since he doesn't agree to the Gezeira Shava since the words are not extra. We can't extrapolate directly from Metzorah since we can ask that a Metzorah is different since we see he needs ceder wood, a hyssop etc. that a Chalitza doesn't need.

36) The Halacha is that you can't do Chalitza in private, but you need to do it in front of three judges. If one of those men turns out to be a relative, or someone else Pasul to judge, the Chalitza is not valid.

37) If you don't read the P'sukim, the Chalitza is valid, but if you don't remove the shoe, the Chalitza is invalid. If you don't spit; R' Eliezer says that it's Pasul since the Pasuk says “so shall you do,” to teach us that all actions are necessary for the Chalitza to be valid. [Tosfos explains: however, the reading is not included since it's not an action of 'doing.' This is even according to the opinion that moving one's mouth to speak is considered an action (and if you transgress a Lav that involves speaking, you would get Malkos since he holds it to be a Lav with an action); but it's still a very weak action. Alternatively, it was only said by screaming at an animal to make it move, where it's considered it an action since it causes an action.] R' Akiva says it's valid since the Pasuk says “so shall you do to a man,” only the action with the man is needed to make it valid.

38) If either the brother or the wife is a deaf-mute, the Chalitza is not valid since they can't read [Tosfos: even though they would be considered as if they're of mature mind if an adult stands over them directing them.] Although, usually, a Chalitza is valid without reading, but they need to be able to read. This is like we say by a Mincha, that it's Kosher if you don't stir in the oil as long as it's possible to stir in the oil (i.e., the volume of the flour is not too large that the oil can't stir in).

39) [Tosfos says: but the insane can't do Chalitza even if Beis Din directs them, since there are too many things for Beis Din to direct them. This is not similar to allowing a Get they wrote with direction from an adult; since he writes the names of the husband and wife and their cities, it's more of a proof that he wrote it for her.]

40) One version of what they sent to Shmuel's father: if the Yevama spits at the Yavam, even without Chalitza, she's forbidden to the brothers and they can only do Chalitza from here on. Also, we can compare it to Rebbi's opinion that holds that, when you bring the two loaves on Shvous (that becomes Kodesh through the Shechita of its Shlomim sheep, if you Shecht it not L'shma, even if you sprinkle the blood L'shma, the loaves are not Kodesh. However, if you Shecht it L'shma but sprinkle the blood not L'shma; the loaves are Kodesh that it becomes Pasul if taken out of the Mikdash, but not to eat. (R' Elazar b. Shimon says that it's not Kodesh at all.) The same over here, the spitting makes her forbidden to the brothers, even though it doesn't allow her to remarry.

41) Alternatively, we can say that its R' Akiva, as we see in a Braisa. Although spitting doesn't have any effect to permit her to remarry, since she's permitted to remarry even if she doesn't spit; it's a decree to forbid her to the Yavam since people will assume that the sandal was already removed, since the spitting is usually done after the sandal removal. However, we don't need to make the same decree by reading. Even though there is some reading after the sandal removal, but since there is some reading before the sandal removal, so people won't say that the sandal was removed just because people were reading some P'sukim.

42) Another version of what they sent to Shmuel's father: If she spits before the sandal removal, she's permitted to remarry without another spitting. As, if we require her to spit afterwards, people will assume that the lack of spitting prevents the Chalitza ceremony, and they'll allow a woman who spat and removed the sandal to still have Yibum.

43) A woman without hands can remove the sandal with her mouth since the Torah only says to remove the shoe and doesn't say that it needs to be done by hand. [Tosfos says: even though the Yerushalmi says that she should remove the sandal with her right hand, that is only L'chatchila.]

44) If a woman spat blood; the Beis Medrish says that it's Kosher since it doesn't say that the she “spits spit,” but only that she spits, any liquid. Shmuel says that the only reason why it's Kosher is because it's impossible that there shouldn't have a little bit of spittle mixed in the blood. However, it's only if she spat with force, but if it dripped out, it could have been pure blood. As we also see by a Zav who has blood dripped out his mouth, or out of his male organ, we don't say that it's Tamai since there must be spit, or Ziva, mixed into the blood.

45) R' Meir says: if a minor girl performs the Chalitza, it's not valid and she would need to redo it after she grows up. After all, the Pasuk has a Hekish between the man and the lady performing the Chalitza. Just as the man needs to be an adult, so too the lady. [Tosfos implies that this is invalid from the Torah. However, the Yerushalmi says that, B'dieved, if she doesn't do it again, it's valid, implying that it's only a rabbinical Asmachta of Hekish.] R' Yossi permits Chalitza [Tosfos: even L'chatchila]. R' Ami says that this is only from the time of P'utos (when her transactions are binding if she doesn't have a guardian to take care of her estate) [Tosfos: since she needs to have some maturity of mind]. Rava says: she has to have reached the time where her vows are binding. [Tosfos says: this is only according to R' Yossi, but he personally held like R' Meir, therefore, Rava concludes] the Halacha is: she can't do Chalitza until she grows her two pubic hairs.

46) You can't trample on the heads of Jews (by walking through a group of them sitting on the ground that looks from afar as if you're stepping on their heads) unless your needed to go there for their need. [Tosfos says: even a judge can't do it unless they need him, or, at least, he needs to walk in the shortest path possible.]

47) The Halacha is that you need three judges for a Chalitza, and it's Pasul if you have less. However, you don't need five. [Tosfos points out: but you should still have five to publicize the Chalitza.]

48) A mistaken Chalitza is valid. Reish Lakish explains it: if the brother was told to do Chalitza, and by that process, you're taking her as a wife. R' Yochanan disagrees and says that the Chalitza is not valid until the brother and wife both do it in order to release her from him. (However, it still Pasuls her to the brother, but doesn't allow her to marry others.) Rather, if the man does Chalitza on condition that she pays him two hundred Zuz, it's a valid Chalitza even if she doesn't fulfill the condition. After all, Chalitza can not be done through an agent, so it's not a condition that's similar to the condition of the children of Gad and Reuvein, so it's not binding. When Beis Din needs to force him to do Chalitza, he can't demand the money that was promised to him as a wage, since they can claim they were only joking with him (since he would need to do it anyways.) This is like somebody running away from prison and he tells a ferryman to get him across the river for a Dinar, he only needs to pay his normal wage. [Tosfos explains: this is only when he's asking a large price for what is usually a small wage. However, if the price for what he's doing is within rage, but the one who hired him didn't end up being able to use what he ordered, he still needs to pay for the whole wage.]

49) However, a mistaken Get is not valid (since it may be given through an agent, so the conditions are binding).

50) A forced Get and Chalitza; they're only Kosher if they're forced until he says that he wants it. Otherwise, it's Pasul. The same with a Korban, it's only Kosher if you forced him to say that he wants to bring a Korban.

51) [Rashi's text and explanation is as follows:] R' Huna says that you perform Chalitza or Mee'un (a minor refusing her husband) without recognizing the parties. Therefore, we don't write for them a document that they had Chalitza or Mee'un since another Beis Din might mistakenly take it as proof and think that the original Beis Din recognized them. [Tosfos says: however, you don't need to worry that witnesses may come to testify that they saw the Chalitza or Mee'un in a new Beis Din, since he won't say a half testimony, since Beis Din will ask if the Beis Din recognized them.] However, Rava says that you can't do Chalitza and Mee'un until Beis Din recognize them. Therefore, witnesses may write a document for them to prove that the ceremony happened even if they don't personally recognize them. We don't need to worry that the first Beis Din mistakenly thought that you can perform the ceremonies without recognizing the participants.

52) [Tosfos says: this is difficult, since the “mistaken Beis Din's” explanation is different by R' Huna's position than by Rava's position. Also, the text in Bava Basra reads that Rava is worried for a mistaken Beis Din. Rather, Tosfos explains: R' Huna allows doing these ceremonies without recognizing the participants since they're not worried that another Beis Din will mistakenly assume that they recognized them and marry them off without checking this out. Rava is worried that the second Beis Din will make that mistake. Therefore, the first Beis Din can't do these ceremonies without recognizing the participants.]

53) The Mitzvah of Chalitza is as follows: she comes in with her Yavam to Beis Din. They give them advice whether to do Yibum or not, and advise them not to do Yibum if they're not from the same age group not to cause strife in the house. Then she says “he doesn't want to do Yibum to me.” He says “I don't want to take her.” Abaya says: she shouldn't say first “no” with a pause, and then finish “wants to do Yibum.” Also, he shouldn't say “no” pause, and finish “want to take her.” After all, that would infer that it's not true, but he wants to take her. However, Rava doesn't hold this to be problematic since they're just getting around to finishing their sentence, and the break is inconsequential.

54) However, this is only in her first sentence “he refuses to do Yibum." However, when she says “he doesn't want to make Yibum,” then even Rava holds that the break in her words is problematic. As the 'no' seems to go on her first sentence “he refuses to do Yibum.” On that, it seem she's saying “no,” it's not true, but “he wants to make Yibum.”

55) Mar Zutra lined a scroll to write the words, and have them read within the scroll. They asked on him that you can't write a scroll with some P'sukim without writing the whole Sefer. The Gemara concludes that the Halacha is like Mar Zutra since it's not written to be learned from, but just to read words with.

56) After that, she takes off his sandal and spit, but if she reverses the order, it's not problematic.

57) If the Yevama is taller than the Yavam, and she spits and the wind blows away the spit before it comes across to the Yavam's face, she's not Yoitza spitting. However, if it's blown after it's in the airspace across to his face, or, if she's shorter than him, as soon as the spit leaves her mouth, she's Yoitza even if the wind blows it away. [Tosfos says: that, which Beis Din needs to see the spit on the floor is only the best way to do the Mitzvah, but it's Kosher without it.]

58) If she ate garlic and that made her spit, she's not Yoitza until she spits on her own accord.

59) Rava says that Beis Din must see the spit as it leaves the woman's mouth.

60) Afterwards, she should say “so should be done to a man etc.” All the reading should be in Hebrew. There is a custom to say “and we should call his name in Yisrael.” The Tanna Kama says that it's only for the judges to say, and not the students. R' Yehuda says: it's a Mitzvah for all who are standing there to say “remove the shoe.”