Yevamot II 101: A Court of Three

Today we end Perek XI with some final words about a son born of a yevama and an unknown father.  The rabbis discuss different circumstances if one possible father is a priest or if both possible fathers are priests. As part of this discussion, we are reminded that the Gemara speaks of cursing one's father as blessing one's father out of extreme deference.  The rabbis note that one cannot curse or strike someone who might be his father.  Perek XI ends with words regarding shares that might be entitled to such an adult-child due to his patrilineage. 

A new Mishna begins Perek XII on the mitzva of chalitza.  Three judges, even laymen, witness the procedure.  He must be wearing a shoe made of soft leather that covers the entire foot.  A soft shoe is not valid, as are sandals without heels.  He can be an amputee from the knee down; wearing a borrowed sandal, or a sandal made of wood, or shoes on the wrong feet.  Chalitza is also valid as long as his shoe is not too big for him to walk in; not so small that it does not cover most of his foot.

The Gemara establishes the need for a shoe that does not tie high upon the leg.  It speaks to the number of elders required: because "elders" implies at least two, and because the word is mentioned twice, we could assume four rather than three elders were intended.  And because the elders should not have an even number, five might be most appropriate, the Gemara argues.  Laymen are implied due to a verse that speaks to blindness; all elders should be without any physical blemish.  Those elders must be able to see the yevama's spittle hit the ground before she becomes a chalutza.

The Gemara focuses on this notion of physical beauty representing some sort of inner perfection.  Rav Yosef teaches that a court must be clean in righteousness and similarly free from blemish.  "You are entirely beautiful, my love, and there is no blemish in you" (Song of Songs 4:7) is also called upon as a proof text regarding the perfection of the Great Sanhedrin.  The rabbis seem eager to speak of the importance of our physical presentation as well as our righteousness.  Why would a natural physical difference be a sign of anything other than G-d's creative creation?  Perhaps the rabbis were more eager to explain physical differences than they were to see all creation as a reflection of G-d's image.

The rabbis continue to explore who these three judges might be if they are not actually experts.  They examine texts that would suggest that they can be Israelites.  They also suggest that according to another verse, these judges might counsel the yavam regarding whether he should perform chalitza or levirate marriage.  The example used is interesting.  If the boy and girl were of different ages, what is an old man to do with a young girl?  And what is a boy to do with an old woman? "Go be with someone like yourself and do not bring a quarrel into your household". 

Refusals, as offered by minor girls who are given in marriage by someone other than their fathers, should also be declared in front of three witnesses.  Similarly, the ordination of elders and the ceremony where the heifer's neck is broken also require three witnesses.  We learn in our notes that a court of three witnesses is announced in advance.  Usually the court will witness chalitza in a synagogue, letting communities know that they will be in a particular place on a particular day.  Does this mean that the yevama would actually spit in on the synagogue floor?  Even if it were a dirt floor, it is difficult to imagine such disrespectful actions within a holy place.

Finally, the rabbis agree that people who have converted to Judaism should not sit on courts.  They use a proof text that speaks about witnesses being of Israel.