Yevamot

or [with one] that belonged to a condemned city  or [with one] that was made  in honour of a [dead] elder,  no halizah may be performed; and even a halizah that has been performed with it is invalid. Said Rabina to R. Ashi: In what respect is [the sandal] that was made in honour of a [dead] elder different [from an ordinary sandal]? Is it because it was not made for walking? That of the Beth din also  was not made for walking! — The other replied: Should the attendant of the Beth din use it for walking, would the Beth din object! MISHNAH. IF [A SISTER-IN-LAW] PERFORMED THE HALIZAH AT NIGHT, HER HALIZAH IS VALID. R. ELEAZAR, HOWEVER, REGARDS IT AS INVALID. [IF SHE PERFORMED IT] WITH [THE LEVIR'S] LEFT SHOE, HER HALIZAH IS INVALID, BUT R. ELEAZAR DECLARES IT TO BE VALID. GEMARA. May it be suggested that they  differ on the following principle: The one Master  holds the opinion that lawsuits are to be compared to plagues,  while the other Master  holds the opinion that lawsuits cannot be compared to plagues?  — No; all agree that lawsuits cannot be compared to plagues; for should they be compared, even the close of a legal process could not have been allowed at night.  Here, however, they  differ on the following principle: Ones Master  holds that halizah is like the commencement of legal proceedings  and the other Master  holds that halizah is like the close of the proceedings. Rabbah  b. Hiyya of Ktesifon  carried out a halizah with a felt sock, with no other men present, at night. Said Samuel: How great is his authority  in acting on the view of one individual!  What [however, could be his] objection?  If [against the use of the] felt sock, an anonymous Baraitha  [permits it]!  If [against his acting at] night, our anonymous Mishnah  [permits this]!  — His objection, however, is [that Rabbah acted] alone. How [he objected] could he act alone when it was only one individual who expressed approval of such a procedure!  For we learned: If [a sister-in-law] performed halizah in the presence of two or three men, and one of them. was discovered to be a relative or in any other way unfit [to act as judge], her halizah is invalid; but R. Simeon and R. Johanan ha-Sandelar declare it valid. Furthermore, it once happened that a man submitted to halizah with none present but himself and herself in a prison, and when the case came before R. Akiba he declared the halizah valid. And  if you prefer I might say: All these [rulings] also are the views of  an individual. For it was taught: R. Ishmael son of R. Jose stated, 'I saw R. Ishmael b. Elisha carry out a halizah with a felt sock, with no other men present, and [this occurred] at night'. WITH [THE LEVIR'S] LEFT SHOE HER HALIZAH etc. What is the Rabbis' reason? 'Ulla replied: [The meaning of] 'foot' [here]  is deduced from that of foot  in the context of the leper. As there  it is the right  so here  also it must be the right. Does not R. Eleazar, then, deduce [the meaning of] foot [here]  from that of foot  in the context of the leper? Surely, it was taught: R. Eleazar stated, Whence is it deduced that the boring [of the ear of a Hebrew slave]  must be performed on his right ear? — For the term ear was used here  and the term 'ear' was also used elsewhere;  as there  it is the right ear  so here also it is the right ear!  — R. Isaac b. Joseph replied in the name of R. Johanan: The statement is to be reversed. Raba said: There is, in fact, no need to reverse [the statement,  the reply to the objection  being that] the terms 'ear'  [are both] free [for the deduction];  the terms of 'foot,'  however, are not free for deduction.  But even if [one of the texts] is not free for deduction, what objection can be raised [against the deduction]?  — It may be objected: The case of the leper is different,  since he is also required [to bring] cedar-wood and hyssop and scarlet. MISHNAH. [IF A SISTER-IN-LAW] DREW OFF [THE LEVIR'S SHOE] AND SPAT,  BUT DID NOT RECITE [THE FORMULAE],  HER HALIZAH IS VALID.  IF SHE RECITED [THE FORMULAE] AND SPAT, BUT DID NOT DRAW OFF THE SHOE, HER HALIZAH IS INVALID.  IF SHE DREW OFF THE SHOE AND RECITED [THE FORMULAE] BUT DID NOT SPIT, HER HALIZAH, R. ELIEZER  STATED, IS INVALID; AND R. AKIBA STATED: HER HALIZAH IS VALID.