She spat thrice while three members of the congregation testified that she passed before them and they made a beit din judgement as is inscribed there.
The questioner then concluded with a number of halakhic queries:
What is the status of the widow? Is she forbidden to her levir? Must she therefore be given halitzah? Is there power in this spitting to forbid her to her brother-in-law, so that he must give her halitzah?
The main point to clarify was whether this staged act of spitting in the synagogue, in the presence of three men who sit as a rump beit din(court), may give the widow the status of a halutzah(one who has received levirate release), which would have prevented her brother-in-law from taking her in levirate marriage. Can this partial“halitzah,” without removal of a sandal, with no declaration by the yavam and without his consent be considered sufficient to make his sister-in-law forbidden to him?
Rabbi Galante replies in a long, closely argued responsum that the deed perpetrated in the synagogue cannot be construed as valid halitzah. Nevertheless, it has the power to eliminate the possibility of yibbum:“In this case there is no one who will claim that she may be taken in levirate marriage. Rather she must receive halitzah.” The decisor thereby gives his post factum approval of the desparate staged act of the young woman, that blocked her brother-in-law from chaining her to him. Now he must give her halitzah.
One question remains:“It is important to know whether a beit din has the power to force the yavam(to give halitzah) or
66