Previous daf

1)

(a) The Gemara concludes that everyone agrees with Rebbi Elazar's Din (that nobody would take the trouble to re-spin torn threads to attach to the border of one's clothes), and the reason that Rebbi Yehudah forbids carrying in new Tefilin, is not because of the suspicion that they may be Kamei'in, but because the straps have not yet been tied into the correct type of knots - and since tying a knot is prohibited on Shabbos, there is no way that one can carry theTefilin inside wearing them.

(b) There is no proof from here that a bow is not acceptable for Tefilin - perhaps it is, but Rebbi Yehudah forbids saving them because, in his opinion, a bow is considered a knot on Shabbos, and is forbidden.

(c) We are not advocating tying an ordinary bow, according to Rebbi Yehudah; what we *are* advocating is making a bow in the form of the knot that is required for Tefilin (i.e. like a 'Daled' or a 'Mem').

(d) We know that the 'Daled' and the 'Yud' made in the Tefilin straps, should be visible - from the Pasuk '*ve'Ra'u* Chol Amei ha'Aretz Ki Shem Hashem Nikra Alecha' ... which pertains to Tefilin. So we see, that all parts which make up the Name of Hashem should be visible.

(a) When Rav Chisda quoting Rav, says that someone who buys Tefilin wholesale from an uncertified salesman, must examine three individual Tefilin before the seller becomes certified - he speaks about a salesman who always buys from the same Tefilin-maker (a fact that we normally take for granted). What he therefore means is that the customer must examine either *two* Shel Yad and *one* Shel Rosh or vice-versa, after which, the Tefilin-maker becomes certified (as far as he is concerned). From then on, he is permitted to buy from him blind.

(b) Should he examine only three Tefilin Shel Yad or three of Tefilin Shel Rosh - then he will only be certified for the type that he examined, but not for the other.

(c) The examination of three pieces or even sets of Tefilin will not be effective - if we know that the salesman tends to buy from different Tefilin-makers.

(a) Rav interprets the Beraisa: 'bi'Tefilin, Bodek Shalosh Shel Yad ve'shel Rosh - to mean 'Bodek Shalosh, Mehen Shel Yad, u'Mehen Shel Rosh'.

(b) The Beraisa: 'bi'Tefilin, Bodek Shetayim, Shel Yad ve'Shel Rosh' - he will explain in the same way, only the author of that Beraisa is Rebbi, in whose opinion *two* constitutes a Chazakah.

(c) The Seifa 've'Chen be'Tzeves ha'Sheni, ve'Chen be'Tzeves ha'Shelishi' - goes like Rebbi too, and Rebbi agrees that when the salesman buys bundles of Tefilin, that there is no Chazakah, since one tends to buy bundles from different Tefilin-makers.

(d) The Tana mentions 'Shelishi' to inform us the above Chidush - namely, that when he buys bundles of Tefilin, there is no Chazakah. In fact, the same will apply to any subsequent purchase that he makes - each one will require an independent examination.

(a) Tzevasin - means sets of Shel Yad and Shel Rosh; whereas Kerichos means a number of Shel Yad or a number of Shel Rosh.

(b) The Mishnah is speaking when there are so many pairs, that he will not finish saving them by nightfall. Consequently, since he will anyway be obligated to continue with the Mitzvah after nightfall, Chazal did not bother him to begin on Shabbos. All he needs to do is to wait until after Shabbos, and then, to carry them all inside in one trip.

(a) Our Mishnah: 'u've'Sakanah, Mechasan ve'Holech' - is speaking about the danger of *gentile* robbers, who will kill him should they find wearing Tefilin; whereas the Beraisa: 'u've'Sakanah, Molichan Pachos Pachos me'Arba Amos' - is speaking about the danger of *Jewish* robbers, who will not threaten him because he is wearing Tefilin.

(b) Before Rebbi Shimon comments in the Seifa, we need to add to the Mishnah 'Bameh Devarim Amurim, be'Sakanas Ovdei-Kochavim, Aval be'Sakanas Listim, Molichan Pachos Pachos me'Arba Amos'.

6)

(a)

1. The Tana Kama prefers the method of carrying them less than four Amos at a time - because involving more people (as Rebbi Shimon advocates), creates a negative Shabbos atmosphere.
2. ... Rebbi Shimon prefers the method of handing them to one's friend etc. - because by carrying them less than four Amos at a time (as the Tana Kama advocates), there is always the fear that one may inadvertently carry them *more* than four Amos - even just once.

(b) 've'Chen Be'no' means - that the same will apply to carrying a baby that was born out in the field, whom they now need to carry into town for the Bris Milah.

(a) Rebbi Yehudah agrees with the principle 'ha'Beheimah ve'ha'Kelim ke'Raglei ha'Ba'alim'. However, he follows his own reasoning in Beitzah, where he says that water is different, because it is not considered a real object, and therefore is not Koneh Shevisah.

(b) Rebbi Yehudah advocates carrying the water - by pouring it from one barrel to another.

(a) Rebbi Yehudah says in Beitzah that although he agrees with the Chachamim, who say that if a woman borrowed various ingredients to make a dough, then the dough may be carried only to places which the various owners may go, he disagrees with them as far as the owner of the *water* goes. According to him, the owner of the water does not forbid the dough to be taken outside his Techum.

(b) The Gemara rejects this contention however, on the grounds that Rebbi Yehudah only made his statement with regard to a *dough*, where the water is not visible, but that he would not say such a thing by a *barrel of water*, where the water is visible as a separate entity. How do we know that? Because in a Beraisa, Rebbi Yehudah holds that even in a *pot*, where the water is absorbed in the food, it is not Batel, how much more so when it is in a *barrel*!

(c) So Rava establishes Rebbi Yehudah - by water which was *not* Koneh Shevisah, and a barrel which *was*, only the barrel is Batel to the water

(d) The Mishnah in Shabbos says that if someone carries out a corpse on a bed, he is Patur even for carrying the bed, because it is Batel to the corpse.

(a) On account of the Beraisa, where Rebbi Yehudah confines the Heter of passing on a barrel of water to a Shayara - Rav Yosef establishes our Mishnah too, by a Shayara, where Chazal permitted transporting the barrel of water, because of the urgency of the situation.

(b) Abaye learns that the Beraisa which confines the concession to a Shayara, is speaking when both the barrel and the water acquired Shevisah; whereas our Mishnah is speaking about a barrel which *was* Koneh Shevisah but water which was *not*. Consequently, it is permitted to transport them anywhere even not by a Shayara.

(c) Rav Ashi establishes our Mishnah by both a barrel and water which were *not* Koneh Shevisah - and the Amru Lo (who are none other than Rebbi Yochanan ben Nuri) hold 'Cheftzei Hefker Konin Shevisah'; consequently, when they say 'Lo Tehalech Yoser me'Raglei Ba'aleha', they actually mean to say that the barrel of water may go no further than a barrel of water that did have an owner.

(a) Our Mishnah permits rolling back a Sefer whose one end rolled out of his hands and whose other end he still holding - precisely because he is still holding the other end, in which case, he is Patur.

(b) Our Mishnah records that, if a Sefer fell from his hands and it landed to within ten Tefachim of the street, he turns it upside-down, so that the writing is facing downwards.

(c) Rebbi Yehudah says that even if it no more than a hairsbreadth from the ground, one may retrieve it (this will explained later).

(d) Rebbi Shimon is the most lenient of all. According to him, even if it has already landed on the street, he may roll it back, since Chazal permitted all Isurei de'Rabbanan, by to Sifrei Kodesh.