Previous daf

1)

(a) The Tana Kama of the Beraisa rules that a folded garment - is Chayav Tzitzis the way it is.

(b) Rebbi Shimon rules - that it is Patur.

(c) The problem with the Beraisa's statement that Rebbi Shimon concedes that it is Chayav if one then sewed it is - that this is obvious, and does require a Beraisa to say it.

(d) We answer 'Lo Tzericha, de'Naktah be'Sichi', which might mean that he did not sew it, but held the folds together with pegs. It might also mean - that he basted it (sewed it with large stitches).

(a) When Rabah bar Rav Huna went to see Rabah (or Rava) bar Rav Nachman, he found him wearing a folded Talis with Tzitzis on the four corners.

(b) When he unfolded it to cover his whole body, two of the Tzitzis landed up in the middle of the garment on his head.

(c) When Rabah bar Rav Huna pointed out that this was not the Kanaf mentioned by the Torah - Rabah bar Rav Nachman replaced that Talis with another one.

(d) Rabah bar Rav Huna objected to that - on the grounds that replacing the 'non-Kasher' garment would not exempt him from attaching Tzitzis to its four corners, since Tzitzis is a 'Chovas Talis', and not just a 'Chovas Gavra'.

(a) We try to prove Rabah bar Rav Huna's ruling, from the Chasidim ha'Rishonim in the Beraisa (that we cited earlier) 'Keivan she'Argu Bah Shalosh, Hayu Matilin Bah Techeiles' - seeing as they attached Tzitzis even though, at that stage, the Begadim were not yet ready to be worn.

(b) We refute the proof however - by stressing that they were after all, Chasidim, whose actions were 'Lif'nim mi'Shuras ha'Din' (to perform Chumros even when there was no Chiyuv), so perhaps they gave the Beged a Din of Chovas Talis, le'Chumra.

(c) Rav Ketina would wear a Sadin in summer and a Sarb'la a coat) in winter. Both of these were Patur from Tzitzis - the former because of the decree of 'K'sus Laylah' (as we learned earlier) - the latter, because two of its four corners were round.

(d) The angel asked him - why he did not wear Tzitzis.

(a) Rav Ketina, who took for granted that the angel was warning him that he would be punished, asked in surprised, whether Hashem punishes for failure to perform an Asei (see Tosfos DH 'Anshiso a'Asei').

(b) The latter's reply was - that when Hashem is angry, Hashem does indeed punish even for Mitzvos Asei such as this one (see Agados Maharsha).

(c) We try to prove from here that the angel argues with Rabah bar Rav Huna, that Tzitzis is Chovas Gavra and not Chovas Talis - because if it was Chovas Talis, how would it be possible to punish someone for not attaching Tzitzis on a Beged that is Patur from Tzitzis?

(d) We refute this proof however, on the grounds that - even we were to say that it is 'Chovas Gavra', we could ask exactly the same question (i.e. how it would be possible to punish someone for wearing a Beged that does not require Tzitzis without attaching Tzitzis).

(a) The angel was accusing Rav Ketina - of evading the Mitzvah of Tzitzis, by constantly wearing Begadim that were Patur from Tzitzis.

(b) Rav Tuvi bar Bisna Amar Shmuel too, requires that one attaches Tzitzis to garments in the drawer. On the other hand, he learns from the Pasuk "Asher Techaseh Bah" - that only a Beged that is worn for warmth and protection is Chayav Tzitzis, but not a garment that an old man wears for Kavod.

(c) When he says 'be'Hahu Sha'ata be'Vaday Raminan, Mishum "Lo'eg la'Rash Cheref Oseihu", he means - that one attaches Tzitzis to the shrouds of a dead man, to avoid the impression that one is mocking him, inasmuch as we are Chayav Tzitzis and he is Patur (see Tosfos).

(a) The distinction Rachbah Amar Rav Yehudah draws between a Beged which tore beyond three finger-breadths from the edge and within three finger-breadths is - that one is permitted to repair the former, but not the latter (see also Shitah Mekubetzes 11).

(b) The reason for this distinction is - because since within three finger-breadths is a location which is eligible to attach Tzitzis, the Chachamim issued a decree in case one subsequently comes to rely on the excess thread to use as Tzitzis. This does not apply to beyond three finger-breadths, which is not an eligible location to attach Tzitzis anyway.

(c) This conforms with the opinion of Rebbi Meir in a Beraisa. According to the Chachamim - Chazal issued no such decree, and even a tear within three finger-breadths may be repaired.

(a) Both opinions agree however, that one is not permitted to bring a complete Kanaf (even the size of an Amah), with the Tzitzis already attached, and sew it over the torn Kanaf - because it constitutes "Ta'aseh", 've'Lo min he'Asuy'.

(b) They permit bringing used Tzitzis from one Beged to attach to another - provided they have the required Shi'ur (since Lechatchilah, the Tzitzis must conform with all the requirements, as we learned above).

(c) We might we have thought that this would be prohibited - because removing Tzitzis from one Beged to attach on to another, denigrates the first Beged (so perhaps we ought to say 'Ein Matirin mi'Beged le'Beged').

(d) We nevertheless reject the proof from here that 'Matirin mi'Beged le'Beged' - because perhaps the Tana is speaking where the first Beged is worn out and is no longer fit to be worn (though it is not then clear what he is coming to teach us).

8)

(a) The Beraisa rules that if a Talis is made completely of Techeiles - one fulfills the Mitzvah of Lavan on it with any color Tzitzis (as long as it is not Techeiles).

(b) The sole dye (besides Techeiles), that is not eligible - is Kala Ilan, which the Chachamim forbade, in case there comes a time when the owner needs Tzitzis for a Sadin, and thinking that all the Tzitzis on this Beged are genuine Techeiles, he will take two of them and use them on the Sadin (not realizing that they are Kala Ilan), and transgress the Isur of Sha'atnez. Note, the author of this Beraisa cannot then be Rebbi, who forbids Sadin be'Tzitzis.

(c) Another Beraisa requires the same color Tzitzis as the Beged (regarding Lavan [see Tosfos DH 'Ein Poter'). We ask on the previous Beraisa, from this Tana's ruling - permitting Kala Ilan Bedieved, which the previous Tana did not.

(d) And we establish the second Beraisa when he added only two threads of Kala Ilan to the two threads of Techeiles which (in spite of what we said earlier) is Kasher Bedieved - because he is unlikely to take the Kala Ilan Tzitzis from the Beged, seeing as there are no spare threads on it.

(a) And we establish the first Beraisa - when, in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of Lavan, he added four Kala Ilan Tzitzis to the four Techeiles Tzitzis that were already there. It is Pasul - because we are afraid that at a later date, he will take the Kala Ilan threads, and believing them to be Techeiles, attach them to a Sadin, as we explained.

(b) Another reason for forbidding Kala Ilan in the first Beraisa (even Bedieved [even according to Rebbi]) is - because the Tzitzis must comprise two different colors.

(c) And we establish the second Beraisa - when there are already eight Tzitzis, four Techeiles and four Lavan, and it remains Kasher Bedieved, since it has eight Tzitzis even without the four of Kala Ilan.

(d) There no proof from the decree currently under discussion that 'Matirin mi'Beged le'Beged' - because the Tana is concerned that one might transfer the Tzitzis from one Beged to another, but that does not mean that it is permitted to do so.

(a) Rav holds 'Ein Matirin mi'Beged le'Beged', 'Ein Madlikin mi'Ner le'Ner' and 'Ein Halachah ke'Rebbi Shimon bi'Gereirah'. The lights he is referring to - are those of Chanukah.

(b) Shmuel rules - 'Matirin mi'Beged le'Beged', 'Madlikin mi'Ner le'Ner' and 'Halachah ke'Rebbi Shimon bi'Gereirah'.

(c) The last ruling constitutes - dragging a bed, a chair or a bench along the ground on Shabbos, which Rebbi Shimon in a Beraisa permits, provided one does not specifically intend to make a groove, because Rebbi holds 'Davar she'Ein Miskaven, Mutar'.

(d) Abaye testified - that Rabah ruled like Rav against Shmuel all through Shas, except for these three cases, where he ruled like Shmuel (presumably, he is referring to Isur only, since in Mamon, the Halachah is like Shmuel).

(a) Rav Yehudah would hand his Tzitzis (garment with Tzitzis) to a Nochri laundry man. We might have thought that this is forbidden - for fear that the Techeiles tears and the laundry man replaces it with Kala Ilan.

(b) Rav Chanina would roll the Tzitzis into a ball - Ravina used to sew a rim round the edge of the Beged, into which he would stuff the Tzitzis (to prevent them from tearing) before giving in to the laundry.

(a) According to Beis Shamai, Tzitzis comprise four threads (which are then doubled). Beis Hillel say - three.

(b) When we say 've'Kamah Tehei Meshuleshes, Beis Shamai Omrim Shalosh' - we are referring to the P'sil ...

(c) ... in which case the size of the G'dil will be two finger-breadths (see also Tosfos DH 'Beis Shamai').

(d) According to Beis Hillel - the P'sil is three finger-breadths (the G'dil one and a half).

(a) The Beraisa defines the finger-breadths of Beis Hillel as - four per Tefach.

(b) That refers to the thumb, Abaye explains. According to him - each Tefach comprises six little fingers and five middle ones.

(c) When Rav Papa says with regard to the Tzitzis ...

1. ... 'Hilchesa Arba be'Soch Shalosh', he means - that the four Tzitzis should be threaded through the hole in the Beged within three finger-breadths from the edge.
2. ... 'Meshuleshes Arba' - that the P'sil should hang down four finger-breadths (as we explained above).

(d) We query Rav Papa from a Beraisa which translates 'Tzitzis' as coming out (from the Kanaf). The Tana, supported by the elders of Beis Shamai and Beis Hillel in the attic of Yonasan ben Beseira, also translate 'Tzitzis' as - a 'Mashehu' (without a Shi'ur).

(a) We reconcile this Beraisa with Rav Papa, who just gave Tzitzis a Shiur - by interpreting 'Ein Lah Shi'ur' to mean 'Ein Lah Shi'ur le'Ma'alah, Aval Yesh Lah Shi'ur Lematah' (though it is unclear how this conforms with the Lashon 'Mashehu' in the Beraisa).

(b) We prove this from the same Beraisa's statement regarding Lulav - 'ka'Yotze Bo, Lulav Ein Lo Shi'ur'.

(c) Which certainly means 'Ein Lo Shi'ur le'Ma'alah, Aval Yesh Lo Shi'ur Lematah' ...

(d) ... since the Mishnah in Sukah - requires a Lulav to be at least three Tefachim, plus an extra Tefach for shaking.