Previous daf

1)

(a) According to Rava, Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar includes three by three Tefachim by other materials, from the Pasuk in Vayikra (by Sheratzim) "O Beged".
What does Abaye (according to whom no-one includes a garment of other materials) do with that Pasuk?

(b) Rava argues that we learn a woolen or linen garment of three by three finger-breadths by Tum'as Sheratzim, from Nega'im.
Why does Abaye not agree with that?

(c) Rava maintains that, in that case, the Torah should have written "ve'ha'Beged" by Sheratzim, and we would have learnt Nega'im from Sheratzim.
Why does Abaye disagree with *that*?

(a) Abaye has discovered a second Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael that clashes with the first, including garments made of other materials in the Din of Tum'as Sheratzim from "O Beged".
How does Rava explain this discrepancy?

(b) How do we now reconcile Rava, with what he himself said earlier - that *that* is the opinion of Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, but that, according to Tana de'Bei Rebbi Yishmael, garments of other materials are not subject to Tum'ah, because of the Pasuk "Beged Tzemer u'Fishtim"?

(a) According to the Gemara's second answer, it is Rav Papa who states the new opinion, - Rava remains with his original statement in Tana de'Bei de'Rebbi Yishmael.
How does Rav Papa understand Rebbi Yishmael's statement 'Af Kol Tzemer u'Fishtim'. What does this come to include?

(b) Why does Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar (according to Rav Papa) require a special Derashah to include wool and linen garments (exclusively) in the Isur of Kil'ayim? Does the Torah not expressly write "Tzemer u'Fishtim"?

(c) Why is Rav Papa's answer to this question a joke?

4)

(a) Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak also rejects Rava's interpretation of 'Af Kol Tzemer u'Fishtim'. According to him, it comes to include Tzitzis.
What are the implications of this statement?

(b) Why is that not obvious from the juxtaposition of the Pesukim in Devarim "Lo Silbash Sha'atnez, Tzemer u'Fishtim Yachdav. Gedilim Ta'aseh Lach" - a form of Derashah known as 'Semuchin'.

(c) Why do we not include other materials by Tzitzis from the continuation of that Pasuk "Al Arba Kanfos Kesuscha *Asher Techaseh* Bah" (which is redundant), in the same way as we include other materials by Tum'ah from "O Beged" because it is redundant?

(d) And what do we learn from the Pasuk in Bamidbar "u'Re'isem Oso"?

(a) "Asher Techaseh Bah" comes to *include* the garment of a blind person, "u'Re'isem Oso" to *exclude* a night garment.
Why do we not say the reverse?

(b) According to Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak, why do we not rather use "Asher Techaseh Bah" to include day-garments made of other materials in the Mitzvah of Tzitzis?

(a) Sumchus says, that if someone uses spun wool as Sechach on his Sucah, his Sucah is Pasul.
What does this have in common with Rebbi Shimon ben Elazar, who said in the Beraisa 'Kol ha'Yotzei min ha'Eitz ... u'Mesachechin Bah Chutz mi'Pishtan'?

(b) How do we see from the words of Rebbi Shimon that he concurs with Sumchus?

(c) According to Rebbi Meir in a Mishnah in Nega'im, the woof and the warp can receive Tum'ah immediately; Rebbi Yehudah agrees by the warp, but, in his opinion, the woof is Mitamei only after he has removed it from the cauldron where it is being bleached, and stalks of flax, according to him, are Mitamei only after they have been washed.
Like whom does Sumchus hold (according to the first explanation of Rashi)?

(d) What is Rashi's second explanation in the Gemara's question 'ke'Ma'an'?

(a) Which is the only derivative of a tree which may be used as a wick for the Shabbos lights?

(b) It is also the only derivative of a tree which is 'Mitamei Tum'as Ohalim'.
What does this mean?

(c) From where do we know that flax is called a derivative of a tree?