Explanation: [He may not open] even to his house, so he will not enter from it to a joint Chatzer.

Explanation: We expound from the Seifa of the verse. It says "va'T'hi Alav Ru'ach Elokim."

Explanation: Now we are thinking that a house that was built when the Beis ha'Mikdash stood, and it fell, one rebuilds it, and when he buys a plastered Chatzer, it is in its Chazakah;

As long as it exists, we attribute that it was made b'Heter, when the Beis ha'Mikdash stood. However, when it fell, we attribute that it was made b'Isur, after the Churban;

Therefore, we challenge Rav Huna, why he rebuilds it. Since it fell, we should attribute that he stuck it out b'Isur!

We answer that an Isur is different. Even if it was definitely built b'Heter, after it fell, one may not build and plaster it.

Question: Why didn't they answer that it is possible to drink water of pits, which is Pasul for Nisuch ha'Mayim, like it connotes in Sukah (48a)?

Answer (Ri): Something from the same species used for Nisuch is considered like the matter itself.

Proof: If not, we should ask that they can drink cooked wine, which is Pasul for Nesachim!

Question: They could drink juice of berries and apple cider!

Answer: They could not bear not to suffer without drinking water.

Question: It says Pru u'Rvu! (What was the Havah Amina to decree not to fulfill a Torah Mitzvah?)

Answer: Perhaps we should decree about those who already fulfilled Pru u'Rvu;

This was the answer "the seed of Avraham would perish", if people fathered only a son and daughter.

Note: Half the time, the second (or third or fourth...) birth is not the correct gender to fulfill Pru u'Rvu. Men could average almost three children each! Perhaps Tosfos holds that even without a decree, many men have less than two children, and through the decree, men will average less than two children each. (Perhaps nowadays people have more children than in the past.) Alternatively, men could cause the second child to be the correct gender to fulfill Peru u'Rvu, like it connotes in Nidah 31a-b. Rav Ketina connotes there that he could do so, but most men cannot. Perhaps in the days of R. Yishmael ben Elisha, most men could do so. Sedei Tzofim (of R. Shmuel Friedman) says that "Kaleh" does not mean perish. Rather, Yisrael would not increase so much.

Explanation: For a matter that we do not know whether or not they will accept [to change] when we protest, one must protest, like is proven in Shabbos (55a);

Midas ha'Din said "if it was revealed in front of You (Hash-m, that had the Tzadikim protested, it would not have helped), in front of them, was it revealed?!" [Due to this, the Tzadikim] were punished;

However, for a matter that we know clearly that they will not accept, we say that it is better that they be Shogeg [than Mezid].