Resolution #2: All agree that one does not toil unnecessarily!

(The father of Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak - Beraisa): Tefilin are considered old if they have straps that are tied [to form a 'Dalet' and 'Yud' of Hash-m's name Shakai]. They are new if they have straps and are not tied;

All agree that one would not toil to make a Kami'a like this. (R. Yehudah forbids because they cannot be worn untied.)

Question: One could make a bow [and wear them]!

(Rav Chisda): This teaches that a bow is invalid for Tefilin. (A proper knot is required. One may not tie it on Shabbos.)

Rejection (Abaye): No, R. Yehudah [forbids new Tefilin] based on what he taught elsewhere, that making a bow is [a Melachah] like making a proper knot. (Tosfos - Rav Chisda knew this. He assumes that the Reisha of our Stam Mishnah is like Chachamim. Alternatively, since the bow is temporary (he will tie a proper knot after Shabbos), it is not a Melachah. Even R. Yehudah should permit!)

Inference: If he did not hold that a bow is like a proper knot, he could make a bow.

Question: Rav taught that a tradition from Moshe from Sinai mandates the knot in Tefilin [to form the letters], and Rav Nachman taught that the beauty (the letters formed) must face outside! (A bow will not form the letters.)

Answer: He makes the bow like the knot of Tefilin [so that the letters will be formed].

(Rav Chisda): If one buys Tefilin from one who is not an expert, he must check two head Tefilin and one arm Tefilin, or vice-versa. (If all are Kosher, he may assume that all of them are Kosher.)

Question: Either way you say, this is difficult!

If all are from one person, it should suffice to check even three head Tefilin or three arm Tefilin;

If he bought from different people, each of them needs to be cheched!

Answer: All are from one person. We must establish that the scribe can write both kinds of Tefilin.

Question: Rabah bar Shmuel taught a Beraisa saying that one checks three head Tefilin v'Shalosh (and/or three) arm Tefilin!

Suggestion: This means that he checks three head Tefilin or three arm Tefilin!

Answer: No. He checks three Tefilin. Some are head Tefilin and some are arm Tefilin.

Question: Rav Kahana taught a Beraisa saying that one checks two Tefilin, one of the head and one of the arm!

Answer: That is like Rebbi, who says that two occurrences make a Chazakah.

Question (Seifa): The same applies to the second and third bundle of Tefilin.

Rebbi would not require checking the third bundle (two bundles makes a Chazakah)!

Answer: Rebbi requires checking each bundle when they were bought from different people.

Question: If so, he should require checking even the fourth and fifth bundles!

Answer: Indeed, this is true. He mentions the third to show that he holds that Chazakah does not apply from bundle to bundle.

(Mishnah): If one finds Tzevasim or Krichos...

Question: What are Tzevasim and Krichos?

Answer (Rav Yehudah): They are [essentially] the same. Tzevasim are bundles of pairs [of arm and head Tefilin tied together]. Krichos are big bundles [of individual Tefilin].

(Mishnah): He waits there until dark and brings them [after Shabbos].

Question: He should bring them one pair at a time!

Answer (R. Yitzchak brei d'Rav Yehudah citing Rav Yehudah): If one could bring them one pair at a time and finish before dark, he does so. If not [since he will have to return after dark anyway], he waits there until dark and brings them.

(Mishnah): If it is dangerous, one covers them and goes away.

Contradiction (Beraisa): If it is dangerous, one takes them less than four Amos at a time.

Answer (Rava): If the danger is from Nochrim [the kingdom decreed to forbid Tefilin, and kill people who disobey, then in all cases] he covers them and goes away. If it is dangerous to stay there due to bandits [who might desecrate the Tefilin if he leaves them there], he takes them less than four Amos at a time. (This is how Rashi (Amud B) explains our text.)

Question (Abaye): You cannot establish the Mishnah to discuss Nochrim, due to the Seifa!

(Seifa - R. Shimon): He gives them to a friend, who [takes them less than four Amos and] gives them to a friend...

All the more so this should be forbidden, for many people are involved! (The kingdom is likely to find out.)

Answer: The Mishnah is abbreviated. It means as follows:

This (he covers them and goes away) is if the danger is from Nochrim. If the danger is due to bandits, he takes them less than four Amos at a time.

(Mishnah - R. Shimon): He gives them to a friend...

Question: What do Chachamim and R. Shimon argue about?

Answer: Chachamim hold that it is better for one person to carry them less than four Amos at a time, for when many people are involved it is an open disgrace of Shabbos [in the eyes of ignoramuses who think that it is forbidden - R. Yehonason];

R. Shimon holds that it is better for many people are involved, for when one takes them less than four Amos at a time, he may forget and carry them four Amos [without stopping] in Reshus ha'Rabim.

(Mishnah): The same applies to his son.

Question: Why is his son in the field?

Answer (d'Vei Menasheh - Beraisa): The case is, his wife gave birth in a field.

Question: Why does it say 'even if 100 people are involved'?

Answer: Even though it is not good for the baby to be passed so much from person to person, this is better than for one person to carry him less than four Amos at a time [lest he forget...]

(Mishnah - R. Yehudah): One may give a barrel [...even to take it outside the Techum].

Question: Does R. Yehudah argue with the following Mishnah?

(Mishnah): One may not take an animal or Kli taken past where its owner may go.

Answer #1 (Reish Lakish): The case is, he poured the contents from one barrel to another. R. Yehudah permits [to take the water outside the Techum,] like he taught elsewhere, that water is insignificant:

(Mishnah): (If people with different Techum contributed ingredients to make dough, one may not take the dough outside the Techum of anyone who contributed.) R. Yehudah says, we are not concerned for [the Techum of the one who gave] the water, for it is insignificant.

Question: Why do Chachamim say 'Lo Tehalech' (feminine, i.e. the barrel may not be taken...? R. Yehudah agrees to this. He permits only the water!)

Answer: They mean 'what was inside [the barrel], i.e. the water, may not be taken past where its owner may go.'

Objection: R. Yehudah taught we are not concerned for the Techum of water absorbed in a dough. We have no source that he is not concerned for water by itself!

R. Yehudah says that water in a pot [of cooked food] is not Batel. All the more so water by itself is not Batel!

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): Water and salt are Batel in a dough, but they are not Batel in a pot, due to the gravy. (They are evident in it.)

Answer #2 (to Question (b) - Rava): The case is, the barrel acquired Shevisah, but the water did not. (It was drawn from a river on Shabbos.) The barrel is Batel to the water.

(Mishnah): If one was Motzi a live person on a bed, he is exempt even for the bed, for it is Batel to the person; (He is exempt for the person because ha'Chai Nosei Es Atzmo. Rashi - living beings make themselves lighter. Tosfos - they did not carry living beings for the sake of the Mishkan.)

If one was Motzi less than a Shi'ur of food in a Kli, he is exempt even for the Kli, for it is Batel to the food.

Objection (and Contradiction to Mishnah - Rav Yosef - Beraisa - R. Yehudah): In a caravan, one may give a barrel to a friend, who gives it to a friend [...even to take it outside the Techum].

Inference: This is permitted only in a caravan (Chachamim are lenient because water is scarce)!

Answer #3 (and Resolution #1 of Contradiction - Rav Yosef): Also the Mishnah discusses a caravan.

Defense (of Answer #2, and Resolution #2 - Abaye): The Beraisa permits in a caravan even if both the barrel and the water acquired Shevisah. The Mishnah permits not in a caravan [even] if the barrel acquired Shevisah, but [only if] the water did not.

Answer #4 (and Resolution #3 - Rav Ashi): The Mishnah discusses a barrel and water that are Hefker [not in a caravan]. The Chachamim [who argue with R. Yehudah] hold like R. Yochanan ben Nuri, who says that Hefker objects acquire Shevisah. (Tosfos - Chachamim who argue with R. Yochanan ben Nuri say that Hefker acquires the Techum of the one who acquires it. We must say that everyone who took the barrel intended to acquire only what he will drink.)

Question: [If they are Hefker,] what is the meaning of 'one may not take it past where its owner may go'?

Answer: One may not take it further than things that have owners.

(Mishnah): If one was reading a Sefer [of rolled up parchment] on a porch and it became unraveled (he is holding one end, and the other end fell off the porch to the ground), he may roll it back to himself;

If he was on the roof (Reshus ha'Yachid) and it became unraveled:

Before the end comes within 10 Tefachim of the ground (Reshus ha'Rabim), he may roll it back;

Once the end is within 10 Tefachim, [he may not roll it back. This is a decree lest he grab it when it fell totally from his hand. He would be Chayav for this! Rather,] he turns it over so the writing is not seen [lest Kisvei ha'Kodesh be disgraced].

R. Yehudah says, even if the end is a tiny amount above the ground, he may roll it back;

R. Shimon says, even if the end is on the ground, he may roll it back, for we do not enforce any Shevus (mid'Rabanan law) if this will cause disgrace to Kisvei ha'Kodesh.