Inference: "V'Amad v'Amar" is even sitting.

Implied question: In Yevamos (106a), we say to the girl "stand [for Chalitzah]"!

Answer: Perhaps mid'Rabanan, l'Chatchilah she must stand.

Question: "V'Amdu Shnei ha'Anashim" teaches that [witnesses] must stand!

Answer: "V'Amad v'Amar" surely connotes even sitting, just like "v'Amdu v'Kidshu" (above 18b);

However, "v'Amad" alone does not connote like this. (Rather, it connotes that one must stand.)

Implied question: It says [about David] "va'Yishkav Artzah" also regarding Bas Sheva's baby, even though this is not written regarding a Mes, rather, for his son [who fell sick]!

Answer: Perhaps since the Navi told him that the baby will die, it is as if he died, even though [David] prayed that he live.

Support: It says like this in the Yerushalmi. Ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu, who knew that in the future there will be a flood, was mourning over His world before the flood.

Question (Tosfos ha'Rav): The Sugya is strange. At first, it says that he did more than was necessary (he did not need to stand), for if you will not say so...

Afterwards, it asks that if he did not stand, he was not Yotzei!

Answer: It seems that it means that as follows. He did more than was necessary, and similarly he inverted his bed and lied on the floor. If so, he did more than was necessary;

Suggestion: "Lying" refers to [fulfilling] inverting the bed.

Rejection: He was not Yotzei his obligation of inverting the bed [through lying on the floor]!

Rather, [he lied on an inverted bed, which is] like [lying on the floor], and nothing is extra.

[Ameimar] prefers answering like this, than to say that it was an extra matter, and to prove about tearing from inverting the bed.

Observation: Here we do not list matters that are a Mitzvah on them, such as inverting the bed and wrapping the head;

We list only matters that are forbidden to him, [such as] Tefilin.

We do not list She'alas Shalom, for this is not for all the days of Avelus, like it says below.

We do not list laundering, for this is included in bathing, even though above (15a) we bring two verses for bathing and laundering'

However, these, which do not apply the entire week, we do not [list]

Observation: This is unlike the Perush of Rabeinu Avraham, who explained that Rabbeinu Shmuel permitted an Avel to do Melachah after three days.

Implied question: Why do people not wrap the head and invert the bed nowadays?

Answer #1: They rely on the Yerushalmi, which says that a guest is not obligated in inverting the bed, lest they say [that he is a] Cheresh, i.e. witch;

Similarly, we live among Nochrim, and there are male and female slaves among us [who could accuse us of witchcraft].

Answer #2: We do not invert the bed nowadays because with our beds, one can sit comfortably on one side (when they are upside down) just like on the other side (right-side up), and the inversion is not recognized;

Our beds have four poles above, like legs;

This is like we say below, that one need not invert a Dargesh (small bed).

Answer #2 (regarding wrapping the head): If we wrapped the head, this would lead to laughter, for wrapping is the way Yishmaelim wrap [and no one does so nowadays].

R. Tam's opinion: In a Teshuvah of my grandfather Rabbeinu Yitzchak, he wrote that R. Tam forbade in his Avelus [learning] Iyos, Kinos (Megilas Eichah), and dire matters in Yirmeyah;

This is because they were not taught in our Sugya, like [they were taught] regarding Tish'ah b'Av at the end of Ta'anis (30a).

Retraction: In his old age, he (R. Tam) retracted and permitted.

Citation (Yerushalmi): He may be Shoneh (learn) where he does not normally learn.

Inference: He may learn like on Tish'ah b'Av, about which it says in Ta'anis "he may read [Tanach] in a place where he does not normally read."

Explanation: There (in Ta'anis), it means that all Mitzvos that apply to an Avel apply on Tish'ah b'Av, and one may not read Torah... However, he may read in a place where he does not normally read, in Iyov, Kinos...

Inference: Avelus and Tish'ah b'Av are the same, like it says in the Yerushalmi.

Disclaimer: However, "an Avel may learn in a place where he does not normally learn" connotes that only this is permitted, but not Iyos, Kinos and Yirmeyah.

R. Yitzchak's proof: It is forbidden, for above (15a) we forbid Divrei Torah to an Avel, for it says "He'anek Dom." This implies that all Divrei Torah are forbidden!

Rebuttal: We say [that he may not learn] something that gives Simchah, like it says in Ta'anis (30a), for it says "Pekudei Hash-m Yesharim Mesamchei Lev."

Support (of rebuttal): Not all of these [Halachos] are precise. We say that he is forbidden [to wear] Tefilin, for it says "Pe'ercha Chavosh Alecha", and it is not forbidden all the days of his Avelus.

Opinion (Rabeinu Avraham, student of Rashbam): We consider part of the third day like the entire day. This is mid'Rabanan. The verse teaches only about two days - "va'Yismu Yemei Bechi Evel Moshe"

We apply to "va'Yismu" to Tefilin, and "va'Acharisam k'Yom Mar" more than other matters, for as long as his soul is bitter, wallowing in the dust, this is not glory, like Rashi explained in Kesuvos (4b, 6b). The Riva said so.

Pesak: My grandfather Rabbeinu Yitzchak said that [Tefilin] on Tish'ah b'Av are permitted, just like from the third day and onwards.

Explanation: He removes Tefilin when new people (consolers) come, and puts them on when they leave. This applies whenever they leave, even 100 times in a day.

The reason is because both according to R. Eliezer and R. Yehoshua, it is forbidden with new people;

R. Eliezer forbids putting on Tefilin, and R. Yehoshua holds that one must even remove [Tefilin if he is already wearing them].

Opinion #1 (Tosfos ha'Rav): This refers to one who is financed from Tzedakah.

Support #1: Above (19b) connotes like this. We say that one who buried his Mes two days before the Regel counts five days after the Regel. Others do his Melachah for him.

Inference: An Avel is forbidden to do Melachah all seven days. Also there, we do not permit him to do Melachah himself.

Support #2 - Citation (Maseches Semachos - Beraisa): An Avel may not do Melachah all seven days, not he, his sons, daughters, male and female slaves, or animal.

Citation (cont.): Just like he may not do, others may not do for him.

Explanation: This excludes when he turned over his olives (so he must press them now) and [other cases of] Meleches Devar ha'Avud.

Citation (cont.): From the third day and onwards, he may do Melachah. This is only for one who is financed from Tzedakah, and it must be covertly. However, Chachamim said that his neighbors should be cursed [for not supporting him during his Avelus].

Citation (cont.): Bar Kapara says, even on the third day he may not do [Melachah].

Question: Tosfos ha'Rav brought this. Seemingly, since we learned (20a) from "v'Hafachti Chageichem l'Evel", just like the Chag is seven days, also Avelus is seven days. This refers to Melachah!

Also Rabeinu Avraham was unsure. Perhaps this refers only to an Oni

Opinion #2: However, in the name of Rabbeinu Shmuel he said that it refers to all Avelim, since it did not say "from now and onwards an Oni does covertly." This is not like I explained.

Explanation (Tosfos ha'Rav): [Avelim] rely on this nowadays and come to the Beis ha'Keneses on Tish'ah b'Av. I do not know whether this is a good custom.

Inference: He considers Tish'ah b'Av to be like after three days. This affects Tefilin, like I explained above.

Explanation: This is difficult based on what we said that from now (seven days) and onwards, he greets and returns.

Inference: This is within 30 days, for after 30 days, how could we say that one may not enter his house to speak consolation with him?

Also regarding other Mesim, we say that one may not speak consolation with him!

Possibility #1: We must establish when he has no children, according to R. Tam, who permits marrying another wife after Shivah.

Possibility #2: Alternatively, she (his first wife, died and) left him with small children. He may marry immediately and have relations after 30 days, according to Rabbeinu Yitzchak.

Reference: Tosfos elaborated in Kesuvos (4a DH Aval) and in Likutim written in a Teshuvah.

Bahag's opinion: This is within 10 Parsa'os (about 40 kilometers).

Question: Miktzas ha'Yom k'Kulo (part of the day counts like the whole day)!

Answer #1: The case is, the consolers did not yet stand [to leave] from them (the brothers).

Support: We also find in Kesuvos (8b) Birkas Avelim with 10 [men] all seven days. Presumably, this (day seven) is during the day [before the consolers stood to leave].

Answer #2: (He came the night before the seventh day.) Miktzas ha'Yom k'Kulo does not apply at night for anything;

Support: This is like we say in Megilah (20a), that Shimor (checking that there were no emissions) in the night is not considered Shimor (of part of the day) regarding seven clean days [that a Zav or Zavah must count].