Explanation: If he needs to check, he checks with a pebble or earthenware (but not with his hand), like it says in the Gemara.

Question: Below, it says that below the crown [on the Ever] is permitted, i.e. at the opening of the Ever, and this is where he checks himself!

Answer #1: One must check also above, towards the body, lest a drop of semen went there.

Answer #2: Even from the crown and below, it is permitted [to touch] only when urinating, due to drops (if they fall on his feet, others might see them and assume that he is sterile and malign his children's lineage), or due to a Beis ha'Keneses (lest urine fall on it), but not for checking himself.

Question: He should say that "he holds [the Ever] and swallows" is from below the crown, which is permitted!

Answer #1: If he lets semen come [inside the Ever] up to the opening, he will not be able to stop it [from leaving].

Answer #2: Since he holds the Ever tightly so that semen will not leave, there is Hirhur (lustful thoughts) even from [touching] below the crown.

Question #1: What was the question from R. Eliezer? Rabanan argue with him, and permit!

Question #2: Also below, what was the question against Rav Yehudah from R. Eliezer?

Answer #1: Rabanan permit only for urinating, due to La'az of Mamzerus. They forbid for other needs;

Also Rav Yehudah was standing on a high place, where there is no concern for drops. He held only lest urine fall on the wall. Rabanan do not permit this.

Answer #2: In the end, Rabanan admitted to R. Eliezer.

Source #1: It says in Brachos (40a) that [the last drops of] urine finishes only if one was sitting, or [standing] in loose earth or on a high place. (If not, he fears lest it drip on his feet, and he stops early.) This is like R. Eliezer. It does not say that one may hold the Ever, even though presumably, also in this case [the urine] finishes!

Source #2: Below (16b) it says "there are three that I hate...", and it counts one who holds the Ever while urinating, and R. Eliezer's name is not mentioned there.

Question: He should rub with his hand, like we say in Yoma (30a) that it is a Mitzvah to rub (to avoid La'az)!

Answer: When he does not hold, there are many drops, and it does not suffice to rub;

When he holds, there is only a little, and it suffices to rub;

If it sufficed to rub even when he does not hold, Rabanan would not permit [holding]!

Explanation: [Standing on a high place helps] even on hard land.

Implied question: It says in Bechoros (44b) that one may not urinate on a hard place, and not on a Kli, for Rav taught that sloped places in Bavel return water to Ein Eitam (the source of the Mikveh in which the Kohen Gadol immerses)!

Answer: There it discusses close to the Pras river, which is higher than all [other] rivers, like we say (Bechoros 55a) that all rivers are below three rivers, and [those] three rivers are below the Pras;

From the Pras, which is higher than all of them, it descends to Ein Eitam, which is high, like we say (Zevachim 54b), that one would think to build [the Beis ha'Mikdash] on Ein Eitam, which is highest;

However, far from the Pras, or even into other rivers, one may [urinate on a hard place or on a Kli].

Citation (Shabbos 118b): They called Rebbi "Rabbeinu ha'Kadosh" because he did not put his hand below his belt! (Aruch l'Ner, Magen Avraham - Tosfos understands "below his belt" to mean touching the Ever.)

Explanation: This was the Chidush, for he was married, and he was stringent for himself.

Note: Perhaps Tosfos teaches that the Gemara there holds like Rav Nachman, that it is permitted for married men.

Explanation: He is not excommunicated automatically. Rather, [others] are obligated to excommunicate him;

We say in Kidushin (28b) "what is the extent of Gilgul Shevu'ah? It is up to saying "swear to me that you are not my slave." [We ask] "we excommunicate him [for saying so]", for a Beraisa says that one who calls his colleague a slave will be in Niduy!

Inference: "He will be in Niduy" means that we put him in Niduy.

Explanation: He rubs his Ever with his hand or leg.

Question (Rashi): In Sotah (37b), when it mentions Arvus (there were 48 Brisos on every Mitzvah, for each of 603,550 Yisraelim, for everyone is responsible for everyone else), why isn't the Eruv Rav included? (If they were, there would be much more!)

Note: Based on this question, Rashi rejected an explanation that [converts] are problematic for Yisrael because we are responsible for them [and they do not do all the Mitzvos properly].

Answer: The number of the Eruv Rav is not known. (The Gemara said the number that is known.)

Question: The Mechilta says that the Eruv Rav were twice the number of [Bnei Yisrael] who left Mitzrayim. (The number was known!)

Explanation: [Converts] are problematic because they intermarry with Yisrael, and it says in Kidushin (70b) that the Shechinah dwells only on families of Yisrael with good lineage.

Support: R. Chelbo's teaching [converts are problematic...] was brought there regarding this matter (the Shechinah dwells only...)

Implied question: It says (Shabbos 118b) that if [all of] Yisrael would observe two Shabbosos, they would be redeemed immediately! (Many Neshamos were not yet born!)

Answer: Women would give birth to many babies at a time [to finish the remaining Neshamos immediately].

Implied question: In Shabbos (108b), it says that a hand [that was not yet washed after the person slept at night] to the mouth [or other openings] should be cut off. This is not a law, and not a curse!]

Answer: There, it teaches that it would be good for him to cut off his hand before he touches these places, due to Bas Melech (a strong Ru'ach Ra).

Explanation: Now, we are thinking that it is literally cut off. This is why it says "his stomach will split!" (Tosfos holds that "stomach" and "navel" are euphemisms for the Ever.)

We answer that it means that his hand will be cut Al his navel (a euphemism for his Ever), i.e. for touching it, and really, it is a curse;

"His stomach will split!" does not refer to Tikatzetz, rather, when a thorn lodged there. If he may not remove the thorn, his stomach will split.

Question: What was the initial Havah Amina? "His stomach will split!" was explicitly taught regarding when a thorn lodged there!

Answer: The text in the Tosefta says first "his stomach will split" (before mentioning a thorn). Now, [the Havah Amina] is fine;

In any case, we answer that it means that if it is always forbidden to touch, sometimes his stomach will split, e.g. if a thorn lodged there.