(Mishnah): [She may tie] straps of her cloak.

Objection: This is obvious (she unties it every day)!

Answer: The case is, there is one strap above and one below - it suffices to untie one to remove her cloak;

One might have thought that we are concerned lest she Mevatel one (permanently leave it tied) - the Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Mishnah): ...Threads of her hairnet.

Objection: This is obvious (she unties it every day)!

Answer: The case is, it is tied loosely, she need not untie it to remove it;

One might have thought that we are concerned lest she permanently leave it tied - the Mishnah teaches, she would not do so, for she does not want to uproot hairs.

(Mishnah): [One may tie] laces of shoes and sandals.

(Beraisa #1): If one untied laces of shoes or sandals he is Chayav Chatas;

(Beraisa #2): He is exempt, but it is forbidden;

(Beraisa #3): It is permitted.

There are contradictions regarding shoes and sandals!

Resolution - part 1 (regarding shoes): Shoemakers tie the lace onto the shoe permanently, one is liable for this (we need not specify tying or untying, the law of both is the same);

One is exempt for tying like Rabanan, but it is forbidden (it is not so tight, i.e. one can remove the shoe without untying it);

It is permitted to tie like people of Mechuza (a city - it is very tight, and one must untie it each night to remove the shoe).

Resolution - part 2 (regarding sandals): Shoemakers permanently tie the strap onto the sandal of Yishmaeli merchants - one is liable for this;

Other people tie the strap on by themselves (it is not permanent, but it can be left for a while) - one is exempt for this, but it is forbidden;

In a sandal used by two people, like Rav Yehudah's, it is permitted (each must retie it to fit his foot, it is untied every day).

Rav Yehudah the brother of Rav Sala Chasida had one pair of sandals - sometimes he would go out with it, sometimes his son would. On Shabbos, he asked Abaye if he may tie it.

Abaye: One is Chayav Chatas for this!

Rav Yehudah: I did not understand why it is forbidden [l'Chatchilah] - can you say that one is liable for it?!

Abaye: Why should it be permitted?

Rav Yehudah: Even during the week, sometimes I go out with it, sometimes my son does.

Abaye: If so, it is permitted.

R. Yirmiyah was walking in a Karmelis, the strap of his sandal snapped; he asked R. Avahu what to do.

R. Avahu: Take a moist reed which an animal could eat, and tie it on [in place of the strap].

(A sandal has an Ozen (flap) and Tarsis (a place in which the straps are fixed) on each side.) The [outer] Tarsis of Abaye's sandal snapped [in the Chatzer]; he asked Rav Yosef what to do.

Rav Yosef: Leave it!

Abaye: Why is this different than the case of R. Yirmiyah?

Rav Yosef: There, the sandal was in an unguarded place - yours is in a guarded place.

Question (Abaye): Why can't I move it? It is a Kli, I could wear it on the other foot! (It is shameful to wear it when the outer strap is broken, but if worn on the other foot, the broken strap would be on the inside and not noticeable!)

Answer (Rav Yosef): Since R. Yochanan answered according to R. Yehudah, this shows that the Halachah follows R. Yehudah.

Question: What does this refer to?

Answer (Beraisa): If the two Oznayim or two Tarsiyos of a sandal snapped; or if the entire sole came off, it is Tahor;

If one Ozen or Tarsis snapped, or if most of the sole came off, it is Tamei;

R. Yehudah says, if an inner Ozen or Tarsis snapped it is Tamei, if an outer one snapped it is Tahor.

(R. Yochanan): They argue about Shabbos [when the outer strap snapped] just like they argue about Tum'ah, but not regarding Chalitzah.

Question: What does R. Yochanan hold regarding Chalitzah (which Tana agrees to the other)?

Answer #1: He holds that Chachamim consider it a Kli for Shabbos, just like for Tum'ah, but not regarding Chalitzah.

Rejection (Mishnah): If Chalitzah was done on the right foot with a left shoe, it is Kosher. (If the outer Ozen of a left sandal snapped, it is still a Kli because he can wear it reversed on the right foot, then the inner Ozen will be broken - all consider this a proper sandal, surely it is valid for Chalitzah!)

Answer #2: He holds that R. Yehudah does not consider it a Kli for Shabbos, just like it is not a Kli for Tum'ah, but it is a Kli for Chalitzah.

Question: Chalitzah on the right foot with a left shoe is Kosher when it is a proper left shoe - here, R. Yehudah says that it is not a proper left shoe (he is Metaher)!

Correction: Rather, R. Yochanan said...'And similarly regarding Chalitzah';

He teaches that Chalitzah with a left shoe is Kosher only when it is a proper left shoe. (This must be like R. Yehudah - it is no Chidush according to Chachamim, it is a proper sandal in any case,)

Question: This shows that R. Yochanan rules like R. Yehudah - but R. Yochanan said that the Halachah follows a Stam (anonymous) Mishnah!

(Mishnah): If an Ozen of a [Tamei Medras] sandal snapped and was fixed; it is Tamei Medras.

Suggestion: This is even if the outer Ozen snapped!

Answer: No, it is only if the inner Ozen snapped.

Inference: If the outer Ozen snapped, it is Tahor;

Question: If so, why does the Seifa teach that if the other Ozen snapped and was fixed; it is Tahor from Medras but Tamei like Maga (something that touched a) Medras - the distinction is not whether one or two snapped, rather, if it was the right or left Ozen!

Answer (R. Yitzchak bar Yosef): We establish the Mishnah to discuss a sandal with four Oznayim and four Tarsiyos, to avoid a contradiction in the words of R. Yochanan.

(Ravin): Rav rules like R. Yehudah, R. Yochanan does not.

Question: But R. Yochanan answered according to R. Yehudah - surely he holds that the Halachah follows R. Yehudah!

Answer: Amora'im argue about the opinion of R. Yochanan.

(Mishnah): If a (wooden) Kli of a Ba'al ha'Bayis (i.e. not a craftsman) has a hole k'Rimon (the size of a pomegranate), it is Tahor.

Question (Chizkiyah): If a Kli had a hole the size of k'Zayis, and it was sealed, then got another hole the size of k'Zayis, and it was sealed, and so on, until the total size of the holes was k'Rimon, what is the law?

Answer (R. Yochanan): [We can learn from what] you taught us about a sandal!

(Chizkiyah): If (a sandal became Tamei Medras (an Av ha'Tumah) through a Zav or Nidah), and one Ozen snapped and it was fixed, it is [still] Tamei Medras (this is true even if it was not fixed - we say that it was fixed on account of the next clause);

If the other Ozen snapped and it was fixed, it is not Tamei Medras, it only (a Rishon), like something that touched a Medras.

Question: When the first Ozen snapped, it did not lose Tum'as Medras, because the second strap was intact - likewise, when the second Ozen snaps, it should not lose Tum'as Medras on account of the other intact (replaced) strap!

Answer (Chizkiyah): There are Panim Chodoshim (enough of the sandal (that received Tum'ah) is missing to Metaher, therefore, even when it is fixed the initial Tum'ah does not return) - the same applies to your question!

Version #1 (Chizkiyah): You are not human (your Chachmah is angelic)!

Version #2 (Chizkiyah): You are an [ideal] person!

(R. Zeira): If the early Chachamim were like sons of angels, we are like people; if they were like people, we are like donkeys;

I do not refer to the donkeys of R. Chanina ben Dosa or R. Pinchas ben Ya'ir [they could tell if food was Tevel, and would not eat it], rather, to regular donkeys.

(Mishnah): [One may tie] drawstrings of pouches of wine and oil.

Objection: This is obvious (one unties it for every use)!

Answer: The case is, the pouch has two openings from which one can pour - one might have thought that we are concerned lest he permanently leave one tied - the Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Mishnah): [A garment] around a pot of meat.

Objection: This is obvious!

Answer: The case is, the pot has a spout - one might have thought that we are concerned lest he permanently leave the opening covered [and always remove through the spout] - the Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Mishnah - R. Eliezer ben Yakov): One may tie [in front of an animal].

Objection: This is obvious (one unties it to let it out)!

Version #1 - Answer: The case is, the rope is tied on both sides of the opening - one might have thought that we are concerned lest he will permanently leave one end tied - the Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

Version #2 - Answer: The case is, there are two ropes, one above the other - one might have thought that we are concerned lest he will permanently leave the top rope tied (the animal can crouch under it) - the Mishnah teaches that this is not so.

(Rav Yosef): The Halachah follows R. Eliezer ben Yakov.

Abaye: This implies that Chachamim argue with him!

Rav Yosef: What difference does it make (either way, the Halachah follows him)!

Abaye: Should we say teachings like a song [for which there is no need]?!