Explanation: The Gemara explains that this is lest a Tevilah for a Mitzvah arises for her, and she will untie them, and come to carry them four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim.

Answer (Ri): This is only for threads that are not in braided hair, but threads that are in braided hair, she may go out with them. We need not decree about them lest she untie them, like it says below (94b);

There is at least an Isur mid'Rabanan to braid, and it is logical that just like making a braid is forbidden, also unbraiding.

Question: For this reason it should be forbidden for a woman to go out with a garment. Surely she will remove it at the time of Tevilah. We should be concerned lest she come to carry it!

Answer: Matters that are one's primary clothing, there is no reason to decree about them, for even during the week it is not normal to leave one's place at all until he wears them;

Rather, only small things, there is concern, for he is not adamant if they are not on him, and during the week, often when he unties them, he carries them in his hand to his house.

Explanation (Ri): Only things that it is common to remove them in order to show them [to others], or due to Chatzitzah, or adamancy, they decreed not to go out with them, lest when he removes it he will forget that it is Shabbos and come to carry;

However, things that one may go out with them, that it is not common to remove them, it is permitted to tie and untie in Reshus ha'Rabim, for there is no concern;

If he remembers at the time he unties that it is Shabbos, he will not come to carry. If he does not remember that it is Shabbos, even if we forbid to untie or remove, it will not help (for he forgot that it is Shabbos)!

Support: It connotes like this below (61a). A Beraisa teaches that one may tie and untie a Kami'a (amulet) even in Reshus ha'Rabim;

Implied question: Why did it need to teach that it is permitted? One may remove anything, like I explained!

Answer: It needs to teach that we do not forbid because it looks like he ties [the Kami'a] not for the sake of Refu'ah (a cure), rather, he intends to take it out.

Source: This [Havah Amina] is like the Isur to put a pepper or salt crystal in her mouth initially on Shabbos, or [if it fell out] to return it [because it looks like a scheme to take it out];

Rather, it is considered like an absolute garment, due to Refu'ah.

Question: Perhaps Rav Huna mentioned "and all of them on girls' heads" for a bigger Chidush! Even [wool] on girls' heads, which is soft on hard, it is a Chatzitzah!

Answer (Ri): Without Rav Huna, we would know that everywhere it is a Chatzitzah, even on the head. Rather, surely he comes to exclude some matter.

Explanation: Now, the Gemara holds that hard on soft is a Chatzitzah more than hard on hard, and soft on hard does not interrupt as much as hard on hard;

Source: According to R. Yehudah, wool strings are not a Chatzitzah, for they are soft on hard, and linen strings, which are hard on hard, are a Chatzitzah;

Distinction: Strings of hair, which are also hard on hard, all agree that they are not a Chatzitzah, even though linen strings are a Chatzitzah according to everyone.

Explanation: Because Rav Yosef himself asked, it is proper to say "Ela" (rather).

Question: It connotes that the reason for Katla (a thick band wrapped tightly around the neck) is due to Chatzitzah. If so, why is it taught in the Seifa of our Mishnah, together with wool strings? It should have been taught in the Reisha!

Answer (Rashba): Also Katla is decoration, and there is concern lest she remove it to show it;

Our Mishnah discusses when it is loose, so there is no Chatzitzah. Therefore, we forbid it only due to an ornament, but not lest she take it off for the sake of Tevilah);

However, the Beraisa here discusses when it is tight, so there is no concern lest she take it off to show it. She does not remove it, for then she would not appear stout.

Question: What forced [Ravina] to establish the Beraisa due to Chatzitzah? He should establish it when it is loose, and [we forbid] lest she take it off [to show it], like our Mishnah!

Answer: The Beraisa connotes that the reason is due to Chatzitzah, similar to the Reisha, which teaches that girls go out with threads in their ears;

It need not teach that there is no concern lest she take it off to show it. This is obvious! Decoration does not apply to threads!

Rather, it needs to teach that it is not a Chatzitzah, and she does not remove it at the time of Tevilah. Similarly, the Seifa is due to Chatzitzah.

Explanation: [Rav Yehudah said that Totefes is Afozaino, i.e. an ornament worn on the forehead. The Beraisa supports him,] since it taught "with Totefes or Sarbitin fixed in [a golden headdress]", and it is normal to fix Afozaino in the headdress;

[This is unlike Rav Yosef, who said that it is] Chumresa d'Katifta (spices wrapped together, or pearls) are not fixed [in it].

Question: If the Mishnah teaches Kavla of a slave, why is it taught regarding a woman?

Answer: It needs to teach in the Seifa of our Mishnah "she may go out with Kavul and a wig in the Chatzer", and a wig applies only to a woman.

Question: Why didn't the Reisha teach a wig along with Kavul, that we may not go out with it to Reshus ha'Rabim?

Answer: It is obvious that it is forbidden to go out with it, for surely she will remove it, for they laugh at her!

Question: If the Mishnah teaches Kavla of a slave, why is it permitted in the Chatzer more than other matters?

However, if it is a wool cap, it is fine that it is permitted in the Chatzer, so she will not be repulsive to her husband, like Ula explained below (60b).

Answer: Kavla of a slave is permitted in order to please the master. If [the slave] were the entire day without Kavul, even in the Chatzer, a minor thing that the slave does against the master's will, the master will think that he wants to rebel on him, and they will come to quarrel.

Explanation (Rashi, below): In the Seifa, all agree that Kavul is a wool cap.

Question (Ri): Here it connotes that according to the opinion that the Mishnah teaches Kavla of a slave, a wool hat is permitted even in Reshus ha'Rabim!

Explanation #1 (Rashi): It is because [Istama] is not spun. (It is felt used to tie down hairs that leave the headdress.)

Objection (Riva): This is not a reason to permit, for a Mishnah teaches that felt is forbidden because it is Shu'a (smoothed)!

Explanation #2: Rather, it is because Stam Istama is hard, and Rabanan did not forbid due to Kil'ayim, like it says in Beitzah (9b);

Citation (9b): Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua said that Istama is permitted, even though other felt is forbidden. It is permitted because it is hard.

Support: Also Yoma (69a) connotes like this. Rav Ashi said that Bigdei Kehunah are hard, therefore one may spread them underneath (lie on top of them), like Rav Huna brei d'Rav Yehoshua said that hard felt of Narash is permitted.

Question (R. Tam): We say in Erchin (3b) that all are obligated in the Mitzvah of Tzitzis - Kohanim, Leviyim and Yisraelim;

The Gemara asks that this is obvious, and answers that the Chidush is Kohanim. One might have thought that since they are permitted Kil'ayim... they are not obligated.

According to Answer #2, how was it permitted to them? Bigdei Kehunah are hard, and in such a case it is permitted also for Yisrael!

Explanation #3 (R. Tam): Something that is Shu'a, Tavuy (spun) v'Nuz (twined), which is forbidden mid'Oraisa, there is no distinction between soft and hard. In every case it is forbidden mid'Oraisa;

However, Kil'ayim mid'Rabanan, e.g. felt, which is only Shu'a, it is permitted if it is hard even to wear, since it is Kil'ayim only mid'Rabanan;

Also Bigdei Kehunah, since mid'Oraisa one may spread them under people, like a Beraisa teaches "they will not come on you, but you may spread them under you, but Chachamim forbade to do so..."

[For Bigdei Kehunah] it is permitted even mid'Rabanan, for they are hard. Chachamim did not decree about hard garments at all;

Also regarding something soft, when it is not common [for a thread] to wrap [on one who sits on it], you may spread them under you, e.g. a donkey's saddle, pillows and blankets and other things listed in Maseches Kil'ayim.

Pesak: The Ri answered regarding Kotash Porpontash (in which a filling is enclosed between linen garments sewn together), that if they have inside them worn out clothing of wool and of linen, and the needle was inserted [through the filling] two stitches, it is forbidden to put them on him, even if the stitch was of hemp or silk;

[Chachamim] permitted pillows and blankets [of Kil'ayim] only under him, but not on him.

Distinction: However, if inside are only wool shearings, it can be that even on him is permitted, for the stitch does not join them to the garment at all. It joins and brings close only two garments of linen, which are the covering of the Kotash from the two sides, and amidst this the wool is pressed tight between them.

This is not connected like connection through weaving or sewing or [the case of] tying ropes above (54a).

Question (Ri): Why does it mention Nega'im? It does not receive even Tum'ah of Mes and Sheratzim, for we require something spun and woven, like it says below (64a)!

Answer (Ri): It receives Tum'ah of Mes and Sheratzim due to a Kal v'Chomer from small flasks (of Cheres), which are Tahor (do not receive Tum'ah) from Zavim (because he cannot enter its airspace (the opening is too narrow to insert his finger), and they receive Tum'ah of Mes and Sheratzim;

Istama, which receives Tum'ah from Zavim, for Midras applies to it, like a cap which it says (Kelim 28:5) that if a cap was given [to be decoration for a Sefer Torah], all the more so it should receive Tum'ah of Mes and Sheratzim!

Explanation: Istama is a piece of a gold covered garment. Gems and pearls are fixed in it. According to this, it is fine that it receives Tum'ah of Mes and Sheratzim, like other ornaments;

However, it does not receive Tum'as Nega'im, for the garment is not primary, rather, the gold and gems.

Support: Also for this reason, Kil'ayim does not apply to it.