Explanation: The Beraisa does not argue with R. Yochanan, and R. Yochanan does not argue with the Beraisa. It means as follows;

[Shoes are] like Tefilin. Even though the right is [more] important regarding Bohan Yad and Bohan Regel (the thumb and big toe), and also regarding Chalitzah, one may put on the left shoe first;

Also the Beraisa teaches that even though the left is [more] important regarding Tefilin, one may put on the right shoe first.

Question: If so, why was R. Yochanan upset with Rav Shemen, who gave to him the right shoe first, since he may put on first whichever he wants?

Answer (Ri): It means as follows. One who did so, did so. One who wants to endear the left due to the Mitzvah of Tefilin, he is permitted. One who wants to endear the right more due to the importance of the right, he is permitted;

R. Yochanan's way was to always endear the left more, and Rav Shemen knew (Maharam, Maharsha; Maharshal - did not know) his custom.

Explanation (Riva): Only regarding tying, the left is more important, because the importance of Tefilin is in tying, but [one may] not [do] oppositely (put on the left shoe first, and tie the right first).

Consequence: According to this, shoes that are not tied, one puts on the right shoe first.

Question (Ri): Even if we are not concerned lest [the Tefilin strap] snap, it is forbidden, for sometimes he must use a privy, and he will carry them four Amos in Reshus ha'Rabim [before donning them]! It says so below about a Kami'a.

Observation: Rashi's Perush connotes that his text does not say "lest they snap." He explained that perhaps he will remove them from his head if he comes to defecate.

Answer (the Kadosh of Korvil): The text properly says so. We need the reason of snapping for the hand Tefilin. One need not remove it when he needs to use the privy, only the head [Tefilin he must remove], due to the Shin (on the Bayis).

Assertion (Ri): If he wrote one text in three parchments and the three healed three people, i.e. each healed one person, this person (the author) is certified to be an expert;

When three of them healed one person, this is a question below whether or not the person (author) is certified to be an expert.

Explanation: He is certified only for this text, but not for other texts, and only if he wrote it, but not if others wrote it.

Distinction: If each of the [three] parchments healed three times, even one person, all three of them are certified;

The text is not certified whenever it is, rather, only the parchment was certified.

Explanation: The case in which the person is certified and the Kami'a is certified is when this Kami'a was certified, for it healed three times, and an expert wrote it, that he wrote three Kami'in and all three helped.

Assertion: All the more so if the Kami'a is certified and not the person [one may go out with it], for certification of the Kami'a is better (it is easier to establish that it will heal) than certification of the doctor, like is proven below;

Regarding certification of the Kami'a, it is obvious that it is certified even through [healing] one person, but certification of the doctor, the Gemara is unsure whether or not he is certified through three Kami'im for one person.

Question (Rashba): How can we find that the person is certified and the Kami'a is not certified? Since the man is an expert to write this text, if so this parchment that he wrote will surely help! (Shabbos Shel Mi - the Rashba asks according to the Ri (so it must say; "Rashi" is a printing mistake), who holds that certification of the person helps only for texts that he already wrote and they healed three times.)

Answer (Ri): It is relevant if he lost his certification. He wrote three Kami'im [of the same text] and they did not help. If the Kami'a is certified (this parchment that he wrote healed three times), it will help (so one may go out with it), even if the doctor lost his certification.

Question (Rashba): Perhaps really, we require both of them, and had he taught so, it would connote that the Kami'a is certified and not the person!

Answer: "Is not certified" connotes properly both the person and the Kami'a, for below (61b) a Beraisa teaches "which Kami'a is certified...?", and we establish it to certify the person.

Assertion (Ri): The text says "like one." It means as follows. Since it taught "like one", this connotes that we discuss three Kami'im;

[The Gemara asks that] above (61a), a Beraisa taught "any [Kami'a] that healed and a second time and a third time [is certified]." This connotes one Kami'a!

[The Gemara] answers that above discusses to certify the Kami'a, and here it discusses to certify the person.

Explanation: The same applies if they were not healed like one. It mentioned "like one" to teach that we discuss three Kami'im, and to certify the person.

Explanation: He wrote one text in three parchments, and each helped three people, or one person three times.

Question (Rashba): How does the third Kami'a become certified? Once the third person was healed through the third Kami'a [once], the [doctor] is certified, and once the [doctor] is certified, surely that parchment will help from now and onwards!

Answer: The case is, these two Kami'im healed two people three times, and the third Kami'a healed one of these two people two times;

Now, two Kami'im were already certified, but the person and the third Kami'a were not yet certified, and the third Kami'a healed a third person. Now, the person and the Kami'a become certified at the same time.

Implied question: He could have said that one healed three times, and the other [two healed] one time [each. The author and the first Kami'a are certified!]

Answer: He wants to say that the three Kami'im are certified.

Assertion (Ri): The same applies if it healed one person three times;

Surely, below [Rav Papa] asks about certifying, whether he is certified through [healing] one person via three Kami'im, but to certify the Kami'a, which is better, he does not ask;

Obviously, we attribute [the cure] to certification of the Kami'a, and we do not say that the [patient's] Mazal is apt to be healed through writing!

Implied question: Why did he mention [healing] three people?

Answer: This is a bigger Chidush. Even so, the person is not certified.

Question: He should resolve this from what was taught above, "which Kami'a is certified? Any one that healed three people", and we establish this to certify the person;

Inference: This is only [if it healed] three people, but not if it healed one person, since it did not teach "any one that healed one person through three Kami'im."

Answer #1 (Rashi (61a DH u'Mumcheh, first Perush): The person and Kami'a are certified when this person made this Kami'a for three people. The person becomes certified, for he healed three people, and the Kami'a is certified, for this text healed three people.

Consequence: Also according to this Perush, the person is certified only for this text.

Question (against Answer #1 - Ri): We say "below" that one Kami'a for three people, the Kami'a is certified, but the person is not certified! (Rav Papa said so "below", i.e. after his words that Rashi explained, but before his question that this Dibur discusses.)

Answer: We can resolve Rashi. He means that this person made this text in three parchments for three people. This person becomes certified, for he healed three people, and this Kami'a is certified, for this text healed three people.

Objection (Ri): If also this is called one Kami'a for three people, the question returns (Rav Papa should resolve that he is certified)!

And if this is called three Kami'im for three people, [and each healed] one time, we say "below" that the person is certified, but the Kami'a is not certified!

Answer #2 (Ri): It is like [the Ri] explained above (61a DH Ad. If he wrote one text in three parchments and each healed a different person, this person is certified. Rav Papa asks about when all three healed the same person.)

Answer #3: The latter Perush in Rashi (if a person wrote three texts for three illnesses for three people [and they helped], he is certified for every Kami'a he will ever write. If a text healed three people from one illness, whether the same person wrote them or different people did, this Kami'a is certified) is better than the first. (Rav Papa was unable to resolve his question.)

Explanation #1 (Rashi): Only this Kami'a is certified through this person (doctor).

Question: Rashi himself explained below regarding "three each", that every text cured three times, that all three Kami'im are certified from any [doctor], even though Rashi means that one doctor wrote them, for he explained "do not say that the Mazal of the doctor caused [it to heal]."

Note: From the continuation of Tosfos, it is clear that he explains that Rashi retracted.

Explanation #2: Surely this (that Rashi explained below) is primary. The Kami'a is certified not only through this man, rather, from any [doctor], for we say below that three Kami'im for three people, and each healed three times, the person becomes certified and the Kami'a is certified;

"Three Kami'im for three people" discusses when one doctor made them. If not, the person is not certified;

If so, this that it says "three times" also discusses one doctor, like the Reisha, and it says that the Kami'a is certified;

You are forced to say [that it is certified] through any person, for if it were [only] through this doctor, even without this (certification of this Kami'a), he is certified for all Kami'im that he will write!

Observation: Also Rashi's Perush about "three times each", that each text healed three times, even one person, he retracted from this;

He explained (at the end of DH v'Ismechei) that the Kami'a is certified, "and you cannot say that the Choleh's Mazal caused him to be healed through the Kami'a, for it was established through three people";

Inference: We do not say that the Kami'a is certified unless it healed three people.

Explanation #1 (Rashi): You cannot say that the doctor's Mazal caused [it to heal], for it does not depend on the doctor's Mazal, rather, on his Chachmah.

Inference: He wants to give a reason why the Kami'a is certified. [One might have thought that] we should attribute to the doctor's Mazal, for he became established. He healed three people through three texts. We should not attribute [the cure] to the Kami'a!

Question (Rashba): What reason does he give for this? Even though the doctor was certified for all Kami'im in the world, other Kami'im [that he will write] for other illnesses are not certified (if another doctor will write the same text);

Likewise, we should attribute these three Kami'im to the doctor (and not say that the texts are certified for anyone who will write them)! (Maharsha - the Rashba thought that Rashi discusses certification of the Kami'a. Really, he discusses certification of the doctor!)

Explanation #2: Rather, we must answer like I explained (above, DH Tilsa) according to the Ri (who holds that certification of the person helps only for texts that he already wrote and they healed three times) about how the Kami'a and the person become certified at the same time. (Two Kami'im healed two people three times, and the third Kami'a healed one of these two people two times, and then it healed a third person.)