Explanation (Ri): Their wallets were not sewn tightly like ours. This is why it asks [that he can remove it] from where it is sewn, and not from elsewhere.

Explanation: The Gemara knew that this matter brought was taught after he retracted.

Explanation: Granted, it is not considered Eged. However, this is not Hanachah, like Rashi explained.

Question (R. Elchanan): According to Rabah (above, 4a), who establishes our Mishnah like R. Akiva, who says that Kelutah k'Mi she'Hunchah (something in the air is considered to be at rest), in this clause brought here, why are both exempt? Above three according to R. Akiva is like within three according to Rabanan!

Answer #1: Rabah holds that Eged Guf is called Eged (the object is considered to be partially in the Reshus in which stands the one holding it).

Answer #2 (Ri): There it is above three, so we should say that it is called Eged, like it says above (3a) that the hand is drawn after the body. Here it is below three. It is not called Eged.

Alternative text: According to Seforim that say kil'Acher Yado (unskillfully), we can say that "with his foot" explains kil'Acher Yado.

Conclusion: The first text (l'Acher Yado) is better, for so it says in the Beraisa in the Gemara.

Explanation: [Marpek] is what we call elbow, unlike Rashi, who explained "underarm".

Source #1: A Mishnah (Ohalos 1:8) teaches 248 limbs in a person - 30 in the hand, i.e. six in each finger, two in the lower arm, two in the Marpek, one in the upper arm, two in the shoulder... This implies that Marpek is below the upper arm!

Source #2: In Erchin (19b), [if one said "the weight of] my hand or foot is Alai" (incumbent on me to this amount of gold or silver to Hekdesh), we fill a barrel with water, and he enters his hand until the Atzil, and the leg until the knee. In the Mishnah there (19a), Atzil is called Marpek;

Also, the Targum of "Atzilei Yadai" is 'Marpekei Yadei.' This implies that Marpek is the elbow, which corresponds in the arm to the knee in the leg. (We find that Aleph and Ayin can be interchanged in these words - Tana d'Vei Eliyahu Raba, Sof Perek 9.)

Note: It seems that Tosfos needed the Targum for this proof. He does not infer that since the leg is until the knee, presumably the arm is until the elbow. Vows depend on how people speak. We find that the Torah says to put Tefilin on "Yadecha", i.e. above the elbow! However, the Ramban does infer like this. This requires investigation.

Source #3: In Zevachim (18b), we expound "Lo Yachgeru ba'Yaza" to teach that [Kohanim] do not gird [the Avnet in a place where people are Mezi'ah (sweat), i.e.] below the loins or above Atzileihem, rather, even with (opposite) Atzileihem;

If Atzilei is the underarm, how could they gird above them?! Also, how could they gird even with Atzileihem? Just the contrary, it is a place of sweat! Rather, surely it is the elbow.

Observation: We can prove from here unlike the one who explains that the place of Tefilin is on the lower arm, below the elbow, for everywhere we say that Tefilin is on the Zero'a;

In Ohalos (1:8) it connotes that Zero'a is above the Marpek (elbow).

Support: In Erchin (19b), it asks "is the Yad [only] until Atzil? It says "v'Hayu l'Os Al Yadecha", and it was taught that this is Kibores (where the bicep muscle is)!

We answer "mid'Oraisa the entire Kibores", i.e. is [included in what is] called Yad. Vows depend on how people speak.

Inference: The place of Tefilin is above the elbow.

Implied question: A Mishnah in Kerisus (13b) says that if it was Shabbos and he was Motzi [food] in his mouth, he is liable!

Answer: This refers only to food. It is normal to be Motzi it in his mouth while eating.

Explanation: From a person's shoulder to the ground is three Amos, like it says in the Targum of Megilas Esther, that Parshandasa was hung in three Amos, and also all [sons of Haman], and their heads were cut off.

Implied question: It says about a Mikveh that a person's entire body fits in, even his head, in an Amah long by an Amah wide and three Amos tall!

Answer: When he enters the water, the water rises above his head. (This if for an average person. It assumes that the cavity of the Mikveh is an Amah square also above three Amos tall.)

Implied question: Cavities [for coffins in burial caves] are four Amos long (Bava Basra 100a)!

Answer: [Four Amos are required] with the head, neck, the thickness of the [walls of the] coffin, and they insert the coffin one or two Tefachim into the cavity (i.e. the coffin does not totally fill the cavity. It is reasonable to make cavities that can accommodate also people who are taller than average - PF.)

Implied question: To avoid Hezek Re'iyah (invasion of privacy), we require [a wall] four Amos tall (Bava Basra 2b)!

Answer: This is due to the neck and head, and he can easily elevate himself (on his toes) so he can see (over a wall). Therefore, four Amos are needed.

Implied question: It says in Eruvin (48a) that the place of a person [lying down] is four Amos!

Answer: This is when he spreads his arm above his head. (R. Meir says so explicitly there.)

Note: If one raises his arm, the elbow is about even with the top of the head, and from the elbow to the end of the middle finger is by definition one Amah. This connotes that a person is three Amos until the top of his head! Tosfos must explain that he does not fully extend his arm.

Inference: Also for a region, we say Batlah Daitan (we ignore their practice. The Halachah depends on the majority of the world.)

Support #1: Also in Eruvin (28a), it asks "is Bavel the majority of the world?!" A Beraisa teaches...

Support #2: Also after that (29b), it asks "are Persians the majority of the world?!"

Question: Below (144b), regarding Beis Menasiya used to squeeze pomegranates, it asks "are Beis Menasiya the majority of the world?!", and it answers "indeed, [practices in one region determine the Halachah everywhere]! A Mishnah teaches that if one lets cactus grow in a vineyard [this is Kil'ayim]... because in Araviya people grow cactus for their camels";

The Gemara asks that these are different. Araviya is a whole region. Here (Beis Menasiya) Batlah Daito Etzel Kol Adam!

Answer: There, the practice of Araviya is important, for also the entire world, if they had many camels, would grow [cactus];

However, Beis Menasiya, who is one person, Batlah Daito, even though the entire world, if they had many pomegranates, would squeeze [them].

Explanation (Rashbam): There is an appointee of the king who carries letters of the king to know the number of his mighty men, soldiers and storehouses. Such appointees carry them in pouches hanging from their belts;

Those pouches sometimes go in front of them, and sometimes in back of them. This is truly like the underpants above, which go (back and forth). The first Tana of (who argues with) R. Yehudah does not consider this something that goes back and forth.

The Gemara brings a Beraisa that says that messengers of the king do so, i.e. [the pouch] goes back and forth. The Reisha of our Mishnah discusses like this.

Explanation: The first Tana should have said that if it was in back of him and it came in front of him, he is exempt. The latter Tana, who obligates, should have said that if it was in front of him and it came in back of him. This would be a bigger Chidush;

However, now he did not know that there is any distinction in this.

Remark: Above (91b) regarding Chizkiyah, we answer that it is as if [he was Motzi the entire basket], and in Kidushin (5b) regarding [if he gave Kidushin money, she said that it is for Kidushin, it is considered as if] she gave and she said [and it is not Kidushin], and in several places we do not answer this.

Question (Riva): Why don't we say that the Torah said one Chatas, and not two or three, like it says regarding Kofer?

Answer: This is explained in Bava Kama (40a DH Kofer. Only regarding Kofer it is proper to expound "and not Chetzi Kofer", for one must pay full Kofer.) (It is redemption of his soul - PF.)