Implied Question: In many places regarding other Takanos the Gemara does not asl this question.

Answe: Only here is different, since it is something that is common, that takes place on a daily basis; therefore we ought to remember.

Explanation #1: Either because Tevilah every day requires forty Sa'ah ...

Explanation #2: Or because even for others nine Kabin will suffice ...

Explanation #3: Or what this means is that the Halachah is not like him, but rather like Rebbi Yehudah ben Beseira, who said that Divrei Torah are not subject to Tum'ah.

Qualification: Some explain that specifically Divrei Torah, but that Tefilah requires Tevilah.

Rejection: Though according to the Ri, there is no difference.

Conclusion: Consequently, somebody who Tovels on Erev Yom Kipur should not recite a B'rachah; if he does, it is a B'rachah Levatalah.

Alternative Explanation: The Gemara might just as well have concluded that everyone holds 'Ein Chozer le'Rosh'

Conclusion: Since it did not, it proves that the Halachah is 'Chozer le'Rosh'.

Proof: Similarly, the Gemara later, quoting Rebbi Avahu, will specifically state 'Chozer le'Rosh'.

Question #1: But the Gemara in Megilah (18:) cites Rebbi Yochanan, who rules that someone who hears nine Teki'os in the course of nine hours of the day, is Yotzei' - from which we see that the Teki'os combine , despite the fact that he waited the time it takes to blow them all?

Question #2: And similarly in Megilah (18:), where Rav Beivoy switched the opinions, citing Rav as the one who rules not like Rebbi Muna, who holds (regarding the Sh'ma) that 'If one waited, one must start all over again; and the Gemara concludes like Rav Beivoy.

Answer: The Count from Coucy therefore explains that one can differentiate between the cases, in that our case is different, because (not only does he not did he not finish reading the Sh'ma, but) he is unable to finish it.

Answer (cont.): But where the man if fit, such as in the case in the Gemara in Megilah and by Teki'as Shofar, everyone agrees that one does not need to read all over again.

Rejection of Initial Conclusion: Rabeinu Yehudah however, explains that the Gemara could not have concluded that everybody holds 'Ein Chozer le'Rosh, and that they are arguing over where they waited, because then everybody would agree that the man is fit, since he does not need to begin all over again.

Conclusion: And most certainly, had the Gemara been able to to say so, it would have done so.

Clarification: The Ri explains that this speaks specifically about a case where there was reason to suspect at the outset that there is excrement in the location where he wants to Daven.

Explanation #1: And it is a wrongdoing that cannot be rectified.

Explanation #2: The Ri however, explains that he must repeat the Amidah.

Explanation #1: It speaks where he urinates on the floor or on clothes which have not become 'Tofe'ach al'M'nas Lehatfi'ach' (very wet), as is implied further on (Daf 25.) - such as where it emerged one drop at t time, and became quickly absorbed. This is how ha'Rav Rav Yosef explained.

) Explanation #2: Alternatively, even if it is has become 'Tofe'ach al'M'nas Lehatfi'ach' it is nevertheless permitted, seeing as mi'd'Oraysa, it is only forbidden whilst one is actually urinating, and it is the Rabbanan who forbade even where he is not ...

Conclusion: Consequently, since he is already Davcning the Amidah, they did not want to trouble him to start all over again.