Rashi's opinion: This refers to business.

Inference: He discusses Devar ha'Avud. He explained so also above regarding "for all Mesim, if he wants, he decreases business. If he wants, he does not decrease."

Support: Also the Rav explained above that he does Devar ha'Avud covertly in his house.

Possibility #1: According to this, it seems that here we discuss [loss of] a father or mother. Because he is on a journey, Chachamim permitted him to do business with them if he cannot diminish;

Regarding other Mesim, one need not diminish at all if he does not want.

Possibility #2: If here we discuss other Mesim, we must say oppositely, that one who is on a journey does not observe Avelus so much, and he is more consoled, so he is forbidden doing much business more than one who sits in his house and is less consoled.

Rabbeinu Yosef's opinion: Here he decreases business of buying food;

Normally, one who is on a journey buys more food than one who is in his house, for the latter has people buying for him, and also he finds many things in his house. Therefore, it discusses one who is on a journey.

Rashi's opinion: They told him about his relative's death when he was on the road.

Question: I am unsure if Rashi means that we discuss one who was taking merchandise from place to place, like Rashi explained;

I.e. perhaps we permit him to sell his merchandise, since he already brought it and toiled with it, and he was not negligent for going, for he did not know to sit in his house, that he can guard it;

Or, perhaps Rashi said so because above (23a) we say that the first week, he may not leave his house. (Presumably, we do not discuss one who transgressed.)

Implied question: This is not difficult (i.e. a reason to say that he heard only while on the road). Even though he may not leave his house in the city, we said (15b) that if he went on the road, he may wear shoes. When he enters the city, he removes them.

Inference: He may go on the road!

Answer: Perhaps he may go on the road only for Devar ha'Avud.

Question: Tosfos ha'Rav was unsure if this refers to Minchah Gedolah or Minchah Ketanah. Before this, he may not sit on it.

Note: The Maharsha asks that we explicitly learned that he may not sit until dark! Rashash suggests that the text should say "Minchah Ketanah or Minchah Gedolah, which is earlier." "Eino Yoshev Aleha" begins a new Dibur.

Suggestion: It seems to me that here is the source not to sit on a chair or bench.

Disclaimer: This is not an absolute proof, for a bed is different, for it must be inverted, and we do not find inverting regarding a chair or bench.

Assertion: You are forced to say that the order of this Mishnah is reversed.

Note: The Rashash explains that this law applies even on a Yom Chol, and the previous Mishnah (24b) and coming laws apply during the Moed.

Alternative explanation: Perhaps all of this is from the Beraisa above (we do not bring incense...), like Tosfos explained above.

Question: Why didn't he explain also here like he explained above?

Answer #1: Perhaps in the Rav's text it was written in the Beraisa itself, so he did not need to explain this.

Answer #2: "V'Ein Molichin..." was not in the Rav's text at all.

Support: Tosfos said "I do not know whether [the Beraisa after our Mishnah] "at first they used to take..." refers to incense and fragrances [mentioned in the Beraisa before our Mishnah]. We said that we do not bless on them, but we do bring them;

Or, perhaps it refers to our Mishnah (24b), which says "we give Seudas Havra'ah." At first they used to take..." It refers to our Mishnah.

Note: The Rashash says that in Tosfos' Gemara, "v'Ein Molichin" was a Mishnah by itself, and the Beraisa "at first..." appeared after it, before the rest of our Mishnah. If "v'Ein Molichin..." was in the Rav's text of our Mishnah, surely "at first..." would refer to it. He would have no Safek that a Beraisa after a Mishnah explains a Beraisa before the Mishnah! Rather, it was not in the Rav's text. He was unsure whether "at first" explains the Beraisa taught just before this, or the end of the last Mishnah (24b).

Strengthening of Support: Since [the Beraisa] explained that they enacted that everyone bring..., and the Mishnah was after the enactment [there would be no reason not to say that it explains the Mishnah].

The Aruch's text: The text says "bi'Chlichah", with two occurrences of the letter "Chaf".

Alternative text: Some texts say "bi'Chlivah", with a Veis at the end. This is [from the root Keluv (pen)], like "they return to their Keluv" (Beitzah 24a) and "ki'Chluv Malei Ohf" (Yirmeyah 5:27).

Alternative Perush: "Bi'Chlivah" is like "Machliv" (above 10a). Rashi explained that this is like a ladder, i.e. stitches far from each other.

He (the Aruch) brings what we say in a Midrash "they took the Keruvim and put them in Chelichah."

If so, we must say that the text of the Piyut (Kinah) of the Churban Beis ha'Mikdash for Tish'ah b'Av is "Amon and Mo'av removed the Keruvim and Chelichah. They were going around in them." The text (Chlichah) has two letters "Chaf" according to the Aruch.

Explanation: All this is to avoid embarrassing one who does not have [a proper bier].

Support: Also in Bikurim (3:7), it says that initially, one who knew to recite [Viduy Bikurim would say it himself. Those who did not know, others were Makreh, i.e. recited the words and they would repeat them. People refrained from bringing due to shame, so they enacted to be Makreh for everyone.]

Application: From that Halachah, some bring a proof regarding "the [last] eight verses of the Torah, a Yachid reads them." We need not say that the Ba'al Korei does not read with him (the Oleh, who received that Aliyah), for in their days, the Ba'al Korei did not read with the Oleh;

Note: Rather, it means that one Oleh reads all eight verses. We do not split them among two Olim.

The custom nowadays [for the Ba'al Korei] to read [with the Oleh] is due to the honor of the Oleh, to avoid embarrassing one who does not know [to read from the Sefer Torah], like it says regarding Bikurim;

Initially, one who knew to recite, recited [it himself]. One who did not know to recite, others were Makreh for them. People refrained from bringing Bikurim, so they enacted to be Makreh for everyone.

Explanation #1: He commanded to do so [bury him in simple linen shrouds] at the time of his death.

Explanation #2: He did so for someone in his household [who died] in his (R. Gamliel's) lifetime.

Support (for Explanation #1): The word " b'Atzmo" (for himself) connotes like Explanation #1.

Explanation: This is clapping the palms on each other.

Question: A Mishnah (Beitzah 36b) says that we do not clap on Yom Tov. Rashi explained (Beitzah 30a) that it discusses clapping for song, or for Avelus;

Why must we say that it is on Yom Tov, lest one fix a musical instrument? It is forbidden even during Chol ha'Moed, due to pain!

Answer: We must say that the Mishnah discusses clapping [only] for song, but not for Avelus [unlike Rashi].

Explanation: This is like I explained. He claps the palms on each other. Also the Yerushalmi in Horiyos connotes like this;

Citation (Yerushalmi): When R. Yehudah [Nesi'ah] seized Reish Lakish, R. Yochanan began to clap with one hand. R. Yehudah asked "do we clap with one hand?!"

Rashi's opinion (in Beitzah 36b): "Mesapkin" is hitting the palm on the thigh.

Consequence: If so, "va'Yispok Es Kapav" means that [Balak] hit both his palms on his thighs. This requires investigation.

Explanation: We permit [banging the foot on the ground] more when he is barefoot, for he is very careful [to do it softly], lest he be harmed.

Explanation: If Talmidei Chachamim are standing, one must tell them "sit!" However, even if an Avel or Choleh stood, one need not tell them "sit!";

It is not only when they stood, that they need not stand. If so, obviously they may sit without permission!

Inference: I explained above (20a DH she'Kevar) that this is even if he eats several times that day, for it was not taught "the first meal."

Inference: One may learn Torah. We forbid only for a Chacham who died. His Beis Midrash is Batel.

Distinction: However, when the Mes is taken out, we are Mevatel learning Torah.

Source - Citation (Kesuvos 17b, Megilah 3b): We Mevatel learning Torah for taking out a Mes [for burial] and for bringing a Kalah [to the Chupah].

Question: However, where there is a burial group, R. Yitzchak was unsure. He elaborated in a Teshuvah and brought a proof from the Yerushalmi.

Riva's opinion: Above, Riva explained that the text is "for Kivus and cutting hair."

He explained that a woman may cut her hair after Shivah. Tosfos said that he did not know his source.

Explanation: This is until 12 months.

Support - Citation (Yerushalmi): All of Shivah, the sword is drawn. Until Sheloshim, it is wavering. After 12 months, it returns to its sheath.

Citation (cont.): This is like an arch of rocks. Once one of them was jolted, all of them are jolted.

Observation: The Bavli says similarly;

Citation (Shabbos 105b): If one of the brothers died, all of the brothers should worry...