Answer #2 (to Question 4:c, 28B - Rava): R. Eliezer forbids lighting with a wick or rag that is not singed.

Question: Rav Yosef heard that a Mishnah discusses exactly three by three - how can we explain this (according to Rava, the size does not matter!)?

Answer: It teaches about Tum'ah:

(Mishnah - R. Shimon): A garment must be three [fingers] by three to Mekabel Tum'ah - this excludes the Malal (a hem around the perimeter).

Chachamim say, [it suffices if there was] exactly three by three [at the beginning, even though there will be less after the hem is made].

(Rav): R. Yehudah permits lighting with a Kli, but not with a Kli that broke [on Yom Tov];

R. Shimon permits [in either case].

R. Yehudah permits lighting with dates (since they are fit to eat, one may move them for other purposes), but not with pits of dates [eaten on Yom Tov, since they are Nolad];

R. Shimon permits.

R. Yehudah permits lighting with nuts, but not with shells of nuts [eaten on Yom Tov];

R. Shimon permits.

We must teach the argument in all three cases:

Had we only taught the first, one might have thought that there R. Yehudah considers it Nolad for it was a Kli and now it is a broken Kli - but he would not forbid the pits, for they did not change;

Had we only taught the second, one might have thought that there R. Yehudah considers it Nolad for the pits were hidden and now they are exposed - but he would not forbid shells, which were exposed from the beginning

Therefore, we also need to teach the third.

Rav did not say this explicitly, rather it was inferred from the following episode:

Rav was eating dates and throwing the pits into an oven.

R. Chiya: It would be forbidden to do so on Yom Tov.

Question: Did Rav agree to this?

Answer: When Rav came to Bavel, he ate dates [on Yom Tov] and threw the pits to animals.

Suggestion: He was eating good, ripe dates (nothing remains on the pit - even though they are no longer fit for people, Rav would move them -) this shows that he did not accept R. Chiya's words!

Rejection: No, they were poor dates (some fruit remains on the pit, they are still fit for people).

Question (Rav Shmuel bar bar Chanah): According to R. Yehudah, who permits lighting with a Kli, but not with a broken Kli, once one starts to light it, it is a broken Kli, he moves Isur!

Answer #1 (Rav Yosef): He does like Rav Masnah:

(Rav Masnah): If wood fell from a date tree into an oven on Yom Tov, one may add to it a larger amount of [permitted] wood ready from before Yom Tov (to Mevatel the Nolad) and light all of it.

Answer #2 (Rav Hamnuna): The case is, the wick was a lowly rag less than three by three [Tefachim, from the beginning it was not considered a Kli];

R. Eliezer and R. Akiva are consistent with what they taught elsewhere.

(Mishnah - R. Eliezer): If a garment less than three by three [Tefachim] was designated to plug up [an opening through which water enters] a bathhouse or to be a potholder, or to clean out a grinder, whether or not it is prepared (this will be explained), it is Tamei;

R. Yehoshua says, in either case it is Tahor;

R. Akiva says, if it is prepared, it is Tamei, if not, it is Tahor.

(Ula): All agree that if the owner threw it in the wasteheap, it is Tahor;

All agree that if he left it in a box, it is Tamei;

They argue about when he hung on a peg or left it in back of the door:

R. Eliezer holds, since he did not throw it in the wasteheap, this shows that he cares about it - it is called unprepared in relation to something left in a box;

R. Yehoshua holds, since he did not leave it in a box, this shows that he was Mevatel it - it is called prepared in relation to something thrown in the wasteheap;

R. Akiva holds like R. Eliezer when he hung it on a peg, he holds like R. Yehoshua when he left it in back of the door.

Later, R. Akiva adopted R. Yehoshua's opinion in both cases.

Question: What is the source of this?

Answer (Rava) Question: Why does it say Pesilas ha'Beged (wick of garment, a construct form) instead of Pesilas Shel Beged (a wick [made] of garment)?

Answer: This teaches that it is still a garment.

(Mishnah): One may not puncture an eggshell and fill it with oil and put it on top of a lamp in order that the oil will drip into the lamp [on Shabbos];

It is forbidden even to leave oil dripping from a Kli Cheres;

R. Yehudah permits [both of these].

If the potter made it like this from the beginning, it is permitted, for it is one Kli.

One may not fill a bowl [next to a lamp] with oil and insert a wick to draw oil;

R. Yehudah permits.

(Gemara): The argument must be taught in all three cases:

If they argued only about an eggshell, one might have thought that Chachamim forbid this because one might take from it [for consumption], but they permit from a Kli Cheres because it is repulsive, one is not likely to take oil from it; (Rashi - since the oil was designated to burn, one who takes it is liable for extinguishing; Tosfos (42B) - one is liable for extinguishing only if he takes from the oil in the Ner itself, taking oil dripping into it only causes it to extinguish sooner, it is forbidden on account of Muktzeh).

If they argued only about a Kli Cheres, one might have thought that R. Yehudah permits because one is not likely to take from it, but he would forbid from an eggshell.

(Mishnah): If the potter made it like this from the beginning, it is permitted...

(Beraisa): If [anyone] joined them with plaster or clay, it is permitted.

Question: The Mishnah permits only if the potter joined it!

Answer: It means, it is permitted only if it was joined [very well,] like a potter would do.

(Beraisa - R. Yehudah): Once we spent Shabbos in Beis Nitzeh in Lud, they brought to us an eggshell; we filled it with oil, punctured it and put it on top of a lamp; R. Tarfon and Chachamim were there, they did not say anything.

Chachamim: In Beis Nitzeh they are zealous, but in other places it is forbidden.

Avin of Tzipori dragged a bench on a stone floor of an Aliyah (upper story) in front of R. Yitzchak ben Elazar.

R. Yitzchak: If I will be quiet, like the Chachamim who saw R. Yehudah use the eggshell, disaster will result (people will think that it is permitted)!

It is forbidden - we decree about a stone floor of an Aliyah on account of a regular Aliyah [with a dirt floor, it could make a furrow].

The overseer of the synagogue in Botzrah dragged a bench on a stone floor in front of R. Yirmeyah the elder.

R. Yirmeyah: You do this for you hold like R. Shimon? R. Shimon permits only big benches, which one cannot carry - he forbids dragging a small bench, for one can carry it!

R. Yirmeyah argues with Ula:

(Ula): They (R. Shimon and R. Yehudah) argue about small benches (and R. Shimon permits), but all permit a big bench!

Question (against R. Yirmeyah and Ula - Rav Yosef - Beraisa - R. Shimon): One may drag a bed, chair or bench, as long as he does not intend to make a furrow;

(In the Seifa, R. Yehudah forbids everything except for a wagon, for it does not make a furrow.) This shows that they argue about big and small Kelim!

Answer #1 (for Ula): The bed discussed is small, just like a chair [which is taught with it].

Answer #2 (for R. Yirmeyah): The chair discussed is big, just like a bed [which is taught with it].

Question (against R. Yirmeyah - Rabah - Mishnah): One who sells garments [with Sha'atnez] may sell normally [he wears it to display it], as long as he does not intend that it will protect him from the sun or rain [or cold, and it is possible that he would be protected without the Sha'atnez, i.e. he also wears other garments].

Tzenu'im (who are careful to avoid suspicion) hang such garments on a stick in back of them.

This is like a small bench, for one could do like Tzenu'im to avoid benefit - still, R. Shimon permits!

R. Yirmeyah is refuted.