Observation: This statement is not part of the Mishnah. Rather, the Gemara deduces that since the Mishnah said that whatever sprays and overflows is not included in Ki Yutan, it implies that whatever is caught inside of it is included in Ki Yutan.

Opinion #1: Rav Yosef from Orleans explains that "Kinah" -- "lice" in our Gemara refers to black jumping lice, as discussed in the Pasuk, "And hit the dust of the earth and it will turn to lice" (Shemos 8:12). It is normal for black jumping lice to come out of the ground. The Rabbanan argued with Rebbi Eliezer regarding these lice.

Opinion #1 (cont.): However, a "Parush" is crawling lice, and one is liable if he kills one even according to the Rabbanan, as stated later (107b).

Question #1: This does not appear correct according to Rabeinu Tam, as we say in the Medrash, "however, a person is a worm" refers to head lice.

Question #1 (cont.): In Nidah (20b), the Gemara says that Rava sent Ifra Hurmiz a comb that is "Mekatel Kalmi." Rashi explains that this means that the comb was used to kill lice. It is abnormal for black jumping lice to be in a person's hair (and therefore it is difficult to say this is the definition of Kinah.)

Question #2: Additionally, in Berachos (51b) we say that people who travel from city to city have a lot to say, and worn out clothes produce lice. It is normal for white crawling lice to be found in worn out old clothes.

Question #3: Additionally, the Gemara later (107b) says that a Parush reproduces while a crawling Kinah does not, but rather is created from the sweat of a person.

Opinion #2: Rabeinu Tam therefore understands that the black jumping lice are called Parosh, and everyone agrees one is liable for killing it. Beis Hillel, who are lenient in this matter, hold that the crawling lice can be killed. Rashi explains later that Rabah killed them on Shabbos.

Implied Question: The one who was answering the question thought as follows. (Why didn't he realize this Beraisa was not better proof than the Mishnah?)

Answer #1: He thought that the Beraisa is usually more explicit than the Mishnah (and therefore there must be only one reason for both).

Answer #2: Additionally, the Beraisa states that one cannot check his clothes for lice or read. This implies by candlelight more than the Mishnah implies it is done by candlelight, as the Mishnah states "And he should not check his clothes for lice" implying it is a separate topic (the Maharam explains that this is through the use of the Vav meaning "And etc." in the word "v'Lo").

Explanation: They had similar looking clothes.

Opinion: We see from our Gemara that one cannot determine which of two items of clothing is his and which belongs to his friend by candlelight.

Explanation #1: It appears that Aba Shaul holds like the Rabbanan, and he decrees that one may not roll a Kinah because he might come to roll a Parush. One may not roll a Parush as he might kill it. However, this is all considered one decree.

Explanation #2: Rashi explains that Aba Shaul holds like Rebbi Eliezer.

Question: This is difficult, as it implies that Rebbi Eliezer holds that checking clothes for lice is also forbidden, as he says that one cannot do so as he might kill one of them. This is according to Rebbi Eliezer! (How can Aba Shaul share Rebbi Eliezer's opinion if Aba Shaul holds it is permitted to carry them and throw them off the clothing?)

Answer: We do not remain with this understanding of Rebbi Eliezer as implied earlier. (Rather, we conclude that Rebbi Eliezer only forbade doing this at night near a candle because one might tip the candle, not because it is forbidden to take away the lice.)

Explanation #1: The Riva explains that this refers to Shabbos, and it is regarding Rav Huna's statement that this is honor, even during the week.

Explanation #2: We rely on Rashi who says that this is referring to Shabbos, and we hold like Beis Hillel who permits this later.

Question: Rabeinu Tam has a difficulty with this. How should prayer help according to Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah? In Rosh Hashanah (16a), Rebbi Meir says that everyone is judged on Rosh Hashanah, and their verdict is sealed on Yom Kippur. Rebbi Yehudah says that everyone is judged on Rosh Hashanah, and everyone's verdict is sealed during the time when that part of the verdict is judged. The amount of grain he receives is sealed on Pesach, and his verdict is sealed on Rosh Hashanah.

Question (cont.): Rebbi Yosi says that a person is judged everyday. The Gemara (ibid.) quotes Rav Yosef as stating that we pray nowadays regarding the sick and the Torah scholars according to Rebbi Yosi. This implies that according to Rebbi Meir and Rebbi Yehudah it would not even help (as their fate has already been sealed)!

Answer #1: We are discussing the Shabbos between Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur.

Answer #2: According to the second answer given there (ibid.) that it could be according to Rebbi Yitzchak who says that it is always good for a person to cry out to Hash-m whether before the verdict or afterwards, our Gemara is understandable.

Text #1: Rabeinu Tam does not have the text, "Shavna" as Shavna was an evildoer. We would never find a person who named after him, as "the name of an evildoer is left to rot," as stated in Yoma (38b).

Text #1 (cont.): Rather, the correct text is, "Shachna" which is also a name, as stated in Sotah (21a), "Rather, like Shachna, the brother of Hillel."

Text #2: It appears to the Ri that the text indeed should be "Shavna." Just because there is an evildoer who is called Avraham does not mean that we will no longer call anyone Avraham!

Text #2 (cont.): We find that there were two people called Shavna. This is apparent from the Pasuk in Yeshaya, "Shavna that is responsible for the house." The Pasuk continues, "And I will call to my servant to Elyakim...and I will put your kingdom in his hands." The Pasuk continues later, "And Elyakim who was in charge of the house came along with Shavna the scribe." This implies that the Shavna that was in charge of the house had already died, and Elyakim took over from him. This was a different Shavna.

Observation: This does not include Gavriel, as the Gemara in Sotah (33a) says that Mar says that Gavriel came and taught Yosef all seventy languages.

Question: How can it be that they even know the hidden thoughts of every man and they do not know Aramaic?!

Observation: It appears that this only applies when the sick person is laying lower. A person should not sit (i.e. in a chair that is) higher than the head of the sick person.

Implied Question: In our Gemara, in Makos (5b) regarding Yehudah ben Tabai who killed an Eid Zomeim, and in Yevamos (96b) regarding a Sefer Torah that was torn due to anger, the Gemara does not ask, "If Hash-m does not even allow an animal of a righteous person to "sin" etc. (Why not?)

Answer: Rabeinu Tam explains that this is only asked regarding righteous people who ate prohibited food, as this is very denigrating to a righteous person.

Implied Question: The Gemara in Pesachim (103b) says that Rebbi Yirmiyah once forgot and ate before Havdalah. The Gemara in Rosh Hashanah (21a) says that Levi said, "The food of the Babylonians is tasty on Yom Kippur as established in Eretz Yisrael." (Both of these cases imply there was a prohibition involving eating, yet the Gemaros do not ask "If Hash-m does not even allow an animal etc." Why not?)

Answer: In those cases, the food itself was not prohibited, rather it was eaten at a prohibited time.

Implied Question: The Bereishis Rabah says that Rebbi Yirmiyah sent Rebbi Zeira a basket of figs, and it relates that it ended up being eaten before Terumos and Ma'aseros were taken (as Rebbi Yirmiyah thought Rebbi Zeira would take Ma'aser anyway, and Rebbi Zeira thought Rebbi Yirmiyah certainly took Ma'aser.) (Why isn't the question asked there?)

Answer: Rebbi Aba bar Zimna in the name of Rebbi Eliezer Zeira indeed remarks there, "If the earlier ones were like angles, we are like people. If they were like people, we are like donkeys, and not like the donkey of Rebbi Pinchas ben Yair."

Observation: This question is asked on the second version.

Text: Rabeinu Tam had the text, "They are both regarding a servant who is not permanent. What is the law regarding a permanent servant and the oil? A temporary servant checks carefully so that he should not be fired, but a permanent servant does not as he is not scared that they will fire him due to this oversight, since he has seniority."