1)

(a)We query Rebbi Yochanan (who always rules like a Stam Mishnah) from a tradition in connection with a Mishnah in Kelim, which rules that a Tamei flax-comb whose teeth are missing, retains its Tum'ah if two teeth remain, but is Tahor, if there is only one left - because, whereas the former can still be used for its original function, the latter can not.

(b)Each tooth that is pulled out, retains its Tum'ah - because it is fit for various purposes (to clean out a lamp or to stretch clothes or threads to separate them).

2)

(a)If the middle tooth of each group of three teeth of a Tamei wool-comb, is missing - it is Tahor.

(b)If one group of three teeth remains intact, the comb remains Tamei - unless one of the teeth is the outer one, which is thicker than the others, in which case that group of three cannot be used for its original function.

(c)The broken teeth will remain Tamei if ...

1. ... two teeth broke off together - provided one then designates them for use as a pair of tweezers.

2. ... even one single tooth broke off - should one then designate it for to clean out a lamp or to stretch clothes or threads.

(d)We reconcile Rebbi Yochanan, who always rules like a Stam Mishnah, with the tradition that this Mishnah is not Halachah, despite the fact that it is a Stam Mishnah - by quoting Rebbi Yochanan himself, who said together with Resh Lakish that this Mishnah is not authentic.

3)

(a)The reason that Rebbi Yochanan rejected this Mishnah cannot be because the Reisha says that a Tamei wool-comb with the middle tooth missing from each group of three is Tahor (implying that if two adjoining teeth remain intact, it is Tamei), whereas the Seifa says that only if a set of three teeth remain intact is it Tamei (according to Rashi's second explanation) is - because in fact, a wool-comb has two parallel rows of teeth. Consequently, the Seifa is referring to the outer row (which serves the main purpose of the comb), which is Tahor because, unless three teeth are intact, it will not function properly; whereas the inner row, which is only to catch the wool, to prevent the wool from falling, serves its purpose even with two, in which case, the comb is Tamei.

(b)Nor did he reject it because, whereas in the Reisha, the Tana considers each tooth that breaks off a Kli even without fashioning it, in the Seifa, he requires fashioning, because, as Abaye explains, maybe the Reisha speaks when a bit of the handle broke off with it, and the Seifa speaks when it did not. Rav Papa explains - that the Reisha speaks about a thick tooth, which does not require a handle, whereas the Seifa speaks about a thin tooth, which does.

(c)Rebbi Yochanan and Resh Lakish rejected the authenticity of this Stam Mishnah - because the experts concluded with the words 'These are the words of Rebbi Shimon' (in which case, it is not a Stam Mishnah at all).

4)

(a)When Rebbi Chiya bar Avin sent (a message) that a woman is permitted within three months - he meant that one does not require three full months, but the majority of the first and of the third months, plus the entire second month will suffice.

(b)Ameimar too, permitted her to become betrothed on the ninetieth day (before three full months had expired). According to him, when Rav and Shmuel both ruled that one needs to wait three months, besides the day on which her husband died and the day of the betrothal - they were referring (not to the general waiting period of a widow, but) to the twenty-four months of a feeding mother.

(c)Likewise, when Rava confiscated the Se'udah that someone arranged when he 'betrothed' a woman on the ninetieth day after her husband's death is a misquotation - because it was (not a Se'udas Erusin, but) a Se'udas Nisu'in.

(d)The Halachah however, is not like Ameimar - but a feeding mother has to wait twenty-four months besides the day that the baby was born and the day of her betrothal; and a woman who is not feeding must wait three months, besides the day when her husband died and the day of the betrothal.

5)

(a)Rav Chisda queries R. Yosi in our Mishnah, who forbids even betrothal during the Sheloshim, from the Mishnah in Ta'anis, which forbids a haircut and washing clothes during the week in which Tisha b'Av falls - though both are permitted on Thursday in honor of Shabbos.

(b)'Before this time', the Beraisa adds, 'one diminishes one's business deals, building and planting' - but betrothal is permitted then, though marriage is forbidden.

(c)Assuming that 'before this time' refers to week of Tisha b'Av, Rav Chisda asks from here on Rebbi Yosi, who forbids the betrothal of a widow during the Sheloshim - because now that, where washing clothes is forbidden, betrothal is permitted, where washing clothes is permitted (a mourner after the Shiv'ah), betrothal should certainly be permitted!

(d)We answer that, as far as betrothal is concerned, when the Beraisa permits betrothal 'before this time' ('Kodem ... '), he means 'Kodem d'Kodem' - before the week of Tisha b'Av, when washing clothes is also permitted ...

(e)... but during the week of Tisha b'Av - it is forbidden (thereby refuting Rav Chisda's 'Kal va'Chomer').

6)

(a)Rava nevertheless reiterates Rav Chisda's Kashya (even on Kodem d'Kodem) using the same 'Kal va'Chomer' (substituting business, which is forbidden even before the week of Tisha b'Av, for washing clothes).

(b)do we therefore emend Rebbi Yosi's statement (in our Mishnah) 'Kol ha'Nashim Yis'arsu Chutz min ha'Almanah' - to 'Kol ha'Nashim Yinas'u Chutz min ha'Almanah'.

(c)The Tana Kama now forbids even an Arusah to become betrothed, whereas Rebbi Yehudah permits the betrothal of a woman who was married and the marriage of one who was betrothed. In fact, Rebbi ...

1. ... Yosi does not hold of Havchanah at all, and Rebbi ...

2. ... Yehudah forbids the betrothal of a widow during the Sheloshim.

7)

(a)According to the second Lashon, we emend Rebbi Yosi's statement to 'Kol ha'Arusos Gerushos Yinas'u', and he does in fact, hold of Havchanah. Bearing in mind that in this Lashon, Rebbi Yosi is more strict than Rebbi Yehudah - he argues with him regarding ha'Nesu'os Yis'arsu, which he forbids.

(b)Rebbi Yosi permits an Arusah to marry - because she is definitely not pregnant, but forbids a married woman to become betrothed - because she might be pregnant, and he decrees betrothal on account of marriage.

(c)We reconcile Rebbi Yosi here with a Beraisa where he says 'Kol ha'Nashim Yis'arsu ... ' - by emending it to 'Kol ha'Arusos Gerushos, Yinas'u Chutz min ha'Almanah' (like we emended our Mishnah).

(d)And Rava emends 'v'Chulan Lo Yinas'u ad she'Yiheyu Lahen Sheloshah Chodashim' in the Beraisa (implying that betrothal is permitted) - to read 'u'Nesu'os Lo Yis'arsu ad she'Yih'yu Lahen Sheloshah Chodashim'.

8)

(a)We query Rava's previous amendment however, from a Beraisa learned by Rebbi Chiya bar Ami, which discusses the Dinim of an Arus and an Arusah. The Tana rules that the Arus does not inherit the Arusah in the event of her death. Should he die however - she may claim her Kesubah (assuming that he wrote her one).

(b)The Tana rules that the Dinim of Aninus and Avelus, and the obligation of burial - do not apply to an Arus and an Arusah, should one of them die.

(c)The problem this creates with Rava's emendment of Rebbi Yosi ('Kol Arusos Gerushos Yinas'u') is - that now we see that a widow from the Erusin is not obligated to mourn (so how can Rebbi Yosi have possibly said 'Kol Arusos Gerushos Yinas'u', but not Almanos, because of mourning?)

(d)As a result of this Kashya, we reinstate the original text as it stands in our Mishnah ('Kol ha'Nashim Yis'arsu Chutz min ha'Almanah'). And we answer our original Kashya on Rebbi Yosi (who forbids a woman who is mourning to become betrothed) from Beraisa (which specifically states 'Kodem ha'Zeman ha'Zeh ... u'Me'arsin') - by turning it into a Machlokes Tana'im (and Rebbi Yosi concurs with the Tana of another Beraisa which forbids both marriage and betrothal during the week of Tisha b'Av).

(e)The Tana includes in the list cutting down on one's normal occupation and on business, building and planting (which are discussed in Ta'anis). The two items that become forbidden during the week of Tisha b'Av are - having a haircut and washing one's clothes (as we already learned in the Beraisa on the previous Amud).

9)

(a)As we just explained, the Tana Kama of the Beraisa forbids betrothal during the week of Tisha b'Av. 'Yesh Omrim' (Rebbi Nasan) is even more strict - forbidding it during the entire month of Av.

(b)Rav Ashi disagrees with those who just portrayed the Heter of betrothal during the week of Tisha b'Av, as a Machlokes Tana'im. In his opinion, when the Beraisa forbids betrothal during the week of Tisha b'Av - it is forbidding betrothal with a Se'udah, but not the betrothal itself.

(c)This does not mean that when the Tana forbids marriage, he also means specifically marriage with a Se'udah (but permits marriage without one) - because marriage is a happy event even without a Se'udah, whereas by betrothal the main Simchah lies in the Se'udah.

(d)Rav Ashi explains that Rebbi Yosi forbids a widow to become betrothed on the one hand - because a fresh, private mourning, which is more intense, is more stringent; whilst on the other, he concedes that betrothal during the week of Tisha b'Av is permitted - because the mourning is both ancient and public (making it less intense, and therefore less stringent).

10)

(a)Our Mishnah rules that in the case of four brothers who all die, leaving behind four Yevamos - the oldest remaining brother has the right to perform Yibum with all of them (and to ignore remaining brothers demand that he performs one Yibum, leaving the other three for them).

(b)And if a man dies, leaving behind two Yevamos - the Yibum or the Chalitzah of one of them exempts the other.

(c)If one of them is Pesulah li'Kehunah (for example, a divorcee), and the Yavam decides to perform Chalitzah, he must perform Chalitzah with the one who is Pasul - to avoid disqualifying the Kasher Yevamah from marrying a Kohen, unnecessarily.

(d)He may perform Yibum however - with whichever one he wishes.