הָכָא בְּקַטְלָא עָסְקִינַן, דְּאִשָּׁה חוֹנֶקֶת אֶת עַצְמָהּ — דְּנִיחָא לַהּ שֶׁתֵּרָאֶה כְּבַעֲלַת בָּשָׂר.
Here we are dealing with a broad, ornamented strap [katla] hanging around the neck, to which a small bib is attached. A woman does strangle herself with a katla because the strap is broad and tightening it does not cause pain. She tightens it because it pleases her that she will appear fleshy. It was considered beautiful to have flesh protrude from the katla.
רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר שֶׁל צֶמֶר וְשֶׁל שֵׂעָר אֵין חוֹצְצִין, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהַמַּיִם בָּאִין בָּהֶן.
In the same mishna in tractate Mikvaot, Rabbi Yehuda says: Strings of wool and strands of hair do not interpose and invalidate the immersion because the water reaches through them.
אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר.
Rav Yosef said that Rav Yehuda said that Shmuel said: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda with regard to strands of hair. However, the halakha is not in accordance with his opinion with regard to wool strings.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: הֲלָכָה, מִכְּלָל דִּפְלִיגִי!
Abaye said to him: By saying that the halakha is in accordance with Rav Yehuda, by inference the Rabbis disagree with regard to strands of hair. However, no opinion stating that strands of hair constitute an interposition is cited in the mishna.
וְכִי תֵּימָא, אִי לָאו דְּשָׁמְעֵיהּ לְתַנָּא קַמָּא דְּאַיְּירִי בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר, אִיהוּ נָמֵי לָא הֲוָה מַיְירֵי — וְדִילְמָא ״כְּשֵׁם״ קָאָמַר לְהוּ: כִּי הֵיכִי דְּמוֹדִיתוּ לִי בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר, אוֹדוֹ לִי נָמֵי בְּחוּטֵי צֶמֶר.
And if you say that had we not heard from the first tanna that he is speaking of strands of hair, Rabbi Yehuda would also not have spoken about them. Apparently, the first tanna prohibited strands of hair, and Rabbi Yehuda disagreed with him. Nevertheless, it could be explained otherwise. And, perhaps he prefaced what he was saying to the Rabbis with the phrase: Just as. Just as you agree with me that strands of hair do not interpose, agree with me that strings of wool also do not interpose. The fact that he mentioned strands of hair does not indicate a dispute; on the contrary, it is an attempt to establish a consensus with regard to the halakha.
אִיתְּמַר, אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: מוֹדִים חֲכָמִים לְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר.
Indeed, it was stated that Rav Naḥman said that Shmuel said: The Rabbis agree with Rabbi Yehuda with regard to strands of hair.
תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: חוּטֵי צֶמֶר חוֹצְצִין, חוּטֵי שֵׂעָר אֵין חוֹצְצִין. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: שֶׁל צֶמֶר וְשֶׁל שֵׂעָר אֵין חוֹצְצִין.
This opinion was also taught in a baraita: Strings of wool interpose. Strands of hair do not interpose. Rabbi Yehuda says: Both strings of wool and strands of hair do not interpose.
אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: מַתְנִיתִין נָמֵי דַּיְקָא, דְּקָתָנֵי: יוֹצְאָה אִשָּׁה בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר, בֵּין מִשֶּׁלָּה בֵּין מִשֶּׁל חֲבֶרְתָּהּ. מַנִּי? אִילֵימָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה — אֲפִילּוּ חוּטֵי צֶמֶר נָמֵי! אֶלָּא לָאו רַבָּנַן הִיא, וּשְׁמַע מִינַּהּ בְּחוּטֵי שֵׂעָר לָא פְּלִיגִי. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The language of the mishna is also precise, as we learned in a mishna in our chapter: A woman may go out with strands of hair whether they are from her own hair or whether they are from the hair of another. Whose opinion is expressed in this mishna? If you say that it is the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda, even strings of wool should also have been permitted. Rather, is it not the opinion of the Rabbis; and conclude from it that with regard to strands of hair, they do not disagree? The Gemara determines: Indeed, conclude from it.
לֹא בְּ״טוֹטֶפֶת״. מַאי ״טוֹטֶפֶת״? אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: חוּמַרְתָּא דִקְטִיפְתָּא.
The mishna said that a woman may not go out with the ornament called a totefet. The Gemara asks: What is a totefet? Rav Yosef said: A packet of spices to ward off the evil eye.
אֲמַר לֵיהּ אַבָּיֵי: תִּהְוֵי כְּקָמֵיעַ מוּמְחֶה, וְתִשְׁתְּרֵי!
Abaye said to him: And let the legal status of this packet be like that of an effective amulet, whose effectiveness is proven, and it should be permitted, as an effective amulet may be moved on Shabbat.
אֶלָּא אָמַר רַב יְהוּדָה מִשְּׁמֵיהּ דְּאַבָּיֵי: אֲפוּזְיָינֵי. תַּנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: יוֹצְאָה אִשָּׁה בִּסְבָכָה הַמּוּזְהֶבֶת, וּבְטוֹטֶפֶת וּבְסַרְבִּיטִין הַקְּבוּעִין בָּהּ.
Rather, Rav Yehuda said in the name of Abaye: A totefet is an appuzainu, an ornament worn on the forehead. This opinion was also taught in a baraita: A woman may go out with a gilded hairnet worn to hold the hair in place, and with the totefet, and with the sarvitin that are fastened to the hairnet, since a woman would not remove her head covering to show her friend those ornaments.
אֵיזוֹ טוֹטֶפֶת וְאֵיזוֹ סַרְבִּיטִין? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: טוֹטֶפֶת — הַמּוּקֶּפֶת לָהּ מֵאֹזֶן לְאֹזֶן. סַרְבִּיטִין — הַמַּגִּיעִין לָהּ עַד לְחָיֶיהָ.
And they said: Which is a totefet and which is sarvitin? Rabbi Abbahu said: Totefet is that which goes around her forehead from ear to ear. Sarvitin are those attached to the net that reach down to her cheeks.
אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: עֲנִיּוֹת עוֹשִׂין אוֹתָן שֶׁל מִינֵי צִבְעוֹנִין, עֲשִׁירוֹת עוֹשִׂין אוֹתָן שֶׁל כֶּסֶף וְשֶׁל זָהָב.
Rav Huna said: Poor women make these ornaments from different types of colored materials. Wealthy women make them of silver and of gold.
וְלֹא בְּכָבוּל. אָמַר רַבִּי יַנַּאי: כָּבוּל זֶה אֵינִי יוֹדֵעַ מַהוּ: אִי כַּבְלָא דְעַבְדָּא תְּנַן — אֲבָל כִּיפָּה שֶׁל צֶמֶר שַׁפִּיר דָּמֵי, אוֹ דִילְמָא כִּיפָּה שֶׁל צֶמֶר תְּנַן — וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן כַּבְלָא דְעַבְדָּא.
We learned in the mishna that a woman may not go out with a kavul. Rabbi Yannai said: This kavul, I do not know what it is. Is it the seal of a slave, who would have a seal on his clothing identifying him as a slave, about which we learned in our mishna that it is prohibited, but a cap of wool that a woman places on her hair, she may well go out wearing it? Or, perhaps we learned in our mishna that going out with a cap of wool is prohibited and all the more so that going out with the seal of a slave is prohibited.
אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: מִסְתַּבְּרָא כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר כִּיפָּה שֶׁל צֶמֶר תְּנַן. וְתַנְיָא נָמֵי הָכִי: יוֹצְאָה אִשָּׁה בְּכָבוּל וּבְאִיסְטָמָא לֶחָצֵר, רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר אוֹמֵר: אַף בְּכָבוּל לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. כְּלָל אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר: כׇּל שֶׁהוּא לְמַטָּה מִן הַשְּׂבָכָה — יוֹצְאִין בּוֹ, כׇּל שֶׁהוּא לְמַעְלָה מִן הַשְּׂבָכָה — אֵין יוֹצְאִין בּוֹ.
Rabbi Abbahu said: It is reasonable to say in accordance with the one who said that we learned about a cap of wool in the mishna. And this opinion was also taught in a baraita: A woman may go out with a kavul and with an istema to the courtyard on Shabbat. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: She may even go out with the kavul into the public domain. Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar stated a principle: Anything that is worn beneath the hairnet, a woman may go out into the public domain with it, since a woman will not uncover her hair even to show off an ornament while in the public domain. Anything that is worn over the hairnet, like an ornamental hat, a woman may not go out with it. From the context and proximity of the halakha dealing with kavul to the statement of Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar, apparently a kavul is a wool cap worn under the net.
מַאי ״אִיסְטָמָא״? אָמַר רַבִּי אֲבָהוּ: בִּיזְיוֹנֵי. מַאי ״בִּיזְיוֹנֵי״? אָמַר אַבָּיֵי אָמַר רַב: כָּלְיָא פָּרוֹחֵי.
Since istema was mentioned in the baraita, the Gemara asks: What is an istema? Rabbi Abbahu said: Istema is a beizyunei. However, Rabbi Abbahu’s explanation employed a term from the Aramaic dialect spoken in Eretz Yisrael, which was not understood in Babylonia. Therefore, they asked there: What is a beizyunei? Abaye said that Rav said: It is a small hat or ribbon used to gather hairs that protrude [kalya paruḥei] from the headdress.
תָּנוּ רַבָּנַן, שְׁלֹשָׁה דְּבָרִים נֶאֶמְרוּ בְּאִיסְטָמָא: אֵין בָּהּ מִשּׁוּם כִּלְאַיִם, וְאֵינָהּ מְטַמְּאָה בִּנְגָעִים, וְאֵין יוֹצְאִין בָּהּ לִרְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים.
The Sages taught in the Tosefta that three things were said with regard to an istema: There is no prohibition of a mixture of diverse kinds, wool and linen, in it. Since it is made of hard felt and not woven together, the prohibition of diverse kinds does not apply to material of that kind. And it does not become impure with the ritual impurity of leprosy. Only woven garments can become impure with leprosy. And women may not go out with it to the public domain on Shabbat.
מִשּׁוּם רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אָמְרוּ: אַף
In the name of Rabbi Shimon they said: Also,