they will guard us.

<<Rava said:

<<when

<<we would

<<walk

<<after

<<Rav Nachman,

<<when

<<he would be

<<holding

<<a book

<<of aggada

<<he would give [it]

<<to us;

<<when

<<he would be

<<holding

<<tefillin,

<<not

<<would he give [them]

<<to us.

<<He said:

<<since

<<they permitted them,

<<the Rabbis,

<<they will guard us.

The Rabbis taught:

<<should not

<<hold

<<a person

<<tefillin

<<in his hand

<<and a Torah scroll

<<on his arm

<<and pray.

<<And he should not

<<pass

<<in them

<<water,

<<and he should not

<<sleep

<<in them,

<<neither

<<a fixed sleep

<<nor

<<a casual sleep.

<<Shmuel said:

<<a knife,

<<and money,

<<and a bowl,

<<and a loaf —

<<these are

<<like

<<them.

Rava said in the name of Rav Sheshes:

<<not

<<is the halacha

<<like

<<this

<<baraisa;

<<of Beis Shammai

<<it is.

<<For if

<<Beis Hillel —

<<now

<<a fixed lavatory

<<is permitted,

<<a temporary lavatory

<<is it even a question?!

They raised an objection:

<<“Things

<<that I permitted

<<you

<<here,

<<I forbade

<<you

<<there.”

<<What,

<<is it not

<<tefillin?

<<If you say,

<<granted,

<<Beis Hillel:

<<I permitted

<<you

<<here

<<a fixed [lavatory],

<<I forbade

<<you

<<there

<<a temporary lavatory.

<<But

<<if you say

<<Beis Shammai,

<<surely

<<not

<<they permitted

<<anything at all!

When

<<is taught

<<that one,

<<it is with regard to

<<a handbreadth

<<and two handbreadths.

<<As one [baraisa] teaches:

<<when he

<<relieves himself

<<he uncovers

<<behind him

<<a handbreadth

<<and in front of him

<<two handbreadths.

<<And it is taught in another [baraisa]:

<<behind him

<<a handbreadth

<<and in front of him

<<nothing at all.

What,

<<is it not

<<both this and that

<<about a man,

<<and it is not difficult:

<<here

<<for the greater [need],

<<here

<<for the lesser [need]?

And can you reason so?!

<<If

<<for the lesser [need],

<<behind him

<<a handbreadth,

<<why

<<do I need [it]?

<<Rather,

<<both this and that

<<for the greater [need],

<<and it is not difficult:

<<this

<<for a man,

<<this

<<for a woman.

If so,

<<that

<<which is taught

<<about it,

<<“This is

<<a kal vachomer

<<that there is no

<<against it

<<rebuttal” —

<<what is

<<“there is no

<<against it

<<rebuttal”?

<<The way

<<of the matter

<<is so!

Rather,

<<is it not

<<tefillin,

<<and a refutation

<<of Rava

<<in the name of

<<Rav Sheshes!

<<A refutation.

In any case

<<it is difficult:

<<now

<<a fixed lavatory

<<is permitted,

<<a temporary lavatory

<<not all the more so?!

This is what he is saying:

<<a fixed lavatory,

<<where there are no

<<splashes,

<<they permitted;

<<a temporary lavatory,

<<where there are

<<splashes,

<<they forbade.

If so,

<<why

<<“there is no

<<against it

<<rebuttal”?

<<A rebuttal,

<<a fine one,

<<it is!

This is what he is saying:

<<this

<<matter,

<<let it be derived

<<by way of

<<reasoning,

<<and let not

<<it be derived

<<by a kal vachomer;

<<for if

<<it were derived

<<by way of

<<a kal vachomer,

<<this is

<<a kal vachomer

<<that there is no

<<against it

<<rebuttal.

The Rabbis taught:

<<one who wishes

<<to enter

<<a fixed meal

<<walks

<<ten

<<times

<<four

<<cubits,

<<or

<<four

<<times

<<ten

<<cubits,

<<and relieves himself,

<<and afterward

<<enters.

Rabbi Yitzchak said:

<<one who enters

<<a fixed meal

<<removes

<<his tefillin

<<and afterward

<<enters.

<<And it disagrees

<<with Rabbi Chiya,

<<for Rabbi Chiya said:

<<he places them

<<upon

<<his table,

<<and so

<<it is fitting

<<for him.

And until

<<when?

<<Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak said:

<<until

<<the time of

<<the blessing.

One [baraisa] teaches:

<<may bundle

<<a person

<<his tefillin

<<with

<<his money

<<in his kerchief.

<<And it is taught in another [baraisa]:

<<he should not

<<bundle.

It is not difficult:

<<this,

<<where he designated it;

<<this,

<<where he did not

<<designate it.

<<For Rav Chisda said:

<<this

<<cloth

<<of tefillin

<<that he designated

<<to bundle

<<in it

<<tefillin —

<<[if] he bundled

<<in it

<<tefillin,

<<it is forbidden

<<to bundle

<<in it

<<coins;

<<[if] he designated it

<<but did not

<<bundle

<<in it,

<<[or] he bundled

<<in it

<<but did not

<<designate it,

<<it is permitted

<<to bundle

<<in it

<<zuzim.

And according to Abaye,

<<who said

<<designation

<<is significant:

<<[if] he designated it,

<<even though

<<he did not

<<bundle

<<in it [it is forbidden];

<<[if] he bundled

<<in it —

<<if

<<he designated it,

<<it is forbidden;

<<if

<<not

<<he designated it,

<<not.

Asked

<<of him

<<Rav Yosef son of Rav Nechunya

<<from Rav Yehuda:

<<what is [the law]

<<that should place

<<a person

<<his tefillin

<<under

<<his head?

<<Under

<<his feet

<<not

<<is it a question for me,

<<for he treats

<<them

<<in a manner of

<<disgrace.

<<When

<<it is a question for me:

<<under

<<his head,

<<what?

<<He said to him:

<<thus

<<Shmuel said:

<<it is permitted,

<<even [if]

<<his wife

<<is with him.

They raised an objection:

<<should not

<<place

<<a person

<<his tefillin

<<under

<<his feet,

<<because

<<he treats

<<them

<<in a way of

<<disgrace;

<<but

<<he places them

<<under

<<his head.

<<And if

<<was

<<his wife

<<with him,

<<it is forbidden.

<<If there was

<<a place

<<that is high

<<three

<<handbreadths

<<or

<<low

<<three

<<handbreadths,

<<it is permitted.

A refutation

<<of Shmuel!

<<A refutation.

Rava said:

<<even though

<<it is taught

<<a refutation

<<of Shmuel,

<<the halacha

<<is like him.

<<What is the reason?