“2: That exact Rashba is used as a source for the Mattirm (for Kriyas Shema), as he brings in the concept of “Ragil Bahen” being Muttar. Therefore (the argument goes) anything that is Ragil does not create Hirhur, and hence Muttar to read Kriyas Shema before it (note the Rashba L’Shittaso against the Rosh l’gabei the din of an absolute Ervah except Oso makom).
Used by whom?”
IIRC the language matches the Mordichai and Tosfos L’Gabei Kol Isha. I’d have to go back and check sources.
“He is clearly distinguishing between hands, face, and feet, which would also be assur if not ???? ???, and ???.”
He’s actually discussing Ishto, so it has nothing to do with Histaklus.
“The ???? ??? also quotes a ???? who argues on that ??”?.”
I’ve seen the ???? inside. He doesn’t say anything about why the Issur exists, and if it is only because at the time of the Gemorah it was a Makom Mechusah.
“See ????? ????? who disagrees with ???? ??????’s understanding of the ??”? and calls it a ???? ?? (he is obviously comparing ?”? to dressing. Rav Moshe, as I recall, specifically only said they’re different for ???).”
I’ll have to see it inside.
“See also, for example, ???? ?????? in ??? ???? who equates ?”? with ???????. We know that ??????? ?????? ?????? is ???? ????? ????? ????, so it’s referring to incidental ???????, so there is a ???? for women to cover these areas to prevent incidental ???????.”
I don’t see where you are talking about, unless you mean the part about Ishto (which has no Shaychus to our discussion). Had the ???? ?????? meant to create an Issur on the woman, he should have included it in Halacha Daled, or said so somewhere.