And place them etc. - Even from a new טלית to a new טלית. And certainly from an old טלית, it's permitted to untie and place them on a new טלית that he wants to wear in order to fulfill the mitzvah. And even [to transfer ציצית] from a טלית גדול to a טלית קטן [is permitted], for they are equal. But one should not untie ציצית from the טלית of an adult and place them on a טלית of a minor, because [the latter's] obligation is only on a rabbinic level. And the Pri Megadim is in doubt whether it would be permitted [to take] ציצית from a wool טלית and place them on a טלית made from other materials according to the rabbinic authorities above in Orach Chaim 9:1; for other materials [besides wool] are only [obligated in ציצית] on a rabbinic level. And the Artzot Hachaim is lenient with this.

Another טלית - See in Pri Megadim who wrote that if he has another pair of ציצית that he is able to get, it is proper to be stringent to not untie the ציצית, unless it is done in the manner described in se'if katan 4.

On another garment, that is not allowed - Because there is a prohibition [in doing so], that he disgraces a טלית that's used for a mitzvah for no reason, unless the טלית is worn out, then it would be permitted to untie its' ציצית under any circumstance: [such as] if he wants to sell it to a gentile, or to make from the טלית another garment that doesn't have 4 corners, [in all those cases] it is permitted to take it [off]. But if he wants to sell the טלית to a Jew, it is forbidden to take [off] the ציצית, even if the other Jew can place [his own] ציצית [on it] himself, even here [in such a case] it is forbidden. And it is permitted to remove the ציצית and put in it's place nicer ones due to [it being an] enhancement of the mitzvah. Or if they (ie. the ציצית) were old and he removes them in order to put new ones. Or if one string severed and there was only left on it enough to loop around the other strings, even though the ציצית are still valid, nevertheless it is still permitted to remove it and place another whole [string] in it's place. And know further, that when the ציצית are whole and fitting to be placed in another garment [as opposed to if they only had enough to loop around the other strings], there are some from the later rabbinic authorities who wrote that one should be careful to undo the knots and their windings, and not to sever or tear them in order to not ruin them. And the sages already said "One should not pour out his well water when others are in need of it". And the Chayei Adam wrote that when it seems to a person that it will require great effort to untie them, [in such a case] it is permitted to sever them, and it doesn't [violate the prohibition] of "Do not destroy" since he is not doing it [simply] for the purpose of destroying. See there further.

One who is obligated - Even if he is only obligated on a rabbinic level.

One may not - See in Magen Avraham se'if katan 3, and it seems from his words that this [that the Shulchan Aruch says that one may not take a corner with ציצית on it and sew it onto another garment because of "on the corners of their garments"] is specifically [referring to] a corner which does not have enough [material] to wrap oneself in it (But if it did have enough to wrap oneself in it, it would be permitted). And even though the gemara prohibited [sewing a corner with ציצית on it onto another garment] even if it's a cubit by a cubit, that too is because it still doesn't have enough to wrap oneself in it. But if the piece [of garment] had enough to wrap oneself in it, it is permitted to combine it with another garment, even with it's ציצית [still attached to it]. But the Ta"z in se'if katan 3 argues on this and prohibits it. And so too is it implied in the Levush and Derech Hachaim.

With the ציצית [still attached] - But without ציצית, it is permitted to attach it [to another garment] if it's at least 3 finger-widths by 3 finger-widths, and then afterwards one can affix ציצית on it. And from the rest of the garment, it's not necessary to untie [the other ציצית] at all. And this is specifically if prior to attaching the corner, the garment [it's being attached to, which is missing a corner] is also obligated [in ציצית]; for example, it's corner was not torn off in a rounded off way. But if it was torn off in a rounded off way and it became a three cornered garment which is exempt from ציצית, it's required to untie all the ציצית and to re-affix them after it's made into a 4 cornered garment. For if not, then it's [a transgression of] "Make it, and not from what is [already] made".

Onto another garment - But if he wants to [re]attach the corner [back] onto the garment that it tore from, even if it tore off completely and it's not attached even slightly, he does not need to untie the ציצית [first], and it [would] not [be] invalidated because of "Make it, and not from that which is [already] made" since it's original "making" on this garment was valid. And all this is as long as the garment did not become a 3 cornered garment when it tore (ie. when the corner tore off, it happened in such a way that the garment now has only 3 corners), as was seen above in se'if katan 6; and also specifically if the corner [that tore off] is at least 3 finger-widths by 3 finger-widths, as is seen nearby in se'if 4. All of this is according to the Shulchan Aruch and the Magen Avraham in se'if katan 3. But the Ta"z in se'if katan 3 rules that there is no difference if the attaching [of the detached corner] is to a different garment, or to this [garment that it tore from] itself; it's all under the same category of "Make it, and not from that which is [already] made", and one should be stringent [regarding this] and so did the Derech Hachaim rule.

And in each part etc. - But if each part did not have enough to wrap in (ie. it wasn't large enough to be obligated in ציצית) - like you would find by our tallit katan, that if it split into 2, it would not have the [required] measurement to wrap in - [then] it's nullified from them immediately the mitzvah of ציצית. And if afterwards he wants to re-attach one part to the other, or to another piece [of garment], he needs to first untie all the ציצית. And if one part has the [required] measurement to wrap in, and one part does not, it is only required to untie [the ציצית] from the part that does not have [the required measurement]; and afterwards affix [the ציצית] onto it from scratch after the two [garment] parts are joined together.

There is no concern for etc. - Because [regarding] the ציצית that remained [on each half], they are not considered invalid since they (ie. the garments halves that the ציצית are affixed to) have the required measurement to wrap in. Therefore, if he wants, he may join to that half, a piece of another garment, and make/tie ציצית on the new corners (ie. the 2 corners from the newly adjoined piece of garment). And certainly he may make a complete טלית from [either of] the halves [that ripped from the original טלית], meaning that he can make/tie ציצית on the new corners (ie. the new corners that it now has after it ripped in half). And if he wants to re-attach the two halves that separated on from the other, there are those who say that he has to first untie the ציצית from one of the halves, and then sew [the two halves], and after he sews them he should affix the ציצית onto it; because if he does not [first] untie them, it's in the category of "Make it, and not from that which is [already] made". But the majority of the later rabbinic authorities are lenient and hold that this is not in the category of "Make it, and not from that which is [already] made", but nevertheless it is good to be stringent optimally.

Within 3 fingerbreadths - But above 3 fingerbreadths, everyone agrees that one may sew it. Because according to Rashi's explanation: behold, that area is not the place for attaching ציצית, as was seen above in siman 11; and we are not concerned that he will take the thread [he used to sew it] and use it as one of the ציצית strings. And according to Rav Amram Gaon's explanation: it has the status of a garment. And even if this corner tore off completely from the garment together with its ציצית, even so, it is permitted to re-attach the corner and the ציצית are valid. The Ta"z argues on this and rules that one must untie the ציצית strings from the corner [before re-attaching it], and then tie them from scratch after sewing [the corner back on]. And one should be stringent [like the Ta"z], as was seen above in se'if katan 7.

With wool thread - Rather, [we sew] with other materials, and everyone knows that [ציצית made from] other materials do not exempt [a wool טלית from it's obligation]. Therefore, one will not come to combine that thread [with 7 other strings to make it count as one of the ציצית strings]. And the same applies: that we may be lenient also with other materials if he sewed with a different material.

Because when it tears etc. - The same applies if initially, at the time of making the garment, one sewed a piece of cloth less than 3 [fingerbreadths] to the edge of the garment, whether on the length or the width, and attached ציצית to that piece [of cloth], it is invalid according to him (ie. Rav Amram), for it is considered to be detached even though he sewed it to the garment. And if one attaches ציצית above that sewed on cloth, the ציצית would be more than 3 fingerbreadths away from the edge of the garment and [would be] invalid. Therefore, one should see to it to sew a 3 x 3 piece of cloth under the [existing] corner. See further below in se'if katan 16.

And if one made etc. - Meaning, even if one made new ציצית on that torn corner after it was sewed on to the טלית - even then it would not exempt the טלית [from needing ציצית], for the sewing is not considered an attachment in this case, and it's considered as if it's still detached - if from the beginning the corner tore completely from the garment.

[...there remained] any part at all [attached to the טלית, it is valid - Meaning, even the ציצית that were on it when it tore [are valid]. And there are those who are stringent regarding this, and they hold that the old ציצית are invalid and one must re-affix them after [the corner] was sewed. See further in Biur Halacha.

There are those who say that according to Rax Amram etc. - They hold that sewing is considered an attachment, and only the ציצית that were on it (ie. the corner) at the time that it was sewed are invalid because of "You shall make it, but not from that which is already made". And see in the Ta"z who argues on the Shulchan Aruch and who wrote that everyone agrees that if after it [ie. the corner) was sewed, one affixed ציצית on it, that it is valid. And so too wrote the Ba"ch, Shiurei Knesset Hagedolah, and the Gr"a; and the Orchot Hachaim agreed. But nevertheless, in order to fulfill the first opinion, one should sew a piece of cloth that's larger than 3x3 [fingerbreadths] underneath the corner [that was sewed].

Complies with all opinions - Therefore, the custom is to sew onto every corner of the טלית, a piece of cloth that is fully 3x3 [fingerbreadths], because it is common in some garments - that even if they are new, there is a stitching within 3 [fingerbreadths from the edge], and this is an invalidation according to Rav Amram based on the first opinion, as was seen above in se'if katan 12.

Where it's possible - And where it's not possible, we hold that the reasoning of Rav Amram is the proper one and also that sewing is considered an attachment.

From the hole - This is referring to when it was not sewed up [after it tore], and it is coming to inform us that [this applies] even though there did not remain the full [measurement of the length of the thumb from the] knuckle [to the end of the nail from the place of the tear to the edge of the garment]; and it is similar to what was written above in siman 11, se'if 10, that it is only required to have that measurement at the time of making/affixing [the ציצית onto the garment]. And if one wants to sew up the tear - then, if the garment is of wool, he may sew it up with threads of any other material, and he does not need to untie to the ציצית from the corner and then re-tie them a second time after he sewed it since the corner was not invalid; and if the garment is of other materials, it is forbidden to sew it with threads of the same material according to Rashi, for perhaps he will leave over some of those threads to be used as ציצית strings. And even if there are already ציצית there, it makes no difference. Rather, he should use threads of another material. And it is better to not sew with white threads, rather to only use colored threads, for nowadays we only make our ציצית white and therefore we would not be concerned that he might leave over from the sewing threads to be used as ציצית strings.

It is valid according to all opinions - For according to Rashi, since the garment is wool, there is no concern that he will leave over from threads of other materials to be used as ציצית strings. And according to Rav Amram, since there remained a little bit [of the garment untorn], it did not lose it's status of being a garment, as was mentioned above in the previous se'if. And certainly, according to the "some say" in the previous se'if, it is valid here, since the affixing of the ציצית happened after the sewing.

One should not sew it - Meaning, with [threads] of that same material. But from another material, one may be lenient. And [it would be] even better with colored thread as was mentioned above in se'if katan 18.

And if it tore etc. - Meaning, that it tore completely from the hole until the edge. Therefore, it is questionable; for even if the garment was wool and one sew's it with threads of other materials - that according to Rashi it is certainly permitted to do so; nevertheless, it is possible that according to Rav Amram it is invalid, because since none of the garment remained untorn [from the place of the tear till the edge], behold it was explained in the previous se'if that according to the first opinion, it's considered as if the corner was completely severed, and sewing it back up won't help, even if he wants to affix ציצית onto it afterwards. And it's possible that our case here is better, since the corner is whole from both sides, and it only tore in the middle, and that is the Shulchan Aruch's doubt. And see in the Ta"z who argues on this and rules that there is no doubt here, for everyone agrees that if you affixed ציצית after sewing it, that it is valid. Nevertheless, it is better to see to it that before sewing it, one places a piece of cloth that's 3x3 [fingerbreadths] under the corner and [therefore] will fulfill all opinions. And if that's not possible, one may be lenient like the Ta"z. For even without that, we wrote in se'if katan 15 that the opinion of the later rabbinic authorities is that sewing is considered an attachment and it works even when the corner tore completely from it's place.

Made from silk - For if it was made from wool, we already explained that there is no concern at all and it is permitted to sew even below 3 [fingerbreadths].

With a silk thread - The same applies if the טלית was from another material and the thread was specifically from the same material. But if the thread was from a different material, one may be lenient; for certainly one may not take that thread and use it for ציצית, because [ציצית strings] can only exempt [a טלית if they are] of the same material.

White - Because if it's colored we are also not concerned at all that he might take it (ie. the colored thread) to be used as ציצית for we do not have the custom of using colored ציצית, as was written in siman 9, se'if 5.

Below 3 [fingerbreadths] etc. - For there is the place of the ציצית; but when the sewing is above 3 [fingerbreadths] or below the [measurement of the length of the thumb from the] knuckle [to the end of the nail from the edge of the טלית], there is no concern that one will use the sewing threads as ציצית, as was written in siman 11. And around the hole [where the ציצית are inserted], it is forbidden to sew with white thread; and [regarding] our טליתות, which are made from wool, one does not need to be particular at all as was mentioned previously.

In any place - Meaning, if it tore and there was left over any amount [that was untorn up until the edge], or anything similar as was explained above in se'if 5.