diff --git "a/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Taharah/Mishneh Torah, Defilement by a Corpse/English/merged.json" "b/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Taharah/Mishneh Torah, Defilement by a Corpse/English/merged.json" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Taharah/Mishneh Torah, Defilement by a Corpse/English/merged.json" @@ -0,0 +1,320 @@ +{ + "title": "Mishneh Torah, Defilement by a Corpse", + "language": "en", + "versionTitle": "merged", + "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah,_Defilement_by_a_Corpse", + "text": [ + [ + "A human corpse imparts ritual impurity that persists for a minimum of seven days when it is touched or carried or when one is under the same structure (ohel). The impurity imparted by touching a corpse or being under the same structure is explicitly mentioned in the Torah, as Numbers 19:11 states: \"One who touches a corpse of any human being will be impure for seven days\" and ibid.:14 states: \"Anyone who enters the tent and anything in the tent will be impure for seven days.", + "The impurity stemming from carrying a human corpse is derived from the Oral Tradition. It is based on an inference from a lesser matter to a more severe one. If the carcass of animal makes a person impure only until the evening, but does not cause a person to incur ritual impurity when under the same shelter, and yet causes him to incur impurity when carrying it, as Leviticus 11:40 states: \"One who carries their carcasses,\" how much more so should this apply with regard to a human corpse. And the process of reasoning continues: if touching an animal carcass causes one to become impure until the evening and carrying it causes a person to be impure until the evening, so too, since touching a corpse causes a person to be impure for seven days, it should cause him to be impure for seven days if he carries it. The impurity resulting from carrying a corpse is not considered of Rabbinic origin, but is instead, a Scriptural Law. It appears to me that Scripture remained silent concerning this type of impurity in the same way that it remained silent concerning the prohibition against relations with one's daughter, because it explicitly forbade relations with the daughter of one's daughter. And it remained silent concerning the prohibition against partaking of meat cooked with milk, because it explicitly forbade cooking it. Similarly, Scripture did not mention the impurity incurred by carrying a human corpse because it explicitly mentioned that one who was under the same shelter as a corpse incurs impurity. Thus one can infer that this certainly applies to one who carries it.", + "The impurity incurred by touching mentioned in all situations, whether involving a human corpse or another source of impurity, is brought about by a person touching the source of impurity itself. Whether he touches it with his flesh, his hand, his foot, or any other portion of his body, even with his tongue, he becomes impure. Similarly, it appears to me that if a person touches a source of impurity with his nails or with his teeth, he becomes impure. The rationale is since they are connected to the body, they are considered as the body itself. If, however, a person took a source of impurity, skewered it with a weaving needle, and inserted it into the throat of a person who is ritually pure without it touching his tongue or inserted it within the womb of a woman from below without touching her flesh, the person who swallowed the source of impurity does not become impure because his inner organs came in contact with the source of impurity. The rationale is that contact between a source of impurity and one's inner organs is not considered as touch.", + "A scab over a bruise is considered as skin with regard to touching sources of impurity. The underdeveloped body hair of a child, by contrast, is not considered as skin.
What is implied? If a source of impurity touches a person on the scab over a bruise, he is impure; it is as if it touched his flesh. Conversely, if it touched the thin hair on the body of a child, he does not become impure.
Similarly, if an impure person has a bruise and a pure person touched the scab on the bruise, he becomes ritually impure. If a minor was impure and a pure person touched the underdeveloped hair on his body, he does not become impure. This applies both with regard to impurity stemming from a human corpse or other types of impurity.
Similarly, blotches of filth, mud, or similar things that are not considered as intervening substances or dried pieces of filth and things that are considered as intervening substances are not considered as flesh, neither to impart ritual impurity to others, nor to contract ritual impurity.", + "Just as a person becomes impure when he comes into contact with a source of impurity, so too, keilim become impure when a source of impurity touches them with the exception of an earthenware utensil that incurs ritual impurity only when a source of impurity enters its inner space, as will be explained in Hilchot Keilim.
This is an inclusive general principle that applies with regard to ritual impurity: Whatever causes a person to contract ritual impurity when touching him, causes keilim to contract ritual impurity. Whatever does not cause a person to contract ritual impurity when touching him, does not cause keilim to contract ritual impurity. A person and keilim contract ritual impurity only from a primary source of ritual impurity.", + "The impurity incurred by carrying mentioned in all situations - whether involving a human corpse or another object that conveys impurity by carrying - is brought about by a person carrying a source of impurity even though he did not touch it. Even if there is a stone between the person and the source of impurity, since he carried it, he becomes impure.
The above applies whether he carries it on his head, his hand, or another portion of his body. And it applies whether the person lifted up the source of impurity himself or another person lifted it up and put it on him; since he carried it on his person in any way, he becomes impure. Even if the source of impurity was hanging on a string or a hair and he hung the string from his hand and lifted the source of impurity to the slightest degree, he is considered to have carried it and he becomes impure.", + "Moving an article is considered as carrying it. Any article that imparts impurity when it is carried imparts impurity when moved.
What is implied? There was a beam resting on a wall and on its side was a human corpse, an animal carcass, or the like. A pure person came to the other end of the beam and moved it. Since he moved the impurity at the other end of the beam, he becomes impure for carrying the source of impurity. Needless to say, this applies if he pulled the other end of the beam toward the earth until the source of impurity was lifted up or he dragged it on the ground, for this is certainly considered as carrying. The above situation and anything similar refers to the activity of moving that imparts ritual impurity, as mentioned in all instances.", + "When a person carries a source of impurity in a hidden part of his body, he becomes impure. Even though touching such portions of the body is not considered as touch, carrying an article there is considered as carrying unless the source of impurity is swallowed up in the person's digestive system. Once a source of impurity reaches a person's stomach, it is not considered as if he touched or carried it. If such a person immerses in a mikveh he regains purity, even though the source of impurity is in his digestive system.", + "Only a human being becomes impure for carrying a source of impurity, not keilim.
What is implied? Ten containers were placed on a person's hand, one on top of the other, and the carcass of an animal or another source of impurity was placed in the uppermost container. The person is considered impure, because he carried the carcass of an animal. The containers on his hand, by contrast, are all pure except for the uppermost one which was touched by the source of impurity. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "The ritual impurity of ohel does not apply with regard to other sources of impurity, only with regard to a human corpse. Whether a person and/or a k'li, even a needle, was extended over a corpse, a corpse was extended over a person and/or a k'li, or a corpse and a person and/or a k'li were under one shelter, they are impure.", + "The impurity of ohel mentioned in all places refers to impurity imparted by a source of impurity to a person or keilim in one of these three ways.
Whether a person enters entirely to the shelter where a corpse is located or part of his body enters, he becomes impure because of the ohel. Even if he inserted merely his hand, his fingertips, or his nose into the shelter where a corpse is located, his entire person becomes impure. If he joined his hand to the lintel of the doorway of such a shelter, he becomes impure as if part of his body entered. If he touched the doorframe from a handbreadth and below above the ground, he is pure. From a handbreadth and above, he is impure. It appears to me that this impurity is of Rabbinic origin.", + "Corpses of both Jews and gentiles impart impurity through touch or through carrying.", + "The corpse of a gentile does not impart ritual impurity through ohel. This matter was conveyed by the Oral Tradition. With regard to the war with Midian, Numbers 31:19 states: \"All who touch a corpse...\", but does not mention an ohel.
Similarly, a gentile does not contract the impurity connected with a corpse. Instead, if a gentile touches a corpse, carries it, or stands over it, it is as if he did not touch it. To what can the matter be compared? To an animal that touched a corpse or stood over a corpse.
Not only the impurity imparted by a human corpse, but all types of impurity do not cause gentiles and animals to become impure.", + "According to Rabbinic Law, gentiles are considered as zavim, According to Scriptural Law, there is no type of living being that contracts ritual impurity while alive or imparts ritual impurity while alive, except a human, and even then, only when he is Jewish.
Both a Jewish adult and a minor can contract all forms of ritual impurity, even the impurity stemming from a corpse, concerning which Numbers 19:20 states: \"A man who shall become impure.\" Nevertheless, both an adult and a minor can contract this impurity, for ibid.:18 states: \"for all the souls that were there.\" Even a newborn infant that touched, carried, or extended a limb over a corpse becomes impure and he is considered impure because of contact with a human corpse.
The above applies provided the baby was born after a nine month pregnancy. If he is born after an eight month pregnancy, he is considered as a stone and he does not contract ritual impurity.", + "A corpse does not impart ritual impurity until the person actually dies. Even if one's veins have been cut, or he is in his death-throes, even if his two vital signs have been slit, he does not impart ritual impurity until his soul expires, as ibid.:13 states: \"The soul of a man who dies....\"
If his backbone is broken together with most of the surrounding flesh, he was torn apart like a fish from his back, he was decapitated, or he was cut in half from his stomach, he imparts impurity, even though some of his limbs are still making convulsive movements." + ], + [ + "A stillborn fetus, even though it is underdeveloped and its limbs have not been firmly connected with their sinews, imparts ritual impurity when it is touched, carried, or when one is under the same structure as it, like the corpse of an adult that has died, as implied by Numbers 19:11: \"One who touches a corpse of the soul of any man.\"
Similarly, an olive-sized measure from the flesh of a corpse imparts impurity like an entire corpse, whether it still retains its moisture or it has become dry like a shard. Netzal is like flesh and imparts impurity when an olive-sized portion is present.
What is meant by the term netzal? Flesh that has decomposed and turned into a putrid liquid mass, provided that the liquid mass that resulted from the corpse coagulates. For if it coagulates, it is apparent that it comes from the flesh of the corpse. If it does not coagulate, it does not impart impurity, for perhaps it is from the deceased's phlegm or other body fluids.", + "Even though these measures were all conveyed as halachot to Moses at Sinai, our Sages said: At the onset of his conception, man's body is the size of an olive. Therefore the measure for which his flesh imparts ritual impurity is the size of an olive.", + "A limb that was cut off from a living person is considered as an entire corpse and imparts impurity when it is touched, carried, or one is under the same structure. This applies even to a limb of a newborn infant, for there is no minimum measure that applies with regard to complete limbs. This is derived from Numbers 19:16 which states: \"Anyone who touches a corpse slain by the sword... on the open field.\" It is a known matter that the laws applying to one slain by the sword are the same as one slain by a stone or through other means. According to the Oral Tradition, we learned that the verse comes only to deem a limb severed by a sword as impure.
When does the above apply? When the limb was intact as it was when it came into being with flesh, sinews, and bones, as the abovementioned verse states: \"Or the bone of a man.\" Implied is that the bone must be like a man, i.e., a human corpse. Just as a human corpse has flesh, sinews, and bones, so too, a limb from a living person must be intact as it was when it came into being and have flesh, sinews, and bones. In contrast, a kidney and a tongue, and the like, even though they are considered as complete organs, since they do not contain bones, they are considered as the remainder of a person's flesh.
If even the slightest amount of bone was missing from a limb severed from a living person, the entire limb is pure. The following rules apply if some of its flesh was missing: If there remained enough flesh on it that, were the person to be alive, his flesh would regenerate, be healed, and return to a state of wholeness, the limb imparts impurity when it is touched, carried, or when one is under the same structure. If not, it imparts impurity when it is touched, carried, but not when one is under the same structure.
Flesh that is separated from a living person is ritually pure. Similarly, a bone without flesh that is separated from a living person is ritually pure.", + "When a limb is separated from a corpse, it imparts impurity as a corpse does when it is touched, carried, or when one is under the same structure, provided it is intact as it was when it came into being with flesh, sinews, and bones.
If a portion of the bone was lacking, when there is at least an olive-sized portion of flesh on it, it imparts impurity like an entire corpse. The following rules apply if some of the flesh was lacking, but none of the bone. If there remained enough flesh on it that, were the person to be alive, his flesh would regenerate, it imparts impurity like an entire corpse. If not, it is like other bones of a corpse on which there is no flesh.", + "The marrow of a bone causes flesh to regenerate on the bone's surface. Therefore if the hipbone of a corpse, a bone that is closed on both of its sides, has sufficient marrow to cause the flesh to regenerate, it is considered as an entire corpse.
The following laws apply if a bone has marrow that has dried out and rattles within. If there is an olive-sized portion of marrow, the bone imparts impurity when one is under the same shelter. Even though the bone is closed on all sides, the impurity breaks through and ascends and breaks through and descends, as will be explained. For the marrow is considered like flesh in all contexts.", + "The following laws apply when there is a limb and/or flesh limply hanging from a person. Even though they cannot be restored to their natural state and vitality, they are pure. If the person dies, the flesh is pure and the limb imparts ritual impurity according to the laws pertaining to a limb severed from a living body and not according to the laws pertaining to a limb severed from a corpse.
What are the differences between the laws pertaining to a limb severed from a living body and the laws pertaining to a limb severed from a corpse? Flesh and bones that become separated from a limb severed from a living person are pure. Flesh and bones that become separated from a limb severed from a corpse are considered as if they were separate from an entire corpse and impart impurity according to the appropriate measures.", + "There is no minimum measure for either a limb severed from a living body or a limb severed from a corpse.
A man has 248 limbs, every one of them comprising flesh, sinews, and bones. The teeth are not included in this number. There are 251 in a woman.
Any limb that became separated while intact as it was when it came into being, whether it was separated while the person was alive or after his death imparts impurity when it is touched, carried, or one is under the same structure with the exception of the three extra limbs possessed by a woman. The latter do not convey impurity when one is under the same structure.
Similarly, an extra finger that has a bone, but does not have a nail, can be counted as part of the sum of the majority of a person's limbs if it is counted on his hand together with his other fingers. If it is not counted on his hand together with his other fingers, it can, nevertheless, impart impurity when it is touched or carried. It does not, however, impart impurity when one is under the same shelter. The impurity it imparts is of Rabbinic origin. If it has a nail, it is considered as other limbs.
Why did the Sages rule that a finger that is not counted should impart impurity? This decree was a safeguard lest the impurity that could be imparted by one that is counted would be ignored. Why did they rule that it does not impart impurity when under the same shelter? They established a point of distinction to make it known that the impurity it imparts originates in a Rabbinic decree so that terumah and sacrificial meat will not be burnt because of this type of impurity.", + "If there is no flesh on the bones of a corpse, they impart impurity like an entire corpse when they are touched or carried or when one is under the same structure, provided it is apparent that they have the form of bones, for one can still refer to them as \"the bones of a man.\" These are the bones that impart the ritual impurity of a corpse: the backbone, the skull, the majority of the body's structure, and the majority of the number of bones in the body.
What is meant by the backbone causing impurity? When the backbone is intact, it is considered as an entire corpse. If even one of the eighteen vertebrae is missing, they are considered as other bones.
What is meant by the skull causing impurity? When the skull is intact, it is considered as an entire corpse. If it is missing a portion as large as a sela, it is considered as other bones. If it has small holes, their area is added together to see if it compromises that of a sela.
The entire structure of a man is: the two shins, the hips, the ribs, and the backbone. The majority of the structure of a corpse is considered as an entire corpse. What is implied? For example, if his two shins and one hip are present, it is as if the entire corpse was present. If even the slightest amount is missing from \"the majority of the structure,\" the bones are considered as other bones.
What is meant by the majority of the number of the bones? The majority of the number of bones, e.g., 125 bones. If there are 124, they are considered as other bones. Even though this particular person had extra limbs or fewer limbs, this figure is calculated according to the number of bones of the majority of people unless the extra limb is a finger that has a nail or which is counted on his hand together with his other fingers. Such a finger is counted in the sum of a person's bones, as stated.", + "The following laws apply to the remaining bones of a corpse when among them, there is not the majority of the number, nor the majority of the structure of the corpse, and not an intact backbone, nor an intact skull. If there are a fourth of a kab of bones, they impart impurity like an entire corpse when they are touched or carried or one is under the same structure. If there are less than a fourth of a kab - this applies even to a bone merely the size of a barley-corn - they impart impurity when they are touched or carried. They do not, however, impart impurity through being under the same structure.", + "If there is one bone, even if it is a fourth of a kab in size, it imparts impurity when it is touched or carried. It does not, however, impart impurity through being under the same structure.
The impurity imparted by one bone is a halachah conveyed by the Oral Tradition. Numbers 19:18 states: \"And all who touch the bone.\" The Oral Tradition teaches that even a bone the size of a barley-corn imparts impurity when it is touched or carried. Since this impurity is taught as halachah by the Oral Tradition, it is considered as Scriptural Law and not as a Rabbinic decree.", + "When the bones of a corpse decompose in the grave and become a rekev, two handfuls of that rekev impart impurity when that quantity is carried or it is located under the same structure as a person or object. It does not, however, impart impurity when it is touched, because it is impossible to touch it in its entirety, because it is not a whole entity. Even if it was mixed with water, the different portions are not considered as joined together.", + "The blood of a corpse imparts impurity like the corpse itself when it is touched, carried, or one is under the same structure, for Numbers 19:13 speaks of: \"the soul of man\" and Deuteronomy 12:23 states: \"the blood is the soul.\"
What is the measure of blood that imparts impurity? A revi'it. Even the liquid left after blood coagulates imparts impurity when one is under the same structure, as a corpse does, as long as it is red in color.", + "Blood from a living person, even if it is the blood that flows out when the person is stabbed in the throat, is pure as long as the person is alive. If the blood which flows from his body at the end, i.e., before his death, becomes mixed with the blood which flows from his body after he died and the entire mixture is a revi'it, and it is not known how much flowed out while he was alive and how much flowed out after his death, even if half a revi'it flowed out while he was alive and half after his death, this is referred to as \"weltering blood.\" It imparts impurity when it is touched, carried, or when one is under the same structure. This impurity is, however, of Rabbinic origin.", + "The following laws apply when the corpse of a person who was slain was lying on a bed. His blood had been dripping from his body while he was alive and descending into a hole. At one point, he died. After he died, the blood continued dripping and descending into that hole. All of the blood is pure. For the drops of blood are nullified one by one, as they become mixed with the blood that flowed from his body during his lifetime.
If only a revi'it of blood flowed out from the person's body and there is a doubt whether it all flowed out during the person's life or afterwards, this is a questionable situation of ritual impurity like other questionable situations. One who touches it in a private domain is impure. In a public domain, he is pure, as will be explained in the appropriate place.", + "According to Scriptural Law, as long as the source of impurity is in a grave, the grave imparts impurity when it is touched or when one is under the same structure, as a corpse does, for Numbers 19:16 mentions touching \"a corpse, the bone of a man, or a grave.\" A person is impure whether he touches the covering of a grave or its sides, provided it is built and totally enclosed. Afterwards, in such a situation, the grave imparts impurity in its entirety when it is touched or when one is under the same structure.
If, however, one places keilim, stones, or the like at the side of a corpse and covers the corpse with keilim, stones, or the like, the covering that shelters the corpse from above is called a gollel. And the objects at the side that support the gollel and upon which it rests are called a dofek. Both of them, the gollel and the dofek impart impurity when they are touched or when one is under the same structure, as is true with regard to a grave. The impurity they impart is of Rabbinic origin. They do not impart impurity when carried. Accordingly, if one drags a gollel with ropes until it covers a corpse or drags it or pulls it away from being above a corpse, or one dragged a dofek until he positioned the gollel above it or pulled it by ropes from under the dofek, the person is pure.
Entities that support the dofek are called dofek dofekkim and they are pure.", + "When a field containing a grave was plowed and the bones of the corpse were lost in its earth, this is called a beit hapras. Its earth imparts impurity when it is touched or carried, for perhaps it contains a bone the size of a barley corn, but it does not impart impurity when one is under the same structure.
Similarly, the earth in the entire Diaspora imparts impurity when it is touched or carried, because of the possibility of the presence of bones, for they are not careful about burying them. The impurity of a beit hapras and the earth of the Diaspora is of Rabbinic origin, as will be explained." + ], + [ + "The following entities impart ritual impurity when they are touched, carried, or one is under the same structure: a) a corpse, even a stillborn fetus whose limbs have not become attached to its body with sinews, b) an olive-sized portion of flesh from a corpse, c) an olive-sized portion of netzal, d) a limb from a living person that has the required amount of flesh, e) a limb from a corpse that has the required amount of flesh, f) the backbone of a corpse, g) its skull, h) the majority of its structure, i) the majority of the number of its bones, j) a fourth of a kab of bones in any instance, even if they do not comprise the majority of the structure of the number of the bones of the corpse, k) a revi'it of blood, and l) a revi'it of blood of \"weltering blood\"; twelve entities in total.", + "The following entities impart ritual impurity when they are touched or carried, but not when one is under the same structure: a) a limb from a living person that is lacking enough flesh to regenerate itself, b) a limb from a corpse that is lacking either flesh or bone and does not have enough flesh to regenerate itself or the bone is lacking, even if has enough flesh to regenerate itself, c) a backbone that is lacking and does not possess a fourth of a kab of bones, d) a skull that is lacking and does not possess a fourth of a kab of bones, e) a bone, even if it is the size of a barley corn, f) the earth of the nations, and g) a beit hapras; seven entities in total.", + "A gollel and a dofek impart ritual impurity when they are touched or when one is under the same shelter, like a grave. They do not impart ritual impurity when carried. The decomposed mass of a corpse imparts ritual impurity when it is carried or when one is under the same shelter. It does not impart ritual impurity when touched.
It appears to me that the ritual impurity imparted by a fourth of a kab of bones when one is under the same structure, a revi'it of blood, a limb that does not have the sufficient amount of flesh, whether from a corpse or from a living person is not of Scriptural origin, as evidenced by the fact that a nazirite need not shave his hair because of them, as we explained in Hilchot Nizirut. Nor is one liable for entering the Temple after having contracted such impurity and when a person is impure due to an impurity of Scriptural origin, he is liable for entering the Temple. Therefore I maintain that all sources of impurity from a corpse that do not require a nazirite to shave are not of Scriptural origin.", + "The decomposed mass of a corpse does not impart ritual impurity unless it is buried naked in a coffin of marble, glass, or the like, and it was totally intact at the time of burial. If it was lacking a limb, it was buried in its garments, or it was buried in a coffin of wood or metal, the decomposed mass does not impart ritual impurity. The rationale is that the rot of the garment or the wood and the rust of the metal will become mixed with the decomposed mass of the corpse.
When any amount of earth becomes mixed with the decomposed mass of a corpse, it remains impure. These laws of rekev applies only to the corpse of one who died naturally. They do not apply to one who was slain.", + "When two corpses are buried together, a deceased's hair or nails were trimmed and then buried with him, or a pregnant woman was buried with the fetus she was carrying, the laws of rekev do not apply.", + "If one ground a corpse until it became a decomposed mass, it does not convey the impurity of rekev. Those laws do not apply unless it decomposes as part of a natural process.", + "If one ground a corpse and then left its remains until they decomposed naturally or a portion of the body decomposed while the person was alive, he died, and then the entire body decomposed, there is an unresolved doubt concerning the ruling. Hence, if a person becomes impure because of two handfuls of this rekev, he must consider himself impure, because of this unresolved doubt.", + "The following laws applies when there are two handfuls and more of earth that was found under a corpse or in a grave and it is not known what it comprises: whether it is rekev that imparts impurity when under the same shelter or it is merely earth that has become soiled with the netzal and the blood of the corpse. It imparts impurity when carried and when one is under the same shelter, because this mass that is more than two handfuls contains two full handfuls of rekev. It appears to me that also this impurity is a Rabbinic decree.", + "When a corpse was burned and its skeleton - i.e., the backbone and the ribs - is intact, it conveys impurity like an entire corpse. Needless to say, this applies if the flesh is merely charred. If, however, it is burnt to the extent that its form is destroyed, it is ritually pure.
Similarly, if a miscarried embryo which had already begun to have its limbs take form was mixed with water, it is pure, because its form was destroyed.", + "When the flesh of a corpse has become powdery and flourlike, it is ritually pure. Similarly, the ashes of corpses that were burnt are ritually pure. Similarly, worms which come into existence from the flesh of a corpse, whether they are alive or dead, are ritually pure.
We have already explained that bone marrow is considered as flesh in all instances, whether with regard to a human corpse or with regard to the carcass of an animal or crawling animal.", + "A person's skin is considered as his flesh. If it was processed entirely or trodden upon as is necessary for processing, it is considered as pure according to Scriptural Law. According to Rabbinic Law, however, an olive-sized portion imparts impurity like the flesh of a corpse. This is a decree, enacted so that people do not become accustomed to processing human skin and using it.", + "The skin that appears opposite the face of a infant when he is born, whether both he and his mother survive the birth or he and his mother die in the process of the birth, is considered as ritually pure. The rationale is that it is like a waste produce, like filth, vomit, or the like.", + "Every element of a corpse is impure with the exception of the teeth, the hair, and the nails, for they are replaced. While they are attached to the body, they are all impure.
What is implied? When a corpse is outside a house and his hair which is attached to his body is inside, everything in the house becomes impure. Similarly, one who touches hair, teeth, or nails while they are attached to a corpse becomes impure. When the hair of the deceased was ready to be cut or his nails were ready to be trimmed, their halachic status is in doubt because they are prepared to be cut off. Therefore, one who touches them is considered as ritually impure because of the doubt.
Any liquid that flows out from a corpse is pure except for its blood. Any liquid with the color of blood that flows from a corpse is impure, as we explained. Why wasn't a decree made with regard to liquids that flow from a corpse as was made with regard to liquids flowing from other impure individuals? Since everyone withdraws from a corpse, they did not feel the need to enact a decree regarding liquids that flow from it.", + "When a liver has decomposed, a revi'it of it imparts impurity, because it is considered like blood that has coagulated.
If all the blood of an infant flows out, but it does not amount to a revi'it, it is pure even though it comprises all the blood in his body.", + "If even the slightest amount of these measures are lacking, the substances are pure: a) a revi'it of blood, b) a piece of bone the size of a barley-corn, c) an olive-sized portion of flesh, d) an olive-sized portion of netzal, e) two handfuls of rekev, and f) a limb from a living person from which the slightest portion of the bone was lacking." + ], + [ + "When a revi'it of blood comes from two corpses, it is pure. To impart impurity, the entire revi'it must come from one corpse. When a backbone was put together from two corpses, e.g., some of the vertebrae came from one corpse and others, from another, when a skull was put together from two corpses, or a fourth of a kab of bones came from two corpses or a limb came from two corpses: in all these instances, impurity is not imparted when one is under the same structure, only through touching and carrying, as is true with regard to other bones.", + "When a limb from a living person comes from two people, it is pure. Even if it comes from one person, it is pure if it was cut into two.", + "An olive-sized portion of flesh that comes from two corpses, an olive-sized portion of netzal that comes from two corpses, and two handfuls of rekev that come from two corpses when the laws of rekev apply to each one of them, can be combined. Similarly, a half of an olive-sized portion of flesh and a half an olive-sized portion of netzal can be combined with each other. All of the other sources of impurity stemming from a corpse are not combined with each other, because they are not of equal measures.", + "When a bone the size of a barley-corn is divided into two, it imparts impurity when carried. Similarly, when a quarter of a kab of bones were crushed, although none of them are the size of a barley-corn, they impart impurity when one is under the same shelter as if they were not crushed.", + "When an olive-sized portion from a corpse was cut into small pieces, flattened, and pressed together, it imparts impurity when under the same shelter and when carried, but it does not impart impurity when one touches a portion of it, even when the pieces are joined together, because anything joined together by man is not considered as joined.", + "When an olive-sized portion of fat that was intact was liquefied, it is impure. If it was separated and it was liquefied, it is pure.", + "When the majority of the vertebrae were taken from a backbone, it does not impart impurity when under the same shelter, even through its form remains. If it is in the grave, even if it is broken and even if it is crushed, it imparts impurity when under the same shelter. The rationale is that the grave joins it together.", + "Whenever a substance that imparts impurity when under the same shelter was divided and then both portions are brought into a house, it is considered as joined together by the shelter and impurity is imparted by them because of it.", + "When there is an olive-sized portion of flesh that grew on a bone through the influence of heaven, and a portion of that bone was brought inside a house, the house contracts ritual impurity. If the flesh had been pushed into the bones by humans, the house is pure. The rationale is that anything joined by man is not considered as joined.", + "When two handfuls of rekev are spread out throughout a house, the house is impure.", + "When a revi'it is absorbed in a house, in the future, the
house is pure. Anything that was in the house at the time the blood was absorbed in the earth, is impure.", + "When an olive-sized portion of a corpse was lost inside a house and it was searched for and not found, the house is assumed to be pure. If it is discovered afterwards, the house is deemed impure retroactively from the time it was lost until the time it was discovered.", + "The following laws apply when a revi'it of blood was poured in an open space. If it coagulated or it was in a place where it could collect, i.e., a low place like a pit and an entity projects over even a portion of it, that entity is impure. If it was spilled on the doorstep which was on an incline, whether to the inside or outside, the house is pure. The rationale is that the blood did not come to rest on the doorstep. If the doorstep was a place where the blood could collect or it coagulated there, the house is impure.
The following laws apply when a revi'it of blood is absorbed in a garment. If it could be washed and a revi'it of blood would be discharged from it, the garment imparts impurity when touched, carried, or when one is under the same shelter. If not, it does not impart impurity when one is under the same shelter and it is considered as a garment that came into contact with a corpse. The rationale is that whenever something absorbed cannot be discharged, it is considered as pure.
How is the quantity of blood measured? The garment should be washed in water. Then an equal quantity of water should be brought and a revi'it of blood placed in it. If their appearance was the same or the water in which the garment was washed was of a redder hue than the mixture, it is apparent that a revi'it was discharged.", + "Carrying, touching, and being under the same structure are three different categories. Whenever activities come from one category, they can be combined and impart impurity. If they are from two categories, they are not combined and are pure.
What is implied? A person becomes impure in all of the following situations, for the activities that are combined are from the same category:
a) He touches two portions of a corpse that are half the size of an olive at the same time or carries two portions of a corpse that are half the size of an olive at the same time.
b) He stands over two portions of a corpse that are half the size of an olive.
c) He stands over a portion of a corpse that is half the size of an olive and has a similar portion hang over his body.
d) He and a portion of a corpse half the size of an olive were under one shelter and a portion of his body stood over another similar portion, or a similar portion was suspended over his body.
One is, by contrast, pure in all of the following situations. He touches a portion of a corpse half the size of an olive or carries such a portion and:
a) another entity covers both him and another such portion from a corpse;
b) another such portion was suspended over a portion of his body; c) he stood over such a portion, or
d) he touched such a portion and carried such a portion. The rationale is that a quantity that is touched is not combined with one that is carried, neither with regard to a corpse, nor with regard to other forms of impurity. Similarly, a quantity that is touched is not combined with one that is governed by the laws of ohel, nor is one governed by the laws of ohel combined with one that is carried, because they are not from the same category." + ], + [ + "All entities - whether humans or keilim - that become impure because of contact with a human corpse contract impurity that lasts seven days.
What is implied? When a person or a k'li touch an entity that imparts the impurity associated with a corpse when touched or contract impurity through ohel from one of the entities that impart impurity through ohel, or carry an entity that imparts the impurity associated with a corpse when carried, he or it contract impurity that lasts seven days, as Numbers 19:14 states: \"Anyone who enters the tent and anything that is inside the tent will be impure for seven days.\"", + "A person who becomes impure because of a corpse and keilim which such a person touches contract impurity that lasts seven days, as Numbers 31:24 states: \"And you shall wash your garments on the seventh day and become pure.\"
If, by contrast, a person touches a person who contracted impurity because of a corpse - whether he touched him after he disengaged himself from the corpse that imparted impurity to him or whether he is still touching the corpse - the second person is impure only until the evening, as ibid. 19:22 states: \"And the soul that touches it will be impure until the evening.\"
This is the Scriptural Law. According to Rabbinic Law, if one touches a corpse and touches another person while he is still touching the corpse, they both contract impurity that lasts seven days, as if the second person touched the corpse itself.
In what context does this apply? With regard to partaking of terumah and sacrificial food. By contrast, a nazirite or one who brings a Paschal sacrifice who are touched by a person who touched a corpse only becomes impure until the evening as is Scriptural Law, whether the first person is still touching the corpse or whether he is not.", + "When keilim become impure due to contact with a corpse, whether because they were touched or because they were under the same shelter, one who touches them is considered like one who touches a corpse itself. Just as a corpse imparts impurity that lasts seven days to whatever touches it, whether a person or a k'li, so too, when a k'li became impure due to contact with a corpse, it and other keilim, or a person who touches it contract impurity that lasts seven days, as implied by Numbers 19:16: \"one slain by the sword or a corpse.\" According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that a sword is like a corpse. This also applies to other keilim, whether they are metal utensils, keilim that can be purified by immersion, or garments.
These concepts can also be inferred from ibid. 31:19 which states: \"Everyone who killed a person and everyone who touched a corpse must purify himself.\" Would one think that a person who shot an arrow or threw a stone and killed another person would become impure for seven days? Instead, this is speaking about a person who kills with a sword or the like who becomes impure because he touched the k'li with which he killed, for that k'li touched a corpse.
What is the source from which we learn that keilim that touch a person who touched keilim that became impure because of contact with a corpse become impure? It is written: \"And you shall wash your garments on the seventh day and become pure.\" This teaches that any person who contracts impurity that lasts seven days imparts impurity that lasts seven days to his garments.", + "Thus in summary: When a person touches a corpse and then touches another person, the first contracts impurity that lasts seven days and the second, impurity that lasts until the evening. When keilim touch a corpse and then other keilim touch them, they both contract impurity that lasts seven days. An entity whose connection is of the third degree, whether a person or a k'li, contracts only the impurity that lasts until the evening.
When keilim are touching a corpse and a person touches those keilim and other keilim, all three contract the impurity that lasts seven days. An entity whose connection is of the fourth degree contracts only the impurity that lasts until the evening.", + "When does the above apply? With regard to terumah and sacrificial food. With regard to liability for karet for entering the Temple or partaking of sacrificial foods, by contrast, only the first two are liable - the first person who touched the corpse and the second person who touched him - as mandated by Scriptural Law, as Numbers 19:22 states: \"Everything which is touched by the impure person becomes impure.\"
When, by contrast, one touches keilim that were touched by an impure person or one touches a person who touches keilim that touched a corpse, he is exempt, as we explained in Hilchot Bi'at HaMikdash. For these matters, although part of the Oral Tradition, are not considered as Scriptural Law. The rationale is that it was only explicitly stated in the Torah that one who became impure because of contact with a corpse becomes a primary source of impurity and secondly, that an entity, whether a person or a k'li,that touches him becomes impure, becoming a first degree derivative of impurity.", + "When an earthenware container touched a corpse or was in the same structure as it, it contracts ritual impurity. It does not impart ritual impurity, neither to a person, nor to another earthenware container, nor to any other k'li. For an earthenware container never becomes a primary source of ritual impurity, neither with regard to impurity stemming from a corpse or other sources of impurity. This is Scriptural Law, even though it is part of Oral Tradition.", + "This is a great general principle with regard to ritual impurity. Any primary source of ritual impurity imparts ritual impurity to humans, garments, and utensils, whether metal implements, utensils that can be purified by immersion, or earthenware containers. Any entity that imparts impurity to a person or keilim when touched is called a primary source of ritual impurity. Any derivative of ritual impurity imparts ritual impurity to food and drink, but it does not impart impurity to a person or keilim, neither to earthenware containers, nor to other keilim and garments.", + "Any entity that touches a primary source of impurity is referred to as a derivative of the first degree. Anything that touches a derivative of the first degree is referred to as a derivative of the second degree. Anything that touches a derivative of the second degree is referred to as a derivative of the third degree. And anything that touches a derivative of the third degree is referred to as a derivative of the fourth degree. A derivative of the first degree and those on a lesser level are called \"the offspring of impurity.\"", + "Any entity, whether a person or a k'li, which contracts impurity that lasts seven days as a result of contact with a corpse is referred to as tamei meit. The person or the k'li is a primary source of impurity with regard to imparting impurity to terumah and sacrificial food, as we explained. From it, are counted a first degree derivative and a second degree derivative to impart impurity to people and keilim when it is touched, like other primary sources of impurity. It does not impart impurity when carried.", + "Any entity that contracts impurity that lasts until the evening as a result of contact with an entity that contracted impurity from a corpse is considered as the offspring of impurity. It is a derivative of impurity of the first degree. It is possible that a fourth degree contact with a corpse can be a first derivative of impurity, as we explained with regard to terumah and sacrificial foods.", + "When a person or keilim contract impurity because of contact with the lands of the nations or a beit hapras or because he carried such earth or he touched weltering blood, a gollel or a dofek, or entered a shelter where they were located or carried weltering blood, in all instances, these individuals or keilim and the like are all primary sources of impurity by Rabbinic decree. Similarly, garments that contract impurity that lasts seven days because of these entities are all primary sources of impurity by Rabbinic decree.", + "A tent itself which encompasses a source of impurity contracts impurity that lasts seven days according to Scriptural Law even though the impurity did not touch it. It is like garments that were touched by a corpse, as implied by Numbers 19:18: \"And he shall sprinkle on the tent.\"
When does the above apply? When the tent was made from cloth, sackcloth, or a wooden k'li, or a hide, either a hide from an animal or beast that is permitted to be eaten or one which is forbidden to be eaten. These concepts are derived from Exodus 40:19: \"And he spread the tent over the Sanctuary.\" The term \"tent\" applies only to an entity that is woven or made from hides, as in the Sanctuary. If, by contrast, the structure was made from slats of wood, like a roof, a mat, or the like, or it was bone, or made of metal, it is pure. Needless to say, if it was made from building materials, it is pure.
Whenever the Torah uses the expression, \"the house is impure,\" the intent is the person and the keilim in the house. There is no product of wood that becomes impure as a tent except flax.", + "When garments touch a corpse, even though they are considered as a corpse with regard to imparting impurity that lasts seven days to other entities that touch them, they are not considered as a corpse with regard to imparting impurity when one is under their shelter or when one carries them. The rationale is that the impurity stemming from carrying a corpse itself is not explicitly stated in the Torah, as we explained. And with regard to the impurity imparted by a tent, Numbers 19:14 states: \"A man when he will die in a tent.\" Therefore if one carried garments that touched a corpse without touching the garments, or if one stands over them, they are held over him, or they were in a structure with him, he is pure.
Similarly, when a person contracted impurity from a corpse and stood over keilim, they are pure. For one who contracts impurity from a corpse imparts impurity through touch alone.", + "A corpse does not impart impurity to a seat or a couch that is below him, nor to articles that are placed upon him, only to a k'li that touches a corpse whether it was at its side or it was below the corpse or on top of it.
What is implied? There were ten garments one on top of the other and the corpse was on top of them and then there were ten garments on top of him. The garment that is touching him and the second garment which is touching the garment touching him both contract the impurity that lasts seven days. The third garment, whether on top or below, contracts the impurity which lasts until the evening.
When does the above - that all the garments or keilim above him and below him are pure - apply? When the impurity was not retzutzah, the laws of ohel do not apply, or there was a stone intervening between them, as will be explained in the appropriate place." + ], + [ + "When one makes keilim out of the bones of a fish or its skin, they are not susceptible to ritual impurity, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor according to Rabbinic Law. Similar concepts apply with regard to the green moss that appears at the surface of the water and the like. For all entities that come from the sea are pure, as will be explained in Hilchot Keilim. Accordingly, when one makes a tent from the skin of a fish or from moss growing in the sea, the tent itself is not susceptible to impurity although it conveys impurity to everything under it like other tents.", + "Keilim made from animal turds, stone implements, or implements made from earth (raw dirt), are not susceptible to ritual impurity, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor according to Rabbinic Law. This applies to the impurity stemming from a human corpse and to other types of impurity.
Similarly, containers that are made to be left in place semi-permanently, e.g., a chest, a cabinet, a container shaped like a beehive which can contain 40 se'ah of a liquid and have a base are not susceptible to ritual impurity, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor according to Rabbinic Law. They are called: oversized wooden containers.", + "When implements are made from wood, those which are flat are pure, while those that can serve as a container are susceptible to impurity. Similarly, with regard to earthenware implements: those which are flat are pure, while those that can serve as a container are susceptible to impurity. The latter are susceptible to impurity only from their inner space or when moved by a zav. Even when a corpse touches the outer surface of an earthenware container, the container does not contract impurity. If any of the sources of impurity enter the inner space of such a container, they impart impurity even though they do not touch the container.
If an earthenware container was in the same tent as a corpse, it contracts impurity, because the impurity enters its inner space. If it had a cover fastened to it, it and everything in it is pure, as stated in the Torah, for impurity enters it only through its opening and when it is moved by a zav. In the latter instance, it is impure, because he is considered to have touched it in its entirety.", + "When one makes a gollel from an object that is not susceptible to impurity, e.g., he placed a stone, a vessel made from earth, an oversized wooden container, an earthenware container that was fastened closed, or a fish skin or its bone, on a grave, one who touches these articles contracts the impurity that lasts seven days, because he has touched a gollel. If they ceased serving as a gollel, or the corpse was removed from beneath them, they are pure,
Similarly, when an animal is tied down and made a gollel, anyone who touches it contracts the impurity that lasts seven days as long as it serves as a gollel. If the animal is released, it is pure, like all other animals. Similarly, if a barrel filled with liquids that was fastened closed was made into a gollel for a corpse, one who touches it contracts the impurity that lasts seven days. The barrel and the liquids are pure.", + "When a beam is used as a gollel for a grave, whether it is standing upright or lying on its side, only the portion that is above the opening of the grave becomes impure. One who touches the end of it which is lying outside the grave is pure.
If one made its head a gollel for a grave and it is standing over the grave like a tree, anyone who touches it within the four handbreadths that are immediately above the grave is impure because of the laws of gollel. If he touches it above four handbreadths, he is pure.
When does the above apply? When he will cut off the upper portions of the beam in the future. If he is not planning to cut them off, the beam is considered as a gollel in its entirety.", + "If two large stones, four handbreadths by four handbreadths, were used as a gollel, when one stands over either of them, he is impure. If one of them was removed, one who stands over the other is pure. The rationale is that the impurity has a path through which to depart.", + "When one uses a mound of small stones as a gollel for a grave, only the inner layer which covers the grave per se imparts impurity. One who touches the remainder of the stones is pure.", + "When a burial vault was hewed out of a large stone, the corpse was placed inside and then one covered it with a gollel, one who touches any portion of the stone is pure. One who touches the gollel is impure. To what can this be compared? To a large pit filled with corpses with a large stone covering its opening. Only the portion above the open space imparts impurity. If one builds a structure over it, it is considered as a closed grave which imparts impurity from all sides.
If a burial vault hewn into the stone was wide at its bottom and narrow at its top, and a corpse was placed within, one who touches it from below is pure, but one who touches it from above is impure. The rationale is that the side portions above are resting over the corpse and are considered like a gollel.
If a burial vault hewn into the stone was wide at its top and narrow at its bottom, one who touches any place on it is impure. If its sides are straight, one who touches it from the handbreadth next to the bottom of the grave and upwards, is impure. If he touches from that handbreadth and lower, he is pure. If one hollowed out a burial vault in a stone and inserted the corpse in it like a nail, one who touches anywhere on the stone's surface is pure, except for the opening through which the corpse was inserted.", + "The following laws apply to a cave in which a grave is located and to the courtyard in front of the cave. When the courtyard is open, one standing in it is pure as long as he does not touch the lintel of the cave. Different laws apply when the courtyard is covered. If there is an area four handbreadths by four handbreadths or more that is open at the side of the cave, anyone who enters the courtyard is pure. If the open space was less than four handbreadths by four handbreadths, one who enters the courtyard is impure, even though he did not touch the entrance to the cave." + ], + [ + "When a corpse is located in a closed structure or in one which had an opening, but its doorframe was destroyed and it was closed up, it imparts impurity to all its surroundings. Anyone who touches the back or the roof of the structure contracts the impurity that lasts seven days, because it is like a closed grave.
If an entrance had been opened in it, even if it was closed up, as long as the doorframe was not destroyed, one who touches the back of the structure or its roof, is pure. Only the area in front of the door is impure.
How large is the measure of a doorway? If an entire corpse is in the building, the entrance must be four handbreadths. If there is only an olive-sized portion of a corpse, the entrance must be a handbreadth. Any portion larger than an olive-sized portion is considered as an entire corpse and requires an entrance of four handbreadths", + "The following rules apply when there is a corpse in a building that has many entrances. When they are all closed, they all impart ritual impurity. One who sits near any of the entrances under the roof that protrudes over the entrance becomes impure.
If one of them was opened or one intended to remove the corpse through one of them even though he had this thought after the person died and even if he intended to remove it through a window that is four handbreadths by four handbreadths, this saves all the other entrances. Only the entrance that is open or about which he thought imparts impurity. The others are pure, because they are closed and the building is not considered as a closed grave. Similarly, if one began hollowing out an opening through which to remove the corpse, when he has hollowed out an area four handbreadths by four handbreadths, this saves all the other entrances.
If there was a closed entrance and he intended to remove the corpse through it and began to open it, once he opens it, it saves all the other entrances. If the building had many windows, but they were all closed, they are all pure. If they are open, they all impart impurity, but they do not save the entrances.
When there is a small entrance inside a large entrance, anything that covers either of them imparts impurity. If one intended to remove the corpse through the smaller entrance, the smaller entrance purifies the larger one. If they are both of equal size, anything that covers either of them imparts impurity. If one intended to remove the corpse through either of them, it purifies the other.
If the building had one entrance in the north and one entrance in the south and one intended to remove the corpse through the northern entrance, that entrance imparts impurity. If, afterwards, the brother or the relatives of the deceased came and said: \"We will remove it only from the southern entrance,\" the southern entrance replaces and purifies the northern entrance provided one does not say so as a ruse. If he says so as a ruse, they both impart impurity.", + "The following rules apply when several houses open to an exedra and a corpse is located in one of the houses. If the usual practice was to remove the corpse through the exedra, the gateway and the houses become impure. If not, the gateway is impure and the houses are pure.
If there is a closed room in a house and a corpse was brought into the room through an open window, the outer portion of the house is pure. The rationale is that the impurity goes back and departs through the same window that it entered.", + "A grave does not impart impurity to the area around it unless there is empty space a handbreadth long, a handbreadth wide and a handbreadth high above the corpse. Should that condition be met, even if one built a structure over the space of one cubic handbreadth until the heavens, it imparts impurity in its entirety, because the entire structure is considered as a grave.
If the impurity was flush against the covering and there was not an empty space of a cubic handbreadth, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. The only ones who are impure are those who touch the space above the impurity, stand over it from above, touch the space below it, or stand below it. If, however, one touches the side of the building, he is pure.", + "This is a great general principle with regard to the impurity stemming from a corpse: If the impurity is flush with its covering, the impurity pierces through and ascends until the heavens and pierces through and descends until the depths, but does not impart impurity to those on the sides.
What is implied? There is a heap of grain or a pile of stones with an olive-sized portion of a corpse in its midst. There are keilim next to the source of impurity, but they are not touching it. Those keilim are pure, but any k'li in the pile that is directly above or below the impurity is impure, because the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. If there was empty space, a handbreadth long, a handbreadth wide and a handbreadth high above the corpse, it is considered as a closed grave and it imparts impurity from all sides.", + "When a building was filled with earth or pebbles, it is as if the house no longer exists. It is like a pile of earth or pebbles. If there was a source of impurity in the midst of the earth, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends, but the keilim in the earth at its sides are pure.", + "When impurity that was flush against its covering was in a wall and one rested a sukkah against the wall, the sukkah is impure. The rationale is that the wall became one of the sides of a structure containing a corpse. Although the sides of the structure would be pure when touched by a person if it did not have a roof, once a roof was placed over them, everything in the structure is impure, because the impurity is contained in the structure." + ], + [ + "When a grave became lost in a field, its earth imparts ritual impurity when one touches or carries it like the earth of a beit hap'ras, for perhaps the grave that was there was crushed and there are bones the size of a barley-corn in its earth. Similarly, one who stands over any portion of the field contracts ritual impurity. If one builds a structure there, everything inside the structure contracts impurity, for perhaps the structure he constructed in that field is constructed over the grave.", + "The following laws apply when a person built a house and a loft on top of it in such a field. If the entrance to the loft was directly above the entrance to the house, the loft is pure. Even if the grave was under the lintel of the house, the loft is pure, for there is one structure on top of another structure, as will be explained. If they were not directly above each other, the loft is also impure, for perhaps the entrance to the loft is above the grave and thus the loft is projecting over the grave.", + "It is permitted to sow any type of seeds in this field, because the roots of the plants growing from the seeds do not reach the grave. One should not, however, plant any fruit trees inside of it, because their roots will reach the corpse.
We operate under the presumption that low hills that are close to a town and near to a cemetery or to the road leading to the cemetery, whether ancient or new, are impure, because women bury fetuses that they miscarry there and lepers bury their limbs there. Different rules apply to those hills which are distant from a town. The new ones are pure, but the ancient ones are impure. The rationale is that perhaps they were close to a town that was destroyed or a road that was lost.
What is meant by a hill close to a town? Any hill that does not have another one closer than it. What is meant by an ancient one? One that no one remembers whether there was a cemetery there or not.", + "The following laws apply to a field for weeping, i.e., a place near a cemetery where women sit and weep over the departed: Even though its earth is pure, because it has not been established that a corpse is buried there, trees should not be planted there, nor should crops be sown there, so as not to have people frequent it, for perhaps a corpse was buried there. Our Sages had this suspicion, because its owner will have despaired of its use, because it is close to the cemetery. Therefore it is possible that a person will come and bury a corpse there.
One may use the earth of such a place to make ovens to cook sacrificial meat, because it has not been established that impurity was there.", + "When a grave is discovered on one's property, it is permitted to disinter the corpse and rebury it elsewhere. If it was reburied, the place around the first grave is impure and it is forbidden to benefit from it until it is checked, as will be explained. When it is known that a grave is located in a field, it is forbidden to disinter the corpse and rebury it elsewhere. If it was reburied, the place around the first grave is pure and it is permitted to benefit from it.", + "When a grave causes harm to people at large, the corpse should be disinterred. Its place is impure and it is forbidden to benefit from it.", + "The following laws apply when a person encounter a meit mitzvah. If he finds it within the city's Sabbath limits, he should bring it to the cemetery. If he found it outside the Sabbath limits, even in a field of saffron, it acquires its place and should be buried where it is found.
If he found it in the public thoroughfare, he should move it to the side. If an uncultivated field was on one side and a plowed field was on the other side, he should bury it in the uncultivated field. If there was a plowed field on one side and a field that had been sown on the other side, he should bury it in the plowed field. If a field that had been sown was on one side and a vineyard on the other side, it should be buried in the field that had been sown. If there was an orchard on one side and a vineyard on the other, he should bury it in the vineyard, because of the impurity of ohel. If both fields were of equal value, he may bury it wherever he chooses.", + "When a grave is discovered, it imparts impurity retroactively. If someone comes and says: \"it is definitely clear to me that there was not a grave here,\" even if he is speaking about a period twenty years earlier, the grave does not impart impurity except from the time of its discovery onward.", + "Whenever a person discovers a grave, a corpse, or a portion of a corpse that would impart impurity through ohel, he should designate it, so that it will not create an obstacle for others.
During Chol HaMoed, agents of the court go out to designate the graves. A designation is not made over a portion of a corpse that is exactly the size of an olive, because ultimately, its size will be reduced in the earth.
With what is the designation made? With lime. It should be mixed and poured over the place of the impurity. The designation should not be placed on the exact perimeters of the impurity, but instead, should extend somewhat on either side so as not to ruin pure articles. The designation should not be extended much beyond the place of the impurity so as not to spoil Eretz Yisrael. A designation is not made on places that are definitely known to be used for burial, for their identity is universally known, only on the places that are doubtful, e.g., a field in which a grave was lost, the low-hanging branches of trees, or rocks jutting out from a wall.", + "When a person discovers a field that has been designated and does not know what the nature of the problem is, he should follow these guidelines. If it does not have trees, he should assume that a grave was lost in it. If it has trees in it, he should assume that a grave was plowed over in it, as will be explained.", + "When a person finds a stone that is designated, the area under it is impure. Should there be two such stones, if there is lime between them, the area between them is impure. If there is no lime between them, only on top of them, the following laws apply: If there is a shard between them, they are pure, because they are the remnants of a building. If there is no shard between them, and a light layer of lime was smoothed out over their heads on either side, we assume that this is a designation and they are impure.
If one boundary line of a field is designated, it is impure and the remainder of the field is pure. This applies also if a second or a third boundary line is designated. If all four boundary lines are designated, they are pure and the entire field is impure, for the sign should not be placed far from the place of the impurity." + ], + [ + "When a person was digging in a field and he found many corpses in a one pit, one on top of the other or one next to the other, or he found the bodies of people who were slain, or he found a corpse sitting or with its head between its knees, he need not be concerned that perhaps this was a cemetery. Instead he should take the corpses and all the soft earth beneath it and then dig down three fingerbreadths He should then take all of this away. The remainder of the field is considered as pure just as it was before the corpse was discovered. This earth and the three fingerbreadths of virgin soil is called the tevusah of the corpse.", + "When the bodies of slain corpses are found in a field, one should collect all the bones from the field and then, it is pure. Similarly, when one disinters a corpse from a grave in his field, he should gather all the bones one by one and then it is pure. Similarly, a pit into which miscarried fetuses or slain corpses are cast, one should gather all the bones one by one and then it is pure.", + "If one was digging and he discovered a corpse buried in an ordinary manner, he should remove it and the earth of their tevusah. Similarly, if he discovered two corpses buried in an ordinary manner, he should remove both of them and the earth of their tevusah, and the entire field is pure. More stringent laws apply when one finds three corpses, each one lying in the manner in which corpses are usually buried. If there are between four and eight cubits between one grave and the other - i.e., the space for a bier and the buriers - it is necessary to check an additional twenty cubits - i.e., the space for two burial crypts and the open space between them from the last grave. If he does not find another corpse in this space, those twenty cubits that he checked are pure, even though they are in an area close to graves.
If he finds another corpse at the end of the 20 cubit area, it is necessary to check another twenty cubits from it, for there is a basis for the assumption that other graves will be found.
If one of the corpses that was found originally or ultimately had been slain, was sitting, or lying in an unordinary manner, e.g., its head was between its knees, it is not necessary to check another twenty cubits. Instead, one must merely remove the remains of the corpse and its tevusah, The rationale is that we operate on the presumption that the corpses are of gentiles.", + "The laws governing the impurity of graves do not apply to those of gentiles since the impurity of ohel does not apply with regard to them. One who touches their graves is pure unless he touches the corpse itself or carries it.", + "When a corpse is lacking a limb or an organ that, were it to be removed from a living person, he would die, there is no requirement to remove the tevusah, nor is there an obligation to check the area around the grave. When corpses are found lying openly on the surface of a field, there is no requirement to remove the tevusah, nor is there an obligation to check the area around the grave. Instead, one should merely gather bone after bone, and the area is pure.
When a corpse is buried without permission of the owner of the field, there is a requirement to remove the tevusah, but there is no obligation to check the area around the grave.", + "When one finds three corpses buried in an ordinary manner at the outset, three hollows in the wall of a cave, or a hollow, a grave, and a crypt, it is considered as a burial area.
If one finds two and the existence of one had been known previously, there is a requirement to remove the tevusah, but there is no obligation to check the area around the grave. The rationale is that a grave whose existence is known does not cause a place to be considered as a burial area. It was said only that when one finds three graves at the outset, then an inspection is required.
How should the inspection of the twenty cubits mentioned be carried out? One should dig until he reaches a rock or virgin earth, i.e., earth that appears that it has never been tilled. If one dug even 100 cubits deep and discovered earth that was plowed, the original requirement remains and one must dig deeper until he reaches virgin earth. If one reaches water, it is as if he reached virgin earth.", + "When making this inspection, a person does not have to dig a trench extending from the beginning of the twenty cubits until their end. Instead, it is sufficient for him to dig a trench one cubit by one cubit, leave a cubit as is, and dig another cubit by cubit trench, continuing this pattern until the end. The rationale is that there is never less than a cubit between one grave and another.", + "If while one was checking, within the twenty cubits, he reached a river, an irrigation channel, or a public thoroughfare, he should cease. There is no need to search further, because the burial area has been interrupted.", + "The person who removes the earth which is searched is considered as pure unless impurity is discovered in the place which was dug up. Before it is discovered, he may partake of terumah.
One who is digging up a landslide may not partake of terumah, for it is certain that there are corpses under the landslide. It is only that he is not aware of their location.", + "The following laws apply when an impure landslide becomes intermingled with two pure landslides. If one inspected one of them and found it to be pure, it is considered pure and the others impure. If he inspected two of them and found them to be pure, they are considered pure and the other impure. If he inspected all three and found them to be pure, they are all presumed to be impure until he inspects the three of them to the extent that he reaches a stone or virgin earth and discovers all three to be pure.", + "When there is a pit into which miscarried fetuses are cast, one who stands over it is impure according to Scriptural Law. Although moles and hyenas are found there, a mere possibility does not change the definitive ruling based on prior conditions. If, however, a woman cast a miscarried fetus there and it was not determined whether she miscarried something which imparts impurity or not, since there are moles and hyenas there, the multiple doubts cause the place to be deemed pure.", + "It is well known that all these and other similar instances which are ruled impure although there is a doubt involved are Rabbinic safeguards. According to Scriptural Law, only one who has definitely contracted impurity is deemed impure. All stringencies stemming from doubt, whether with regard to ritual impurity, forbidden foods, forbidden intimate relations, or the observance of the Sabbath, are only Rabbinic in origin, as we explained in Hilchot Issurei Bi'ah and in other places. Nevertheless, when there is a situation where one would be liable for karet for an intentional violation, it is forbidden by Scriptural Law to act in a manner that allows for the possibility that one committed such a violation, as evidenced by the fact that one who performs such an act is obligated to bring a provisional guilt-offering, as stated in Hilchot Shegagot." + ], + [ + "What is meant by a beit hapras? A place where a grave was plowed over. Since, in such a situation, the bones of the corpse are crushed and dispersed throughout the field, our Sages decreed that any field where a grave was plowed over is impure. This applies even if one plowed over a coffin and even when the corpse was placed under stone tablets or rocks. Even if there are two stories high of earth above a coffin, since one plowed over the grave, the field is considered as a beit hapras.
How large an area is considered as a beit hapras? 100 cubits by 100 cubits from the place of the grave.", + "All of this square, which is an area in which four se'ah of grain can be sown is a beit hapras. Its earth imparts impurity when it is touched or carried, as we explained. It does not impart impurity because of ohel. Similarly, one who stands over a beit hapras is pure.", + "If one began to plow and plowed over a grave, and while continuing to plow, before he completed the 100 cubits, shook out the plow or knocked it against a rock or a fence, he makes the field a beit hapras only to that point. The remainder of the 100 cubits are pure, because he did not reach it while continuing to plow.
If he plowed 50 cubits or more and then continued plowing until he completed the 100 cubits, the entire area is considered a beit hapras. If he continued plowing beyond the 100 cubits, the area beyond 100 cubits is pure, because the bones in the grave will not be carried more than 100 cubits.", + "We operate under the assumption that bones that were buried are human unless it is known that they came from an animal. Conversely, we operate under the assumption that any bones that are openly revealed are from an animal unless it is known that they are human.
When there was a trench filled with human bones or there were human bones piled on earth, and one plowed these bones together with a field or one plowed a field in which a grave was lost or one in which a grave was discovered, a beit hapras is not created. For our Sages deemed impure only a field in which a grave whose identity was definitely known was plowed. Similarly, when one plows the body of a corpse together with a field, it is not deemed a beit hapras. The rationale is that all these are uncommon situations and our Sages instituted their decree only with regard to a field that was plowed, for this is a common situation.", + "When a person plows a grave in a field that does not belong to him, he does not create a beit hapras, because a person cannot cause an article that does not belong to him to become forbidden. Even a partner, a sharecropper, or a guardian does not create a beit hapras.
When a person plowed over a grave in a field which belongs to him and to a colleague as one, he creates a beit hapras in his portion, but not in the portion belonging to his colleague.", + "When a gentile plows a grave in his field, he does not create a beit hapras, because the concept of a beit hapras does not apply with regard to gentiles.", + "When there is a field which is a beit hapras above and a field that is pure below and rain washes the earth from the beit hapras to the pure field, it remains pure. These laws apply even the earth of the lower field was red and it became white or it was white and it became red. The rationale is that a beit hapras does not make a second beit hapras and impurity was decreed only on the earth in its original state.", + "It is permitted to plant any tree or bush in a beit hapras, because their roots extend below three handbreadths and the area below three handbreadths in a beit hapras is pure, for the bones from the grave are spread out over the surface of the field. We do not, by contrast, sow in it any seeds from which grow crops that are not reaped.
If one sowed crops in such a field and harvested them by uprooting them, one must collect the grainheap in that field and sift the grain with two sifters - and if one grew beans, with three sifters - lest one find a bone the size of a barley corn. One must burn the chaff of the grain and beans there. This is a decree lest there be a bone the size of a barley corn among it. If one were allowed to benefit from the chaff, he would take it out of the field and sell it and thus spread the impurity.", + "When there is a field that is presumed to be a beit hapras, we continue to operate under this assumption even if it is large enough to grow four kor of grain, even if it is to the side of a place of soft mud which is not plowed, and thus does not become a beit hapras, and even if a pure field surrounds it on all four sides.", + "When a person discovers a field that has been designated and does not know what the nature of the problem is, he should follow these guidelines. If it has trees in it, he should assume that a grave was plowed over in it. If it does not have trees, he should assume that a grave was lost in it, as has been explained. The above applies provided there is an elder or a Torah scholar in this place, because not every person is knowledgeable concerning such matters and is not aware that it is permitted to plant in this type of field and forbidden to plant in another.", + "When a person walks through a beit hapras on stones that do not wobble under a person's feet when he is walking on them or he enters it when he is riding on a person or an animal of formidable strength, he is pure. If, however, he walks on stones that usually shake while he treads upon them, even if he was careful and walked so that they would not shake, he is impure, as if he walked upon the ground itself. Similarly, if he was riding on a person who was not strong to the extent that his knees would knock against each other and his thighs would shake when he carried him or on an animal which was not strong to the extent that it would defecate when it carried him, he is impure as if he had walked on the field with his feet.", + "When a person purifies a beit hapras, he must purify it in the presence of two Torah scholars.
How does he purify it? He gathers together all the earth that he can move from the surface of the entire field and places it in a sieve with small holes. He breaks the earth into small pieces and removes any bone that is the size of a barley-corn. Alternatively, it is pure if he places three handbreadths of earth from another place upon it or removed three handbreadths of earth from its entire surface.
If he removed three handbreadths of earth from half the field and placed three handbreadths of earth over the other half, it is pure. If he removed a handbreadth and a half from its surface and placed another handbreadth and a half of earth from another place upon it, his actions are of no consequence. Similarly, if he leveled it and checked it from above and below while removing the rocks, his actions are of no consequence. If he paved it with stones that will not shake when a man walks upon it, it is pure." + ], + [ + "With regard to the earth of the Diaspora: our Sages instituted a decree regarding a clod of earth - that it be considered like a beit hapras. They would only deem impure one who walked on it or touched or carried its earth. Afterwards, they decreed that even its space imparts impurity, even if one did not touch or carry its earth. Instead, even when one merely inserted his head and the majority of his body into the space of the Diaspora, he becomes impure. Similarly, if the open space of an earthenware implement was taken into the Diaspora or the larger portion of other types of implements were taken into the open space of the Diaspora, they contract impurity.", + "The impurity of the open space of the Diaspora is not as severe as the impurity of its earth, but instead, is more lenient. Because of the impurity of its earth, terumot and sacrificial foods are burnt and one who carries such earth contracts the impurity that lasts seven days and the ashes of the Red Heifer must be sprinkled on him on the third and seventh days. When, by contrast, one contracts impurity through entering its open space, it is not required that the ashes of the Red Heifer be sprinkled on him on the third and seventh days, merely that he immerse himself in a mikveh and wait until sunset. Similarly, the ruling concerning terumot and sacrificial foods that contracted impurity through entering its open space is held in abeyance; they are not eaten, nor are they burnt.", + "The earth of the Diaspora and the earth of a beit hapras impart impurity when touched or carried, as explained.
What is the measure that imparts impurity? The amount of earth necessary for a seal for sacks. This is the size of the large ball of a sack-maker's needle.
The following rules apply when the earth of the Diaspora or the earth of a beit hapras comes attached to a vegetable. If there is an amount the size of the seal of a sack in one place, it imparts impurity. If not, the various pieces of earth are not combined. The rationale is that our Sages instituted a decree only on a clod of earth in its natural state. An incident occurred when letters from the Diaspora were coming to the sons of the High Priests and there were about a se'ah or two of seals. They nevertheless did not show any concern regarding their impurity, because not one of the seals was as large as the seal of a sack.", + "The following rules apply when a person brings ovens, cups, and other earthenware utensils from the Diaspora. Until they were fired in a kiln, they are considered impure because of the earth of the Diaspora. Once they were fired, they are considered impure like an earthenware utensil that became impure in the lands of the Diaspora. Such a utensil does not impart impurity to people or utensils, as we explained.", + "When a person is walking on mountains and boulders in the Diaspora, he contracts the impurity that lasts seven days. If he proceeds in the sea or in a place where the waves of the sea wash up, he is pure despite the decree against touching the earth of the Diaspora, but is impure because of the decree against entering its open space.
One who enters the Diaspora in a cabinet, chest, or closet which are carried in the air is impure, because a tent that is movable, is not considered as a tent.", + "The earth of Syria is impure like the earth of the Diaspora. Its open space is pure, because a decree was not imposed concerning it.
Therefore if there was a portion of Syria next to Eretz Yisrael, one edge to the other edge without the earth of the Diaspora, a cemetery, or a beit hapras interposing between them, one could enter there in a state of purity in a cabinet, chest, or closet, provided he did not touch its earth. Similarly, if there is a portion of the earth of the Diaspora next to Eretz Yisrael and there is no place of impurity between them, it may be checked and is considered as pure.", + "A place where gentiles dwelled in Eretz Yisrael is considered impure like the earth of the Diaspora until it is inspected, lest a miscarried fetus have been buried there.", + "The ruling concerning terumah and sacrificial food that became impure because they were brought into a dwelling of the gentiles should be held in abeyance; they are not eaten, nor are they burnt.
How long must gentiles stay in a dwelling for it to require an inspection? 40 days, sufficient time for a woman to become pregnant and miscarry a fetus that conveys impurity. Even if a gentile man without a wife stays in a dwelling for 40 days, it is impure until it is inspected. This is a decree, instituted because of a dwelling where there is a woman. Even a servant, a eunuch, a woman, or a minor of nine years of age causes a dwelling to be considered as \"the dwelling of a gentile.\"", + "If there was a Jewish servant, woman, or minor who was nine years old in a dwelling of the gentiles, guarding so that a fetus would not be buried there, an inspection is not required.
What do they inspect? The deep septic drains and the cisterns of squalid water. Wherever a pig or a mole could drag out the fetus, an inspection is not necessary, because it can be assumed that they will drag it out.
When a dwelling of the gentiles is destroyed, it is still considered impure, until it is inspected.", + "A covered walkway is not included in the decree concerning the dwellings of the gentiles because it is open and there is no place to hide a miscarried fetus.
There are ten places where the decree concerning the dwellings of the gentiles does not apply. Since these are not permanent dwellings, a decree considering them impure was not instituted with regard to them. These are the ten places: a) Arab tents, b) sukkot, c) rubber tents, d) storage areas, e) roofed areas above pillars without walls; people would dwell there in the summer, f) guard houses, g) the open space of a courtyard, h) a bathhouse, i) a workshop where arrows and other weapons are fashioned, and j) soldiers' barracks.", + "The decree applying to the dwellings of gentiles does not pertain to a store unless a gentile dwells there. When a courtyard is impure as a result of the decree applying to the dwelling of gentiles, its gatehouse and the open space above it are impure like it. The decree applying to the dwellings of gentiles and the concept of a beit hapras do not apply in the Diaspora.", + "The decree concerning the impurity of the earth of the Diaspora does not apply to gentile cities enclosed within the boundaries of Eretz Yisrael, e.g., Sisis and its suburbs, Ashkelon and its suburbs, despite the fact that they are exempt from the tithes and from the obligations of the Sabbatical year,
Although the roadways taken by festive pilgrims from Babylon are surrounded by the earth of the Diaspora, they are presumed to be pure." + ], + [ + "A covering that is a square, a handbreadth by a handbreadth and a handbreadth high brings ritual impurity and intervenes between ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law. For an ohel is given that distinction only when it is a handbreadth by a handbreadth and a handbreadth high or more.
What is implied? There was an olive-sized portion of a corpse lying with open space above it and implements (keilim), e.g., needles and spits, were at its side, without touching it. If one covered the portion of the corpse and the implements with an ohel that was a handbreadth by a handbreadth and was more than a handbreadth above the ground, the covering conveys impurity to the implements and renders them impure.
If there were other implements on top of this ohel that was a handbreadth by a handbreadth, they are pure, because the ohel intervenes between them and the impurity. Thus we have learnt that just as an ohel imparts impurity to everything that is under it, it preserves the purity of anything outside it, and intervenes between the impurity and the implements that are on top of it. Similarly, if the impurity was above the ohel and the implements were below it, the implements are pure, because the ohel intervenes in the face of impurity.
If the ohel was less than a handbreadth high or less than a handbreadth by a handbreadth, even if it was several handbreadths high, the implements that are next to the impurity are pure. Any of the implements that are above this ohel and are directly above the impurity are impure. The rationale is that they were positioned over the impurity and there was no ohel intervening in the face of the impurity. Similarly, if there was impurity above this ohel and implements beneath it, any implements that are directly beneath the impurity are impure, for the impurity was hanging over them and there is no ohel intervening in the face of the impurity. The rationale is that whenever there is less than a handbreadth of open space, it is considered as touching and the impurity under it is considered as \"flush,\" as we explained.
When does the above apply? When the ohel was not a person or an implement. If, however, a person or an implement serves as an ohel over the impurity, whether they were the covering itself or the support for the covering, even if the implements were such that themselves do not contract impurity, they convey impurity and do not intervene in the face of impurity.
What is implied? If there was a board placed upon four men or on four implements, even stone implements or the like that do not contract impurity or, needless to say, if they were placed on four spits or four reeds that were a handbreadth high, and there was impurity and other implements beneath it, those implements are impure. If the implements were on top of the board, even if they were not directly above the impurity, they are impure. If there was impurity above the board and implements below it, all of the implements below the board are impure. If, however, the board was placed on four stones or on an animal or a beast and there was impurity under it, the implements on top of it are pure.", + "If there was impurity on top of a board, all of the implements under it are pure, because the ohel intervenes in the face of the impurity. Implements made from animal turds, stone implements, or implements made from earth that are oversized are considered as ohalim and not as implements. Therefore, they intervene in the face of impurity.", + "The following laws apply when a board was placed on top of a new oven and it protrudes beyond the oven on either side for more than a handbreadth. If there was impurity below the board, implements that are on top of it are pure. If there was impurity on top of it, the implements below it are pure. The rationale is that a new oven is not considered as a k'li in this context. If the oven was old, everything is impure.", + "When a board was placed over two ovens, even if they are old, and it protrudes beyond each oven and there is impurity below it, between the two ovens, only the space between them is impure. Keilim that are beneath the two ends that are beyond the ovens are pure, for the area beneath the ends and that beneath the ovens are considered as two tents, one next to the other.
Similarly, if a board was placed over an oven, even an old one, and it protruded a handbreadth at both ends, but not from the sides, should there be impurity under one end, keilim under the other end are not considered as impure.", + "The following laws apply when a person carries a k'li, e.g., a plow or the like, and one side of the k'li hung over impurity. If the circumference of the k'li was a handbreadth, even though its width was only a finger breadth and a third, it imparts impurity to the person carrying it. Impurity is conveyed to him according to Rabbinic Law, for our Sages decreed impurity for a k'li whose circumference is a handbreadth as a safeguard lest one be lenient when there is one whose width is a handbreadth. It does not, however, convey impurity to keilim that are below it or other people over which it hangs unless its width is a handbreadth.", + "Wooden coffins in which a corpse is placed are not considered as graves. Instead, if there is a handbreadth of empty space between the covering of the coffin and corpse, the cover is considered as an intervening substance and one who stands on the cover is considered as pure according to Scriptural Law. Nevertheless, although most coffins have an empty space of a handbreadth, since there are some which do not have such space, our Sages degreed that no coffin would be considered as an intervening substance. Thus one who walks on a coffin is considered as if he touched a corpse or a grave.", + "The following laws apply when a beam extended from one wall to another wall and there was impurity under it. If it was a handbreadth wide, it conveys impurity to everything under its entire span. Any keilim or persons under it are impure. This applies even if its width is not the same along the entire span and some portions are less than a handbreadth wide. The rationale is that these portions are considered as part of an ohel. If it is not a handbreadth wide, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends, as we explained.
How much must the circumference be for the board to have a width of a handbreadth? If it is round, three handbreadths. If it is square, four handbreadths.", + "When a barrel a se'ah in size was on its side in an open area, it does not convey impurity to everything under its entire expanse unless it is approximately four and half handbreadths in circumference. In this way, its upper portion will be a handbreadth and a half above the ground and there will be a portion of it, a handbreadth by a handbreadth a handbreadth above the ground. Accordingly, if it was suspended half a handbreadth above the ground and its circumference was three handbreadths, it conveys impurity.
Similarly, if there is a round pillar lying in an open space and resting on the earth, it does not convey impurity under its side unless it is 24 handbreadths in circumference. If it is not 24 handbreadths in circumference, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. The reason that 24 handbreadths are required is that whenever there is a circumference of three, there is a width of one. Whenever there is a square, a handbreadth by a handbreadth, its diagonal will be a handbreadth and two fifths. Therefore if the pillar's circumference was 24 handbreadths, there is a little bit more than a handbreadth by a handbreadth that is a handbreadth high under its entire side. All of these calculations are approximations. This is its form." + ], + [ + "Whenever there is a covering that is a handbreadth by a handbreadth that is a handbreadth high, it is considered an ohel, as we explained. It intervenes in the face of ritual impurity and conveys ritual impurity whether it was made as a shelter or came into being as a matter of course. Even if it was brought into being without human activity, it conveys ritual impurity and intervenes in the face of it.
What is implied? If there was a cavern that was hollowed out by water or crawling animals or even if the earth itself cratered or one gathered stone and beams and created a covered space of a handbreadth, it is considered as an ohel and it conveys ritual impurity and intervenes in the face of it.", + "When does the above apply? When the ohel was strong and sturdy. A unstable ohel, by contrast, does not convey ritual impurity, nor does it intervene in the face of ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law. According to Rabbinic Law, by contrast, it conveys ritual impurity, but does not intervene in the face of it.
What is implied? When branches of trees that hang over the earth which are called sichachot and stones which project outward from a wall that hang over the earth and are called peraot are sturdy enough to carry an average ceiling and remain standing, they convey impurity and intervene in the face of it according to Scriptural Law. If they are not sturdy enough to carry an average ceiling and would fall, they convey impurity according to Rabbinic decree and do not intervene in the face of it. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "These substances convey ritual impurity and intervene in the face of it: oversized wooden vessels, keilim made from stone, animal turds, or earth that are oversized, simple leather keilim, a curtain, a sheet, or a reed mat that are made like tents, animals or beasts, whether kosher or non-kosher, provided the head of one is placed between the legs of another and they are flush against each other, a bird that rests, one who digs out a place for a child in a grainheap to save him from the sun, and food that was not made ready to be susceptible to ritual impurity so that it would not become impure.
When vegetables continue to grow in the summer and the winter, they are considered like trees and convey ritual impurity and intervene in the face of it. Among those in this category are: mint, bindweed, wild gourd, and Greek squash. Similarly, all of the following - branches of trees that hang over the earth, stones which project outward from a wall, projections, balconies, dovecotes, the clefts of stones, stones that stick out of a wall, the arches of a wall, and stony precipices - convey ritual impurity and intervene in the face of it.", + "The following convey ritual impurity, but do not intervene in the face of it: a human being, wooden vessels that are not oversized, because they are like all other keilim and convey ritual impurity, simple leather keilim, a curtain, a sheet, or a reed mat that are not made like tents, but merely extended outward, without being on a slant or having walls, an animal or a beast that died, and impure foods or foods that were made susceptible to ritual impurity, for an impure substance does not intervene in the face of ritual impurity, and a hand mill, because it is in the category of stone keilim. All of these convey ritual impurity, but do not intervene in the face of it.", + "The following articles neither convey ritual impurity, nor do they intervene in the face of it: seeds, vegetables that are still connected to the ground with the exception of the four vegetables mentioned, a mound of hail, snow, sleet, ice, or salt, one who skips from place to place, one who runs from place to place, a bird that flies freely, a garment flying in the wind, or a ship that floats on the water. All these neither convey ritual impurity, nor do they intervene in the face of it. Although they create a covering, the covering is not lasting.", + "If one tied a ship to something that could anchor it or covered the corner of a garment with a stone, it conveys ritual impurity.", + "When there is a board floating in the water and there is impurity under one of its sides, the keilim under its other side are pure. The rationale is that, as we already explained, a ship that is floating does not convey impurity.", + "The following entities intervene in the face of ritual impurity, but do not convey impurity]: the threads of the woof on a weaver's loom, the cords of a bed, a net on which fertilizer is held, and lattice shades for windows.
How do they intervene in the face of impurity? If there was a window between two houses, impurity was found in one house, and one of these entities is extended over this window and covers it, it serves as an intervening substance and prevents impurity from entering the second house. This applies even if there is open space within the intervening article, provided there is not a square handbreadth of empty space in this lattice work, net, or cords. If there is a square handbreadth of empty space, impurity will enter as will be explained." + ], + [ + "Impurity does not enter a shelter, nor does it depart from it if there is an opening less than a handbreadth by a handbreadth.
What is implied? When there is a window between one house and another or between a house and a loft, if it is a square handbreadth by a handbreadth and there was impurity in one of the structures, the other structure is also impure. If the window does not comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth, impurity does not depart from it, nor does it enter the second structure.
When does the above apply? With regard to a window made by a person for functional purposes. When, by contrast, a window was made by man for illumination, that light should enter, its measure is the size of pundiyon. Then ritual impurity departs through it.
What is implied? There was impurity in a house. A person came and stood on the outside, near this window for light or placed a k'li there, or there was a covering on the other side of the wall, the person, the k'li, and everything under the covering to which the impurity passes through becomes impure. A window made for light is one that is not covered by a roof, but instead, is open to the sun.", + "When an aperture was not made through intentional human activity, e.g., it was hollowed out by water or crawling animals, the earth itself cratered, a window had been shuttered close and the shutter was removed, or it had been covered by glass and the glass broke, the minimum measure is the full span of a shingle which is the size of the head of an ordinary man.
The above applies provided that the owner did not think of using that aperture for functional purposes. If, however, he thought of using it, the minimum measure is an opening of a handbreadth by a handbreadth. If he thought to use it for light, its measure is the size of a pundiyon. The rationale is that, in these instances, thought is considered equivalent to deed.", + "The following rules apply when a person began closing a window opened for light and did not complete the task because he did not have sufficient cement or a colleague called him, night fell initiating the Sabbath, and there remained a small amount open. If a portion the height of two fingerbreadths and the width of a thumbbreadth remain, it conveys ritual impurity. If it is less than that, it is as if it was closed.", + "The following rules apply when there was a large window made for light covered by a lattice or the like. If there was one place where there is a hole as large as a pundiyon, it conveys ritual impurity and allows ritual impurity to depart. If the holes of the lattice are small and not one of them is the size of a pundiyon, it is considered as closed. Similarly, when there was a large window made for functional purposes and it was covered by thatchwork coverings or shades, if there was empty space a handbreadth by a handbreadth square, it conveys ritual impurity and allows ritual impurity to depart. Otherwise, it is considered as closed.", + "When a window is exposed to the open air, its minimum measure is the size of a pundiyon, because it is made solely for the purpose of light, as we explained. If one builds a house outside this window and thus the window is now under a roof, it is considered as if it is between two structures and its measure is a handbreadth by a handbreadth of empty space. If the roof was built in the middle of the window, the measure for the lower portion that is below the roof is a handbreadth by a handbreadth of empty space. The measure of the upper portion that is above the roof is the size of a pundiyon, because it is exposed to the open air.", + "The following rules apply in the situations to be described: There is a hole in a door, a carpenter left an empty place above or below or hung two swinging doors and did not complete adjusting them and thus there was empty space between the two doors, or he closed the door and it was blown open by the wind. In all these situations, if the opening was the size of a shingle, the impurity leaves through this opening and enters through it. If the opening is less than the size of a shingle, it is considered as closed.", + "When a person makes a hole in a wall in order to place a rod or a large nail there, to see those who pass by, or to speak to his colleague, it is considered as a window made for functional purposes and its minimum measure is a space a handbreadth by a handbreadth." + ], + [ + "The following laws apply when a functional window was closed entirely or closed to the extent that less than a handbreadth by a handbreadth remained. If it was closed with an entity that intervenes in the face of ritual impurity it is considered as closed, provided it is an entity that the owner does not intend to move.
Therefore if he closed a window or reduced its size with foods that were not made susceptible to contract ritual impurity, they do not intervene. Even though they are not susceptible to ritual impurity and they are pure, his intent is to move them. If they were rotting, they intervene. Similarly, straw that is rotting intervenes. If it is not rotting, it does not intervene, because we assume that the owner intends to move it.
When grain grew and blocked a window or reduced its size, it does not intervene, because the owner's intent is to remove it, lest it damage the wall. If its roots were distant from the wall, but the heads of the stalks grew on an incline and blocked the window, it intervenes. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "The following rules apply when a barrel that is filled with rotting dried figs which were never made susceptible to ritual impurity and are not fit to be eaten were placed in a window and the opening of the window faced a source of impurity. The barrel itself is impure, In such a situation, and similarly, if a container is filled with rotten straw that is not fit to be used as animal fodder, for mortar for building, or for kindling that was placed in the window: when the figs or the straw would be able to remain standing independently were their container to be removed, they would be considered as intervening. If not, they do not intervene.
The following entities all reduce the size of a window:
a) bitter grasses that are not fit for animal fodder,
b) patches that are not three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths, that are filthy and firm, so that they are not fit to clean blood off a scratch,
c) a limb or flesh that was hanging limply from an impure animal, provided the animal was lean and unfit to be sold to a gentile and tethered so that it will not flee,
d) an impure fowl resting in a window, provided it is one which scratches, so that it would not be fit for a child to play with,
e) a gentile who is bound, because he is one of the prisoners of the king whom another person may not release,
f) an infant born after an eighth month pregnancy on the Sabbath, because it is forbidden to move him,
g) salt that is mixed with thorns that is not fit to be used for food, nor for leatherworking, provided it is placed on a shard so that it will not damage the wall.
The rationale is that these substances are not susceptible to ritual impurity, nor does the owner intend to move them, because they are not fit for work. Similarly, when a Torah scroll was worn out and placed in a window, if the owner had decided that it would be entombed there, it reduces the size of the window. In contrast, snow, hail, sleet, ice, and water do not reduce the size of a window, for they are susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "If one reduced the size of the handbreadth with less than an olive-sized portion of the flesh of a corpse, less than an olive-sized portion of the meat of a dead animal, a portion of bone from a corpse that is less than the size of a barley-corn, or a portion less than a lentil from a crawling animal, these substances intervene in the presence of ritual impurity. The rationale is that they are all pure and since they are not important to the owner, he does not intend to move them. Similarly, less than an egg-sized portion of food that was not made susceptible to ritual impurity is not important, he does not consider moving it. Hence, all of the above reduce the measure of the handbreadth.", + "If one closed a window with an earthenware vessel whose opening faced outward, it intervenes. The rationale is that it does not contract impurity from its outer side and thus it is pure. Therefore this earthenware vessel must be disgusting and perforated so that it is not fit to be used for anything, not even bloodletting, so that the person will not think of moving it.", + "The following laws apply if there was a corpse, a fourth of a kab of bones, or the like from bones that impart impurity through ohel in a house and the owner sought to reduce the size of the window of this house with a bone that is less than a barley-corn. Its size is not reduced, because the bone in the window is considered as part of the bones that generate impurity.
Similarly, if a corpse or an olive-sized portion from the flesh of a corpse was in a home and the owner sought to reduce the size of the window with a portion of flesh from a corpse, its size is not reduced, because the flesh is combined with the other flesh. Nevertheless, a bone that is less than the size of a barley-corn reduces the size of a window and thus prevents the spread of impurity brought about by an olive-sized portion of flesh. And less than an olive-sized portion of flesh reduces [the size of a window and thus prevents the spread of impurity brought about by] a fourth [of a kab] of bones or the like.
If one sought to reduce the size of a handbreadth with the woof and the warp of cloth that is afflicted with tzara'at or with a clod of earth from a beit hapras, its size is not reduced. The rationale is that an impure object does not intervene in the face of ritual impurity.
If one made a brick from the earth of a beit hapras, it is pure and can reduce the size of a window. Our Sages' decree concerned only a clod of earth in its natural state.
The following rules apply if the handbreadth was closed or reduced in size by a spider web. If its strands were substantial, it is considered as an intervening substance. If not, it does not intervene." + ], + [ + "The following rule applies when there is an aperture - whether it is the size of a handbreadth by a handbreadth or it is less than a handbreadth by a handbreadth - in the midst of the roof of a house and there is a source of impurity under the roof of the house: The space directly below the aperture is pure, because it is open to free space and the remainder of the house is impure. If the impurity was solely under the aperture, the entire house is pure.
The following rules apply when the source of impurity was partially under the roof and partially under the aperture. If the aperture comprised a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space, the house is impure entirely and the space below the entire aperture is impure. If it does not comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space, different rules apply. If the impurity is large enough so that if it was divided, a minimum measure would be found below the roof and also a minimum measure would be below the aperture, everything is impure. If not, the house is impure, but the space under the aperture is pure.
If the aperture comprised a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space and a person put his foot on top of the aperture, everything becomes considered as one ohel. Therefore whether there was impurity only under the roof or only under the aperture, everything is impure, the house and the space below the aperture. Moreover, the person who conveyed the impurity to this place is impure, because he became part of an ohel over impurity. If the aperture did not comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space and the impurity is under the roof, the person who placed his foot over the aperture is not impure, because impurity does not depart through less than a handbreadth of open space.
The following laws apply if the impurity was under the aperture and a person closed it with his foot. If the impurity was there before his foot, he is impure, because he stood over the impurity. If his foot was there before the impurity, he is pure, because his foot is part of the ohel and the impurity does not depart to him.", + "If there was an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the mouth of a raven that held it over an aperture in the roof of a house and thus the olive-sized portion was found in the space of the aperture, the house is impure even though the aperture does not comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space.", + "The following rules apply when there is a house with an aperture in its roof, a loft built above it with an aperture in its roof, and the two apertures are positioned one on top of the other. Whether the apertures comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space or not, if there is impurity in the house, the space under the apertures is pure and everything else is impure. If the impurity is under the apertures, the entire house is pure.
If the apertures comprised a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space, whether the impurity was under the roof of the house or under the apertures, were an entity that is susceptible to impurity to have been placed either above the aperture of the house or above the aperture of the loft, everything is impure. The rationale is that an impure entity does not intervene in the face of ritual impurity.
If one placed an entity that is not susceptible to ritual impurity over the aperture of the house, the house is impure and the loft is pure. If such an article was placed on the aperture of the loft, the house and the loft are impure and the space directly above the aperture until the heavens is pure.
If the apertures did not comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space, impurity was found under the roof of the house, and one placed an object - whether an object that is susceptible to ritual impurity or one which is not susceptible to ritual impurity - on either the aperture of the house or the aperture of the loft, only the house becomes ritually impure. The rationale is that impurity does not depart to the loft unless there is an open space of a handbreadth by a handbreadth.
If the impurity was beneath the apertures and one placed an entity that was susceptible to ritual impurity over either the lower or the upper aperture, both the house and the loft are impure, because one has extended the impurity. If he placed an entity that is not susceptible to ritual impurity over either the lower or the upper aperture, only the house is impure.
All of these laws apply only when one purposely makes an aperture. If, however, a roof is opened as a matter of course, the measure which conveys ritual impurity is the full size of a rafter, as we explained.", + "The following laws apply when one opens a ceiling to make an aperture in the roof of a house so that the leg of a bed can be inserted into it and the leg of the bed closes the aperture. If the aperture comprises a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space and there is impurity in the house, the loft is also impure, because a k'li that can contract ritual impurity does not intervene. If it does not comprise a handbreadth by a handbreadth, the loft is pure, and the foot of the bed that extends below is impure, like a k'li that hangs over impurity. If, however, a roof is opened as a matter of course, the measure which conveys ritual impurity is the full size of a rafter, as we explained.", + "The following laws apply when there is an aperture in the roof of a house and there is an earthenware pot placed on the earth directly aligned with the aperture so that if it was lifted up, it would be able to be lifted through the aperture without leaving any space at all. If there was impurity beneath the pot, flush between it and the earth, or there was impurity inside the pot, or on its outer surface, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends and only objects that are directly above it or below it are impure. The remainder of the house is pure in its entirety.
If the pot was a handbreadth above the ground and there was impurity under it or under the roof of the house, the house is impure in its entirety and whatever is under the pot is impure, because it serves as a shelter. The inner space of the pot are pure, because an earthenware container cannot become impure from its outer surface and the open space of the pot is under the open space of the world at large. If there is a k’li in it or on its outer surface, the k’li is pure. If the impurity is in [the pot] or on its outer surface, the entire house is pure, for the impurity is only directly under the aperture.
If the pot was under the aperture and the aperture was greater than the pot to the extent that if the pot was lifted up there would be an open space of more than a handbreadth by a handbreadth between it and the edge of the aperture, even if the pot is a handbreadth above the ground and there is impurity in it, on its outer surface, or below it, the house is pure.
The following laws apply when the pot was placed next to the doorstep of a house in a way that if lifted up, a handbreadth of the space of its opening will be within the outer border of the lintel. If the impurity was flush under the pot, if the pot was a handbreadth above the ground and the impurity was under it or in the house, the area under it and the house are impure, because it is all considered as one structure and its inner space and outer surface are pure. If there was impurity in it and there was impurity below it, only the area below the pot is impure, the house, by contrast, is pure.", + "The following laws apply when there are beams of a house and loft without a ceiling over them stretching from one side of a structure to another. If the beams of the house and the loft are aligned one beam directly over the other, the empty space between them is aligned one over the other, the width of a beam is a handbreadth, the width of the empty space is a handbreadth and there is impurity beneath one of the beams, only the area beneath it is impure. If the impurity was between the lower beam and the upper beam, only the space between them is impure. If the impurity was on top of an upper beam, the space above it until the heavens is impure.
If the upper beams were aligned above the empty space between the lower beams and there was impurity below one of them, the area beneath all of them is impure. If the impurity was on top of an upper beam, the space above it until the heavens is impure.
If the beams were not a handbreadth wide, whether they were aligned one above the other or whether the upper ones were aligned above the space between the lower ones, were impurity to be beneath them, between them, or on top of them, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends, and it imparts impurity only to entities under it or over it. The rationale is that any impurity that is not under a covering that is a handbreadth wide and a handbreadth high is considered as \"flush.\"
When the roof and the walls of a building are split into halves and there was impurity in the outer portion where the entrance was, the keilim in the inner portion are all pure. Different laws apply when there was impurity in the inner portion. If the split was as wide as a plumb line, the keilim in the outer portion are pure. If the the split was less than this, they are impure.", + "When an exedra was split and there was impurity in one side, the keilim on the other side are pure. For it is like two tents next to each other with space in between them, for the split runs across the entire exedra.
If he placed his foot or a reed above, over the crack, he joins the impurity to the other side of the exedra. If one placed a reed, or even a large k'li, on the earth, directly under the crack, it does not join the impurity unless the k'li is under the crack and is a handbreadth high.
If a person was lying on the ground below the crack, he joins the impurity to the other side. The rationale is that a person is hollow and his upper portion can be considered as a tent that is a handbreadth high. Similarly, if there were folded garments placed on the ground, one on top of the other and the upper one was a handbreadth above the ground, it joins the impurity to the other side. All of the garments below it are considered as garments that are under a tent." + ], + [ + "When a projection protrudes from the side of an entrance to a home facing downward and it is twelve handbreadths or less above the earth, it conveys ritual impurity regardless of how small it is. It is clear that such a conveyance of impurity is merely a Rabbinic ordinance. Similarly, any analogous instance where impurity is conveyed by something that is not a sturdy ohel is only a Rabbinic ordinance.
Projections that are more than twelve handbreadths high or which face upward and similarly, the crowns and the ornamental embellishments that project from a structure, do not convey impurity unless they are a handbreadth by a handbreadth in area. This also applies to a projection that extends over an entrance from a lintel. Even if there was a reed at the side of the lintel as wide as the entrance, it does not convey ritual impurity unless it is a handbreadth by a handbreadth in area.", + "When a projection surrounds an entire building and encompasses a handbreadth at the entrance to the house, it conveys ritual impurity. If it encompasses less than a handbreadth at the entrance of the house and there is impurity in the house, keilim under it are impure. If there is impurity under it, it does not convey impurity to the house. Similar laws apply with regard to a courtyard that is surrounded by an exedra.", + "When a window serves a functional purpose and a projection protrudes across the entire window, even if it was only as wide as a thumbbreadth, it conveys ritual impurity. This applies provided it is two fingerbreadths or less above the window. If it is more than two fingerbreadths higher than the window, it does not convey ritual impurity unless it is a handbreadth wide. When there is a projection over a window that is made for light, it conveys ritual impurity regardless of its size and regardless of its height.
When there is a structure that protrudes in front of a window upon which a person looking out from the window leans while looking, it does not convey ritual impurity. If it has a projection over it, we consider the structure as if it does not exist and the projection above it conveys ritual impurity.
How do all these projections convey ritual impurity? If there was impurity under them or under the house, everything is impure - whether it is in the house or under the projection.", + "When there are two projections one on top of the other, each one of them is a handbreadth by a handbreadth in area, there is a handbreadth of space between them, and there is impurity below the lower one, only the space below it is impure. If there is impurity between them, only the space between them is impure. If there is impurity above the upper one, the space above it until the heavens is impure.
If the upper one extended beyond the lower one for a handbreadth and there was impurity below the lower one or between them, the space beneath them and between them is impure. If there is impurity above the upper one, the space above it until the heavens is impure.
If the upper one extended beyond the lower one for less than a handbreadth and there was impurity beneath them, the space beneath them and between them is impure. If the impurity was between them or under only the extra portion of the upper projection, the space between them and under the extra portion is impure, but the space below the lower projection is pure.
If each of the projections were a handbreadth by a handbreadth in size, but there was not a handbreadth between them, and there was impurity below the lower one, only the space below it is impure. If there was impurity between them or on top of the upper one, the space directly above it until the heavens is impure.
If the projections were not a handbreadth by a handbreadth in size, whether there was a space of a handbreadth between them or not, whether the impurity was beneath the lower one, between them, or on top of the upper one, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends, because it is flush. Similar laws apply when there are two curtains that are a handbreadth above the ground and placed one on top of the other.
When there are keilim, garments, or wooden tablets placed on top of each other and impurity was flush between them, if the impurity was a handbreadth above the earth, the k'li that is above it is considered as creating an ohel over the space of a handbreadth and it imparts impurity to all the keilim under it. If there were stone tablets, even if they were a thousand cubits above the ground, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends, because they are considered as earth.", + "When tablets of wood are touching each other at their corners, they are a handbreadth above the ground, and there is impurity under one of them, the keilim which are under the second are pure, because it is not touching the other one over the space of a handbreadth. A person who touches the second tablet is considered as one who touched keilim that touched a covering over a corpse.
Different rules apply, by contrast, with regard to all those keilim which we said convey ritual impurity and do not intervene in the face of it. If such a k'li was positioned above a corpse, all of the keilim that are above it are impure, as we explained. They are deemed impure as keilim that were held over a corpse. Even the keilim over it that are not directly over the impurity are impure. They are considered keilim that touched keilim that were held over a corpse.", + "When an earthenware jug was standing on its base in open space and there was an olive-sized portion from a corpse inside of it or below it, directly below its inner space, the impurity pierces through and ascends, pierces through and descends. The jug is impure, because the impurity pierces its bottom and its inner space becomes impure.
If the impurity is located under the thickness of its walls, the impurity pierces through and ascends, pierces through and descends, but the jug is pure. Why is the jug pure? Because the impurity does not pierce through into its inner space, but only to its walls and an earthenware container contracts impurity only from its inner space.
If some of the impurity was below the thickness of its walls and some below its inner space, the impurity pierces through and ascends, pierces through and descends. If the walls were a handbreadth in thickness, it is entirely impure but the space aligned with its opening is pure, for the impurity has spread only throughout the walls.
When does the above apply? When the jug was pure. If, however, the jug was impure, it was a handbreadth raised above the earth, it was covered, or it was turned upside down, and the impurity was in it or on top of it, everything is impure and anything that touches it in its entirety is impure. If it had a cover fastened to it and was placed over a corpse, any food and drink inside of it are pure, but the keilim over it are impure.
When jugs are resting on their bases or leaning on their sides in open space, they touch each other over a handbreadth of space, and there is impurity below one of them, the impurity pierces through and ascends, pierces through and descends, because it is flush.
When does the above apply? When the jugs are pure. If, however, they are impure or they are raised a handbreadth above the ground, and there is impurity under one of them, the space below all of them is impure, because they are considered as a single ohel." + ], + [ + "The following rules apply when a person held one hand over a corpse and one hand over keilim or he touched a corpse and held his hand over keilim. If each of his hands cover a handbreadth of space, the keilim are impure. If they are smaller, they are pure.
Similarly, if there are two buildings near each other and there is a portion of a corpse the size of half an olive in each of them and a person inserted one hand into one building and the other into the second building, if each of his hands cover a handbreadth of space, he has joined the impurity together. Everything is considered as one ohel and he and the buildings are impure. If they are smaller, he does not join the impurity together.", + "When a person looks out from a window and leans over impurity, he conveys impurity to the house in which he is located. The entire house becomes impure. If he was lying on the doorstep, part of his body being in the house and part being outside the house and impurity was positioned above the portion outside the house, the house is impure, because a person is hollow and the upper portion of his body is a handbreadth high. Since impurity was held over him, it is as if he stood over it and he conveys the impurity.
Similarly, if there was impurity within a house and pure people stood over the portion of a man lying outside, over the doorstep, they are impure. The rationale is that he is considered as if he is covering impurity and a person conveys impurity, but does not intervene against it, as we explained.", + "The following rules apply when the people carrying a corpse passed under an exedra, one of them closed the door to a house and locked it with a key so that the house would not become impure or if there was a person inside or outside who closed the door. If the door could stand close by itself, the house is pure. If not, the house is impure. The rationale is that in the latter situation, it was the person who intervened in the face of ritual impurity. As we explained, a person and keilim convey ritual impurity and do not intervene in the face of it.", + "When an oven standing in a house has a dome-shaped opening that extends outside, if people carrying a corpse carried it over the opening that extends outside, the oven is impure, but the house is pure. The rationale is that the oven is not upraised above the ground so that it would bring impurity to the house.
When an oversized closet standing in an entrance opens to the outside and there is impurity in it, the house is pure. When there is impurity in the house, what is in the closet is impure, because it is open in the entrance and it is the nature of impurity to depart and not to enter. If its drawer was extended behind it, projecting less than a handbreadth, and could not be separated from the closet and there was impurity there opposite the boards of the roof of the house, the house is pure. The rationale is that even though it projects outward, it cannot be separated and it does not extend a handbreadth. This applies provided it is a handbreadth by a handbreadth and a handbreadth in height. If the drawer does not have an empty space of a handbreadth, the impurity is considered as flush within the house and the house is impure.
If the closet was standing in the house itself and there was impurity in it or in a chest within it, even though there is not an opening of a handbreadth through which the impurity could depart, the house is impure. If there is impurity in the house, everything in the closet is pure. The rationale is that the nature of impurity is to depart and not to enter.", + "If there are keilim between the closet and the ground, between it and the wall, or between it and the ceiling, they are impure if there is a handbreadth of empty space there. If not, they are pure, because we considered it is if the beams of the ceiling descend and close the space between it and the closet.", + "If there is impurity under the closet, between it and the earth, between it and the boards of the ceilings, or between it and the wall, the house is impure whether there is an open space of a handbreadth or not.
If the closet was standing under the open air and there was impurity in it, the keilim within the breadth of its walls are pure. If there is impurity within the breadth of its walls, the keilim inside of it are pure.", + "All the slanted walls of tents are considered as the tents themselves.
What is implied? When a tent slants downward and ends within a fingerbreadth of the ground and there is impurity in the tent, the keilim under the slanted side are impure. If there is impurity under the slanted wall, the keilim in the tent are impure.
If there is impurity within the slanted wall, one who touches its inner side contracts impurity that lasts a week. One who touches its outer side contracts impurity that lasts until the evening, for the outer side of the slanting wall is considered as a k'li that touches a tent that has become impure.
If there is impurity on the outer side of the slanted wall, one who touches its outer side contracts impurity that lasts a week. One who touches the inner side of the slanting wall contracts impurity that lasts until the evening.
If there was half an olive-sized portion of a corpse inside the tent and half behind it, one who touches it - whether from inside or outside - contracts impurity that lasts until the evening. The tent itself contracts impurity that lasts for seven days.", + "If the edges of the tent were spread out on the ground and there was impurity on the ground under an edge of the tent spread out or above it, the impurity pierces through and ascends, pierces through and descends." + ], + [ + "The following rules apply with regard to a beehive-like container lying on the ground, in the entrance of a building with its opening facing the outside and an olive-sized portion of a corpse under or on top of the portion outside the building. Whatever is directly under or above the olive-sized portion below or above the container is impure. Whatever is in its inner space is pure except a k'li that is directly above or below the impurity. The building is pure.
If there is impurity in the building, only the building is impure, but keilim that are in the container or under it or above it outside of the building are pure. If there was impurity in the container, everything is impure, i.e., everything in the building and everything in the container, everything above it and everything below it that is opposite the impurity, as we explained.
If the container was raised a handbreadth above the ground and there was impurity under it, in the building, or above it, everything is impure, i.e., everything in the building, everything below it and everything above it. Whatever is in its inner space, by contrast, is pure except a k'li that is directly above or below the impurity. If there was impurity in the container, everything is impure, i.e., everything in the container and everything in the building, everything below it and everything above it. The rationale is that keilim or people who become an ohel over impurity or who have impurity above them convey impurity and do not intervene in the face of it, as we explained.
When does the above apply? When the container is a k'li and hollow. Different laws apply, however, if it was damaged and broken open and the open portion was plugged with straw and thus it is not considered as a k'li, or it was filled with straw so there was not an empty space of a handbreadth by a handbreadth and a handbreadth high, but instead, it was stuffed and there was not an empty space of a handbreadth in one place. If it was a handbreadth raised above the ground and there was impurity under it or in the building, the building and all the space under it are impure, because everything constitutes one ohel. Its inner space and anything on top of it on the outside of the building are pure, because it is considered an ohel of wood and it is not a container. If there was impurity inside of it, only what is inside of it is impure. If the impurity was above it, the space above it until the heavens is impure.
If such a container was placed on the ground, it opened to the outside, and an olive-sized portion of a corpse was under it, the space under it until the depths is impure. If the impurity was above it, the space above it until the heavens is impure. If there was impurity in the building, only the building is impure. If there is impurity within the container, only its inner space is impure.", + "When a beehive-like container is lying on the ground in the entrance to a building, it opens up to the inside of the building, it is intact and hollow and there is an olive-sized portion of a corpse below it or above it, everything that is directly below the olive-sized portion of impurity or over it is impure. Everything that is in its inner space is pure except those keilim that are directly above or directly below the impurity and the building is pure.
If it was raised a handbreadth above the ground and there was impurity under it, in it, above it, or in the building, everything is impure: everything that is in the building and everything under it, because it and the building constitute one ohel.
If it was damaged and broken opened and the open portion was plugged with straw or stuffed, was raised a handbreadth above the ground and there was impurity under it, in the building, or in it, everything is impure except the articles above it. If the impurity was above it, the space above the impurity until the heavens is impure, but its inner space is pure and the space under it, the building, and everything in them is pure. Since it is not a k'li, it intervenes in the face of impurity.
If such a container was placed on the ground, it opened to the inside, and an olive-sized portion of a corpse was under it, the space under it until the depths is impure If [the impurity] was above it, the space above it until the heavens is impure. If there was impurity within it or within the building, its inner space and the building are impure.", + "The following laws apply when there is a beehive-like container inside a building, it fills the entire height of the building, its opening is positioned toward the ceiling of the building, and it reaches the ceiling so that there is less than a handbreadth of space between it and the ceiling. If there is impurity in it, the building is impure. If there is impurity in the building, its contents are pure. The rationale is that when there is less than a handbreadth of open space, it is the nature of impurity to depart towards the building, but not to enter the container.
This law applies whether the container was standing upright or leaning on its side, with its opening to the wall and there was less than a handbreadth between it and the wall, whether there was one beehive-like container or two beehive-like containers, one above the other, and there was not a handbreadth of empty space between the upper container and the ceiling or the upper container and the wall.
When such a container was standing in the entrance to a building with its opening facing upward and there was less than a handbreadth between it and the lintel, if there is impurity in it, the building is pure. If there is impurity in the building, the contents of the container are impure. The rationale is that it is the nature of impurity to depart and not to enter.", + "The following laws apply when there is a hollow beehive-like container that is intact and resting on its side in the open and there is an olive-sized portion of a corpse below it or above it. Anything that is directly above or directly below the olive-size portion is impure. Whatever is within its inner space, is pure except what is directly above or below the impurity. Whatever is not directly above or below the impurity inside the container is pure. If there is impurity inside of it, everything is impure: everything inside of it and everything below the container or above it that is directly above or below the impurity.
If it was raised a handbreadth above the ground and there was impurity under it or above it, everything that is below it and everything that is above it is impure, but everything that is inside of it is pure except a k'li that is directly above or below the impurity.
If there is impurity inside of it, everything is impure, everything inside of it, everything below it, and everything resting upon it from above. The rationale is that keilim convey ritual impurity, but do not intervene in the face of it, as we explained. Accordingly, if this beehive-like container that was lying on the earth was damaged and then plugged with straw or it is an oversized wooden container and there is an olive-sized portion from a corpse under it, anything below it until the depths is impure. If the impurity is on top of it, anything above it until the heavens is impure. If the impurity is inside of it, only the keilim inside of it are impure.
If [such] a container was raised a handbreadth above the earth and there was impurity under it, the space beneath it alone is impure. If [the impurity] was inside of it, only its inner space is impure. If [the impurity] was on top of it, the space above [the impurity] until the heavens is impure. We have already explained that an oversized wooden container is considered as an ohel and not as a k’li. Therefore, it intervenes in the face [of impurity].", + "When an intact beehive-like container was resting on its base in the open space and there was impurity under it, inside of it, or on top of it, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. If, however, it was raised a handbreadth above the ground, covered, or standing upside down and there was impurity below it, in it, or above it, everything is impure: everything inside of it, everything below it, everything above it if the impurity was below it, for a k'li conveys ritual impurity and does not intervene in the face of it, as we explained.
Accordingly, if the container was damaged and plugged with straw and there is impurity under it, in it, or above it, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. If it was raised a handbreadth above the ground and there was impurity below it, the space below it alone is impure. If the impurity was inside of it or on top of it, anything above it until the heavens is impure, but the keilim under it are pure, because it is a ohel and intervenes.", + "If there is a camel standing in the open space and there was impurity below it, the keilim above it are pure. If there is impurity above it, the keilim under it are pure. If it was lying down and there was impurity under it, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. Similarly, if there was impurity flush under its foot or above its foot, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends.
We already explained in Hilchot Nizirut that if a nazirite and an olive-size portion of a corpse were both under a camel, a bed, or another similar k'li, even though he contracts impurity that lasts seven days, he does not shave. From this, we can derive that all of the impurity mentioned with regard to an ohel created by a person, an animal, or a k'li have their source in the words of the Sages. Some of them are part of the Oral Tradition and others are decrees and safeguards. Therefore a nazirite does not shave because of any of these impurities and one is not liable for karet for entering the Temple or partaking of consecrated food. All of the statements regarding the impurity conveyed in this manner are relevant only with regard to the ritual impurity of terumah and sacrificial foods, as we explained." + ], + [ + "There are three conditions that protect an entity located under the same ohel as a corpse from contracting impurity: a sealed covering, an ohel, and the fact that something was swallowed. Being swallowed prevents pure entities from contracting impurity and prevents impurity that was swallowed from departing and spreading that impurity. In contrast, a sealed cover and an ohel prevent pure entities from contracting impurity, but they do not prevent the impurity from departing and causing other entities to become impure.
What is implied? If there is a container that is sealed in a house that is impure, everything in the container is pure. Similarly, if there is an ohel in such a house, all of the keilim in that ohel are pure. If, however, there was an olive-sized portion from a corpse placed in containers that were sealed close and then they were brought into a house, the house is impure. Similarly, if there was one ohel inside another ohel and an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the inner ohel, all of the keilim in the outer ohel are impure.", + "In contrast, when entities are swallowed, pure articles are prevented from contracting impurity and impurity is prevented from spreading.
What is implied? When a dog ate the flesh of a human corpse and entered a house, the house is pure. When a ring was swallowed, even by a person, and then the person who swallowed it entered an ohel where a corpse was located, even though the person contracts the impurity that lasts seven days, the ring remains pure. Similarly, the fact that an entity was swallowed by a beast, a domesticated animal, a fowl, or a fish prevents it from contracting impurity as long as they are alive. If, however, they die and the flesh of a human corpse or keilim are in their intestines, it is as if these articles were not swallowed.", + "If the majority of one of a fowl's determining signs for ritual slaughter was slit or the majority of both an animal's signs were slit, even though the living beings were still in their death throes, they are considered as dead. They no longer protect the keilim that are swallowed in their intestines, nor do they prevent impurity that is in their intestines from spreading outward and imparting impurity.", + "How long may the impurity remain in their intestines and still impart impurity when they die? For a dog three full days, i.e., three twenty-four hour periods. For other wild beasts, domesticated animals, fowl, or fish, one full day.
When does the above apply? When the flesh of the corpse remains in their intestines. If, however, a wolf swallows a baby and then expels it through its anus, the flesh is pure, but the bones are impure.", + "Entities that are swallowed are protected from impurity only in the digestive organs of a living creature, as we explained. Those, however, which are concealed in the body of a k'li or a stone are not protected.
What is implied? If there is a spindle in which a metal hook was concealed, into which the iron point was driven, or a brick in which a ring was found that were brought into an ohel in which a corpse was found, the articles are impure even though they are not visible and they are covered. The rationale is that articles encompassed by keilim are protected from impurity only by a sealed cover.
Similarly, if there was a pin or a ring covered in the clay used to reinforce an oven and the oven became impure because it was in an ohel where a corpse was located or a dead crawling animal fell into its inner space, the keilim in the clay become impure. If, however, the oven was sealed close, since the oven itself is pure, the keilim that are covered up by the clay on top of it are also pure.
Similarly, if a jug is sealed closed and there is a needle or a ring in the clay sealing at its side, they are impure, and they are not saved in an ohel where a corpse was located. If they were in the sealing of the jug over its opening and they could be seen from the inside of the jug, but do not enter its inner space, they are pure. If they enter its inner space, they are impure. The rationale is that an earthenware container that is sealed close does not protect the keilim that are inside of it, as will be explained. If there is a layer of clay, even as thin as a garlic shell under them, they are pure, even though they project into the inner space of the jug.", + "All keilim that are embedded in the earth of a house are impure and they are not protected. The rationale is that the earth of an ohel has the same status of the ohel itself until the very depths of the earth. This does not apply with regard to its walls, as will be explained.
What is implied? If there is impurity in a house and there are keilim embedded in its earth, even if they are deeper than 100 cubits, they are impure. If, however, there is a handbreadth by a handbreadth by a handbreadth of empty space in their place, they are pure, because it is as if they are in another ohel. To what can the matter be compared? To a loft that is built over a house. If there is impurity in the loft, the house is pure.
Similarly, if one divided a house with a partition that runs parallel to the ground and there was impurity between the partition and the earth, the keilim that are in the house above the partition are impure, because an ohel does not prevent the spread of impurity, as we explained. If there was impurity above the partition, the keilim between the partition and the earth are pure, because the ohel protects them. If there is not a space of a handbreadth between the partition and the ground, the keilim are considered as if they are embedded in the earth of the house and they are impure.", + "The following laws apply when there is a covered drain extending under a house and the drain is a handbreadth by a handbreadth by a handbreadth and its opening outside the house is a cubic handbreadth in size. If there is impurity in the drainage channel, the house is pure. If there is impurity in the house, the contents of the drainage channel are pure.
If the drain was a cubic handbreadth in size, but its opening on the outside was not a cubic handbreadth in size and there was impurity in it, the house is impure. If there is impurity in the house, the contents of the drainage channel are pure. The rationale is that it is not the way of impurity to enter a secondary entity like a drain.
If the drain was not a cubic handbreadth in size and its opening on the outside was not a cubic handbreadth in size and there was impurity in it, the house is impure. It is as if the impurity is in the house. If there is impurity in the house, the contents of the drain are impure. The rationale is that they are considered like keilim buried in the earth and the earth of a house has the same status as the house itself until the very depths.", + "When there are two jugs, each containing half of an olive-sized portion of a corpse and each is sealed close, placed within a house, they are pure, because a partial measure of impurity does not impart impurity. The house is impure, because there is an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the house and a sealed cover does not prevent the spread of impurity outward. The jugs do not become impure because of the house, because they are sealed close. If one of the jugs are open, it and the house are impure and the other jug is pure.
Similarly, if there are two rooms open to each other and to the main room of a house and there is half of an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the inner room or the middle room and half of an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the outer room, the outer room is impure. The inner room and the middle room are pure. If there is half of an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the inner room and half of an olive-sized portion of a corpse in the middle room, the inner room is pure. The middle and the outer rooms are impure, because it is the way of impurity to depart and not to enter." + ], + [ + "What is the source that teaches that a sealed covering saves the contents of a container from contracting ritual impurity in a shelter in which a corpse is located? Numbers 19:15 states: \"Any open container that does not have a sealed covering on top of it is impure.\" One can derive from this that if there is a sealed covering on it, it is pure.
According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that the verse is speaking only about an earthenware container, for it is a container that contracts impurity only through its opening. Therefore, if its opening is closed with a sealed covering, all of its contents are protected.
From this, we can infer that the contents of any of the containers which are not susceptible to ritual impurity are protected when the container is closed with a sealed covering. Such containers include: containers made from cow turds, stone containers, containers made from earth, containers made from the bones or skin of a fish or the bones of a fowl, oversized wooden containers, wooden boards that are flat and are not containers, metal keilim which have not been completely fashioned. The contents of all of these are protected by a sealed covering.
Now if the contents of a utensil closed with a sealed covering are protected, we can infer that this also applies to keilim that are swallowed or under an ohel. What is the difference between ohalim and containers that protect because of a sealed covering? That the covering of the containers must be sealed close, while for an ohel, any covering is sufficient.", + "If a funnel is turned upside down, it protects anything it covers from impurity. Although its other end has a small hole, it is considered as if it were closed.", + "All containers that protect their contents when sealed closed also protect anything that is under them to the very depths if they are turned upside down and stood on the earth, when their inner space is a handbreadth by a handbreadth by a handbreadth, even though one did not spread clay around the sides to seal them. The rationale is, in that position, they are like an ohel and an ohel protects from impurity. The only exception is an earthenware container, for an ohel formed by an earthenware container does not protect from impurity.
What is implied? When an earthenware jug is turned upside down, even if one smeared clay on its sides everything under it is impure, for the prooftext speaks of \"a sealed covering on top of it,\" and not a closed covering on its back. If one attached its opening to the wall and smeared clay on its sides, it protects everything inside of it and everything opposite its opening in the wall. If one did not smear clay on its sides, it does not protect its contents, because an earthenware container does not protect as an ohel, as we explained.
All of the other containers that protect their contents when sealed close protect their contents when their openings are attached to the walls of a house even when they do not have a sealed covering, because they protect as an ohel. Therefore it is necessary that the walls of the utensil be at least a handbreadth high, for containers do not protect their contents with their walls as an ohel unless the wall of the container is at least a handbreadth.
If the wall of the container was half a handbreadth, there was a border of half a handbreadth protruding from the wall, and they were attached to each other, it is not considered as an ohel and does not protect its contents even though there is a handbreadth of empty space. It is necessary that the handbreadth come from one entity.", + "Just as such containers protect their contents from impurity when they are inside an ohel and attached to its walls, so too, do they protect their contents when they are outside the ohel if they are attached to the ohel, for the ohel is considered as a covering in all instances.
What is implied? A samovar that has walls that are a cubit high was placed on its side on staves outside an ohel and its opening was placed immediately next to the wall of the tent. If there is impurity under it, the keilim inside of it are pure. If it was placed next to the wall of a courtyard or the wall of a garden, it does not protect its contents, because these are not the walls of a tent. Therefore any keilim in the container are impure, for they were held above the impurity.", + "If there is a beam that is a handbreadth wide running from wall to wall, there is impurity below it, a pot was hanging from the beam and the beam was touching the entire opening of the pot and covering it, the keilim in the pot are pure. The rationale is that they were saved by the ohel covering them. If the opening of the pot was not covered by the beam, but instead there was some empty space between them, everything in the pot is impure and the pot itself is impure.", + "The following laws apply when there is a cistern in a building, there is impurity in the building, and there are keilim in the cistern. If the cistern was covered with a flat board or a container that can protect its contents from impurity because it has a wall that is a handbreadth high, everything that is in the cistern is pure. If the cistern had a border built around its opening that was a handbreadth above the ground, whether he covered it with a container that can protect from impurity because it has a wall or whether the container did not have a wall, the container protects the contents of the cistern from impurity, because there is a wall of a handbreadth from another source.", + "The following rules apply when a cistern is built inside a building and there is a lamp in it with its flower protruding and covering the opening of the cistern. One placed a container that can protect from impurity in an ohel where a corpse is located over the opening to the cistern and it is resting on the flower of the lamp. We see if the container that can protect from impurity would remain in its position if the lamp was removed. When this is the case, it protects everything that is in the cistern from impurity. The keilim that are between the edge of the container that serves as a cover and the edge of the cistern are pure until the very depths. Even the lamp is pure despite the fact that the edge of the flower is visible between the covering and the cistern. If the container would not remain in position, everything is impure.", + "The following laws apply when a cistern is built inside a house and a container that could protect its contents from ritual impurity was placed over its opening. If there was impurity between the edge of the container and the edge of the cistern or within the cistern, the house is impure. The rationale is that an ohel inside a building does not prevent the spread of impurity, as we explained.
If there was impurity in the house and there is a handbreadth by a handbreadth by a handbreadth of empty space in the cistern, the keilim stored in the walls of the cistern are pure. If not, they are impure.
If the width of the walls of the cistern extends outside the house, they are nevertheless pure. The rationale is that they are not the walls of the house and just as the inside of the cistern is protected from impurity, so too, its walls protect.
We have already explained that an old oven is like all other keilim that convey impurity and is not considered as an ohal. For this reason, it does not protect its contents from ritual impurity unless it is sealed close like other containers that protect their contents. We have already explained that an oven is not considered as a k'li in this context and does serve as an ohel. Therefore it protects its contents from impurity merely by covering them without the cover being sealed close like other ohalim. The covering of an oven is called a serida.", + "The following rules apply when there is impurity in a house and there is an old oven inside a new oven, a serida resting on the new oven and that cover is being supported by the opening of the old oven. We see whether, when the old oven was removed, the cover would fall. If so, it does not protect from impurity and everything inside of it is impure. If the cover would not fall, everything is pure.
When there is a new oven inside an old oven and the serida is resting on the opening of the old oven, if there is less than a handbreadth between the new oven and the cover, everything in the new oven is pure. It is considered as if the covering was resting on its opening.", + "When there is a covering of earthenware that has a border and extends beyond the edge of the oven and the oven is closed with a sealed covering, even if there is impurity under the covering or on top of it, everything above or below the impurity is impure. Nevertheless, the portion opposite the inner space of the oven is pure.
If there is impurity on the covering above the inner space of the oven, the space above it until the heavens is impure. Anything inside of the oven is pure.", + "When there is impurity in a house and an earthenware pot was turned over and placed on the opening of a jug and then clay was smeared on its walls and the jug to seal it close, it protects everything inside of it and everything between it and the edge of the jug from impurity.
If one placed it on the opening of the jug upright and smeared clay around it to seal it, it does not protect it. The rationale is that the pot becomes impure from its inner space and an impure utensil does not protect another utensil from impurity, as we explained." + ], + [ + "The handles of a large earthenware container, the bulges at the bottom of such a container, and the back of its walls do not protect their contents when sealed close in a tent where a corpse is located. If one cut them off, planed them, and made them into containers, they protect their contents if sealed close. The rationale is that the concept of sealing something close applies only to containers.", + "When clay is put into an earthenware container and filled half of it, it does not nullify it from being considered as a container. If keilim are sunk in that clay and the container is sealed close, the contents are protected from impurity.", + "An earthenware container protects its contents from impurity when sealed close unless it is perforated with a hole large enough for a pomegranate to fall through. If it is large, the majority of it must be damaged and open for it to be disqualified.
What is implied? If there was a large container and half was damaged, it was sealed close, including the damaged portion, it protects its contents from impurity even though it is not considered a utensil with regard to impurity. If, however, a container that was sealed close had a hole or a crack and the hole was not closed, it becomes impure and does not protect its contents.
How large must the hole be to disqualify the container? If the container was used for foods, the measure is a hole large enough for olives to fall through. If it was used for liquids, its measure is that the hole must be large enough to enable liquids to seep in when the container is placed in them. If it is used for both these purposes, we rule stringently and if a hole was made that was large enough for liquids to seep in, it does not protect its contents until the hole is closed or reduced in size.", + "The following rules apply when there was an oven in an ohel where a corpse was located. The oven had a covering upon it, it was sealed close, but it was cracked. If the crack was as wide as the opening of the rod of a plow which is a handbreadth in circumference, the oven is impure even though the rod could not be inserted into the oven through the hole, but the hole was equal to its size. If the hole was smaller than this, the oven is pure.
If the covering was cracked to the extent that the rod of a plow could enter, it is impure. If it is less, it protects its contents with a sealed covering. If the crack is round, we do not consider it as if it was long. Instead, the measure is dependent on whether the opening of the rod of a plow could be inserted.", + "The following rules apply when an oven that is sealed close has an eye that was partially closed with clay. If the hole was large enough for a reed to be inserted and taken out while it was burning, the contents of the oven are impure. If the hole is smaller than this, the contents are protected.", + "When an oven has a hole at its side, the size of the hole that causes it to not to be considered as sealed is enough space for a reed to be inserted and taken out even when it was not burning. Similarly, when the clay seal of a jug was perforated, the measure is space for the second joint of a rye stalk to be inserted in the hole. Similarly, when large casks were perforated, the measure is space for the second joint of a reed to be inserted. If they are less than this, they are pure.
When does the above apply? When they were made to store wine. If, however, they were made to store other liquids, a hole of even the slightest size causes them to contract impurity and the fact that they are sealed close is not effective unless the hole was closed. Moreover, even if they were made for wine, the above applies only when they were not perforated by human hands. If, however, they were perforated by human hands, even the slightest hole causes them to contract impurity and they are not protected unless the hole is closed.", + "When a jug that is filled with pure liquids has an earthenware tube in it, it is considered as sealed close. If it is located in an ohel where a corpse is found, the jug and the liquid are pure. The tube is impure, because one end of it is in the jug which is sealed close and the second end is open in the ohel where the corpse is found and it is not closed. Even though it is crooked, this does not cause it to be considered as closed.", + "When a jug that was sealed close had a hole on its side, but that hole was closed by wine dregs, it protects its contents from impurity. If the owner plugged half the hole and the dregs closed the other half, there is an unresolved question whether the contents are protected or not.
If one plugged the hole with a twig, it is not considered as closed unless one smears clay around the sides. If one closed it with two slivers of wood, one must smear clay from the sides and between one sliver and the other. Similarly, if a board was placed over the opening to an oven and one smeared clay at the sides, it is protected from impurity. If there were two boards, one must smear clay from the sides and between one board and the other. If, however, one joined the boards together with wooden pegs or the like or with cork, it is not necessary to smear clay in the middle.
With what can a jug be sealed close? With lime, clay, gypsum, pitch, wax, mud, filth, mortar, or any substance that can be smeared. We do not seal with tin or lead, because it will not be a seal, nor will it close the container tightly. A plump fig that was not prepared to contract ritual impurity may be used as a seal. This also applies with regard to a dough that was kneaded with fruit juice so that it will not become impure. These qualifications are necessary, because an impure object cannot intervene in the face of impurity.", + "When the covering of a jug has become loose, even when it does not slip off, it no longer protects the contents, for it is not considered as sealed.
When a rubber ball or strands tied together were placed on a jug and clay was smeared at the sides, it does not protect the contents unless clay was smeared on the entire ball or collection of strands from below upward. Similar concepts apply with regard to a patch of cloth that was tied to a container. If a covering of paper or leather was tied over a container with string, it protects the contents if one merely smeared clay at the sides.", + "When a jug was enwrapped in a container made from the skin of a fish or from paper and it was tied close from below, the contents are protected. If it was not tied, it does not protect the contents, even if clay was smeared at the sides.", + "The following rules apply when there was a jug that was covered with pitch from the inside and then a portion of the clay of the jug was peeled off, but the pitch remained standing. If one placed a covering on the pitch and pressed it down until it became attached to the pitch and thus the pitch was standing between the covering and the base of the jug, its contents are protected.
Similar concepts apply with regard to a container used for fish brine or the like. If one of the substances that is smeared as insulation for the container was standing between the covering and the container like a border, since everything was attached together, the contents are protected." + ], + [ + "When the contents of any implement that is sealed close are protected from impurity, all of the contents are protected: food, liquids, clothes, and keilim that can be purified in a mikveh.
This is the Scriptural Law. According to Rabbinic Law, however, earthenware containers which are sealed close protect only foods, liquids, and other earthenware containers inside of it. If, however, keilim that can be purified in a mikveh or garments were in an earthenware container that was sealed close, they are impure.
Why did the Sages decree that they do not protect everything like other containers that protect their contents from impurity? Because the other containers that protect their contents do not contract impurity and earthenware containers do contract impurity. An impure container does not intervene in the face of impurity and all of the containers of the common people can be assumed to be ritually impure, as will be explained.
Why did the Sages not decree: an earthenware container of a common person does not protect anything from impurity, but a container belong to a chaver does protect everything because it is pure? Because a common person does not consider himself as impure. He will say: Since an earthenware container that is sealed close protects all its contents, there is no difference between me and a chaver. Therefore the Sages decreed that the seal should not protect everything.
Why did they say that it protects food, liquids, and earthenware containers from impurity? Because [regardless] these three types of entities are impure because they come from a common person – before they were located in an ohel where a corpse is located or after they had been located in such a place – [although they were in a container] that was sealed closed. A chaver will never borrow food, liquids, or earthenware containers from a common person except under the assumption that they are impure, for these entities can never be purified. Thus a stumbling block will never arise.
A chaver will, however, borrow keilim that can be purified in a mikveh from a common person. He will immerse them in a mikveh to purify them from the impurity they contracted from being touched by a common person, leave them until the evening and then use them for pure food. Therefore our Sages were concerned that a chaver will borrow keilim that can be purified in a mikveh from a common person that were sealed close in one of his earthenware containers. Now the common person will think that this container was protected, when in truth it has contracted the impurity that lasts seven days. The chaver will immerse these containers, leave them until the evening and then use them for pure food. Thus a stumbling block will arise. This is the reason it was decreed that sealing an earthenware container close would not protect the keilim that can be purified in a mikveh which were in it.", + "When a person was placed inside a cask that was sealed close, he is pure. This applies even if the cask was made a covering for a grave. It appears to me that the Sages did not decree that an earthenware container sealed close would not protect a person from impurity, because it is an infrequent situation. And our Sages did not enact decrees concerning infrequent situations.", + "The word of common people is accepted with regard to a container used for the ashes of the red heifer or sacred foods if they say they are pure. The rationale is that even common people are very careful in this regard. Therefore all entities are protected from impurity when their container is sealed close even though it is of earthenware.", + "The following laws apply when there is an aperture between a home and a loft and there is an earthenware dish placed over the aperture. If the dish has a hole large enough to allow liquids to seep in, the dish is impure, but the loft is pure.
If the dish is intact, everything in the loft - food, liquids, and earthenware containers - is pure, but a person and keilim that can be purified in a mikveh are impure, for an earthenware container intervenes in the face of impurity only for food, liquids, and earthenware containers. Everything in the loft is pure, as if it is in an earthenware container that is sealed close. A person in the loft was deemed impure, because that is a common situation. Therefore if there was a metal container or the like filled with liquids in this loft, the container contracts the impurity that lasts seven days, but the liquids are pure.
If there was a woman kneading dough in a wooden kneading trough in this loft, the woman and the kneading trough contract the impurity that lasts seven days, but the dough is pure as long as the woman is kneading it. If she ceased and then touched it again, she imparts impurity to it. Similarly, if one moved the dough or the liquids to another one of the keilim that can be purified in a mikveh that were in the loft, they become impure due to contact with the other container.
If the k'li covering the aperture was one that was not susceptible to impurity and which protect their contents when sealed close, as we explained, in which instance, contact with a common person does not render them impure, or the k'li was an earthenware container that was pure and intended to be used for the ashes of the red heifer or for consecrated foods – in which instance everyone's word is accepted with regard to their purity – it protects everything in the loft. If there was a tent erected in the loft and a portion of its fabric was draped over the aperture between the house and the loft, it protects [everything in the loft] even though its roof is not positioned over the loft. [The rationale is that] a tent protects when it covers, as we explained." + ], + [ + "The following rules apply when one divided a house by making a barrier of pure earthenware jugs from the ground until the roof and there is impurity in one side of the house. If the opening of the jugs was facing the pure side of the house, they protect the house from the spread of impurity. If the openings were facing the impurity, they do not protect it. If, when they were facing the impurity, he applied mud to them, whether from the inside, or the outside, we see whether the mud is able to stand on its own or not. If it can, it protects the house from impurity. If not, it does not and the entire house is considered as one ohel.", + "The following rules apply when a house was divided in two with boards or with curtains, whether it was divided lengthwise or widthwise or facing the ceiling. If there was impurity in the remainder of the house, keilim between the partition and the wall or between the partition and the ceiling are pure. If there is impurity between the partition and the wall or between the partition and the ceiling, the keilim in the house are impure, because the partition does not prevent the impurity from departing and imparting impurity, as we explained with regard to a tent inside a house.
The following laws apply when there are keilim in the midst of the thickness of the partition itself, whether the impurity was within the area set off by the partition or within the house. If the place where the keilim were located was a handbreadth by a handbreadth or more, the keilim are impure. If it is smaller than that, they are pure. We have already explained the laws pertaining to a house that was divided horizontally.", + "The following rules apply when there is a house that is filled with straw and there is not a cubic handbreadth of space between the straw and the ceiling. If there is impurity in the inner portion of the house, whether within the straw or in the space between the straw and the ceiling, all of the keilim that are opposite the space through which the impurity will depart in the entire open space of the entranceway are impure.
The following laws apply if the impurity was outside the straw, anywhere in the open space of the entranceway. If there are keilim within the straw and there is a handbreadth by a handbreadth by a handbreadth of open space, they are pure. If not, they are impure. If there is a cubic handbreadth of space between the straw and the ceiling, the keilim are impure regardless, for the straw does not intervene, because we can assume that the person's intention is to remove the straw.", + "When there is a wall between two houses and there is impurity in the midst of the wall, the house that is closest to the impurity is impure, while that which is closest to purity is pure. If the impurity was equidistant from them, they are both impure.
The following rules apply when the impurity was in one of the houses and the keilim were in the midst of the wall. If the keilim were located from the center towards the impurity, they are impure; from the center towards the pure side, they are pure. If they are equidistant, they are impure.
Similar principles apply when there is a ceiling between a house and a loft and there is impurity in the ceiling. If it was located from the center downward, the house is impure and the loft is pure; from the center, upward, the loft is impure and the house is pure. If it is equidistant from them, they are both impure.
When there is impurity in either the house or the loft and there were keilim in the ceiling, if the keilim were located from the center towards the impurity, they are impure; from the center towards the pure side, they are pure. If they are equidistant, they are impure.
The following rules apply if the ceiling had nothing but open space above it and there was impurity in it. If the impurity was located from the center downward, the house is impure and a person standing on the roof - even if he is directly above the impurity - is pure, because the impurity spreads throughout the house. If the impurity was located from the center upward, the house is pure and a person standing on the roof directly above the impurity is impure. If the impurity was in the center of the ceiling, the house is impure and a person standing on the roof directly above the impurity is impure, because it is impossible to make an exact calculation.", + "Similarly, if there is a wall that serves a house, it is considered as half and half.
What is implied? There is a wall that has open space on one side. The roof of the house is supported by the wall, but does not rest on the wall and there is impurity flush inside the wall. If the impurity is from the halfway point of the wall inward, the house is impure. A person standing on top of the wall is pure like someone standing on the roof of the house.
If the impurity is from the halfway point outward, the house is pure. A person standing on top of the wall, above the impurity is impure, because the impurity did not spread out in the house. If the impurity was in the center of the wall, the house is impure, but a person standing above it is pure, because the impurity spread within the house.
If one removed part of the wall from the inside or added to the outer portion of the wall until the impurity was in the inner half of the wall, the house is impure. If he removed part of the wall from the outside or added to the thickness of the inner portion of the wall until the impurity was in the outer half of the wall, the house is pure. If the impurity was placed on the top of the wall, even if it is on the inside, the house is pure.", + "When there is a structure that serves a wall, as long as there is part of the wall as thin as a garlic peel, the structure is considered as separate from the wall.
What is implied? A person dug two burial vaults or two burial caves one next to the other and thus there were two structures dug into the ground with a wall dividing between them. If there is impurity in the structures and keilim in the wall, as long as there is a portion of the wall as thin as a garlic peel covering them, they are pure. If there is impurity in the wall and keilim in the structures, if it is covered by a portion of the wall as thin as a garlic peel, they are pure.
Thus we can learn the following general principles: When there is a wall that was built from building materials, the status of the house depends on the half of the wall in which the impurity is located. When the wall was made of stone or of the thickness of the earth when one dug from either side, as long as there is part of the wall as thin as a garlic peel, the structure is considered as separate from the wall.", + "When half of the thickness of a wall was constructed and half was a rock, the status of the house depends on the half of the wall in which the impurity is located.", + "If there was impurity between the beams of the roof of a house, even if there is only a portion of a board as thin as as a garlic peel under it, the house is pure. We consider the impurity as if it were flush in the earth and only the area directly below it or directly above it is impure. If there is a handbreadth by a handbreadth of empty space in its place, everything is impure. Similarly, if the impurity could be seen from the house, the house is impure regardless.
If there are two entrances, one on top of the other, and there is impurity in the wall between them, if it can be seen from one of them, that entrance is impure and the other is pure. If not, their status depends on the half of the wall in which the impurity is located." + ], + [ + "If there is a pillar standing in a house and impurity is flush under it, the impurity pierces through and ascends and pierces through and descends. It imparts impurity only to entities that are directly above or below the impurity. If there is a flower, projecting from the pillar and there are keilim under the flower, the keilim are pure. Impurity is imparted only to the entities under or above the impurity.", + "If there is open space a handbreadth by a handbreadth and a handbreadth high in the pillar where the impurity is located, it is considered as a closed grave and it imparts impurity to all its surroundings. The entire house is impure because it is standing over a grave.", + "When there is impurity in a wall and it is an open space a handbreadth by a handbreadth and a handbreadth high, all of the stories built on this wall - even ten - are impure. The rationale is that the wall is considered a closed grave until its highest point. It is the wall for these upper stories and every upper storey is considered to be an ohel over the grave.
If he built a structure next to that wall on one side and another structure next to the wall on the other side and a second storey that spans both those structures and thus the top of the impure wall is in the middle of the floor of the second storey, the second storey is impure because it serves as an ohel over a grave. A third storey built over it is pure, because they are one on top of the other and the impure wall is not one of the walls of this storey.", + "The following rules apply when there is a large hole in the thickness of a wall which people would employ for functional purposes which was called a pardisek. If there was impurity within it and it had closed doors, the house is pure. If there is impurity flush in its floor, its wall, or its roof, we consider the entire hole as if it is a solid mass and see where the impurity is located. If it is located in the inner portion of the thickness of the wall, the house is impure. If it is in the outer portion, the house is pure. If it is in the exact center, the house is impure.", + "If there are two pardiskin - one next to the other or one on top of the other - and there is impurity located in one of them and it is opened, it and the house are impure, but the other one is pure. If there was impurity flush in the walls of the building, we consider the pardiskin as if they were a solid mass and the status of the house depends on the half of the wall in which the impurity is located.", + "If there is an olive-sized portion of a corpse attached to the doorstep of the house from the outside, the house is pure. If it was flush below the doorstep, the status of the house depends on the half of the doorstep in which the impurity is located. If it is attached to the lintel, the house is impure.", + "When a dog ate the flesh of a corpse, died within three days of doing so, and was lying on the doorstep of a house, we consider the place where the impurity is located in his body. If it is under the lintel and inward, the house is impure. If it is beyond the lintel and outward, the house is pure.", + "The following laws apply when the fetus being carried by a woman dies in her womb. If its head has reached the size of a weaving needle, when her womb opens and the head becomes visible, the house becomes impure because of the fetus even if it has not emerged yet.", + "If a woman was in the midst of labor and went from one house to another and miscarried in the second house, the first house is still impure because of a doubt: perhaps the head of the fetus had emerged while she was there.
When does the above apply? When its head did not reach the size of a weaving needle. If, however, its head reached the size of a weaving needle, the first house is pure. For if her womb had opened to that degree, she would not be able to walk unsupported. Therefore if she was being supported by her shoulders and taken from one house to the other, the first is impure because of a doubt, even though its head reached the size of a weaving needle.", + "When a woman discharged a placenta, the house in which she was located is certainly impure. It can be presumed that there is no placenta without a fetus.", + "The following laws apply when a woman gave birth to two children, one a viable birth and the other, stillborn. If the stillborn child emerged first, the living child is pure, because he did not touch the stillborn child after he emerged into the world. If the living child emerged first, he is impure, because it is impossible that the stillborn child did not touch him, for the stillborn tumbles out after the living child like a stone that does not have any vitality and cannot hold itself back.", + "When a woman discharges a stillborn infant - even, as we explained, a tiny fetus - she contracts the impurity that lasts seven days. If the fetus dies within her womb and the midwife extended her hand inside the womb and touched it, the midwife contracts the impurity that lasts seven days, but the woman is pure until the fetus emerges.
The impurity of the midwife is a Rabbinical decree, instituted since she may have touched the fetus after it emerged into the vaginal channel. According to Scriptural Law, touching a hidden portion of the body is not considered as touching. Since the fetus is in the mother's inner organs, anyone who touches it is pure. Similar laws apply to one who swallowed an impure ring and then swallowed a pure ring. Although the two certainly touched each other in his digestive system, this is not considered as touch. The impure one is considered as impure and the pure one, as pure." + ] + ], + "versions": [ + [ + "Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007", + "https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI" + ] + ], + "heTitle": "משנה תורה, הלכות טומאת מת", + "categories": [ + "Halakhah", + "Mishneh Torah", + "Sefer Taharah" + ], + "sectionNames": [ + "Chapter", + "Halakhah" + ] +} \ No newline at end of file