diff --git "a/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Taharah/Mishneh Torah, Vessels/English/merged.json" "b/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Taharah/Mishneh Torah, Vessels/English/merged.json" new file mode 100644--- /dev/null +++ "b/json/Halakhah/Mishneh Torah/Sefer Taharah/Mishneh Torah, Vessels/English/merged.json" @@ -0,0 +1,489 @@ +{ + "title": "Mishneh Torah, Vessels", + "language": "en", + "versionTitle": "merged", + "versionSource": "https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah,_Vessels", + "text": [ + [ + "There are seven types of keilim that are susceptible to impurity according to Scriptural Law. They are: clothes, keilim from sackcloth, leather keilim, keilim made from bone, metal keilim, wooden keilim, and earthenware keilim. For Leviticus 11:32 states: \"From all wooden implements, garments, leather articles, or sackcloth.\" And with regard to metal utensils, Numbers 31:22 states: \"But the gold and the silver....\" And with regard to earthenware utensils, Leviticus 11:33 states: \"And every earthenware container into whose inner space one of them will fall, everything inside of it will contract impurity and the container should be broken.\"", + "According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that the Torah's statement Numbers 31:20: \"And anything made from goats\" includes keilim made from the horns, hooves, and bones of goats. The same applies to keilim made from the body parts of other domesticated and undomesticated animals. keilim made from the bones of fowl, by contrast, are not susceptible to impurity with the sole exception of keilim made from the wings of an osprey and an ostrich egg that was coated. Since they resemble bones, they are susceptible to ritual impurity as a bone implement is. It appears to me that their impurity is of Rabbinic origin.", + "keilim that are fashioned from the bones or the hide of sea-animals are pure. Everything from the sea is pure and is not susceptible to any form of impurity, including the impurity stemming from articles that contracted impurity from a zav. Even if one weaves a garment with \"wool\" growing in the sea, it is not susceptible to impurity.
This is implied by the phrase: \"garments or leather articles.\" According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught \"Just as it is only a garment that comes from plants that grow on the earth that is susceptible to ritual impurity, so too, only leather keilim that come from plants that grow on the earth are susceptible to ritual impurity.
The following law applies if one connected fabric from plants that grow in the sea with fabric from plants that grow on the earth, even if only by a thread or a fringe. If they were connected in a way that they are considered a single entity with regard to ritual impurity, i.e., if one became impure, the other became impure, the entire entity becomes susceptible to impurity.", + "It appears to me that utensils made from the skin of a fowl are not susceptible to impurity like its bones. One might object, saying: Such skin is acceptable to have tefillin written upon it like the hide of a domesticated or undomesticated animal. [That objection can be refuted as follows:] The skin of a fish is not susceptible to ritual impurity. [Nevertheless,] were it not for its filth which never ceases, it would be acceptable to be used for tefillin. Thus it is derived that even an entity that is not susceptible to ritual impurity is acceptable to be used for tefillin if it is not characterized by filth.", + "Glass keilim are not susceptible to ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law. Our Sages decreed that they would be susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that since, at the outset, they are made from sand like earthenware utensils, they are considered as earthenware utensils. Since their inside can be seen like their outside, the Sages did not decree that they would contract impurity from their inner space. Instead, the impurity must touch them, whether on the inside or the outside, as is true with regard to metal utensils. They did not establish this decree with regard to flat glass keilim, only those that serve as containers. Once such containers contract impurity, they cannot be purified in a mikveh. Terumah and sacrificial food is not burnt after contact with them, for it was decreed only that their state would be held in abeyance.", + "Utensils made from animal turds, stone, or earth are always pure. They are not susceptible to any form of impurity, nor to the impurity that stems from articles that contracted impurity from a zav, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor according to Rabbinic Law, neither flat keilim, nor containers.", + "When an elephant swallows thin branches and then excretes them as feces, if one fashions utensils from them, their status is unresolved. It was not determined whether they are considered as utensils made from feces or utensils made from wood as they would have been had they not been swallowed. When, however, a basket that had contracted impurity was swallowed by an elephant and was excreted as feces, it remains impure.", + "Flat earthenware utensils, e.g., a lamp, a chair, a table, or the like made of earthenware are not susceptible to any of the types of impurity, nor to the impurity that stems from articles that contracted impurity from a zav, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor according to Rabbinic Law, as implied by the phrase, Leviticus 11:33: \"Into whose inner space one of them will fall.\" One can infer that any earthenware utensil that has a receptacle is susceptible to impurity. If it does not have a receptacle, it is pure.", + "Metal keilim, whether flat, like knives or scissors, or containers like pots or kettles, are all susceptible to ritual impurity, as implied by Numbers 31:23: \"Any entity that will pass through fire,\" i.e., whether a container or a flat implement. Even a chest or a drawer, or the like that are made from metal and which contain 40 se'ah of liquid measure or more are susceptible to ritual impurity, as implied by the phrase: \"Any entity that will pass through fire.\"", + "Containers made from wood, leather, or bone, e.g., a kneading trough, a drinking pouch, or the like, are susceptible to ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law. Keilim made from wood, leather, or bone that are flat, e.g., tablets, a chair, a leather mat on which one eats, and the like, by contrast, are susceptible to ritual impurity only according to Rabbinic Law, as implied by the phrase: \"From all wooden keilim... or sackcloth.\" According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught: \"Just as the sackcloth which is susceptible to ritual impurity has a receptacle, so too, keilim made from all the other substances mentioned must have a receptacle. keilim made from bone are governed by the same laws as those made from wood in all matters.
When does the statement that flat utensils made from these substances are susceptible to impurity only according to Rabbinic Law apply? With regard to all impurities other than the impurity contracted from a support that contracted impurity from a zav. With regard to the impurity resulting from a support that contracted impurity from a zav or others like him, they contract impurity according to Scriptural Law, as implied by Leviticus 15:4: \"Any surface on which one lies upon which a zav will lie.\" This includes everything made to lie upon or ride upon, as we explained. Similarly, glass keilim made to lie upon contract impurity according to Rabbinic Law.", + "Any article that is woven, whether from wool, from linen, hemp, silk, or other fabrics that grow on land, is called a garment with regard to impurity. Felt is like a garment with regard to all matters.", + "Sackcloth refers to threads of hair that are braided like a chain or woven like garments, whether they are made from goats' hair, camels' wool, the hairs of a tail of a horse or cow or the like. This applies whether they are woven like sacks or braided like a band for donkeys or the like. Ropes or strands, whether they are spun from goats' hair or from wool or linen are not susceptible to ritual impurity on their own accord.", + "All utensils that are fashioned from reeds, from willow-branches, from bulrushes, from date branches, from leaves and branches, the bark of the tree, and grasses, e.g., small baskets, large baskets, rugs, or mats are all considered as wooden utensils, for anything that grows from the earth is considered as wood.
The same laws that govern earthenware utensils govern sandstone utensils. Any utensil that is made from earth or sand and is then burnt in a kiln is considered as an earthenware utensil. An oven, a range, a stove or the like, i.e., structures in which food is baked or cooked, all are susceptible to ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law. The laws governing their impurity are the same as those governing that of an earthenware utensil." + ], + [ + "Whenever a person makes a receptacle, it is susceptible to impurity according to Scriptural Law regardless of its size. There is no minimum measure for a receptacle, provided it is made from a lasting substance that will be maintained.
What is implied? When a person makes a utensil from a hide that was not processed at all, from paper, even though the paper itself is not susceptible to impurity, or from the shells of pomegranates, nuts, or acorns, even if children hollowed out the shells to measure earth or they were prepared to be used for scales, the utensils are susceptible to ritual impurity. The rationale is that the deeds of a child, a deafmute, a mentally or emotionally compromised person and a minor are halachically significant, although their intent is not halachically significant.
If, however, one makes a utensil from a dried turnip, esrog, or squash, hollowing them out to measure with them or the like, they are pure, for it is impossible that they will last longer than a short while.", + "All of the following - the horizontal rod of a scale and a leveling rod that have a receptacle where metal can be place, a peddler's pole that has a receptacle where coins can be stored, a wooden pole that has a place where water is stored, a staff that has a receptacle for a mezuzah or a place for a pearl, a wooden sharpener that has a receptacle for oil, a wooden writing tablet that has a receptacle for wax - are susceptible to ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law, because they have a receptacle, even though it may be of the smallest size.
According to Scriptural Law, it is only the receptacle that these keilim contain and the part of the k'li that serves the receptacle and that the receptacle requires that is susceptible to impurity. The remainder of a flat k'li that is not necessary for the receptacle, is pure according to Scriptural Law. It is susceptible to impurity according to Rabbinic Law, as we explained.", + "When a receptacle is intended to be filled, it is not considered as a receptacle. What is implied? When a receptacle is hollowed out from a block of wood and then a metal anvil is inserted into it, if it is a blacksmith's, it is not susceptible to ritual impurity. Although it has a receptacle, it was made to be filled. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
If the anvil was for jewelers, the k'li is susceptible to ritual impurity, because whenever they desire, they lift up the iron and collect the filings of gold and silver that collect there, under the anvil. Thus the hollow is meant to serve as a receptacle. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "When a cup is carved below the legs of beds, chests, and the like, even though it is a receptacle, it is pure. It is considered as if it does not have a receptacle, because it is not intended to collect anything, but rather to support furniture.
A hollow piece of straw is susceptible to impurity like any wooden k'li that is susceptible to impurity even if it can only take in one drop. A hollow reed is not susceptible to impurity until all the white sap in it is removed. If it was not cut for the sake of taking in other substances, it is considered like other flat wooden keilim. The hollow stems of gall and the like are not considered as keilim, but rather as foods.", + "When one cuts a straw, inserted a mezuzah inside of it, and then placed it inside a wall, it is susceptible to impurity even if he placed it in the wall with its open part pointed downward. If he affixed it to the wall, affixing it with its open part pointed upward, it is susceptible to impurity. If the open part is pointed downward, it is pure.
Should one place the straw in the wall and then insert the mezuzah inside, if the open part was pointing upward, it is susceptible to impurity. If the open part is pointing downward, it is pure. If he affixed it to the wall, even if its open part is pointing upward, it is pure.", + "The following laws apply to a k'li that is made by weaving pieces of wood or sh'am for the purpose of spreading clothes over it while incense is burned below it so that they become fragrant. If it was made like a beehive that has no base, it is pure. if it has an opening where a covering can be placed, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "A metal foot-covering for an animal is impure. If it is made from sh'am, it is pure, because that is not considered as a receptacle.", + "When a person bundles a pearl in a hide and, after he removes it, a hollow is left, it is susceptible to impurity until it is smoothed out. For any container is considered a receptacle if it can hold even the slightest amount and, in the above instance, something resembling a small pocket is left. If, however, one bundles coins in a hide, it is not susceptible to impurity, because such a bundle does not have the form of container at all." + ], + [ + "Any wooden k'li that is made with the intent that it remain in one place, even though it is made to contain only a small amount, is not susceptible to ritual impurity, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor according to Rabbinic Law. Conversely, any wooden k'li that is intended to be carried whether full or empty like a sack - even if it holds 100 se'ah and it has a base, since it is not intended to remain in one place - it is susceptible to ritual impurity according to Scriptural Law like other receptacles.
Whenever a k'li's use is undefined, if it has a base to rest upon on the ground so that it is not easily rolled and it could hold 40 se'ah of liquid measure which equals two kor in dry measure, it is not susceptible to impurity at all, neither according to Scriptural Law nor Rabbinic Law, because it can be assumed that it is not intended to be moved.
These principles are part of our received tradition. According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that just as a sack is carried whether full or empty, so too, a wooden implement is not susceptible to impurity unless it would be carried full or empty. This excludes a wooden implement that is intended to remain in one place.", + "Keilim that are made to remain in one place, e.g., a chest, a counter, a closet, a bee-hive like container made of reeds, a reservoir of drinking water for a large ship, and the like, if they contain 40 se'ah, they are not susceptible to ritual impurity.
The following are wooden keilim that are intended to be moved even when they are full: a large barrel of water that is placed on a wagon, a food trolley of kings, a leather maker's trough, the water reservoir of a small ship that cannot sail on a large sea, and a coffin. Even though all of these five types of wooden keilim contain more than 40 se'ah, they are susceptible to impurity, because initially they were made to be carried while full.
It can be assumed that all other wooden containers that are made to hold 40 se'ah and that have a base are not meant to be carried when full. Therefore they are not susceptible to ritual impurity. Similarly, containers made of bone or leather that hold 40 se'ah of liquid measure are not susceptible to impurity unless they were initially made to be carried when they were full.", + "Large chests, counters, and closets of glass are pure. Other glass containers, even if they hold more than 40 se'ah, are susceptible to ritual impurity. This is an added stringency that applies to glass keilim over wooden keilim.", + "Whenever the volume of a container is one cubit by one cubit with a height of three cubits, it will contain 40 se'ah of liquid measure. When the container is measured, it is measured from the outside. If it is one cubit by one cubit with a height of three cubits, it is pure even though its inner space is less than that. For the thickness of the walls does not reduce its size. The breadth of its legs and the breadth of its border, if it has one, is not included in its measure.", + "If there was a drawer in a small counter, e.g., a drawer in a chest, it is not included in the measure of its volume if it can be removed. It is not considered as attached to it, nor is it protected from impurity by it in a shelter that is impure due to the presence of a human corpse. If it cannot be removed, it is measured with it and they are considered as one utensil.", + "When a large container has a domed cover, if it is permanently affixed to it, it is included in its measurement. If it is not permanently affixed, it is not. If it has drawers that open to the inside, they are measured with it. If they open to the outside, they are not measured with it.", + "Even though a wooden container does not hold 40 se'ah when standing upright, if it could hold such an amount when leaned on its side or supported by another entity, since it is ultimately capable of holding more than 40 se'ah, it is pure.", + "When one of the legs of a chest, a counter, or a closet was removed - even though it was not perforated and thus they can still serve as containers - they are pure. The rationale is that they still have a base and it can be assumed that the intent is still that they will not be moved like they were originally." + ], + [ + "There are three categories of wooden implements that are not intended to serve as containers:
a) Any wooden implement that is made solely for human use, e.g., a ladder. It is pure. It is not susceptible to impurity at all, nor did our Sages decree that it should be included among the implements susceptible to impurity.
b) Any wooden implement that is made to be used for other implements and by a human, e.g., a table, a counter-top, a bed and the like. They are susceptible to ritual impurity. How is it known that they serve both a person and his accessories? Because one places plates on the table, cups on the counter-top, and spreads on the bed.
c) Any wooden implement that is made solely for the use of implements; thus it serves entities that serve man. If it only serves other implements during the time work is being performed with them, it is entirely pure, e.g., a wooden candelabrum that serves a lamp while it burns.
Similar laws apply to an implement placed under an implement while it is being used and all molds. If, however, it serves implements during the time work is being performed with them and when work is not being performed with them, they are susceptible to ritual impurity. Examples of such implements are: the covering for a box and the like; a sheath for a sword, a knife, a spear, scissors, a razor, a spoon used for blue eye paint, or a stylus used to write; a well used to store blue eye paint; a case for a writing tablet or a leather placemat, a carrier for arrows, a case for wide arrows, and a case for flutes. All of these and anything like them are susceptible to impurity even though they are only used to serve other implements. The rationale is that they are necessary for the implements both at the time work is being performed with them and also when work is not being performed with them.
There are, by contrast, other somewhat similar implements that are pure, for example: the covering for a wardrobe, the covering for a chest, the covering for a basket, a carpenter's press, a chair placed under a chest or a domed covering for it, the mold over which a leather covering for a Torah scroll is made, a wooden covering for a door bolt, or the covering for a latch or a mezuzah, a case for lyres and harps, a bust on which the makers of turbans wrap that head-covering, a mold on which tefillin are made, a wooden horse used by a singer, rhythm sticks used by mourners, a sun-shield of a poor man, support beams for a bed, the pillars of a bed, and a board used as a support for a bed. All of these and implements like them are pure, because they serve other implements only when they are being used.", + "With regard to the headboard of a bed: if it is capped and has legs that are connected to the bed, it contracts impurity together with the bed, because it is placed at the head of the bed and it is considered as one of its components. If it was placed on two of the bedposts, and thus it is higher than the bed, even though the headboard is tied to the bed with cords, since it does not have feet, it is pure. The rationale is that the headboard only serves other implements at the time work is being performed with them, like the hanging boards of the Levites, upon which they would hang their harps and their instruments, which are pure.", + "A press used by shoemakers over which leather is pulled tightly is pure, because he places the stone in the hollow inside of it and uses it. Thus it is made to serve implements only at the time work is being performed with it. It does not contract impurity because of its receptacle, because the hollow within it is meant to be filled with a stone.", + "The coating of a bed is pure. Similarly, any ornamental covering - whether it is made from wood, bone, leather, or metal - is pure. This concept is derived from Leviticus 11:32 which states \"with which work will be performed with them.\" This excludes the ornamental covering of implements.
Similarly, a wooden or bone implement that has a receptacle, but which was plated with metal is pure and it is not susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that the plating causes the implement itself to be considered insignificant and the plating itself is pure, as explained.", + "The following rules apply when a person makes a utensil partially of wood and partially of metal. If the wood serves the metal, it is susceptible to impurity. If the metal serves the wood, everything is pure.
What is implied? If a key was made of wood and its teeth - or even one of its teeth - were metal, it is susceptible to impurity. If it was metal and its teeth, wood, everything is pure.", + "If a ring is made of metal and its signet is of coral, it is susceptible to impurity. If it was made of coral and its signet was of metal, it is not susceptible to impurity.", + "When there is a tooth from a key or a signet of metal, it is susceptible to impurity independently if it was not connected to wood. Similarly, if one of the wooden teeth of a pitchfork, a farming prong, a winnow or a comb for a girl's head was removed and replaced by a metal one, the implements are susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "When a metal projection shaped like a pomegranate was placed on a wooden staff to use as a handle, it is not susceptible to ritual impurity. If the staff was made with a metal cap so that the earth would not destroy the wood, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "Similarly, if spikes were affixed to a stick to use as a weapon, it is susceptible to ritual impurity, for the wood is serving the metal. If they were placed there for decorative purposes, it is not susceptible to ritual impurity, for the metal is serving the wood.", + "Similarly, if a tube of metal was affixed to a staff or a door for decorative purposes, it is pure. Similar principles apply in all analogous situations involving other implements." + ], + [ + "No keilim are susceptible to ritual impurity until the work involved in fashioning them is completed. When do wooden keilim become susceptible to ritual impurity? A bed and a cradle, when they are rubbed with fish skin. If one decided not to rub them, they become susceptible to impurity when they are fashioned.
Wooden baskets are considered as completed when their borders are sealed and the ends of the branches and small pieces of wood that emerge over the rim of the basket are trimmed. If the baskets were made of palm leaves, they are susceptible to impurity even though one did not trim the ends of the leaves on the inside, because they are left like that. A hanging basket is considered as completed when its border is sealed, the ends of the branches are trimmed, and the loop on which it hangs is completed. A basket for cups or for jugs is susceptible to impurity even though the leaves were not cut off on the inside of the basket. Wicker servers and reed bowls become susceptible to impurity when their borders are sealed and the branches that stick out are cut off.
Large wicker serving trays and containers become susceptible to impurity when two circles are wound around their width. A sifter, a sieve, or a weighing pan become susceptible to impurity when one circle is wound around their width. A large basket becomes susceptible to impurity when two circles are wound around their width. A long, narrow basket becomes susceptible to impurity when one circle is wound around its width. Even though the walls of these baskets are not completed, they become susceptible to ritual impurity, because they have already become fit for the purpose for which they were fashioned and they already have taken on the form of that utensil. To what can the matter be compared? To a garment that has been partially woven.
The task of fashioning a mat is completed when the long leaves from which it is made are trimmed. All keilim made from thin shoots of wood do not become susceptible to impurity until their borders are sealed. Unfinished wooden keilim become susceptible to impurity when the keilim are fashioned into their desired shape even though in the future one will paint designs onto them with dye, even them with a compass, improve their appearance with a plane, to perform similar tasks. Although they are still unfinished, since there is no need to make engravings and their shape has been hewn out, they are susceptible to impurity.
All unfinished wooden keilim become susceptible to impurity except those made from boxwood, because a k'li made from such wood is not considered as a k'li until it has been finished. It appears to me that keilim made of bone are like those made of boxwood and unfinished keilim made from bone are not susceptible to ritual impurity.
A wooden object that has not been formed into a k'li is not susceptible to ritual impurity even though it is being used as a k'li. Long wooden trays used by bakers upon which loaves are arranged while they are still dough are susceptible to ritual impurity, because they are considered to have the shape of a k'li. Those used by ordinary private persons are not susceptible to impurity. If, however, they were painted with red dye, saffron, or the like, they are susceptible to impurity, because they have been given the form of a k'li.
A baker's accessory in which water used to daub the dough is placed is impure. Those used by ordinary private persons are pure. If a private person made a rim around its four sides, it is susceptible to impurity. If the rim is broken down on one side, it is pure. The board on which loaves are arranged is susceptible to impurity. The container into which the sifters of flour would sift flour is susceptible to impurity. That used by ordinary private persons is pure.
A winnowing shovel for beans is susceptible to impurity. One used for gathering kernels into a storehouse is pure. One used for gathering wastes from the vat is susceptible to impurity. One used for gathering grain into a grainheap is pure. This is the general principle: A k'li made to serve as a receptacle is susceptible to impurity. If it is made to gather items together, it is pure.", + "All loops are pure with the exception of the loops for a sifter of flour makers, the loop for a sieve used in granaries, the loop for a handheld sickle, and the loop for a staff used by inspectors because they are of assistance when work is being performed. This is the general principle: Anything made to be of assistance at the time work is being performed is susceptible to impurity. If it only serves as a hanger for the k'li, it is pure.", + "Lyres of singers are susceptible to ritual impurity, but the lyres of the Levites that were used to play in the Temple were pure. A guitar, a standing harp, and a drum are susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "A trap for moles is susceptible to ritual impurity; one for mice is pure. The rationale is that it does not have a receptacle and it is not made in the form of a k'li.", + "A basket that is woven from branches in which figs are placed and the like are susceptible to ritual impurity. Those which are woven into the form of a large silo where wheat is stored are pure, because they do not have the form of a k'li.", + "When leaves are woven like a divider around produce, they are pure. If, however, one made a divider from twigs, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "With regard to a pocket made of palm branches into which fresh dates and the like are placed: if one places fruit inside of it and removes it from it, it is susceptible to ritual impurity. If one cannot take the fruit stored in it unless he tears it or undoes it or one intends to eat the fruit inside of it and cast away the pocket, it is pure.
Similarly, a horn that is used and then discarded is not susceptible to impurity. If one thinks of using it as a utensil, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "A ram's horn is not susceptible to ritual impurity. If it was cut to be used as a useful k'li, it is susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "The following rules apply when a bowl was permanently affixed to a chest, counter, or closet. If it is affixed in a way that it still serves as a container, it is susceptible to ritual impurity. If it was affixed to the wall of the chest - and thus cannot serve as a container unless the chest is turned on its side, it is considered as part of the chest and is pure.", + "A fishing trap, a trap for fowl, and a wooden cage are pure.", + "A flat trap for fowl, a snare for fowl, and the snare in a dam are susceptible to ritual impurity because they do have the form of a k'li.", + "Benches set up in inns and by the teachers of young children are pure even though they have holes into which legs are inserted. If the legs were affixed to them with nails, they are susceptible to impurity.
This is the general principle: Whenever a seat is portable and its legs are not carried with it, it is pure. Any seat that is portable and its legs are carried with it is susceptible to impurity. If both of its legs are made of wood or bone, it is susceptible to impurity. If one of them was made of stone, it is not susceptible to impurity." + ], + [ + "Whenever a k'li contracted impurity and, after it contracted impurity, it was broken to the point that its form was ruined and it could no longer serve the purpose for which it was made, it regains purity by being broken. Similarly, when keilim that were pure are broken, their broken pieces are not susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "To what extent must a wooden or bone k'li be broken before it regains ritual purity? All keilim belonging to ordinary, private persons are pure when they are broken to the extent that they cannot contain a pomegranate.
What is implied? If a container was perforated to the extent that a pomegranate would fall through, it is pure. The pomegranate about which we are speaking is one of intermediate size, one that an onlooker would neither consider large or small and we are speaking about an instance where there are three pomegranates in a container, one touching the other.
If a k'li that had contracted impurity became perforated to the extent that an olive would fall from it, the owner patched it, it then was perforated again in a different place to the extent that an olive would fall from it, the owner patched it, and this pattern continued until the hole is large enough that a pomegranate would fall from it, even though it is patched entirely, it is pure, because it is a new entity.", + "When keilim were originally made in a manner that pomegranates would fall from them, e.g., a basket and a rope-net carrier borne by camels and trellises, for vines are susceptible to ritual impurity unless their greater portion is torn.", + "Even though rods were attached to trellises above them and below them to reinforce them, the trellises are pure. If a frame of any size was made for them, even if the entire trellis has holes large enough for pomegranates to fall through, it is susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "The size of a hole that renders as pure all vessels that cannot contain pomegranates, e.g., a container of a fourth of a kab, half a fourth of a kab, and wicker servers, is one sufficient for olives to fall through. Although their borders have been ruined, if there remains enough of the vessel to contain even the slightest amount, it is impure.", + "Breadbaskets are rendered as pure if they possess a hole large enough for a loaf of bread to fall through.", + "Gardeners' bushels are rendered as pure if they possess a hole large enough for a bundle of vegetables to fall through. Bushels of homeowners are rendered as pure when they possess a hole large enough for a bundle of straw to fall through. Those used by bathhouse attendants are rendered as pure when they possess a hole large enough for stubble to fall through.", + "A chest for bowls that cannot hold bowls is nevertheless susceptible to ritual impurity, because it can hold pots. Similarly, even if a chamber pot cannot contain liquids, since it can contain feces, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "Any wooden container that is divided in two is pure even though its walls could serve as a container, as a frying pan does, with the exception of wooden utensils that half or a portion of them is considered as an independent utensil from its fashioning at the outset. Examples of the latter include a double table that at the outset was made in two parts and it is folded over and extended, a pot with compartments for different types of food which includes many bowls, each of its compartments having complete bowls, a double bench, and the like.
Similarly, when one of the holders in a wooden case for bottles or cups was ruined, the one that is ruined is pure and is not considered as joined to the other holders. If a second one is ruined, it is pure and is not considered as joined to the case. If all three are ruined, they are pure. Similar laws apply in situations involving comparable types of keilim.", + "When the center of a wicker crate used to spread fertilizer is upraised and its sides are lower, it is still susceptible to impurity if one side is ruined, because it can still contain fertilizer from the other side. If the other side is also ruined, it is pure.
When part of a table or a counter for drinks is ruined, it is still susceptible to impurity until it was divided and separated into its component parts entirely. If one of its legs was removed, it is pure. This ruling also applies if the second was removed. If the third was also removed and one had the intent to eat on this table or counter like one eats on a serving board, it is susceptible to impurity. If not, it is pure.", + "Wicker utensils whose borders have fallen off are pure. If even the slightest bit of the seal around their border remains, they are susceptible to impurity.", + "When a serving board was filled with pieces of wood that were attached to it, it is pure. If it is covered with boards, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When a bench falls apart, it is pure. If one tied it together with straps or ropes, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "A camel's saddle-baskets that were released are pure. If the driver returned and tied them, they are susceptible to impurity. Thus they can become susceptible to impurity and then released from impurity even ten times a day.", + "When a table or a counter for drinks were covered with marble, but the place where cups are placed was left uncovered, it is susceptible to ritual impurity. If one covered the entire surface, it is pure. This ruling applies whether the coating is permanently affixed or not, whether it covers its frame or not, whether the table was made from valuable wood like boxwood or the like or from other wood, since it was covered, it is pure, as we explained." + ], + [ + "At which point does a leather k'li become susceptible to ritual impurity?
A shepherd's satchel - From the time its edges are folded over and sealed close to make a border, one trims the tiny pieces that project beyond the leather, and makes straps with which it could be closed.
A leather mat - When its borders are trimmed and its ornament is made.
A leather bedsheet - When its borders are sealed and trimmed.
A leather pillow or cushion - When its borders are sealed and the strands that emerge are trimmed. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.
Tefillin - When one finishes the cube. Even though one will later add the strap, it is susceptible to impurity at this stage.
A leather base for a cradle for which loops will be made - When those loops are made.
A sandal - When its leather will be bent over.
A shoe - When it is placed on its mold. If, in the future, one will color it yellow and make designs, it is not susceptible to impurity until one colors it and makes designs.", + "When a hide does not have the shape of a k'li, it is not susceptible to impurity. Therefore a leather hand-covering which people who gather thorns tie around their hands so that they will not be wounded by a thorn is not susceptible to impurity, for it is a simple hide and it does not have the form of a k'li. Similarly, a hide used to collect cow turds, a hide used to muzzle the mouth of an animal, a hide used to chase away bees when gathering honey, and a hide used as a fan because of the heat are pure and are not susceptible to impurity.", + "All finger-coverings of leather are pure except those of fruit reapers. They are impure, because they are used to collect sumach berries. If they are torn and cannot hold the major portion of a sumach berry, they are pure.", + "Leather belts and the pieces of leather amputees place on their stumps so they can walk on them on the ground are susceptible to impurity, because they have the form of a k'li. Similarly, leather rings which craftsmen place on their arms to hold up their garments to prevent them from interfering with them during their work are susceptible to impurity like other simple leather keilim.", + "When a piece of leather is sewn to cover the hands and the arms of those who winnow grainheaps, travelers, or those who make flax, it is susceptible to ritual impurity. If it is used by painters or blacksmiths, it is not susceptible to impurity.
This is the general principle: Anything that is made as a receptacle, to protect one from thorns, or so that one will have a good grip is susceptible to impurity. Anything that is made as protection against sweat, i.e., so that the article with which one is working not be ruined because of the sweat of one's hands is not susceptible to impurity.", + "How large must a hole in a leather k'li be for it to be pure? A carrying case for food - when its hole is large enough for a ball of the warp thread to fall through. If it cannot contain the warp, but it does contain the woof, it is susceptible to impurity unless the hole comprises the majority of the container.", + "A leather satchel whose inner pocket was ripped is still susceptible to impurity. It is not considered as attached to the pocket.", + "The following laws apply when a drinking pouch was made from the hide of an animal, the scrotum was often left and was used as part of the container. If it was opened, it is pure, because it cannot contain liquids in the ordinary manner.", + "When leather keilim have loops and straps - e.g., sandals worn on flat land or a pouch tied close with a strand - even though when they are untied, they do not have the shape of a k'li, they are still susceptible to impurity in that state. The rationale is that even an ordinary person can insert the strands in the loops and return the k'li to its previous shape. Similarly, if they contracted impurity and the straps were removed from them and their shape was undone, they are pure even though it is possible to restore them without a craftsman's activity.", + "Although the strands from a pouch closed by strands have been removed, it is still susceptible to impurity, because it can still serve as a container. If it was straightened out and returned to the form of a simple piece of leather, it is pure. If one attached a hook from which it could be hung from below, it is susceptible to impurity even when it is straightened out, because it has the form of a k'li.", + "A piece of leather used to wrap an amulet is susceptible to impurity. If one straightens it out, it is pure. If one uses it again to wrap an amulet, it is susceptible to impurity. It can become impure and pure, even ten times during a day.
The parchment on which one writes an amulet is pure. If one cut off a piece and made a ring to use it as an ornament, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "The head tefillin is considered as four separate containers. Should it contract impurity from a human corpse and one remove the first compartment and then restore it, it is still a primary source of impurity as it was. This ruling also applies if one removes the second compartment and restores it. If one removed the third and restored it and removed also the fourth and restored it, the entire tefillin is considered a primary derivative of impurity. For he removed each one of them and then restored them all, thus it is as if this \"second\" tefillin touched the original tefillin.
If he then removed the first compartment a second time and then restored it, the tefillin remains a primary derivative as before. This ruling also applies if one also removed the second and the third compartments. If one removed also the fourth compartment and then restored the tefillin, it is entirely pure. For a primary derivative of impurity does not impart impurity to articles, because it is a derivative itself, as we explained.
Similarly, when a sandal was impure because of contact with a zav or the like and one of its pegs was detached and it was repaired, it is still impure as before. If the other one also became detached and he repaired it, the sandal is purified from the impurity, because it has new pegs. It is, however, impure due to contact with an article that is impure because of contact with a zav. If he did not repair the first until the second was detached, the heel or the toe of the sandal was removed, or it was divided in two, it is pure.", + "When a shoe was damaged, if it does not cover the majority of the foot, it is pure.", + "When do tefillin that have contracted impurity become pure again? The arm tefillin - when it is released from the base on three sides. The head tefillin - when it is released from the base on three sides and each of the compartments are separated from each other.", + "When a ball, a mold, an amulet, or tefillin were torn after they contracted impurity from a human corpse, one who touches them is impure. If he touches their contents, he is pure.
When a saddle that is impure is torn, one who touches its insides is impure, because the sewing attaches it to the saddle itself and it is considered as a single entity." + ], + [ + "All metal keilim are not susceptible to ritual impurity until the tasks involved in fashioning them are totally completed and they are no further tasks to be performed with them at all. Unfinished metal keilim, by contrast, are not susceptible to impurity at all.", + "The following are unfinished metal utensils: anything that will be smoothed with a file, have its surfaced leveled, have its uneven points scraped away, be polished, be pounded with a hammer, or is lacking a handle or a rim. Such a utensil is not susceptible to impurity until it was finished and beautified to the extent that no work is required for it at all.
What is implied? A sword does not contract impurity until it has been smoothed, nor a knife until it has been sharpened. Similar concepts apply with regard to other comparable acts. Accordingly, when one makes utensils from a block of iron ore, a bar of metal, or the iron surface of a wheel, from plates, from the coverings of utensils, from the base of utensils, from the rims of utensils, from the handles of utensils, from metal scrap removed from utensils or pieces cut away from utensils, they are pure. For all of these are considered as unfinished metal utensils.
If, however, one fashions a utensil from broken metal utensils or from utensils that have worn out over the course of time, or from nails that were made from utensils, these are susceptible to impurity, because they are not in an unfinished state. If, however, it is not known whether nails were made from utensils or from blocks of iron ore, they are pure. Even if they were formed into a k'li, they are not susceptible to impurity.", + "When a metal k'li is only lacking a cover, it is susceptible to ritual impurity. For the cover is not considered as part of the k'li itself.", + "When a needle was made without a hole, but instead was smoothed and prepared for use in such a state at the outset, it is susceptible to impurity, because it can be used to remove a splinter. If, ultimately, however, one intends to make a hole in it, it is like other unfinished metal utensils and is not susceptible to impurity.", + "We have explained that, according to Scriptural Law, unfinished metal keilim are pure and unfinished wooden keilim are impure and conversely, flat metal keilim are impure and flat wooden keilim are pure. Thus keilim that are impure when made from wood are pure when made from metal. And keilim that are impure when made from metal are pure when made from wood.", + "All articles of war, e.g., a sword, a spear, a helmet, armor, soldiers' boots, and the like are susceptible to ritual impurity. All ornaments for humans, e.g., a necklace, earrings, rings - whether with a seal or without a seal - or the like, are susceptible to ritual impurity. Even if a dinar was disqualified for use and it was adapted to be hung from the neck of a girl, it is susceptible to impurity. Similarly, a metal amulet is susceptible to impurity like other jewelry for humans.", + "All ornaments used for animals and keilim, by contrast - e.g., the rings made for the neck of an animal and for the handles of keilim are pure and are not susceptible to impurity independently with the exception of the bell of an animal or a k'li that creates a sound desired by humans.
What is implied? When one makes bells for a spice mill, a cradle, book-covers, and children's diapers, they are pure. If one made clappers for them, they are susceptible to impurity. Since they were made to create a sound for a person, they are considered as ornaments for humans. Even if the clapper was removed afterwards, they are still susceptible to impurity, because it is still fit to generate a sound by banging it on a shard.", + "The following rules apply when a bell was made for a person. If it was made for a minor, it is not susceptible to impurity unless it has its clapper, because it was meant to produce a sound. If it was made for an adult, it is considered as an ornament and is susceptible to impurity even though it does not have a clapper.", + "All masks are susceptible to impurity. All seals are pure with the exception of a metal seal that is used to imprint a seal. All rings are pure except the rings worn on a finger. In contrast, the ring used to gird one's loins or one that is tied between one's shoulders is pure. A ring used as an animal collar is susceptible to impurity, because a person uses it to pull the animal. Similarly, a staff made of metal used to control an animal is susceptible to impurity.", + "All keilim can become susceptible to impurity through thought, but do not lose that susceptibility unless a deed is performed to change their function. A deed negates the influence of a previous deed or thought, but thought does not negate the influence of a previous thought or deed.
What is implied? A ring used for an animal or a k'li that one thought to use as a ring for a person. That thought itself causes a change in the ring's status and makes it subject to ritual impurity, as if originally it was made with the intent of being used for a human. If, afterwards, one reconsidered and thought to leave it as a ring for an animal as it was, it remains susceptible to impurity, even though a person never used it as an ornament. For one thought does not negate the effect of another thought unless one performs a deed in the actual physical substance of the entity, for example, to polish it or to adjust it as is done for an animal.
If there was a ring used for humans and one thought to use it for an animal, it is still susceptible to impurity as it was originally, for a k'li's susceptibility to impurity cannot be nullified by thought. If one performed a deed, changing it into an animal's ring, it is not susceptible to impurity, for deed can negate the influence of a previous deed.", + "The deeds of a deafmute, a mentally or emotionally compromised individual, or a minor are significant. Their thoughts are not significant, as explained above with regard to making foods susceptible to impurity.", + "When one thought of using a bell used for a door for an animal, it is susceptible to impurity. When one made the bell of an animal suitable for a door, even if he attached it to the ground and even when he attached it with a nail, it remains susceptible to impurity until one performs a deed affecting the substance of the bell itself.", + "The following laws apply when a craftsman makes - and carries a stock - of bells for both animals and doors. If the majority of his stock is made for entities that cause them to be susceptible to impurity, the entire stock is considered as susceptible to ritual impurity unless he sets aside a portion specifically for entities that do not cause them to be susceptible to impurity. If the majority is made for entities that do not cause them to be susceptible to impurity, the entire stock is not considered as susceptible to ritual impurity unless he sets aside a portion of the stock specifically for entities that cause them to be susceptible to impurity.", + "Wherever bells are found, they are susceptible to impurity, except in large cities, for there the majority are made for doors.", + "If a person tells a craftsman: \"Make me two bells, one for a door and one for an animal,\" \"...two mats, one to lie on and one to use in constructing a tent,\" \"...two sheets, one for designs and one for a curtain for a tent,\" they both are susceptible to impurity unless he explicitly states: \"This is for this purpose and this is for the other.
\"" + ], + [ + "All metal keilim that have independent names are susceptible to impurity except a door, a bolt, a lock, a holder for a door hinge a hinge, a beam, and a drainpipe. The latter are not susceptible to impurity, because they serve the earth or wood. This applies even before they are affixed to a building or to wood.
Any metal k'li that has an auxiliary name does not contract impurity independently because it is only part of a k'li. What is implied? The \"scorpion\" of a muzzle is impure and the iron plates placed on the cheeks of the animal on both sides are pure, because they do not have an independent name. When all these articles are connected to the reins, everything is susceptible to impurity.", + "When metal plates are placed on a person's cheeks for protection at the time of battle, they are not susceptible to impurity, because they do not have an independent name. If, however, they have a receptacle for water, they are susceptible to impurity like all receptacles.", + "When a ring is fashioned like a bowl from below and a lentil from above, and the bowl becomes detached, it is susceptible to impurity in its own right, for it has a receptacle. The lentil is susceptible to impurity, because it has an independent name. The ring's wire, i.e., the portion that enters the ear or the nose, is not susceptible to impurity in its own right.
If a ring is made like a cluster of grapes and it becomes separated, it is pure. The rationale is that it does not have a receptacle, none of the \"berries\" has an independent name, and while broken up, it is not fit to be used as an ornament.", + "A ring worn by young girls around a leg is referred to as a birit. It is not susceptible to impurity, because it does not have the form of an ornament. Instead, it is like a ring of a k'li or a ring one ties between his shoulders. The set of two rings which young girls put around their legs with a chain connecting one to the other is susceptible to ritual impurity. The rationale is that it is an ornament for young girls. This set is called kevalim.", + "When there is a necklace with metal links on a string of wool or linen and the string snaps, each of the links is susceptible to impurity, because each is considered as a k'li independently. If the strand was of metal and the links of jewels, pearls, or glass and the links broke, but the chain remained, the chain is susceptible to impurity independently. The remnants of a necklace continue to impart impurity and to be susceptible to impurity as long as they are large enough to go around the neck of a young girl.", + "All of the metal coverings of receptacles are pure. They are not susceptible to impurity, because they do not have an independent name with the exception of the covering of a samovar and the covering of doctor's prescription box. Since bandages are placed in it, it becomes a receptacle.", + "When one scrapes down and polishes the metal cover of a container, making it into a mirror, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "All metal weights are susceptible to impurity. They are called unkiyot. The wooden crossbeam of a scale is susceptible to impurity, because of the weights hanging from it.
When does the above apply? To the crossbeams of the scales of flax merchants and wool merchants. The crossbeams of the scales of private persons are not susceptible to impurity unless the weights are permanently affixed to it.", + "When weights have been broken, even though one brought the pieces together and weighed objects with them, they are not susceptible to impurity. If one designated the broken pieces as half-litra weights, one-third-litra weights, or one-quarter-litra weights, they are susceptible to impurity.", + "When a sela was disqualified, if it was adjusted to use as a weight, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "A porter's hook is pure. Hooks used by perfume salesmen are susceptible to impurity. The hooks of bed-poles are pure. Those of a small platform are susceptible to impurity.
The hooks of the bee-hived-shaped snare used by fishermen to catch fish are pure. Those of a chest are susceptible to impurity. The hooks of wooden lamps are pure. Those of a table are susceptible to impurity.
This is the general principle: Whenever a k'li is susceptible to impurity in and of itself according to Scriptural Law, its metal hook and its chain are susceptible to impurity. Whenever a k'li is not susceptible to impurity, e.g., flat wooden keilim, oversized wooden keilim, and the like, its metal hook and its chain are not susceptible to impurity. When either of them is considered independently, it is pure, because neither a hook or a chain is considered as a k'li in its own right; they are only as parts of a k'li. Even hooks on the wall upon which keilim, clothes, and the like are hung are pure.", + "When a chain has a lock, it is susceptible to impurity. If it is meant to secure an entity, it is pure.", + "Chains used by wholesalers are susceptible to impurity, because they are used to lock the stores. Those owned by private persons are pure, because they are meant only as ornaments.", + "The chains of the measurers of land and the pegs that they insert into the ground at the time they conduct their measurement are susceptible to impurity. Those used by gatherers of wood are pure, because they serve wood.", + "The four handbreadths of a chain for a large bucket that are closest to the bucket contract impurity with the bucket for it is necessary for its use. The remainder is pure, because it does not have an independent name. Ten handbreadths of the chain of a small bucket are susceptible to impurity.", + "All of the following: a metal ball, an anvil, an iron shaft of a builder, a carpenter's leveling tool, a smith's \"donkey,\" plumb-weights used by builders, the iron beams used to press olives, a metal dispenser for a mill, the blade with which scribes cut off the tips of the reeds with which they write, a metal pen, a stylus and a ruler with which scribes rule lines are all susceptible to impurity. For each one of these articles has an independent name." + ], + [ + "Pegs that reinforce a ceiling that are made to be pounded into wood are not susceptible to impurity. Similarly, this ruling applies to pegs that are pounded into walls to serve as hangers. If they are made to serve as an independent k'li, they are susceptible to impurity.
What is implied? A hook that was installed to enable one to open and lock a door, to remove a wick, or it was placed in a handmill or a mill powered by a donkey is susceptible to impurity. If it was made to open a barrel, it is pure unless its point is sharpened.", + "A peg that is made as a sign to guard an entrance is not susceptible to impurity. Similarly, the peg of a money-changer on which he hangs his scale and his purse is pure. Similarly, pegs for metal brushes are pure even though these pegs have a different form than other pegs used as hangers.", + "A bloodletter's needle, i.e., the utensil with which he draws blood, is susceptible to impurity. The pointer of a sundial is pure.", + "A weaver's needle, i.e., the long needle that is like a spit which the weaver inserts into a cylinder coming from a reed or wood around which he winds the threads is susceptible to impurity.", + "These are the metal keilim in a wagon that are susceptible to impurity: the metal shaft, the wooden yoke, the wings into which the straps are inserted, the metal rod below the necks of the animals, the support, the \"limper,\" the containers, the bell, the hook, and the pegs which attach all the different parts of the wagon together.
These are the components of a wagon that are pure: a plated wooden shaft, the wings that are made only as ornamental articles, a reed that makes a sound, a lead plate hanging from the neck of an animal, the metal rimming of a wheel, ornamental plates, and coatings. Similarly, all other pegs it contains are pure.", + "The scorpion of the olive press is susceptible to ritual impurity. Even though a chest for ground lentils is pure, if there is a metal carriage below it, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "A pepper mill is susceptible to ritual impurity because of each of the three keilim of which it is comprised: one is susceptible to impurity because it is a metal k'li, another, because it is a receptacle, and the third, because it is a sieve.", + "A metal door in a cabinet of a homeowner is not susceptible to impurity. Such a door in a cabinet of a doctor is susceptible to impurity, because bandages are placed there and scissors are hung from it.", + "Metal plates on which a hot pot is placed are susceptible to impurity. Those that are affixed to a range are pure.", + "Tongs with which one squeezes the wick are susceptible to impurity. The metal bars that hold up a mill from its front are not susceptible to impurity, because they are made only in order to reinforce the mill.", + "A bolt that locks double-doors: if it is made of metal, it is impure. If it is made of wood coated with metal, it is pure.", + "The pointed end of a lock and the base of a lock are impure.", + "The ball of a weaving needle is pure, because it serves the wood.", + "A weaving needle, a spindle, a walking stick, and a symphonia or flute of metal are susceptible to impurity. If they are made of wood and coated with metal, they are pure with the exception of a symphonia which, if it has a receptacle for wings, is impure even if it is coated.", + "With regard to a trumpet that is split up into different pieces: If only a craftsman would know how to put it together, it is susceptible to impurity while the pieces are connected. If anyone can take it apart and reconstruct it, it is not susceptible to impurity.", + "The end of the round trumpet on which one places his mouth when blowing is susceptible to impurity independently. The wide portion is not susceptible to impurity independently. While they are connected, everything is susceptible to impurity.
A similar ruling: The branches of a candelabrum are not susceptible to impurity, because they have an accompanying name. Its flower and its base are susceptible to impurity. While they are connected, all the components are susceptible to impurity.", + "A target for arrows that has metal strips is susceptible to impurity. A metal boot placed on prisoners' feet is pure. A metal collar is susceptible to impurity.
A saw whose teeth were inserted into a slit in a lintel and project into the doorway is not susceptible to impurity even though one makes use of it. If he inserted it in the slit of the doorway after it became impure, it remains impure until one affixes it with a nail. If he turned it over, whether from above, from below or from the sides, it is pure." + ], + [ + "To what degree must metal keilim be broken so as not to be susceptible to ritual impurity or to be purified from ritual impurity? Everything depends on the nature of the k'li involved.", + "As long as the k'li can be used in a way resembling its intended task, it is considered as a k'li and is considered like a complete k'li.
What is implied? A metal bucket that was broken but still can be used to draw water is considered a k'li as it was before. An urn is still susceptible to impurity if it can be used to heat water; a samovar, if it can contain selaim; a large pot, if it can contain metal pitchers; a metal pitcher, if it can contain perutot, wine measures, if they can measure wine; oil measures, if they can measure oil.
When three holes, one next to the other, in the bottom of a strainer for mustard seed, were widened, it is pure, because it is no longer fit for its original task. When the hollow of a builder's shovel is removed, it is pure, even though it appears like a hammer, for it is no longer useful for its original purpose, but instead, as a hammer, and it was not made to pound objects as a hammer does. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "When the teeth of a comb for wool have been removed, it is impure as long as three teeth remain in one place. If, however, one of the external teeth was one of the three, it is pure, because it is no longer useful for combing flax, because the exterior tooth is not effective when combing. Hence we follow the principle: Whenever a metal k'li can no longer be used for its intended purpose, it is pure.
If two teeth were taken and made into tweezers, they are impure. If one was removed and it is used for the sake of a lamp or for thread to be wound around it for embroidering, it is susceptible to impurity. If it was a thick and large tooth, even though it was not prepared for a particular function, it contracts impurity independently.", + "When the teeth of a comb for flax were removed, but two remained, it is impure. If only one remains, it is pure.", + "When a kedum is broken, but its hooks are intact, they are still impure, because it is possible to use them to remove a bucket from a well as before.", + "When the teeth of a saw are removed in an alternating pattern, it is pure. If a portion the full length of a sit remained intact in one place, it is impure, because it is possible to saw with the portion that remains.", + "A hatchet, a blade, a plane, a drill, that have been damaged are still susceptible to impurity. If their steel portion is removed, they are pure. If any of them is divided into two, they are impure with the exception of the drill, because it is no longer possible to make holes with it. A runkey alone is not susceptible to impurity, because it is only part of a k'li.", + "When a sword, a knife, a knife that is curved like a sickle, a spear, a hand sickle, a harvesting sickle, a small household scissors, or a larger barber's scissors are divided in two, each of their components is susceptible to impurity, because it is still able to be used for a task resembling its primary function.", + "When a shaver is divided into two, it is pure, because in that state it can only remove hair with difficulty.", + "When armor is divided along its length, it is pure. When divided along its width, if it still can serve its initial purpose, it is impure. When does it become pure? When it becomes worn out to the extent that it can no longer perform its original task.
The following rules apply if it became worn out, but its major portion remained intact. If the upper portion remains, it is impure. If it covers the lower portion, it is pure. If one cut of part of the armor and made it a link for an ornament, it is susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "A bellows used by goldsmiths, glassmakers, blacksmiths, and glaziers that was divided into two lengthwise, is pure. If it is split widthwise, when it can serve its initial purpose, it is impure. If not, it is pure.", + "When tongs used by barbers, doctors, or glassmakers are divided into two, they are pure. Those used by blacksmiths that are divided are impure. The rationale is that at the outset, they are used to stir coals and in their present state, they can be used to stir coals.", + "When a metal mirror was broken or became scratched, if it does not reflect the majority of the face, it is pure. If it reflects the majority of the face, it is still considered a k'li as it was previously.", + "When either the eye or the point of a needle was removed, it is pure. If an adjustment was made with it so that thread could be wound around it and it could be used as an embroidery needle, it is impure. In contrast, when the eye of a sackmaker's needle is removed, it is impure, because the other end can still be used as a stylus.", + "Different rules apply to a needle around which scarlet thread, gold thread, or the like is wound as is the practice of embroiderers. Whether the eye or the point is removed, it is still impure, because it is not used to sew.", + "When a needle has become rusty, if the rust prevents sewing, it is pure. If not, it is impure.", + "When a sword or a knife become rusty, they are pure. If they are then smoothed or sharpened, they return to their initial impurity. Similarly, the hook on top of a flax spindle that was straightened is pure. If it was bent back again, it returns to its initial impurity.", + "A key that is curved like a knee which is broken in the middle of its curve is pure. Similarly, a key that is shaped like a gamma which is broken at its vertex is pure. In both instances, they can no longer be used to open locks and thus they are not able to be used for their initial purpose.
If the broken portion has teeth and holes, it is impure, because it still can be used as a key. If its teeth are removed, it is impure because of the holes. If the holes are filled, it is impure because of the teeth. If the teeth were removed and the holes filled or the holes were expanded until they were joined, it is pure.", + "The following rules apply when a k'li consists of a rod with a cup on one side used to pick up ash and a fork on the other side used to roast meat. If the cup was removed, it is impure because of the fork's teeth. If the fork's teeth are removed, it is impure because of the cup. Similarly, with regard to a utensil used to paint one's eyes, if the cup with which the dye is collected is removed, it is impure because of the applier used to dye the eye. If the applier is removed, it is impure because of the cup.", + "Similar laws apply with regard to a k'li that has an iron net on one end on which food is roasted and teeth to remove meat from a pot or from a fire on the other end. If the net was removed, it is impure because of the teeth. If the teeth are removed, it is impure because of the net.
The same principles apply with regard to a metal pen which has one end that is used to write and another end that is used to erase. If the writing utensil is removed, it is impure, because of the eraser. If the eraser is removed, it is impure because of the writing utensil. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations provided the remaining instrument can still be used for its initial purpose.
What is implied? When the eraser is removed from a pen, but the writing utensil remains, if it is long enough to reach his knuckles, it is impure because it is possible to hold it and write with it. When the writing instrument is removed and the eraser remains, if its length matches the width of one's hand, it is impure, because one can erase with it. If less remains, it is pure. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "When the narrow edge of a hatchet - i.e., the side that a carpenter uses to carve - is removed, it is impure, because of the side used to chop. If the side used to chop is removed, it is impure because of the narrow edge. If the socket into which the handle is inserted is broken, it is pure.", + "When a lance is damaged, it is still considered as a k'li until its major portion is removed. If, however, the socket into which the head of the lance is inserted is removed, it is pure.", + "A plow is also called a malmad. It is comprised of a long, thick beam with something like a sharp peg implanted in its end from above. This metal peg is called a darvan. On the other end below is a metal projection like a spear. The wood that is inserted into it and this iron piece is called a lance.", + "When a metal pipe which is like a tube becomes impure, if it is affixed to a staff or a door and is thus attached to wood, it becomes pure. If it did not contract impurity and it was affixed to a staff or a door, it is susceptible to impurity in its place. For any metal k'li that was fixed to a beam or a wall is susceptible to impurity until its function is changed. Therefore a metal baker's sheet that was affixed to a wall is impure. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations involving other metal objects that were affixed to wooden objects whether containers or flat keilim. They are susceptible to impurity as they were beforehand." + ], + [ + "When wood keilim, leather keilim, or bone keilim are broken, they are purified of their ritual impurity. If one then made a k'li from the broken pieces or one collected the broken pieces and made other keilim from them, these are considered like other pure keilim that had never contracted impurity previously and are susceptible to impurity from the time they were fashioned onward.
All metal keilim that are broken after they contracted impurity regain purity. If one melted them down and made other keilim from them, they return to their previous impurity. A metal k'li cannot become utterly pure unless it was immersed in a mikveh while intact or it remains broken.", + "The return of metal keilim to ritual impurity is a Rabbinic decree. Why did the Sages decree that metal keilim should return to their former impurity? This is a decree, enacted as a safeguard lest a person's k'li contract impurity and he melt it down and make it into a new k'li on that day. If it is considered as pure as is its status according to Scriptural Law, one might come to say: Breaking a k'li purifies it and immersing it purifies it. Just as when it is broken, melted down and fashioned into a new k'li, it is pure on that day, so too, if it is immersed, even though it is intact, one may mistakenly think that it is pure on that day and he will say that it is not necessary to wait until nightfall for keilim to regain purity. Due to this concern, the Sages decreed that they are impure.", + "Whether a k'li contracted impurity from a corpse or another type of impurity and was then melted down, it returns to its former impurity until the ashes of the red heifer are sprinkled upon it and/or it is immersed in a mikveh.
If a k'li contracted impurity from a corpse and the ashes of the red heifer were sprinkled upon it on the third day and afterwards, it was melted down, anotherk'li was made from it and then ashes were sprinkled on it on the seventh day and it was immersed, it is still considered impure. The sprinkling before it was melted down is not linked to the sprinkling after it was melted down. It cannot regain purity unless ashes were sprinkled on it on the third and seventh days and it was immersed while it was a k'li before it was melted down or ashes would be sprinkled on it on the third and seventh days and it was immersed once it was made into a new k'li after it was melted down.", + "The following laws apply when impure iron was mixed with pure iron. If the majority was from the impure metal, it is considered as impure. If the majority was from the pure metal, it is pure. If there were equal amounts, it is impure. Similarly, when mud is mixed with turds and the mixture was fired in a kiln and made into a k'li, if the majority was from the mud, it is susceptible to impurity, because it is an earthenware k'li. If the majority was from the turds, it is not susceptible to impurity.", + "When pure metal keilim were coated with an impure coating, they are impure. If, however, one fashions keilim from an impure coating, they are pure.", + "When the thick side of a hatchet was made from pure iron and its blade from impure metal, it is impure. If the blade was made from pure metal and the thick side from impure metal, it is pure. The status of the entire tool is determined by that of the portion with which work is performed.", + "A pure hatchet that was coated with impure iron is pure.", + "When the mouth of a pitcher was made from impure metal and its base from pure metal, it is pure. When it was made of pure metal and its base from impure metal, it is impure, because the status of the entire implement is determined by that of the container, for it is the portion with which the task is performed.", + "When a metal k'li contracted impurity of Rabbinic origin, e.g., it contracted impurity from a false divinity or the like, then it was broken, melted down, and fashioned into a different k'li, there is an unresolved doubt whether it returns to its former impurity or not.", + "When glass keilim became impure and then broke, they are pure like all other keilim. Even if they were melted down and new keilim were made from them, they do not return to their former impurity. The rationale is that, as we explained, their impurity is primarily of Rabbinic origin. Hence, it was not decreed that they return to their former impurity.
Similarly, if glass utensils were broken, even though the broken pieces are themselves keilim and fit to be used, since they are components of broken utensils, they are not susceptible to impurity, because they do not resemble earthenware keilim.
What is implied? When a glass bowl is broken and one made its base fit to be used as a k'li, the base is not susceptible to impurity, even though it is like a bowl. If one leveled the broken portion and filed it down, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When the mouth of a small bottle that can be carried with one hand is removed, it is still susceptible to impurity, because one does not use it by inserting one's hand in it, but by pouring from it. By contrast, when the mouth of a large bottle that is held with both hands is removed, it is pure, because it will injure one's hand when it is inserted within it. Similarly, even though a flask of perfume is small, if its mouth is removed, it is pure, because it would injure one's finger when one removes the perfume from it.", + "Large pitchers whose mouths were removed are still considered keilim because they are used for pickling.", + "When the major portion of a glass cup is damaged, it is pure. If a third of the circumference over the major portion of its height is damaged, it is pure. If a hole was made in it and he plugged it with tin or tar, it is pure. When a hole was made in a cup or a bottle, whether in its upper portion or its lower portion, it is pure.", + "When a hole was made in the upper portion of a large pot or a bowl, it is impure. If it is in its lower portion, it is pure. If such utensils are cracked, but can still contain hot liquids just as cold liquids, they are impure. If not, they are pure.", + "Cups that have been chinked, even though their rims scratch a person’s mouth, nevertheless, remain susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "A glass dispenser is pure, because it is like a distributor, for it is not a container.", + "When a glass item is used as a pane, it is pure, even if it can contain liquids, because it was not made to serve as a container. A glass ladle is considered as a container even though when it is placed on a table, it will turn to its side and not serve as a container; it is still susceptible to impurity.", + "When a glass pot is made into a pane, it remains susceptible to impurity. If it was made intentionally for the purpose of sight, i.e., that the objects placed inside of it could be seen from its other side, it is pure. All glass utensils are not susceptible to ritual impurity until the tasks to fashion them are completed, as is true with regard to other utensils." + ], + [ + "In several places, we have already explained that an earthenware container contracts impurity only from its inner space or when moved by a zav. In contrast, all other keilim contract impurity when touched by impurity, but if impurity enters their inner space without touching them, they remain pure.
Thus what makes an earthenware container impure leaves other keilim pure. And what makes other keilim impure, leaves an earthenware container pure, for an earthenware container contracts impurity only from its inner space, as Leviticus 11:33 states: \"Any earthenware container into whose inner space one of these will fall.\" It contracts impurity from its inner space and not from its outer side.", + "Just as it contracts impurity from its inner space, so too, it imparts impurity to food and liquids from its inner space. What is implied?
When food and/or liquids enter the inner space of an earthenware container that contracted impurity, they contract impurity even though they never touched, as ibid. states: \"Everything inside it shall contract impurity.\" Other impure keilim do not impart impurity to an impure k'li unless they touch it.", + "An earthenware container does not impart impurity to keilim - whether earthenware keilim or other keilim - through their entry into its inner space.
What is implied? When there is a large earthenware container with other containers in it and impurity enters its inner space, it contracts impurity, but all the containers inside of it remain pure. If there also were liquids inside of them, the liquids contract impurity because of their presence within the inner space of the large container and they then impart impurity to the smaller containers. It is as the smaller containers say: \"The one that imparted impurity to you did not impart impurity to me, but you imparted impurity to me.\"", + "When impure liquids touch only the outer surface of an earthenware container, its outer surface contracts impurity like other keilim.
When does the above apply? When it is a container that has inner space. If, however, it is an implement that does not have inner space and impure liquids touch it, it is pure. For the outer surface of any earthenware k'li that does not have inner space does not contract impurity from liquids.
If foods or liquids touch the outer surface of an impure earthenware container, they are impure. Earthenware containers and other keilim are governed by the same laws in this context. For when foods or liquids touch any impure utensil whether on its inner surface or its outer surface, they contract impurity.", + "The same laws that apply when impurity enters the inner space of an earthenware container apply when one turns it over, covering impurity that is lying on the ground and serving as a tent over it, for the impurity is within its inner space. According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that the phrase, ibid., \"into whose inner space\" also includes containers that serve as tents.", + "When there is a pit with the carcass of a crawling animal inside of it and an earthenware container is turned over the pit, it does not contract impurity. For the phrase \"Within its inner space\" implies that the impurity itself must enter its inner space.
For this reason, if the carcass of a crawling animal is found beneath the earth below an oven, the oven is pure, for we assume that it was alive when it fell into the pit and it died while in that pit. Similarly, if a needle or a ring is found beneath the earth below an oven, the oven is pure even though any keilim that are found are considered impure, as we explained. For we assume that the keilim were there before the oven was placed there and the oven was built over them without them having fallen inside of it. If these keilim were found in the ash removed from the oven, the oven is impure, because there is nothing on which the person can base a supposition for leniency.
The following laws apply if these keilim were found in the earth below an oven; they were visible, but did not enter the inner space of the oven. If when one bakes dough, they will touch it, the oven is impure as if they were within its inner space. If not, the oven is pure as if they were beneath the earth below it. Concerning what type of dough was this said? An ordinary dough that was neither overly soft, nor overly firm.", + "The following laws apply if the carcass of a crawling animal was found in the eye of an oven, the eye of a range for two pots, or the eye of a range for one pot. If the crawling animal was within the inner edge of the hole or further toward the outside, the oven or range is pure, because it did not enter the inner space of the oven or the range. Instead, it is suspended below the thickness of its walls. The oven or the range is pure even if an olive-sized portion of a human corpse is found in that place unless the opening of the eye is a handbreadth. In the latter instance, the oven would be impure because a hole of that size brings impurity to the inner space of the oven, as explained with regard to the impurity of a human corpse.", + "When the carcass of a crawling animal is found in the place where wood is placed, if it is found from the inner edge of the range and further outward, the range is pure. If it is found in the place where the bath attendant sits or the dyer sits, or the place where those who cook olives sit, everything is pure.", + "Neither an oven, a range, nor other places of cooking contract impurity unless the impurity is found from the sealing and inward.", + "There are earthenware containers from which homeowners drink water that have an earthenware screen in their center and projections like a comb above that screen. It is called a tzirtzur. If impurity entered the space enclosed by the comb above the screen, the entire k'li is impure, for this is \"the inner space\" of this container.", + "The following laws apply when there is an earthenware container that has three walls, one further inside than the other. If the interior wall was the highest and impurity entered its inner space, all foods and liquids that are in the space between the inner wall and middle wall or the outer wall are pure. If the middle wall was the highest and its inner space became impure, the area from this wall inward is impure. The area outside of it is pure. If the exterior wall was the highest and its inner space became impure, everything is impure. If the walls are of the same height, any enclosure whose inner space contracts impurity is impure and the remainder are pure.", + "If several frying pans are placed one inside the other and their rims are of the same height, should the carcass of a crawling animal be found in the uppermost frying pan or the lowest one, the frying pan containing the carcass is impure and the other frying pans and the food inside of them are pure.
If all of the frying pans had a hole that would allow liquid to seep in and the carcass was in the uppermost one, all of the foods and liquids in all the frying pans are impure, because the impurity is considered in the inner space of all of them, as will be explained. If the impurity was in the bottom one, it is impure and all the others are pure, because the carcass of the crawling animal did not enter the inner space of the uppermost one and the rim of the lowest one is not higher than it, so that it would impart impurity to all the food and liquids contained in it.
If the carcass was located in the uppermost one and the rim of the lower one was higher, the uppermost one is impure, because the carcass is located within it. Similarly, the bottom one is impure, because its rim is higher and thus the carcass is in its inner space. The remainder of the frying pans that are located in the bottom one are pure, because an earthenware container does not impart impurity to other keilim inside of it. If there was liquid that could be felt between the frying pans, any pan that has liquid on it contracts impurity. For the liquid contracts impurity because of its presence in the inner space of the bottom pan whose edges extend above the higher pan. It then imparts impurity to the pan that it touches.", + "When an earthenware tabletop had bowls attached to it from the time that it was initially made, although it is all a single k'li, if one bowl contracts impurity, they all do not contract impurity. If the table top has an upraised border, all of the bowls are considered in its inner space. Thus if one contracts impurity, they all become impure. Similar laws apply to an earthenware spice box and a split inkwell that are made in analogous manner.", + "When one of the compartments of a wooden spice box contracts impurity from liquids, the remainder of its compartments do not contract impurity. If it has an upraised border and thus all of the compartments are considered within its inner space and one of them contracts impurity from liquids, they all contract impurity, for it is considered as a single container and when the inner space of a container contracts impurity from liquids, the entire container becomes impure.
If the compartments were attached to it by nails, they are considered as joined both with regard to contracting impurity and with regard to sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer. If they are merely wedged together, they are considered as joined with regard to contracting impurity, but not with regard to sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer. If the compartments could be easily removed and returned, they are not considered as joined, neither with regard to contracting impurity, nor with regard to sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer." + ], + [ + "Any entity that protects from ritual impurity as a sealed covering in a structure that is impure because of a human corpse, protects from ritual impurity as a sealed covering in the inner space of an earthenware container. If it can prevent an entity from contracting ritual impurity from a severe form of impurity, i.e., a structure that is impure because of a human corpse, it can be assumed that it will also prevent impurity in the more lenient instance of an earthenware container. Any entity that does not protect from ritual impurity in a structure that is impure because of a human corpse, does not protect from ritual impurity in the inner space of an earthenware container.", + "Just as a sealed covering does not prevent impurity from escaping in a structure that is impure because of] a human corpse, so too, it does not prevent impurity from escaping into the inner space of an earthenware container.
What is implied? If a pot was filled with food and liquids and sealed closed and placed in an impure oven, the pot and its contents are pure. When the pot contained the carcass of a crawling animal or impure liquids, even though it is sealed closed, if it is placed in the inner space of an oven, the oven contracts impurity. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.", + "When an impure ring was enclosed within a brick or an impure needle was enclosed within a block of wood that fell into the inner space of an earthenware container, it contracts impurity. Even though a loaf of bread that is terumah that would touch this wood or brick would be pure, these articles impart impurity to an earthenware container by virtue of their presence in its inner space.", + "When a rooster swallows the carcass of a crawling animal or flesh from a human corpse and falls into the inner space of an oven, the oven is pure. If the rooster dies there, the oven contracts impurity. The rationale is that the fact that these entities were swallowed by a living being generates protection from the impurity in an earthenware container, just as it generates protection from impurity in a structure that is impure because of a human corpse.", + "Entities in a person's mouth or in the folds of his body are not considered as swallowed.
What is implied? A person had impure liquids in his mouth. If he closes his mouth and inserts his head into the inner space of an earthenware container, he imparts impurity to it. Similarly, if a pure person who had food and liquids in his mouth inserted his head into the inner space of an impure oven, the food and the liquids in his mouth contract impurity. If he had a lentil-sized portion of the carcass of a crawling animal and inserted it in the inner space of an oven, the oven contracts impurity even though the source of impurity is found in the folds of the person's body.", + "When a sponge absorbed impure liquids, even though its surface is dry, if it fell into the inner space of an earthenware container, it imparts impurity to the container, because ultimately, the impurity will emerge. Similar laws apply to a piece of turnip or a reed.
When shards that were used for impure liquids became dry and fell into the inner space of an earthenware container, they do not impart impurity to it. If they fell into an oven and it was heated, they impart impurity to it, because ultimately, the liquids will emerge.
When does the above apply? With regard to impure liquids of a lesser severity. When, however, the impurity of the liquids is severe, e.g., the blood of a woman in the nidah state or her urine, if it is possible that they will emerge and the person is concerned that they emerge, they impart impurity to the oven even if was not heated. If he is not concerned that they emerge, they do not impart impurity until the oven is heated and the liquid emerges.
Similarly, when new olive dregs that come from impure liquids are used as kindling fuel for an oven, it contracts impurity, for, ultimately, the liquids will emerge. If, however, the olive dregs are old, the oven is pure. When are dregs considered old? After twelve months. When, however, it is known that liquids will emerge from the dregs when the oven will be heated, the oven contracts impurity when heated even if the dregs are three years old.", + "Even though an earthenware container was divided with a partition extending from its rim until its bottom, if impurity enters the inner space of one of the portions, the entire container contracts impurity. The rationale is that it is not common practice for people to divide earthenware containers as they divide structures. Therefore, if an oven is divided with boards or curtains and the carcass of a crawling animal is found in one place, the entire oven is impure.", + "When a container in which impurity was located was inserted into the inner space of an earthenware container, if the edge of the impure container extends outside the earthenware container, the earthenware container is ritually pure even though the impurity is positioned inside of it, for Leviticus 11:33 states: \"Into whose inner space one of these will fall.\" Implied is that the presence of impurity in the inner space of a container conveys impurity but not its presence in the inner space of a container in the inner space of a second container.", + "A similar concept applies if there was an impure earthenware container and another container holding food or liquids was inserted into its inner space. If the edges of the other container extend beyond the impure earthenware container, the food and the liquids remain pure. This is derived from the continuation of the above verse: \"Everything in its inner space shall contract impurity,\" i.e., \"in its inner space,\" and not in the inner space of a container in its inner space.
What is implied? When a bee-hive shaped container, a basket, a pot, a flask, or the like contained the carcass of a crawling animal and then one lowered the basket or the like into the inner space of a barrel or into the inner space of an oven, even though the carcass of the crawling animal is positioned inside the inner space of the barrel or the oven since the edge of the basket or the flask extends above the edge of the barrel or the edge of the oven, the barrel or the oven is pure. In such a situation, if there were pure food or liquids in a flask, in a pot, or the like and one lowered them into the inner space of an impure oven or barrel, the food and liquids are pure.
If, however, the bee-hive shaped container, the basket, the flask, or the like had a hole, they do not save entities from ritual impurity. Instead, if they contained the carcass of a crawling animal and they were lowered into the inner space of a pure earthenware container, it contracts impurity. If there were pure food or liquids and one lowered them into the inner space of an impure earthenware container, the food and the liquids contract impurity.
How large must the hole be for these laws to apply? In keilim that can be purified by immersion: large enough for an olive to fall out. If it was an earthenware container made to hold foods, the measure of the hole is: enough for olives to fall out. If it was intended to hold liquids, the measure is: enough for liquids to seep in when the container is placed in them. If it was made for both these purposes, it is judged stringently and when this earthenware container has a hole large enough for liquids to seep in, it does not save entities from impurity when inserted in the inner space of an earthenware container.", + "The following rules apply if one sealed a hole in an earthenware container with tar. If the carcass of a crawling animal was in such a container and it was lowered into the inner space of a pure oven, the oven contracts impurity. For a sealed covering does not protect entities from contracting impurity, as we explained.
If, however, this container held pure food or liquids and it was lowered into the inner space of an impure oven, the food and the liquids are pure, because the hole has been sealed. When holes in all other types of containers were sealed close with tar and the like, they do not protect their contents from contracting ritual impurity from an earthenware container.", + "When a bee-hive shaped container has an opening, even though the opening was closed with straw, it no longer protects its contents from contracting impurity from an earthenware container, because it is not a container.", + "Although a flask or stone container was opened to the extent that a pomegranate would fall from them - and thus they were no longer considered in the category of keilim - they still save entities from contracting impurity due to their presence in the inner space of an earthenware container, provided the opening is above the outer edge of the earthenware container and the receptacle is lowered within the inner space of the earthenware container.", + "When a simple hide or the like is hanging into the inner space of an earthenware container or into the inner space of an oven and there is a carcass of a crawling animal on the hide, the oven contracts impurity. If the carcass was inside the oven, any food or liquids on the hide are impure. The rationale is that the only type of entity that can prevent impurity from spreading due to the inner space of an earthenware container is a container that has a receptacle, e.g., a basket, a bin, or a flask.", + "When there is impurity in the inner space of an earthenware container and there was another pure earthenware container turned upside and resting on the impure container, even though their inner space is combined, the impure one is impure and the pure one is pure. This same ruling applies if the impurity was attached to the wall of one container and it was overturned and resting on a pure container. The rationale is that the impurity itself has not entered the inner space of the pure earthenware container.
Therefore, if a barrel that was filled with pure liquids was found below an oven and the carcass of a crawling animal fell into the oven, the barrel and the liquids are pure, even though the inner space of the oven is combined with the inner space of the barrel. Similarly, if the barrel is turned facing the opening of the oven and its mouth opens to the inner space of the oven, even the liquid at the base of the barrel is pure." + ], + [ + "An earthenware container does not become susceptible to ritual impurity until the tasks necessary to finish it are completed.
When are the tasks necessary to finish it completed? When they are fired in a kiln. An oven: When it is heated to bake donuts. A range with two openings: When it is heated so that a stirred egg can be baked over it in a frying pan. A range with one opening: If it was made for baking, the measure is the same as that of an oven. If it was made for cooking, the measure is the same as that of a range.", + "When one has begun building an oven, if it is large, once one has begun building it for four handbreadths and heats it, it is susceptible to impurity. If it is small, once one has begun building it a for a handbreadth and heats it, it becomes susceptible to impurity. A range with two openings, becomes susceptible to impurity, once one has begun building it for three fingerbreadths and heats it. With regard to a range with one opening: If it was made for baking, the measure is the same as that of an oven. If it was made for cooking, the measure is the same as that of a range.", + "When an oven was heated from behind, heated in the shop of the craftsman, or heated unintentionally, since it was nevertheless heated, it is susceptible to impurity. An incident occurred when a fire broke out in an oven in a village. The incident was brought before the court for a ruling and it determined that it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When an oven was heated to roast food in it, it is susceptible to impurity. When it was heated to whiten bundles of flax, it is pure, because he is not doing work that affects the substance of the oven.", + "When an oven was divided into half and one of its portions was heated and then contracted impurity from liquids, that portion is impure, but the other portion remains pure. If it contracted impurity from the carcass of a crawling animal or other similar impurities of Scriptural origin, everything is impure. The thickness of the partition separating them is impure.
If they were both heated and only one portion contracted impurity from liquids in its inner space, we divide the thickness of the partition. That which is used by the impure portion is impure; that which is used by the pure portion is pure.
When does the above apply? When it was divided and then heated. If, however, it was heated and then divided, if only one of them became impure, even only due to liquids, everything contracts impurity.", + "An oven or a range made from stone is always pure. A metal one is pure with regard to the laws of an oven or a range. This is derived from Leviticus 11:35 which states that an impure oven \"must be smashed,\" i.e., these laws apply to an entity that can be smashed. A metal oven or range, is, however, susceptible to the impurity of a metal k'li.
What is implied? Such ovens and ranges do not contract impurity due to the presence of a source of impurity within their inner space, nor do they contract impurity when attached to the ground as an earthenware oven or a range does. And if a source of impurity touches them even from the outside, they contract impurity like all metal keilim. If they contract impurity from a human corpse, they become a primary source of impurity and they can regain purity after contracting other types of impurity through immersion in a mikveh.", + "When a metal oven was perforated, blemished, or cracked and one patched it with clay or one made it a coating or an upper surface of clay, it contracts impurity as an earthenware oven does.
How large must the hole be for the above law to apply? Large enough for fire to emerge through it.
Similar concepts apply with regard to a metal range. If pot-rests of clay are made for it, it contracts impurity as an earthenware range does. If one smears clay on a metal range, whether inside or outside, it is still not susceptible to impurity.", + "Although an earthenware oven is not fixed to the ground - even if it is hanging from the neck of a camel - it is susceptible to ritual impurity as an earthenware oven is, as implied by ibid.: \"They are impure,\" i.e., in any place they are located.", + "A furnace used by smelters of metal that has a place where a pot can be placed contracts impurity as a range does. Similarly, if a range used by glassmakers has a place where a pot can be placed, it contracts impurity as a range does.", + "A furnace used to produce lime, glass, or pottery, is pure. An oven with an opening at its side - if it has a border at its side, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "The following laws apply when stones were joined to each other and formed into an oven. If one made a coating for it on the inside and on the outside, it is considered as an oven in all contexts and contracts impurity from the presence of a source of impurity within its inner space. If it was coated from the outside alone, it contracts impurity from contact with a source of impurity, but not from the presence of a source of impurity within its inner space.
If stones were connected to an oven, but were not connected to each other, they contract impurity together with the oven. If they were connected with each other, but were not connected to the oven, they are like a tira. If one dug in the earth and fashioned a tira of earth, it is pure. A tira of a range is pure.", + "When two barrels and two frying pans are combined to make a range, they contract impurity from the presence of a source of impurity within its inner space and from contact with a source of impurity. The inner space of the barrels is pure. The thickness of the walls of the barrels is divided: That which serves the range is susceptible to impurity; that which serves the inside of the barrels is pure.", + "When a person affixes the three earthenware stands of a trivet in the earth and connects them with clay so that he can place a pot on them, they are susceptible to impurity like a range. If he affixed three pegs in the earth so that he can place a pot on them, even though he used clay to make a place on which the pot would sit, they are pure, like a metal range. Similarly, stones that were not coated with clay on which one places a pot are not susceptible to impurity. It is like they are a stone range.", + "When a person makes two stones into a range and connects them with clay, they are susceptible to impurity. If he connected one with clay but he did not connect the other with clay, it does not contract impurity.", + "When a person rests a pot on a stone and on an oven, on it and on a range with an opening for one pot, or it and on a range with an opening for two pots, it is susceptible to impurity. ...On it and on a wall or on it and on a rock, it is not susceptible to impurity.", + "With regard to a range made by a cook - in which instance, one stone is placed at the side of another stone, and then another is placed at its side in a continuous chain and they are all connected with clay: If one of them contacts impurity, they all do not contract impurity.", + "The following rules apply when there are three stones that were connected with clay and were made into two ranges, whether they were connected to each other and not connected to the ground or connected to the ground and not connected to each other. If one of the two ranges contracts impurity, the portion of the middle stone which serves the impure range contracts impurity. The portion which serves the pure range, by contrast, remains] pure. If one removed the outer stone of the pure range, the middle stone has been definitively classified and is impure in its entirety. If the outer stone of the impure range is removed, the middle stone is purified in its entirety.
The following rules apply if both ranges contracted impurity. If the middle stone is large, one allocates a portion large enough for a pot to be placed down on it on one side for one range and a portion large enough for a pot to be placed down on it on the other side for the other range, but the remainder of the stone is pure. If it was small, everything contracts impurity.
If the middle stone was removed, different laws apply: If a large pot can be placed down on the two outer ones, the range is impure. If they are further apart, the range is pure. If one returned the middle stone, everything is pure as it was. If one coated it with clay, it is susceptible to ritual impurity in the future, provided one heats each of them sufficiently to cook an egg.", + "When two stones were made into a range and contracted impurity, but afterwards one added one stone to the stone on one side and another stone to the stone on the other side, half of each of the two stones from the first range is impure and half is pure. If the two pure stones that were added were later removed, the two stones of the first range return to their initial impurity.", + "An earthenware heating counter that has receptacles in which a mixture of ash and coals were placed and which were used for pots is pure with regard to the laws pertaining to a range, but it is susceptible to impurity as a k'li with a receptacle. Therefore, if it was attached to the ground, it is pure as are other keilim. And if it has a hole, it is not susceptible to impurity like other keilim. These laws do not apply to a range.
An entity that touches the sides of the counter does not contract impurity like one which touches a range. Its wide portion where one can sit while the food is cooking contracts impurity if the counter contracts impurity.
Similarly, if one turned over a basket and built a range on top of it, it contracts impurity according to the laws pertaining to a wooden k'li and not according to those applying to a range. Therefore, it does not contract impurity from the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space as a range does." + ], + [ + "The remnants of a larger oven are four handbreadths. The remnants of a small oven are its larger portion.
What is implied? If a large oven is broken, as long as four handbreadths remain, it is susceptible to impurity. And if a small oven is broken, as long as its larger portion remains, it is susceptible to impurity. Similarly, if a large oven contracted impurity and it was smashed to the extent that less than four handbreaths remain, it is pure. A small oven becomes pure when less than its larger portion remains. If more than four handbreadths of a large oven remain or the larger portion of a small oven, it remains impure.
The remnants of a range with two openings are three handbreadths. For a range with one opening: If it was made for baking, the measure is the same as that of an oven. If it was made for cooking, the measure is the same as that of a range.", + "How can the owner restore the purity of an oven that contracted impurity that he does not want to destroy? It should be divided into three portions and the coating removed from the shards so that each shard is standing on the earth without a coating of clay.
If he divided it in two, leaving one large portion and one smaller portion, the larger portion is impure and the smaller portion is pure. If they are both of equal size, they are both impure, because it is impossible to make an exact determination which is larger. When, by contrast, an earthenware tabletop with a wall was divided in two equal portions, they are both pure. If one was larger and one smaller, the larger one is impure.", + "When an impure oven is divided into three portions and one is as large as the other two, the large portion is impure.
The following laws apply if such an oven was cut into circular portions, widthwise. If the height of every ring was less than four handbreadths, it is pure. If, afterwards, one arranges the rings one on top of the other and coats them with clay, making them into an oven as they were before, it is as if he made a different oven. It is susceptible to impurity only from the time it was reconstructed, provided it was heated to the extent that doughnuts could be baked in it after it was coated with clay.
If one separated the clay coating from the substance of the oven itself and placed sand or pebbles between the rings and the coating, it never becomes susceptible to impurity. Concerning this type of oven, it was said: A woman who is a nidah and one who is pure may both bake inside of it and everything is pure.
If it has one ring that is four handbreadths high and that ring contracts impurity through physical contact with a source of impurity and not from the presence of impurity within its inner space, the remainder of the rings are pure.", + "The following rules apply when an oven comes cut in pieces from the craftsman's shop and one makes supports for it so that they will be joined together as a single entity. If one placed them there while it was pure and it contracted impurity, when one removes the supports, it regains purity. Even after he returns them, it remains pure. If one coated the portions of the oven with clay, they become susceptible to impurity from that time onward. It is not necessary to heat the oven, because it was already heated the first time it was assembled.", + "When an oven was cut into rings, sand placed between each ring, and the entire structure coated with clay from the outside, it is susceptible to ritual impurity.", + "A pit used by Arabs - i.e., one digs in the earth, coats the pit with clay, and bakes in it - is governed by the following rules: If the clay could stand independently, it is susceptible to ritual impurity. If not, it is pure.", + "When one brings earthenware shards and sticks them together and forms an oven from them, making a coating for them from the inside and from the outside, after he heats it, it becomes susceptible to impurity, even though none of the shards is of the size required.", + "When one removed the base of a large barrel and made it into an oven, coating its exterior with clay, it is pure even though its walls are capable of containing the required amount. The rationale is that once an earthenware container is classified as not being susceptible to impurity, it never becomes susceptible again unless one makes it into an oven and coats it on the inside and on the outside.", + "When there is an oven with cracks for which a coating was made for each of the pieces, but the place of the cracks was left open, it is not susceptible to impurity. If clay, lime, or gypsum were placed on the cracks, it is susceptible to impurity. If one patched it with a paste made from ground earthenware and water, tar, sulfur, beeswax, yeast, dough, or animal turds, it is pure. This is the general principle: An entity from which an oven is not usually made is not considered as being sufficient to patch the cracks.", + "When the crack in an oven is positioned in a corner, even though one smeared clay at the sides, it is pure.", + "When a shelf outside an oven was placed in a corner in order to bake with it, it is pure. If it comprises the majority of the oven, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "The following rules apply when a person filled half of an oven with earth. If the oven contracted impurity from its inner space alone, only the portion above the earth contracts impurity. If it contracted impurity from contact with a source of impurity and the impurity touched its inside, the entire oven contracts impurity, even the portion below the earth.", + "The term kirah refers to a range with a place for two pots to rest; the term kopach refers to a range with a place for one pot to rest. Therefore if a kirah is divided lengthwise, it is pure. If it is split across its width, it is still susceptible to impurity. When, by contrast, a kopach is split, it is pure whether it is split lengthwise or widthwise.", + "The following rules apply when there is an opening in the upper surface of the base used by homeowners placed below a range. If the opening is less than three handbreadths deep, the range is susceptible to impurity, because if the kindling fuel is less than three handbreadths from the bottom of the range, a pot placed above will cook. If the opening is three handbreadths or more deep, it is not susceptible to impurity, because the fire will be too far from the pot and it will not cook.
If one places a stone or a rock over the opening, the range is still pure. If one coated the stone with clay, it becomes the base of the range and the range is susceptible to impurity in the future." + ], + [ + "All accessories of keilim are considered as the k'li itself. If the k'li contracts impurity, an accessory that is required to enable it to be used also contracts impurity. If the accessory is not required to enable it to be used, it is pure, as will be explained. Therefore when a stone protrudes a handbreadth from an oven or three fingerbreadths from a range with a place for two pots, it is considered as connected. Hence, if the oven or the range contract impurity, these stones also do. If foods or liquids touch these stones, they contract impurity. If they touch a place that is beyond a handbreadth from an oven or beyond three fingerbreadths from a range, they are pure.", + "When a range with a place for one pot was made for baking, the measure is the same as that of an oven. If it was made for cooking, the measure is the same as that of a range.", + "With regard to the extra layer of earth placed on top of an oven: that of homeowners is pure; that of bakers is susceptible to impurity like the oven is, because it is used as support for a spit. A similar law: an addition built around a pot used by those who cook olives is impure. One used by dyers is pure.", + "The \"crown\" of a range is pure. The following laws apply to the tira of an oven, i.e., a place built at the side of an oven where a loaf is placed when it is removed from the oven. If it is four handbreadths high, it contracts impurity together with the oven. If it is less than four handbreadths high, it is pure, because it is not connected to the oven. If it was connected to the oven, even on three stones, it can contract impurity.", + "The following laws apply to a place at the side of a range for a cruse of oil to be stored, for spices to be stored, or for a lamp to be placed. If the range contracted impurity by contact with a source of impurity, all of the above also contract impurity. If the range contracts impurity due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space, they do not contract impurity, because they are considered as joined to the range only by Rabbinic decree. Therefore our Sages made a distinction in this regard, so that terumah and sacrificial food that come in contact with it should not be burnt.
Similarly, any object concerning which it is stated that it contracts impurity through contact with a source of impurity, but it does not contract impurity due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space is considered as connected to an object that is fully susceptible to ritual impurity only according to Rabbinic Law. A distinction was made in its regard so that consecrated foods should not be burnt because of it, but instead, they should be held in abeyance.", + "The open space in front of a range is considered as joined to the range when it is elevated three fingerbreadths above the ground. If either the range or its open space contracts impurity either due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space or through contact with a source of impurity, the other entity also contracts impurity.
If the open space was lower than that and one contracted impurity through contact with a source of impurity, the other entity also contracts impurity. If, however, one contracts impurity only due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space, the other entity is not impure. The rationale is that it is only considered as connected according to Rabbinic decree.
When the open space in front of a range was separate from it, when it is three fingerbreadths high, it is considered as joined to the range, both with regard to impurity stemming from contact with a source of impurity or the impurity that arises due to the presence of impurity in its inner space. If it was lower than this or the open space was flat and did not have a border, it is not considered as joined to the range. If the range contracts impurity - whether due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space or through contact with a source of impurity - the open space is pure. Conversely, if the open space contracts impurity, the range is pure.", + "The following laws apply with regard to trivets on which a pot is placed on a range. If each of them was three fingerbreadths high or less, if the range contracts impurity - whether through contact with a source of impurity or due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space - all three contract impurity. Similar laws apply if there are four protrusions on which a pot is placed.
If one of the protrusions of the trivet is removed, a slight leniency is granted. If the range contracts impurity from contact with a source of impurity, the two remaining protrusions also contract impurity. But if the range contracts impurity due to the presence of impurity in its inner space, the protrusions do not contract impurity.
If at the outset only two protrusions - one opposite the other - were made to support a pot on a range, similar laws apply. If the range contracts impurity from contact with a source of impurity, the protrusions also contract impurity. But if the range contracts impurity due to the presence of impurity in its inner space, the protrusions do not contract impurity.
When the trivet was more than three fingerbreadths high, the portions that are three fingerbreadths high and lower contract impurity together with the range whether through contact with a source of impurity or due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space. The portions higher than three fingerbreadths contract impurity together with the range if it contracts impurity through contact with a source of impurity. If, however, it contracts impurity due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space, it does not contract impurity with it.
If the protrusions are removed from the rim of the range, when they are located within three fingerbreadths of the rim, they contract impurity together with the range whether through contact with a source of impurity or due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space. When they are located beyond three fingerbreadths from the rim, they contract impurity together with the range if it contracts impurity through contact with a source of impurity. If, however, it contracts impurity due to the presence of a source of impurity in its inner space, the protrusions do not contract impurity with it.
We are not extremely meticulous with regard to these measurments, for they are all of Rabbinic origin." + ], + [ + "An earthenware k'li is not susceptible to ritual impurity unless it has a receptacle and was made with the intent that it serve as a receptacle. If, by contrast it does not have a receptacle or even if it has a receptacle, but it was not made to serve that purpose, it is not susceptible to impurity at all, neither according to Scriptural Law, nor Rabbinic decree. Accordingly, a chair, a bed, a bench, a candelabra, or a table made of earthenware or any similar k'li that does not have a receptacle are not susceptible to impurity.
Similarly, a large pipe even though water passes though it, and even it is curved, and even when it holds water, is pure, because it was not intended to contain water, but rather that the water should pass through it. Similarly, a barrel used by swimmers is not susceptible to impurity. This ruling also applies to a cask at the side of the base of a large barrel , because it was made to serve as a handle for those who carry the large barrel and was not intended to serve as a receptacle.", + "A lantern that has a receptacle for oil is susceptible to ritual impurity. If it lacks one, it is pure. Similarly, a potter's frame that has a receptacle is susceptible to impurity.", + "A homeowner's funnel is pure. A perfumer's funnel is susceptible to impurity, because he turns it on its side so that his customers can smell the fragrance.", + "Covers for jugs of wine, jugs of oil, and barrels are pure, for they were not made to serve as receptacles. If a cover was altered so that it could be functional, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When the cover of a frying pan has a hole or a protrusion on its top, it is pure. If it does not have a hole or a protrusion, it is susceptible to impurity, because a woman will use it to drain off the sauce in which vegetables were cooked. This is the general principle: Anything that serves an earthenware container while it is turned upside down is pure.", + "A titrus, even though it has holes and water drips out from them, is nevertheless susceptible to impurity, because the water collects at its sides, and they are intended to serve as receptacles.", + "An earthenware torch into which patches of cloth and oil are placed to burn, is susceptible to impurity. Similarly, a receptacle that is placed under a lamp to collect drops of oil is susceptible to impurity.", + "A base that is placed under containers to collect the liquids that flow from the container is susceptible to impurity.", + "A boat made of earthenware, even though it serves as a receptacle, is not susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that a boat is not in the category of the keilim mentioned in the Torah. This applies whether it is made of earthenware or of wood and whether it is large or small.", + "Whenever keilim have been broken and their form has been destroyed, their broken fragments are not susceptible to impurity even if those fragments are functional with the exception of the fragments of earthenware containers. With regard to them, we follow the principle: If there is an earthenware fragment that can serve as a receptacle, it is susceptible to impurity. This is derived from Leviticus 11:33 which states: \"Any earthenware container.\" According to the Oral Tradition, it was understood that this phrase was mentioned only to include the broken shards of earthenware containers.
When does the above apply? When the earthenware shard has a receptacle that can hold liquids when the shard is resting on its base and not leaning. If, however, it is fit to hold liquids only when it is leaned against a support, it is not susceptible to impurity.", + "When an earthenware container cannot rest on its base because of a handle or it has a protrusion and the protrusion causes it to lean to one side, it is pure even though the handle was removed or the protrusion was broken. The rationale is that whenever an earthenware container is considered as pure for even one moment, it is never susceptible to impurity again.", + "When there is an earthenware container that has a pointed base, e.g., a basin with a pointed base, that was broken and its base is still able to serve as a container, even though the base cannot hold liquids unless it is supported, e.g., the bases of containers used to draw water and the bases of goblets, they are susceptible to ritual impurity, for this is the way they were made at the outset, that their bases would contain liquids when they would be supported or held.", + "How much liquid must the broken pieces of an earthenware container be able to contain to be susceptible to impurity? When the container while intact was between the size that would enable it to contain enough liquid to rub on a small person and the size of a barrel that could container a se'ah or close to that and it was broken, if the shards - either from the base or the wall - were able to contain a revi'it, they are susceptible to impurity.", + "If the vessel was a large barrel that could contain between a se'ah and two se'ah or more, if the shard that remains is large enough to contain half a log, it is susceptible to impurity. If originally the vessel was extremely large - from a barrel that could contain two se'ah until a large vat - and it broke, if a shard that remained could contain a log, it is susceptible to impurity. If the shards would contain less than these measures, they are not susceptible to impurity.", + "When a small earthenware container, e.g., a cruse or the like, breaks, but there remains from its bottom a shard that can hold even the slightest amount of liquid when resting on its base, even though it is very narrow, as thin as possible for a small container, it is susceptible to impurity. If a shard from its walls that could contain liquids remains, it is not susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that the walls of these containers and the like are fundamentally flat; they do not have a hollow that is apparent. Thus they are like flat earthenware implements.", + "The prevailing assumption is that wherever shards are found, they are pure except those found in a potter's workshop, because the majority of those are considered as bases for keilim. And a base for an implement is susceptible to impurity even if it is a broken vessel." + ], + [ + "To what degree is it necessary for an earthenware utensil to be broken so that it can no longer serve as an effective container and, hence, have its impurity nullified if it was impure or no longer be considered as susceptible to impurity if it was pure?
For a container made for food - when it has a hole through which olives can fall. For a container made for liquids - when it has a hole through which liquids can seep in; i.e., when it is inserted into liquids, the liquids will seep into the container through the hole. If it was made for both foods and liquids, it is judged stringently and it is susceptible to impurity unless it has a hole large enough for olives to fall through.
The measure \"enough for liquids to seep out\" was stated only with regard to a base for containers, because it is made to collect liquids that flow from containers and if liquids seep from it, it no longer serves its function.", + "There are five categories applicable with regard to an earthenware container:
a) if it has a hole through which liquids can seep out, it is pure with regard to contracting impurity as a base for containers, but it is still considered a container with regard to the consecration of water for the ashes of the red heifer;
b) if it has a hole that allows liquid to seep in, it is no longer considered as a container with regard to the consecration of water for the ashes of the red heifer, but it is still considered a container with regard to making produce subject to ritual impurity because of the liquids contained within it, as we explained;
c) if it has a hole large enough for a small root to emerge from it, the water it contains do not make produce subject to ritual impurity because the liquids contained within it are considered as if they are not in a container; nevertheless, it is still considered as a container with regard to holding olives and hence, it is susceptible to impurity;
d) if it has a hole large enough for olives to fall through, it is pure and it is regarded as a k'li made from animal turds or stone that is not susceptible to impurity, nevertheless, it is still considered as a container with regard to saving its contents when sealed closed in a building where a corpse is located unless its larger portion is broken, as we explained in Hilchot Tum'at Meit.", + "The size of a hole necessary for a barrel not to contract impurity is one through which nuts would fall. The size of a hole necessary for a frying pan or a pot not to contract impurity is one through which olives would fall. Similarly, even when an earthenware kneading trough is large and contains 40 se'ah of liquids, if it has holes large enough for olives to fall through, even though one turns it on its side and kneads with it, it is pure, for it was not made with this intent at the outset.", + "The size of a hole necessary for a cruse and a container not to contract impurity is one through which oil can seep through. The size of a hole necessary for a pitcher not to contract impurity is one through which water can seep in.", + "When the opening of a lamp is removed, it is pure. A lamp of earth whose mouth was fired by the wick is not susceptible to impurity and is not considered as an earthenware container until the entire lamp was fired in a kiln like an earthenware container.", + "When a barrel is broken, but it can hold liquids when it is turned on its side or if it was split and it is like two kneading troughs, it is still susceptible to impurity. If it became cracked and cannot be carried while holding half a kab of dried figs, it is pure.", + "When the handles of a barrel are removed, it is considered as a base placed under a container. This is true even if only one handle was removed. If it was cracked below its handles, even though its handles are intact, it is also considered only as a base. If initially it was made without handles, it is considered as a barrel.", + "The following laws apply when a barrel became cracked in the oven and thus two bases for containers were produced. If it cracked after the work necessary to fashion it was completed, each of the bases is susceptible to ritual impurity. If it was cracked before the work necessary to complete it was finished and afterwards, it was fired in the kiln, it is pure.
How can this matter be determined? If the broken pieces were flat and the clay was red beneath the surface, it can be assumed that it was broken before the work necessary to fashion it was completed. If the broken pieces were not flat and the clay was not red beneath the surface, it can be assumed that it was broken after the work necessary to fashion it was completed. Hence it is susceptible to impurity like other broken earthenware containers that are fit to be used.", + "When a base to be placed under containers is cracked and it is not suitable to hold liquids, it is pure even though it is still suitable to hold food. The rationale is that it is made only to collect liquids that seep out as we explained. If it would leak, it would be useless, because a base is not placed under another base.
Similarly, a base that is broken or divided into two is pure, because it was not said that the remnants of remnants are susceptible to impurity. Instead, it is only the remnants of earthenware containers themselves that are susceptible to impurity.", + "If there are protrusions emerging from a base, whether it is resting upright or leaning on its side, whenever the protrusions can hold olives if the base is filled with olives, it contracts impurity when the base is touched by impurity and when impurity enters the inner space opposite it. If it cannot hold olives, it contracts impurity when the base is touched by impurity, but does not contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite it.", + "What is meant by the statement: it contracts impurity when the base is touched by impurity, but does not contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite it? If impurity touches the actual body of the inside of the base, the protrusion contracts impurity. If impurity enters the inner space of the base, even if it is directly opposite the protrusion, the protrusion does not contract impurity.", + "What is meant by the statement that a base contracts impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite it? That if impurity enters the inner space of the base opposite the protrusion, the protrusion contracts impurity together with the base.
Similar concepts apply whenever it is stated that an earthenware container, an oven, or a range contract impurity if touched by impurity, they contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite them, or that they do not contract impurity when impurity enters the inner space opposite them. Similarly, whenever the concept of contracting impurity through contact is mentioned with regard to an earthenware container, an oven or a range, the intent is that the impurity will touch the inside of these entities. Contracting impurity via their inner space means that the impurity will not touch them at all, merely enter into their inner space.", + "When a barrel was cracked and one held it together by smearing animal turds upon it - even though the shards would fall if the turds were removed - it remains susceptible to impurity, because its classification as a k'li was never nullified.
If it was broken and, after the shards fell apart, one stuck them together with turds or one brought shards from another place and stuck them together with turds - even though the shards would stand as a unit if the turds were removed - it is pure, because there was a time when it was no longer considered as a k'li. If one of the shards could hold a revi'it, that shard alone contracts impurity if impurity enters its inner space, because it is considered as a k'li in its own right. The remainder of the barrel does not contract impurity unless impurity touches it from the inside, because it is not a whole k'li.", + "The following laws apply if a barrel was perforated, one plugged the hole with tar, and then the barrel was broken. If the shard plugged with tar could hold a revi'it, it is susceptible to impurity, because it is considered as a broken portion of a barrel and its classification as a k'li was never nullified.
If, however, one plugged a hole in a shard with tar after it was separated from the k'li, it is pure, even though it is now capable of holding a revi'it. The rationale is that when a shard is perforated, it is no longer considered as a k'li and it is pure. And once an earthenware container has been considered as pure for even one moment, it never becomes susceptible to impurity again.", + "When a kettle was perforated and it was patched with tar, it is pure, because it cannot hold hot liquids as it holds cold ones. Similarly, keilim made from tar, beeswax, or the like are pure and are not considered as keilim.", + "When an earthenware funnel was plugged with tar, it is not susceptible to impurity, because the tar does not cause it to be considered as a container. If, however, a wooden funnel is plugged in this manner, it is considered as a container and it is susceptible to impurity." + ], + [ + "We already explained that every accessory that is required by an implement when it is being used is considered as an integral element of the implement with regard to both contracting and imparting impurity. Therefore, when one coats an earthenware container which is intact and strong, if the container contracts impurity and foods and/or liquids touch the coating, they are pure. The rationale is that the container does not require this coating.
If, however, one coats an unsound earthenware container, the coating is considered as an integral element of the container. Similarly, when one reinforces an earthenware jug used to draw water by covering it with leather, parchment, or the like, if the jug was unsound, the coating is considered as an integral element of the container.", + "When one coats an earthenware container in order to cook with it, the coating is not considered as joined to it. If one coats implements in order to heat tar in them, the coating is considered as joined to them.", + "When there was a hole in a barrel and one plugged it with tar, tin, sulfur, lime, or gypsum, the filling is not considered as joined to it. If one plugged it with other substances, the filling is considered as joined to it.", + "Moist substances that can be stretched that are used to coat casks of water so that water will not drip from the container are considered as integral elements of the container. Even if the container contracted impurity because of the presence of impurity within its inner space, food and/or liquids that touch the coating are impure.
Similarly, the coating of an oven is considered as the earthenware substance of the oven itself, provided the coating is no more than a handbreadth thick, because that it is what is necessary for an oven. Anything more than a handbreadth is not necessary for an oven and entities that touch a portion of the coating that is more than a handbreadth thick are pure. The coating necessary for a range is three fingerbreadths thick.", + "When there was a hole in a barrel and one plugged it with more tar than was necessary, an entity that touches the portion that is necessary to plug it is impure. If it touches the portion that is not necessary, it is pure. When tar dripped onto a barrel, an entity that touches it is pure.", + "When a samovar that was coated with both mortar and pieces of ground shards contracts impurity, one who touches the mortar contracts impurity. One who touches the ground shards does not contract impurity, because the ground shards do not attach themselves thoroughly to the container.", + "When a coating was applied to the cover of a barrel and to the barrel, the covering is not considered as connected to it. If impure liquids touch the barrel, the cover does not contract impurity. If such liquids touch the cover, the outside of the barrel does not contract impurity.", + "When a metal implement is covered with tar, the tar is not considered as joined to it. If it was designated for wine, the coating is considered an integral part of the container.", + "The following laws apply when the carcass of a crawling animal comes in contact with dough that is in the cracks of a kneading trough. On Pesach, since there is a significant prohibition against the possession of dough, it is considered as an intervening substance and the contact of the carcass with it does not impart impurity to the kneading trough. Different laws apply throughout the year. If one is particular about it, the kneading trough does not contract impurity. If one desires that the dough remain, it is considered as part of the kneading trough and the kneading trough contracts impurity.", + "The following laws apply to the strands and the straps attached to covers for books or handkerchiefs for children. Those that are sewn are considered as attached, while those that are merely tied are not. Similar laws apply to the straps attached to a hoe, a sack, and a bushel. Those joined to the handles of an earthenware container, by contrast, are not considered as attached - even if they are sewn - because there is no way they can be attached to an earthenware container.", + "The following rules apply with regard to the extension of the handle of a hatchet: Within three fingerbreadths of the head is considered as joined. Anything that touches beyond three fingerbreadths is pure.
With regard to the portion of the handle that is held, the handbreadth next to the head is considered as attached. Anything that touches beyond that measure is pure.", + "For the implement to be susceptible to impurity, the remnant of the shaft of a compass must be a handbreadth long. The handle of a jewelers' hammer must be a handbreadth. The handle of a goldsmith's hammer must be two handbreadths long, that of a carpenter, three handbreadths.
The remnant of a plow drawn by oxen is four handbreadths close to the metal peg implanted in its upper end. The handle of the hatchet with which one digs irrigation ditches is four handbreadths. The handle of a hatchet used to prune trees is five handbreadths. The handle of a small hammer is five handbreadths and that of an ordinary hammer is six. The handle of a hatchet used to chop firewood and that of one use to break up earth is six handbreadths. The handle of a hammer used by stonecutters is six handbreadths. The remnants of a plow that is close to the metal edge at the plow's end must be seven handbreadths. The handle of a ladle is eight handbreadths, that used by appliers of lime is ten handbreadths. With regard to any greater measure, if one desires to keep it, it is susceptible to impurity. The handles of any implements used when cooking over a fire, e.g., spits and skewers, are susceptible to impurity even if they are very long.", + "When a staff is temporarily used as a handle for a hatchet, it is considered as attached to it at the time one is working with it. If a source of impurity comes in contact with the staff while one is breaking up earth or chopping with it, the head of the hatchet contracts impurity. If impurity touches the head, the staff contracts impurity.
Similarly, a diyustar which is made up of two wooden implements held together by a peg with which one sets up a loom is considered as attached at the time one works with it. If one affixed the diyustar to a beam, it is still susceptible to impurity and the beam is not considered as attached to it. If one made part of the beam a diyustar, any part of the beam that is necessary for the diyustar is considered as part of the diyustar. However, a person who touches the remainder of the beam is pure because the entire beam is not considered as joined to the diyustar.", + "When a wagon contracts impurity, one who touches the metal bar, the wooden yoke, the eye, and the thick ropes - even at the time work is being performed - is pure.
One who touches the swordlike beam of wood, the kneelike piece of wood, the handle, a metal ring, the \"cheeks\" of the yoke, and the articles hanging from it are impure.
Similarly, when a saw manned by two people becomes impure, one who touches either side contracts impurity. One who touches the strap, the band, the shaft, or its supports remains pure, for these are not considered as attached to it. In contrast, one who touches the frame of a large saw is impure.", + "When the lance in a carpenter's press becomes impure, one who touches the press itself is pure. When a drill becomes impure, one who touches the bow wound around it is pure, because it is not considered as attached to the drill.
When a bow was extended and the arrow extended within it, if the arrow contracts impurity, one who touches the bowstring or the bow does not contract impurity. This applies even when it is extended. Similarly, if the lance of a trap for field mice becomes impure, the trap does not contract impurity, even if it has been set.
Similarly, when a loom that is extended contracts impurity in the weaving process, one who touches all of the following: the upper beam and the lower beam, the heddles, the weaver's comb, the thread that is passed over purple thread when weaving a sheet of fabric, and a strand extending from the weave that will not be integrated within it is pure. The rationale is that all of these are not considered as joined to the garment. One, however, who touches the woof that has not yet been tightened, the woof that is standing, a thread that is woven as part of a purple fabric, and a strand extending from the weave that will be integrated with it is impure. The rationale is that all of these are considered as joined to the garment.", + "One who touches wool that is on the base of a spindle of a loom or on a rod is pure. One who touches a spool before it has been uncovered, is impure. After it has been uncovered, he is pure.", + "When a string is threaded through a needle, even if it is tied on both sides, it is not considered as joined to it. If it was inserted into a garment, the string is considered as connected to the garment, but the needle is not considered as connected to the garment. Moreover, not even the entire string is considered as connected to the garment, only what is necessary for sewing. What is not necessary is not considered as connected.
When a thread has unraveled from a garment, even if it is 100 cubits long, the entire thread is considered to be attached to the garment. When a rope is attached to an earthenware container, even if it is 100 cubits long, the entire rope is considered to be attached to it. If one tied another rope to the initial rope, the portion on the inside of the knot is considered as attached. The portion outside the knot is not considered as attached. When a rope is attached to a basket, it is not considered as attached unless one sewed one to the other." + ], + [ + "The strands that emerge from the weave and those at the beginning of the sheet of fabric and at its end are called nimin. Until what measure are they considered as part of the fabric? For a sheet, for a headcovering, a scarf, or a veil, six fingerbreadths. For a cloak that is open across its entire length and which is then closed with loops, the measure of its strands is ten fingerbreadths; a thick blanket, a mantle, a cloak, three fingerbreadths. Even if the garment is impure due to the impurity of a zav or because of another form of impurity, if one touches a strand beyond these measures, he remains pure. Needless to say that if impurity touched the additional portion, the garment does not contract impurity.", + "There is no minimum measure for the strands that emerge from a headcovering, a mask worn by the Arabs over their faces, a belt made of goats' hair, undergarments worn by a person close to his flesh, a handkerchief, and a curtain placed over entrances like a drape.", + "When a plumb line contracts impurity, the twelve handbreadths of its strand are considered as joined to it. Anyone who touches a portion beyond twelve handbreadths is pure. A plumb line of carpenters is eighteen handbreadths; one used by the builders of large structures is 50 cubits. When one touches any portion beyond these measures, even if the owner desires that it be preserved, he is pure.", + "Plumb lines used by roofers and artists are impure regardless of their length.", + "The length of the chain of a scale of goldsmiths, an ordinary balance scale, or a scale used by those who weigh precious purple cloth which is held by the seller, suspending the scale from his hand, is three fingerbreadths. Its horizontal beam and its strings have no specific length.
The length of the chain of the scale of sellers of scrap metal and the like is three handbreadths. Its beam and its strings are twelve handbreadths. The length of the chain of a scale used by merchants and homeowners is a handbreadth. Its beam and its strings are six handbreadths. The length of the chain of a scale used by wool merchants and those who weigh glass is two handbreadths. Its beam and its strings are nine handbreadths. Anything more than these measures is not considered as joined to the scale.", + "When is the cord used to tie the supports for a bed considered as joined to the bed? When one ties three squares. One who touches the cord from the point where it is tied and further inward is impure. For three fingerbreadths, the length of the cord on the outside of the knot is impure, because that measure is necessary for the knot and is considered as part of the bed. Anything outside of three fingerbreadths is pure, because it is not necessary for the k'li. Even if it is cut off, the knot will not become undone.", + "When a person touches a cord extending out from a bed that is impure, until the end of four handbreadths, he is pure. The rationale is that this measure is not considered as necessary for the bed, since it is not fit for any purpose. From the beginning of the fifth handbreadth until the end of the tenth handbreadth, he is impure, because the cord is used to tie the beds when they are hung from the walls. From ten handbreadths and more, he is pure, because it is more than what is necessary for the bed.", + "The woven band tied around a bed to reinforce the connection between its components is called a mizran. The following rules apply with regard to the portion that extends outside the bed. For ten handbreadths, it is considered as necessary for the bed. Anything more than that is not necessary for the bed.
When a mizran has worn out, if seven handbreadths of it - enough to make a girdle for a donkey - remain, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When a bed was impure because it served as a support for a zav and a portion of its mizran protrudes from it, for ten handbreadths, it is a primary source of impurity like the bed itself. Everything is considered as a support to which a zav imparted impurity. Beyond ten handbreadths, the extra portion of the mizran is impure like an object that was touched by a support to which a zav imparted impurity.
When a zav steps on the extension of a mizran, if he steps on the first ten handbreadths, the entire bed is considered as a support to which a zav imparted impurity. If he steps on the portion, outside of ten handbreadths, the bed is pure.
With regard to what does the above apply? With regard to impurity stemming from serving as support for a zav. With regard to other types of impurity, even 100 cubits is considered as attached to the bed.
What is implied? When a mizran is wound around a bed and one brought its end into a structure in which a human corpse was found, the carcass of a crawling animal touched its end, or impure liquids fell on its end, the bed contracts impurity even if the end of the mizran that contracted impurity is 100 cubits away from the bed itself.", + "When a bed was impure because it was used as a support for a zav and one wound a mizran around it, everything contracts that impurity. If one separated them afterwards, the bed retains its original status, but the mizran is considered merely as an object that touched a support for a zav.
If the bed had contracted impurity that lasts seven days and one wound a mizran around it, everything contracts that impurity. If one separated them afterwards, the bed retains its original status, but the mizran is impure merely until nightfall. If the bed was impure until nightfall and one wound a mizran around it, everything contracts that impurity. If one separated them afterwards, the bed retains its original status, but the mizran is pure.", + "If there was a mizran wound around a bed and a human corpse touched them, everything contracts impurity that lasts seven days. If they are separated, they both remain impure for that time. If the carcass of a crawling animal or the like touches them, they contract impurity that lasts until nightfall. If they are separated, they both remain impure for that time.", + "When a bedpost that was deemed impure as a support for a zav was connected to a bed that had been pure, the entire bed is considered as such a support. If they were separated afterwards, the bedpost retains its original status and the bed is impure because of contact with such a support. Similarly, if a bedpost that had contracted impurity that lasts seven days was connected to a bed, the entire bed is impure for seven days as if a corpse had touched its bedpost. If one sprinkled the ashes of the red heifer on the bed, it is purified and the bedpost is purified together with it. If the bedpost was separated from the bed before the ashes of the red heifer were sprinkled, the bedpost retains its original status and the bed is impure until the evening.
If a bedpost that was impure until the evening was connected to a bed, everything is impure until the evening. If the bedpost was separated from the bed, the bedpost retains its original status and the bed is pure, for an article that it is impure until the evening as a derivative of impurity stemming from a corpse does not impart impurity, neither to a person, nor to a k'li, because it is merely a derivative, as we explained. Similar laws apply with regard to a tooth of a plow that contracted impurity from a corpse and was then joined to the plow." + ], + [ + "What is the minimum measure for a cloth to contract impurity? Three handbreadths by three handbreadths to contract the impurity of a support for a zav, precisely three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths together with the loose hanging strands to contract the impurity stemming from a human corpse or other types of impurity.
With regard to what does the above apply? To clothes of wool or flax. If, however, clothes were made from other fabrics, they do not contract any type of impurity unless they are three handbreadths by three handbreadths. This is derived from Leviticus 11:32 which states: \"or a garment.\" According to the Oral Tradition, it was taught that \"or\" serves as an inclusion, teaching that a garment three handbreadths by three handbreadths from other fabrics is susceptible to impurity.
When does the above apply? With regard to torn pieces from a garment. When, however, one weaves a garment independently, it is susceptible to any impurity no matter how small it is, with the exception of the impurity of a support for a zav to which only those articles fit to serve as a support are susceptible.", + "Very thick cloths, e.g., felt or firm, thick blankets, or very thin clothes, e.g., the linen garments of the Egyptians through which the flesh can be seen, are not susceptible to impurity unless the torn fabric is three handbreadths by three handbreadths. This applies both with regard to the impurity of a support for a zav or other types of impurity.", + "All woven nets are susceptible to impurity like clothes are. This applies equally to one who weaves strands together and makes them into a thick cord or who weaves them together to make a belt, with the exception of a net made by wool merchants to hold wool which is pure.
When the portion of a slingshot where a stone rests is woven or made of leather, it is susceptible to impurity. If the place where one places his finger is slit, it is pure. If the handle of the slingshot is slit, it is still susceptible to impurity.
Different types of fishing nets are susceptible to impurity. A fishing net with a closely-woven pocket is susceptible to impurity because of that pocket. Since its holes are so small, it is considered like a garment. When one makes a garment from such a net, it is pure. When one makes a garment from the pocket, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When one made a cloak from a cloth used as a filter of liquids, if it is three handbreadths by three handbreadths, it is susceptible to impurity.", + "When a cloth used as a filter for wine becomes worn out, if it is still useful for its initial purpose, it is susceptible to impurity. If not, it is pure.", + "Cloth covers for scrolls on which designs were made are not susceptible to impurity, because they do not serve humans. The designs indicate that they were made for the scrolls. If there were no designs on them, they are susceptible to types of impurity other than that contracted by the support of a zav, because were one to sit on such a cover, he would be told: \"Stand up and let us perform our work,\" as we explained concerning Hilchot Metamei Mishkav UMoshav.", + "A cushion that porters place on their shoulders because of the yoke they carry is susceptible to the impurity contracted by the support of a zav. A cloth used as a filter for wine is not susceptible to that type of impurity.", + "When one originally had in mind using a cloth for designs, it is not susceptible to impurity. If the person nullified his original intent, it is susceptible to impurity. When a homeowner made covers to hang over walls or pillars, they are not susceptible to impurity.", + "A cloak that is made like a veil in order to entertain drinkers is not susceptible to impurity.", + "A woman's head kerchief that was used to cover a scroll is not susceptible to the impurity contracted by the support of a zav. It is, however, susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse and other types of impurity.", + "When one makes a bandage, whether from leather or from cloth, even though the bandage is of the minimum measure to contract impurity, it is pure. If one applies a compress to cloth, it is not susceptible to impurity, because it becomes soiled and is not fit to be sat upon. If it is applied to leather, it is susceptible to impurity, because it is cleaned easily and is then fit to lie upon.", + "At what point does a cloth become susceptible to ritual impurity? When a portion three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths will be woven. All garments that are woven with needles, e.g., pockets and leggings, are not susceptible to impurity until the work to complete them has been finished.", + "All keilim that are made with needlework, e.g., a trap, become susceptible to impurity when the receptacle that enables the intended task to be performed with them is completed.", + "With regard to the headcovering worn by young women: If one began making it from its opening, it does not become susceptible to impurity until one completes its base. If one began from the base, it does not become susceptible to impurity until one completes the opening.
An ornament for a headcovering is susceptible to impurity independently. The strands that attach the head-covering to the woman's hair are considered as joined to the head-covering, both to impart impurity and to contract impurity.", + "When a head covering is torn, if it no longer can cover the greater portion of the hair on the woman's head, it is pure.", + "When is the fashioning of a cloak made from fabric, felt, or paper completed? When one makes the opening for the head. This depends on the person for whom the cloak is made. For someone who is large, the opening is made for his size; for someone who is small, the opening is made for his size.
When does such a cloak regain purity? When it is worn out to the extent that it can no longer serve its original purpose. If its upper portion comprises the larger part of the cloak and it remains intact, the cloak still retains its impure status. If the bottom portion comprises the larger part of the cloak and it remains intact, the cloak is pure. If the border around its opening is torn, it is pure.", + "If one makes a belt from the collar of a garment or the side of a sheet, it is not susceptible to ritual impurity until one makes a border at its edge. If one makes it from the middle of garment or the sheet, it is not susceptible to impurity until one makes a border at the other side as well.", + "When both edges of a belt have worn out, but its middle portion is intact, it remains impure.", + "When a border was separated from a garment and was adapted to use for girding one's loins, it is susceptible to impurity, because it is like a belt.", + "The following laws apply to a garment of a poor person that has become worn out: If the greater portion of its edges are intact, even if it does not have a portion three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths that is intact, it is susceptible to impurity. If its edges are not intact, but it has a portion three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths that is strong and intact, it is susceptible to impurity. If not, it is not susceptible to impurity. Similar concepts apply to other clothes of poor people.", + "Patches that are smaller than three handbreadths by three handbreadths are not susceptible to impurity. If one had in mind to use them for a given purpose and prepared them with that intent, they are susceptible to impurity unless they are less than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths. For anything less than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths is not susceptible to impurity at all, even though it was prepared to be used.", + "When a cloth that is smaller than three handbreadths by three handbreadths which had been prepared to be used to plug a bathhouse, as a hand guard when turning over a pot, to clean a mill, or the like was cast on a dung heap, it is no longer susceptible to impurity.
If it was hung on a hook or placed behind the door, it is as if one placed it among his clothes. It is still significant for him and it is susceptible to impurities other than that of a support of a zav. It is not susceptible to that impurity, because it is less than three handbreadths by three handbreadths.", + "When a cloth three handbreadths by three handbreadths was cast in the dung heap, if it was whole and durable so that it could be used to hold a fourth of a kab of coarse salt without tearing, it is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav. If not, it is not susceptible to impurity. If, however, it was in the house and it was durable, even if it could not be used to hold salt or if it was used to hold salt even if it was not durable, it is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav.", + "The following laws apply when a cloth three handbreadths by three handbreadths was torn, but the pieces were not separated from each other. If it was placed on a chair and when one sat on it, his flesh would touch the chair itself, it is pure. If not, it is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav.", + "If a cloth three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths had even one thread that was very worn out, there was a knot in it, or two strands ran together with each other, it is pure.", + "If a cloth three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths was thrown into the dung heap, it is pure. If he took it back, it is susceptible to impurity. In a continuous cycle, casting it away purifies it, taking it back makes it susceptible to impurity. The only exceptions are remnants of purple fabric and fine red silk. Even if they were cast in the dungheap, they are susceptible to impurity, because they are valuable.", + "When a cloth three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths was placed in a ball of fabric or it was made into a ball of fabric itself, it is pure. If, however, a cloth three handbreadths by three handbreadths was placed in a ball, its status is the same as it was previously and it is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav. If such a cloth was made into a ball itself, it is not susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav, because the sewing necessary to make it into a ball reduces it from the size of three handbreadths by three handbreadths." + ], + [ + "A mapatz is a mat made by interweaving cords, reeds, grasses, or the like. A mapatz is not one of the keiliim mentioned by the Torah. Nevertheless, it is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav according to Scriptural Law. The rationale is that Leviticus 15:4 states \"All surfaces on which one lies,\" expanding the category of articles susceptible to impurity. A mat is thus included, because it is fit to lie on and is indeed made for that purpose. Similarly, it contracts impurity from contact with a human corpse and other sources of impurity according to Rabbinic Law, like all other flat wooden keiliim, as we explained. This is a great general principle: Any entity that is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav is susceptible to other types of impurity.", + "We already explained that a piece of cloth three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths is susceptible to other types of impurity and one three handbreadths by three handbreadths is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav.", + "The measure for a cloth of goats' hair to be susceptible to impurity is four handbreadths by four handbreadths; for leather, five handbreadths by five handbreadths, for a mat, six handbreadths by six handbreadths, both with regard to the impurity associated with the support of a zav and with regard to other types of impurity. Anything smaller than these measures is pure on all accounts.
In which instance does the above apply? When a piece of fabric was torn from such a cloth unintentionally. If, however, one intentionally cuts a piece off, even if it is merely one handbreadth by one handbreadth for a seat or three handbreadths by three handbreadths for a surface on which one lies, it is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav. This applies whether the piece one handbreadth by one handbreadth or three handbreadths by three handbreadths was a cloth, from goats' hair, leather, or a mat. Similarly, if one sets aside a fragment of such fabrics to hold, i.e., to hold in one's hand as the harvesters of figs do so that their fingers will not be damaged, the fragment is impure whatever its size, provided it is not less than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths. For any fragment less than three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths is pure under all conditions.", + "If one joins two handbreadths from a cloth to one handbreadth from a cloth of goats' hair, three handbreadths from a cloth of goats' hair to one handbreadth from leather, four handbreadths from leather and one from a mat, the article is pure. If, by contrast, one joined five handbreadths from a mat and one from leather, four handbreadths from leather and one from goats' hair, three handbreadths from goats' hair and one from cloth, the article is susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav.
This is the general principle: Whenever one completes the minimum measure with a substance governed by a more stringent law, it is susceptible to impurity. If it is completed] with a substance governed by a less stringent law, it is pure.", + "When a sifter or a sieve that became worn out was adjusted to be used as a seat, it is pure. They are not susceptible to impurity until the edges are cut and straightened. Afterwards, it is considered as a mat.", + "A cloak of a child is not susceptible to impurity unless it comprises the minimum measure: three handbreadths by three handbreadths. Both of its sides are measured as one, for that is the way it is made.
These are the garments whose sides are measured as one: garments that are worn over the feet, the shins, and the head, pants, undergarments with pockets. When a patch was sewn over the edge of a garment, if it was extended to its full length, it is measured as its full length. If it was folded over, it is measured as it is folded over.", + "When exactly three handbreadths by three handbreadths of a garment were woven and it contracted the impurity associated with the support of a zav and afterwards, the entire garment was completed, the entirety of the garment is impure on that level of impurity. If one removed one strand from the beginning of the original garment, it is no longer considered in that category of impurity. It is, however, impure like an article that came in contact with a support that contracted the impurity of a zav. It is a primary derivative, like a k'li that touched such a support. If one removed one strand from the beginning of the original garment and then completed the entire garment, the entire garment is impure like an article that came in contact with a support that contracted the impurity of a zav.
Similarly, when three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths of a cloth were woven, it contracted the impurity associated with a human corpse, and then one completed the entire garment, the entire garment is impure with the impurity associated with a human corpse. If one removed one strand from the beginning of the original garment, it is no longer considered in that category of impurity. It is, however, impure like an article that came in contact with such impurity. If one removed one strand from the beginning of the original garment and then completed the entire garment, the entire garment is pure.
Why is the entire garment pure? Because it was said that when the size of a cloth three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths was reduced, it is pure entirely. By contrast, although a cloth three handbreadths by three handbreadths whose size was reduced is no longer susceptible to the impurity associated with the support of a zav, it is susceptible to other types of impurity.", + "When a patch that had contracted the impurity associated with a support of a zav was attached to a basket or a hide, the entire entity is considered as a primary derivative of impurity. If, afterwards, one separated the patch from it, the basket or the hide remain a primary derivative, because they came in contact with a support. The patch, however, is pure, since it was attached and detached, its identity was subsumed to that of the basket or hide.
If he attached the patch to a cloth of linen or wool or of goats' hair, the entire cloth is considered as a primary source of the impurity associated with a zav. If, afterwards, the patch was separated, the cloth or the goats' hair is considered as a primary derivative and the patch is a primary source of impurity, as it was originally. For it is not subsumed to the weave.
When he attached the impure patch to the garment, if he sewed it on one side or even on two sides, but like a gamma, it is not considered as joined together, nor is the entire garment considered as a primary source of impurity. Instead, it is only considered to have come in contact with a support of a zav. If it was sewn on two sides, one opposite the other, it is considered as joined to the garment, and the entire garment is considered as a primary source of impurity.", + "When a cloth three handbreadths by three handbreadths that had contracted the impurity associated with a support of a zav was afterwards divided, it is purified and the remnants are not impure at all. Their status is like that of the broken pieces of a k'li that had contracted impurity. When, by contrast, one cut a piece three fingerbreadths by three fingerbreadths from a large cloth that had contracted the impurity associated with a support of a zav, that piece has been purified from that level of impurity. It, nevertheless, is impure, as an object that touched such a support, because at the time it was separated from the larger cloth, it contracted that level of impurity through contact with the impure cloth.", + "When a cloak that had contracted the impurity associated with a support of a zav was afterwards made into a curtain, it is purified from that impurity.
When is it purified from that impurity? When one attaches to it loops from which it will be hung like other curtains.", + "When a garment that had contracted the impurity associated with a support of a zav was immersed in a mikveh, but before nightfall that day, one began tearing fragments from it, once the majority of it was torn, it is no longer considered as joined together and the entire garment is pure even though there still remained a portion large enough for a scarf that was not torn. The rationale is he has the intent to continue to tear it.
With regard to what does the above apply? With regard to an article that was immersed that day. Since he did not care for it enough not to refrain from immersing it, it can be assumed that he will also not care for it enough not to refrain from tearing it in its entirety. Therefore, the entire garment is pure." + ], + [ + "These are the hides that can contract the impurity associated with the support of a zav (midras): a hide that one intended to use as a carpet, a hide placed on top of beds to sleep upon, a hide placed on a donkey under the burden it carries, a hide placed in a basinet under a baby, a hide used for a pillow, a hide used for a cushion, a hide placed beneath the table while eating so that crumbs will fall upon it; it is susceptible to impurity, because one leans his feet upon it, a hide worn by a potter, a hide worn by a flax-carder when he cards flax, a hide a porter places on his shoulders when he is carrying burdens, and a hide which a doctor places on his knees when he is puncturing boils. These hides are susceptible to impurity, because a person will sit upon them.
The hide placed over a child's heart upon which spittle descends so that his clothes will not be spoiled, a hide meant to place over a person's heart during the harvest, because of the heat, a hide wrapped around a garment, and a hide sewed into a chest in which clothes are placed are all susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that they are all turned upside down and used as supports.", + "All of the hides that are susceptible to midras impurity are not susceptible to that impurity unless they are of the minimum size: five handbreadths by five handbreadths.
The following hides are not susceptible to midras impurity: a hide a person who combs wool wears while combing, a hide wrapped around combed wool, a hide wrapped around fine purple cloth, and a carrying case for fine purple cloth sewn from leather. All of these hides are susceptible to other types of impurity.", + "When leather was made into a cover for a k'li, it is pure with regard to all types of impurity. If it was made as a cover for weights, it is susceptible to other types of impurity, because it was made to serve as a receptacle. It is not susceptible to midras impurity.", + "If a hide made to protect one's heel and the sole of one's foot, covers the greater portion of the foot, it is susceptible to impurity. If not, it is pure.", + "A shoe that is on the mold, even though it has not been worn by a person yet, is still susceptible to midras impurity, because the tasks associated with it have been completed.", + "All hides that are fit to become susceptible to midras impurity and are not lacking the performance of any tasks to make them functional become susceptible to impurity through thought alone, i.e., if one intended to use it as a mat for a table or the like, it becomes susceptible to midras impurity. If the performance of a task is necessary to make them functional, one's intent does not change their status until that task is completed. There is an exception: a hide used to cover a saddle to guard it against dust. In this instance, the person's intent has an effect even though the deed necessary to make it functional has not been completed.
With regard to what does the above apply? To hides owned by a private person. Hides owned by a leather maker, by contrast, can be assumed to be set aside for sale. Hence, one's intent does not have an effect on their status unless one performs a deed with them preparing them to serve as a support.", + "A person does not impart midras impurity to a surface on which one lies or sits unless it belongs to him, as indicated by Leviticus 15:5: \"One who touches his couch....\" If one obtained a surface on which one lies through robbery and used it as a support without touching it, it is pure. If the owner despaired of its recovery, it contracts impurity. If one stole a surface on which one lies and sat on it, it contracts impurity, for it can be presumed that the owner despaired of its recovery, because he does not know who stole it. If it is known that the owner has not despaired, the surface is pure. Therefore, if a thief stole a hide and intended to use it to lie on, his intent alone is sufficient to change its status and it can contract midras impurity from him. The intent of a robber, by contrast, does not change the status of an article unless the owner despairs of its return.", + "When a hide contracted midras impurity and the owner began tearing straps from it, it remains impure until its size was reduced to less than five handbreadths by five handbreadths.", + "The following rules apply to all leather keilim that had contracted midras impurity from a zav and, afterwards, were fashioned into another type of k'li. If a leather article was changed from one flat implement to another such implement, it remains impure. If it was changed from a simple implement to a receptacle or from a receptacle to a simple implement, it is pure. And with regard to articles from cloth, everything is impure.
What is implied? If one made a leather drinking pouch into a rug or a rug into a leather drinking pouch, it is pure. If, however, a leather drinking pouch was made into a satchel or a satchel into a drinking pouch, they are considered as impure due to midras as they were before.", + "When a cloth pillow that had contracted midras impurity was made into a cloak, a cloak was made into a pillow, a cushion or a garment was made into a cover, or a cover was made into a cushion, they remain impure due to midras as they were before.", + "The following laws apply to articles that are fundamentally made to function both as receptacles and surfaces on which one can sit or lie, for example, pillows, cushions, sacks, carrying bags. If they were damaged and unable to hold substances, even though they are pure with regard to susceptibility to the impurity associated with a human corpse and other impurities, because they are no longer fit to serve as receptacles, they are still susceptible to midras impurity, for they are still fit to serve as supports.
Different rules apply when, by contrast, keilim that are made primarily to serve as a receptacle, e.g., a drinking pouch or a satchel. If they are large enough that they are fit to sit upon, since they are sat upon due to their size, they are susceptible to midras impurity as long as they are intact. If they are damaged and unable to hold substances, even though it is still possible to sit upon them, they are not susceptible to midras impurity. The rationale is that they are made primarily to serve as receptacles. Since they become unfit to serve as receptacles, they became pure and are not susceptible to any type of impurity, neither midras, nor any other type.
What is the measure that makes these keilim subject to midras impurity? A drinking pouch, seven kabbin; a carrying case, five kabbin; a feeding bag in which barley is hung from the head of an animal, four; a leather sack with which water is poured, a se'ah. Anything less than these sizes is not fit to be used as a support and it is not common to be used for people to sit upon.
If they were damaged and one bound up the damaged portion, they are pure; it is as if the damaged portion was not tied closed. All of the drinking pouches that were damaged and bound closed are pure except those of Arabs, because it is always their practice to bind them closed. A bag pipe is not susceptible to midras impurity, because it is not common to use it as a support." + ], + [ + "All flat wooden implements made to sit, lie, or ride upon are susceptible to midras impurity, e.g., a bed, a chair, or the like.", + "The bier, the pillow, and the cushion of a corpse, the chair of a bride, the birthing chair of a woman in childbirth, the chair of a launderer on which he washes clothes, and the chair of a child that has legs, even though it is not a handbreadth high, are all susceptible to midras impurity.", + "An iron seat covered with leather that is used in a lavatory is susceptible to midras impurity and to other types of impurity. If the leather covering was removed, that leather is susceptible to midras impurity. The metal seat is susceptible to other types of impurity, but not to midras impurity.", + "A small basket made from reeds or the like that is covered with leather is susceptible to midras impurity and to other types of impurity. If the leather covering was removed, that leather is susceptible to midras impurity, but the basket is entirely pure, for it is considered like other broken keilim.", + "When the two legs of benches in a bathhouse are made of wood, they are susceptible to midras impurity. If one was made of wood and the other of marble, it is not susceptible to impurity.", + "When boards of a bathhouse were covered with cork, they are not susceptible to impurity, for they are not made to be sat upon, but so that the water will flow under them.", + "When a large basket or wicker holder was filled with straw or fragments of cloth, even though they were adapted to be sat upon, they are not susceptible to midras impurity, because they are not fit to be sat upon. If they were laced with reeds or string over their opening, they are susceptible to midras impurity.", + "When one made a seat on one of the ends of a beam of an olive press, it is not susceptible to midras impurity, for if a person were to sit there, he would be told: \"Stand up and let us do our work.\" If, however, a chair was affixed to the beam of an olive press, the chair is susceptible to midras impurity. Nevertheless, if a zav trod on the beam, the chair does not contract impurity.
Similarly, if one affixed a chair to a large beam or made a chair at the end of a large beam, only the place of the chair itself is susceptible to impurity. The remainder of the beam is pure. The same law applies to a chair that is affixed to a kneading trough; it is pure.", + "When a stonecutter prepares the edge of a beam to sit upon, the place where he sits is susceptible to midras impurity. The place where a person sits in the back of a carriage is not susceptible to impurity, because it is uncomfortable to sit there.", + "The tops of beams on which craftsmen sit and smooth stones or the like are pure. Similarly, a piece hewn from a date palm upon which one sits is pure even if it is a handbreadth high. The rationale is that this is not a k'li. Similarly, a lump of wood, even if it was colored red or saffron and made part of the façade of a gateway or the like, is not considered a k'li, nor is it susceptible to impurity unless one engraves decorative designs in the wood.", + "The following laws apply to heads of beams that have been hewn out. If they were hewn out with the intent that one sit upon them, they are susceptible to midras impurity. If one intended to sit upon them, they are susceptible to impurity from this time onward. If a deaf-mute, an intellectually or emotionally challenged person, a minor or a person to whom they did not belong intended to sit upon them, they are pure. For the only intent that is effective in changing the status of an entity vis-à-vis ritual impurity is the intent of the owner who is sound of mind.", + "When a person makes a mound from dried yeast and designates it as a seat, it is nullified as a food and susceptible to midras impurity, for it serves the purpose of a wooden article.", + "A straw mat is susceptible to midras impurity. One made of reeds or grass is pure, because they are not fit to serve as supports. With regard to other types of mats, if they were made to lie on, they are susceptible to impurity, if they were made to give shade, they are pure. If they were made without any specific intent, the ruling is dependent on its size. If they are large, it can be assumed that they were made for shade. If they are small, it can be assumed that they were made to lie upon.", + "If reeds were attached to a mat lengthwise for reinforcement, it is susceptible to midras impurity, because it is still fit to lie upon. If they were attached in the form of the Greek letter chi, it is pure. If the reeds were attached widthwise and there were less than four handbreadths between them, it is pure.
A mat that was divided across its width is still susceptible to impurity. If it was divided across its length, different rules apply. If three bonds of six handbreadths remain, it is still fit to use as a support and is susceptible to impurity. If a smaller portion remains, it is pure. Similarly, if one released the bonds, the mat is pure.
A mat will not become susceptible even to midras impurity until the work involved with its fashioning is completed and its edges are trimmed, as we explained.", + "A chest that opens from above is pure with regard to midras impurity, because it is not fit to sit upon. It is, however, susceptible to other types of impurity. If it opens from its side, it is susceptible to midras impurity and other types of impurity.", + "The carriage of a child is susceptible to midras impurity, because he will lean upon it.", + "A walking stick used by an old man is absolutely pure, because it is only an aid.", + "A sandal used by limeworkers - which is made of wood - is susceptible to midras impurity, because, at times, a limeworker will wear it while walking until he reaches his home.", + "A prosthetic leg of a person whose leg was amputated that has a receptacle for the remnants of his flesh is susceptible to other types of impurity, because of the receptacle and is susceptible to midras impurity, because he leans upon it.", + "These items are susceptible to impurity, because they are surfaces upon which one rides: the saddle-blanket of a donkey, the saddle of a horse, the cushion for a camel, the saddle of a female camel, and the like.
The boards that are placed on a donkey, after which, a burden is placed upon them, are pure. If it is fit to be used as a saddle, it is susceptible to impurity." + ], + [ + "The following rules apply to wooden keilim that are fit to serve as supports that were permanently affixed to a wall in a building. If they were fixed in a wall, but nothing was built upon them or something was built upon them, but they were not permanently attached to the wall, they are still susceptible to midras impurity, as before. If they were affixed to the wall with nails and then one built over them, they are pure.
Similarly, when a mat was placed over beams, if it was affixed there, but a ceiling was not built over it or a ceiling was built over it, but it was not affixed, it is still susceptible to midras impurity. If it was affixed and a ceiling was built over it, it is pure.", + "When one of the legs of a bench was removed, it is still susceptible to midras impurity. If the other leg is also removed, it is pure. If, however, it is a handbreadth high, it is susceptible to midras impurity.", + "When the ornamental coating of a bride's chair was removed, it is pure. If the coating of a chair did not project outward and was removed, the chair is still susceptible to midras impurity, because it is the ordinary practice to turn it on its side and sit on it.", + "When the coating of a chair was removed and it is still fit to be sat upon, it is susceptible to impurity. If two of its coatings, one next to the other, were removed, it is pure.", + "When the upper portion of a closet is removed, it is still impure because of the lower portion, because that portion is fit to use as a support. If the bottom portion was removed, it is impure because of the upper portion. If they were both removed, the side frames are pure.", + "When a chest is broken open at its side, it is susceptible to midras impurity and other types of impurity, because it is still fit to sit on, and indeed everyone sits on it. If it was broken open from above, it is pure with regard to midras impurity, for it is no longer fit to sit on. It is, however, susceptible to other impurities, because it is still a receptacle. If it is broken open from below, it is pure from all types of impurity. The rationale is that even though it is still possible to sit on it like a chair, since its fundamental purpose was to serve as a receptacle and that fundamental purpose has been nullified, its secondary purpose is not considered significant. Its drawers are subject to impurity and are not considered as joined to it.
Similarly, a basket that serves as a dispenser which is broken open to the extent that it cannot hold pomegranates is entirely pure even though it is still fit to serve as a support. The rationale is that its fundamental purpose was to serve as a receptacle and since that fundamental purpose has been nullified, the secondary purpose is also nullified.", + "A mixing trough made from wood in which building materials and gypsum are mixed is not susceptible to midras impurity even though it is susceptible to other forms of impurity.
When a kneading trough used to knead dough that holds between two luggin and nine kabbin has been cracked to the extent that one cannot wash even one foot in it because of the crack, it is susceptible to midras impurity. The rationale is that mostly likely it will be turned upside down and sat upon, because of its size and because of its crack.
If the cracked kneading trough was left in the rain until its wood swelled and the crack closed, it is no longer susceptible to midras impurity, for in its present state, it is fit to knead dough and, initially, that was its purpose. It is susceptible to other types of impurity. If, afterwards, one left it exposed to the east wind, and the crack opened, it becomes susceptible to midras impurity again and is pure with regard to other types of impurity.", + "When a large kneading trough that can hold more than nine kabbin that was damaged and cannot hold pomegranates was prepared to be sat upon, it is pure even from midras impurity until the corners were trimmed. The rationale is that one's intent does not have an effect on the status of a large kneading trough that was damaged unless one performs a deed to make it fit for that purpose. If he made it a feeding trough for animals, it is susceptible to all types of impurity even if it was affixed to a wall.", + "When the two long sideboards of a bed were removed after it contracted impurity and new sideboards were made for it, but the holes used to attach the sideboards to the headboards were not changed, the bed, including the new sideboards remains impure. Even if the new sideboards are broken, the bed is still impure. If the old sideboards are broken, it is pure, because the status of the entire bed depends on the old sideboards.", + "When a bed had contracted midras impurity and a short board and its two legs were removed, it is still impure, because it still has the form of a bed. If one of the sideboards and its two legs were removed, it is pure.", + "If one cut off two of the cornerposts of a bed on a diagonal, cut off two of the bedposts by a handbreadth by a handbreadth on a diagonal, or reduced their size to less than a handbreadth, the bed is considered as broken and it is pure.
If one of the sideboards were broken and fixed, the bed is still considered as a primary source of impurity, as it was before. If also the second sideboard was broken and fixed, it is free of midras impurity. It is, however, impure because it touched a support to which a zav imparted impurity. If one was not able to fix the first before the second was broken, the bed is pure.", + "When a bed had contracted midras impurity or other types of impurity and then half of it was stolen or lost, or brothers or partners divided it, it is pure. It is like a broken k'li. If it was put back together, it is susceptible to impurity in the future. It is like someone who made a k'li from the broken pieces of impure keilim. The new k'li is pure and is susceptible to impurity in the future.", + "The following laws apply when the components of a bed were taken apart. If one sideboard and two bedposts or one headboard or footboard and two bedposts were broken, it is still impure, because it can be propped against a wall and slept upon.", + "Even when an entire bed contracted impurity, if it was immersed component by component, it is pure.", + "When one takes a bed apart to immerse it, a person who touches its cords, is pure." + ], + [ + "There are three types of chests:
a) a chest that was broken open from its side; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one that was broken open from above; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) an oversized one; it is pure entirely.", + "There are three types of kneading troughs:
a) a kneading trough that contains between two lugin and nine kabbin that was cracked; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one that is intact; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) an oversized one; it is pure entirely.", + "There are three types of wagons:
a) a wagon made like a chair; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one that is made like a bed; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one made to transport large stones; it is pure entirely.", + "There are three types of shields:
a) a shield that is bent over; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one used for sport in a stadium; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one made for Arabs to play with; it is pure entirely. The rationale is that it is made only to use as a shape and does not serve a functional purpose for people. Any k'li that does not serve a functional purpose for people is not susceptible to impurity at all.", + "There are three types of leather wrappers:
a) one used by bloodletters; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one upon which people eat; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one upon which olives are spread; it is pure entirely, because it is not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "There are three types of bases:
a) one placed before a bed or before scribes; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one for a table; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one for a closet; it is pure entirely, because it is considered as part of the closet and its shape indicates such.", + "There are three types of beds:
a) one made to lie on; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one for glass workers upon which they place glass utensils; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one for weavers upon which they weave clothes; it is pure entirely, because it is not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "There are three types of baskets that serve as dispensers:
a) one for fertilizer; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one for straw; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) a rope net carrier borne by camels; it is pure entirely, because its ropes are very coarse and thick, nor is it fit to serve as a container for straw and the like. Thus it is not considered as a k'li at all; it is only ropes.", + "There are three types of mats:
a) one made for sitting; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one on which dyers place their garments; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) those used for vats upon which grapes are placed and which are used as covers; they are pure entirely, because they are not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "There are three types of leather pouches and three types of leather satchels:
a) those that contained the specified measures susceptible to midras impurity. What are their specified measures? For a leather pouch, four kabbin and for a satchel, five.
b) those that do not contain the specified measure are susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse; and
c) those made from the skin of a fish are pure entirely.", + "There are three types of hides:
a) one made to serve as a rug; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one used to wrap keilim; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one used for straps and for sandals; it is pure entirely, because it does not have the form of a k'li.", + "There are three types of sheets:
a) one made to lie upon; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one used for a curtain; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one with forms used for an embroiderer to learn from; it is pure entirely, because it is not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "There are three types of clothes:
a) a cloth napkin; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one used for scrolls; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) the shrouds of a corpse and the wrappings for the harps of the Levites; they are pure entirely, because they are not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "A leather garment made in the shape of a hand into which one inserts one's hand and fingers because of the cold and the like is called a firaklin (a glove). There are three types of gloves:
a) one used by trappers of wild beasts and fowl; it is susceptible to midras impurity, because the trapper rests against it;
b) one used to catch grasshoppers; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse, because the grasshoppers are placed inside of it;
c) one of harvesters with which fruit is harvested; it is pure entirely, because it is not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "There are three types of hairnets:
a) one worn by girls; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) one worn by an older woman; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) one worn to entertain drinkers; it is pure entirely, because it is not used for a purpose directly benefitting man.", + "There are three types of sandals:
a) those worn by humans; they are susceptible to midras impurity;
b) metal shoes for animals; they are susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) those made of cork or reeds; they are pure entirely.
The general principle is: Any entity that is not fit to sit upon or to ride upon - or which could be used for those purposes, but was not made for those purposes, but for another reason - is not susceptible to midras impurity. If it was made for another purpose, but is also used for sitting, e.g., a cloak or a veil; it is susceptible to midras impurity.
Whenever an article is susceptible to midras impurity; it is also susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse. There are, however, articles that are susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse, but are not susceptible to midras impurity, as we explained. Whenever an article is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse; it is also susceptible to the other types of impurity, whether of Scriptural origin or of Rabbinic origin, and they are susceptible to impurity imparted by liquids.", + "There are three general principles applying to storage baskets:
a) when a worn-out one is patched on to one that is intact, the status of the one that is intact determines the ruling;
b) if a small one is patched on to a large one, the status of the large one determines the ruling;
c) if they are equal in size, the status of the inner one determines the ruling.
What is meant by saying: its status determines the ruling? That if it is perforated to the extent that a pomegranate would fall through it, they are both pure.", + "There are three types of tablets:
a) one which scrolls are placed upon; it is susceptible to midras impurity;
b) a writing tablet that has a receptacle for wax; it is susceptible to the impurity associated with a human corpse;
c) those that are flat are entirely pure, because they do not have the form of a k'li and they are not fit to sit or lie upon." + ], + [ + "Whenever the external surface of a k'li that has a receptacle contracts impurity from liquids, its inner side does not contract impurity vis-à-vis terumah. Nor does the outer side of the k'li's neck, its handles, or the fingerhold on the rim of the k'li contract impurity. If the inner portion of the k'li contracts impurity, all of the above components also contract impurity.
If impure liquids fall on the bases of keilim, their rims, their projections, or handles of keilim with receptacles, one should dry them and the receptacle is pure. Even the entire outer surface does not become impure.", + "The following law applies to keilim made from goats hair, e.g., sacks and carrying bags, leather keilim, e.g., pillows and bolsters, and wooden keilim, even baskets and dispensers. If their external surface contracts impurity from liquids, their inner portion does not contract impurity.", + "Flat keilim that can be purified by immersion, that are not fit to sit or lie upon, e.g., a table or countertop that does not have a side are not susceptible to impurity according to Scriptural Law. Accordingly, if the external surface of such a k'li contracts impurity from liquids, its inner surface does not contract impurity. If, however, flat keilim that can be purified by immersion are fit to sit or lie upon, e.g., a bed, a hide on which one sleeps, a chair or the like, the distinction between an inner surface and an outer surface does not apply. Instead, whether impure liquids touch their inner surface or their outer surface, the entire k'li contracts impurity.
Similarly, the distinction between an inner surface and an outer surface does not apply with regard to measures for wine and oil, a two-sided cooking k'li, a filter for mustard, and a filter for wine. If impure liquids fell on a portion of the k'li, the entire k'li contracts impurity, as is the law with regard to garments.", + "A concept paralleling an external surface and an inner surface apply with regard to a plow.
What is implied? If impure liquids fall on the lance, only seven handbreadths of the beam adjacent to the lance become impure and the remainder of the beam is pure. Similarly, if impure liquids fall on the metal peg, only the four handbreadths of the beam that is adjacent to the metal peg become impure. If the liquids fell beyond the seven handbreadths and the four handbreadths, the situation resembles a receptacle whose outer surface was touched by impure liquids, in which instance, only the place where the liquids touched and the outer surface contract impurity.", + "When there is a pouch with an inner pocket and one of the two contracted impurity due to contact with impure liquids, the other does not contract impurity.
When does the above apply? When their rims are on the same level. If, however, the external one overlaps the inner one, and the inner one contracts impurity, the external one also contracts impurity. If the external one contracts impurity, the inner one does not contract impurity. If the impurity stems from the carcass of a crawling animal, in all instances, if one contracted impurity, the others also did.", + "When one carves out a measure of a revi'it and half a revi'it into one piece of wood and one of them contracted impurity from impure liquids, the other does not contract impurity even though they are on the same piece of wood.
What is implied? If impure liquids touched the inner surface of the revi'it measure, that measure and its outer side are impure, the half-revi'it measure and its outer side are pure. If the liquids touched the inner surface of the half-revi'it measure, that measure and its outer side are impure, the revi'it measure and its outer side are pure.
When one immerses this piece of wood in a mikveh, it should be immersed in its entirety all at one time. If the outer surface of the revi'it measure or of the half-revi'it measure contracted impurity from liquids, the entire outer surface of the piece of wood contracts impurity, because an outer surface is not divided.", + "When the outer surface of a kettle was impure and it was boiling, we do not suspect that maybe liquids flowed out from it, touched its outer surface, and then receded back inside it. Instead, the liquids that are inside it are pure with regard to terumah." + ] + ], + "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 כלים", + "categories": [ + "Halakhah", + "Mishneh Torah", + "Sefer Taharah" + ], + "sectionNames": [ + "Chapter", + "Halakhah" + ] +} \ No newline at end of file