ב"ה
Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day
Tum'at Met - Chapter 22
Tum'at Met - Chapter 22
1The handles of a large earthenware container,1 the bulges at the bottom of such a container,2 and the back of its walls do not protect their contents when sealed close in a tent where a corpse is located.אשׁוּלֵי הַמְּחָצִין, וְשׁוּלֵי קַרְקָעוֹת (וְהַ)כֵּלִים, וְדָפְנוֹתֵיהֶן מֵאֲחוֹרֵיהֶן - אֵין מַצִּילִין בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל בְּאֹהֶל הַמֵּת.
If one cut them off, planed them, and made them into containers, they protect their contents if sealed close. The rationale is that the concept of sealing something close applies only to containers.3קִרְסְמָן וְשָׁפָן וַעֲשָׂאָן כֵּלִים - מַצִּילִין בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל, שֶׁאֵין מַצִּיל בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל אֶלָּא כֵּלִים.
2When clay is put into an earthenware container and filled half of it, it does not nullify it from being considered as a container. If keilim are sunk in that clay and the container is sealed close, the contents are protected from impurity.4בכְּלִי חֶרֶס שֶׁנָּתַן בּוֹ טִיט עַד חֶצְיוֹ, לֹא בִטְּלוֹ; וְאִם הִשְׁקִיעַ בּוֹ אֶת הַכֵּלִים, מַצִּיל.
3An earthenware container protects its contents from impurity when sealed close unless it is perforated with a hole large enough for a pomegranate to fall through.5 If it is large, the majority of it must be damaged and open for it to be disqualified.6גכְּלִי חֶרֶס מַצִּיל בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל, עַד שֶׁיִּנָּקֵב בְּמוֹצִיא רִמּוֹן; וּבְגָדוֹל, עַד שֶׁיִּפָּחֵת רֻבּוֹ.
What is implied? If there was a large container and half was damaged, it was sealed close, including the damaged portion, it protects its contents from impurity even though it is not considered a utensil with regard to impurity.7כֵּיצַד? כְּלִי גָּדוֹל שֶׁנִּפְחַת [חֶצְיוֹ] רֻבּוֹ, וְהִקִּיפוֹ צָמִיד פָּתִיל, וְסָתַם מְקוֹם הַפְּחָת בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל - הֲרֵי זֶה מַצִּיל, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינוֹ חָשׁוּב כְּלִי לְעִנְיַן טֻמְאָה.
If, however, a container that was sealed close had a hole or a crack and the hole was not closed, it becomes impure and does not protect its contents.אֲבָל כְּלִי הַמֻּקָּף צָמִיד פָּתִיל שֶׁהָיָה נָקוּב אוֹ סָדוּק, וְלֹא סָתַם הַנֶּקֶב - נִטְמָא, וְאֵינוֹ מַצִּיל.
How large must the hole be to disqualify the container? If the container was used for foods, the measure is a hole large enough for olives to fall through. If it was used for liquids, its measure is that the hole must be large enough to enable liquids to seep in when the container is placed in them.8וְכַמָּה יִהְיֶה בַּנֶּקֶב? אִם הָיָה כְּלִי הֶעָשׂוּי לְאֹכָלִים, שִׁעוּרוֹ בְּמוֹצִיא זֵיתִים; הָיָה עָשׂוּי לְמַשְׁקֶה, שִׁעוּרוֹ בְּכוֹנֵס מַשְׁקֶה.
If it is used for both these purposes, we rule stringently and if a hole was made that was large enough for liquids to seep in, it does not protect its contents until the hole is closed or reduced in size.הֶעָשׂוּי לְכָךְ וּלְכָךְ, מַטִּילִין אוֹתוֹ לְחֻמְרוֹ, וּמִשֶּׁיִּנָּקֵב בְּכוֹנֵס מַשְׁקֶה, אֵינוֹ מַצִּיל - עַד שֶׁיִּסְתֹּם הַנֶּקֶב אוֹ עַד שֶׁיְּמַעֲטֶנּוּ.
4The following rules apply when there was an oven in an ohel where a corpse was located. The oven had a covering upon it, it was sealed close, but it was cracked. If the crack was as wide as the opening of the rod of a plow9 which is a handbreadth in circumference, the oven is impure even though the rod could not be inserted into the oven through the hole, but the hole was equal to its size. If the hole was smaller than this, the oven is pure.דתַּנּוּר שֶׁהָיְתָה סְרִידָא עַל פִּיו, וּמֻקָּף צָמִיד פָּתִיל, וְנָתוּן בְּאֹהֶל הַמֵּת, וְנִסְדַּק הַתַּנּוּר: אִם הָיָה הַסֶּדֶק מְלֹא פִּי מַרְדֵּעַ, שֶׁהוּא הֶקֵּף טֶפַח - נִטְמָא הַתַּנּוּר, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין הַמַּרְדֵּעַ יָכוֹל לְהִכָּנֵס בַּסֶּדֶק, אֶלָּא הֲרֵי הוּא כְּמוֹתוֹ בְּשָׁוֶה; פָּחוֹת מִכַּאן - הַתַּנּוּר טָהוֹר.
If the covering was cracked to the extent that the rod of a plow could enter, it is impure. If it is less, it protects its contents with a sealed covering.נִסְדְּקָה הַסְּרִידָא שֶׁעַל פִּיו כִּמְלֹא פִּי מַרְדֵּעַ נִכְנָס, הֲרֵי זֶה טָמֵא; פָּחוֹת מִכַּאן, נִצָּל בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל.
If the crack is round, we do not consider it as if it was long. Instead, the measure is dependent on whether the opening of the rod of a plow could be inserted.הָיָה הַסֶּדֶק עָגֹל - אֵין רוֹאִין אוֹתוֹ אָרֹךְ, אֶלָּא שִׁעוּרוֹ מְלֹא פִּי מַרְדֵּעַ נִכְנָס.
5The following rules apply when an oven that is sealed close has an eye10 that was partially closed with clay.11 If the hole was large enough for a reed to be inserted and taken out while it was burning,12 the contents of the oven are impure.13 If the hole is smaller than this, the contents are protected.התַּנּוּר הַמֻּקָּף צָמִיד פָּתִיל, שֶׁנִּקַּב נֶקֶב בְּעֵינוֹ שֶׁל תַּנּוּר הַטּוּחָה: אִם הָיָה הַנֶּקֶב מְלֹא כוֹשׁ נִכְנָס וְיוֹצֵא כְּשֶׁהוּא דוֹלֵק, הֲרֵי זֶה נִטְמָא; וְאִם הָיָה הַנֶּקֶב פָּחוֹת מִזֶּה, נִצָּל.
6When an oven has a hole at its side, the size of the hole that causes it to not to be considered as sealed14 is enough space for a reed to be inserted and taken out even when it was not burning.15ונִקַּב הַתַּנּוּר מִצִּדּוֹ - שִׁעוּרוֹ מְלֹא כוֹשׁ נִכְנָס וְיוֹצֵא שֶׁלֹּא דוֹלֵק.
Similarly, when the clay seal of a jug was perforated, the measure is space for the second joint16 of a rye stalk to be inserted in the hole.וְכֵן מְגוּפַת הֶחָבִית שֶׁנִּקְּבָה, שִׁעוּרָהּ כְּדֵי שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס מִיצָה שְׁנִיָּה שֶׁל שִׁיפוֹן בַּנֶּקֶב.
Similarly, when large casks were perforated, the measure is space for the second joint of a reed to be inserted. If they are less than this, they are pure.וַחֲצָבִים גְּדוֹלִים שֶׁנִּקְּבוּ, שִׁעוּרָן כְּדֵי שֶׁתִּכָּנֵס מִיצָה שְׁנִיָּה שֶׁל קָנֶה. פָּחוֹת מִכַּאן, טְהוֹרִין.
When does the above apply? When they were made to store wine. If, however, they were made to store other liquids, a hole of even the slightest size17 causes them to contract impurity18 and the fact that they are sealed close is not effective unless the hole was closed.בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? בִּזְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ לְיַיִן; אֲבָל אִם נַעֲשׂוּ לִשְׁאָר הַמַּשְׁקִין, אֲפִלּוּ נִקְּבוּ בְּכָל שֶׁהֵן - נִטְמְאוּ, וְאֵין הַצָּמִיד פָּתִיל מוֹעִיל לָהֶם עַד שֶׁיִּסְתֹּם הַנֶּקֶב.
Moreover, even if they were made for wine, the above applies only when they were not perforated by human hands.19 If, however, they were perforated by human hands, even the slightest hole causes them to contract impurity and they are not protected unless the hole is closed.וְאַף בִּזְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ לְיַיִן, לֹא אָמְרוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁנִּקְּבוּ שֶׁלֹּא בִּידֵי אָדָם. אֲבָל אִם נַעֲשׂוּ בִּידֵי אָדָם - אֲפִלּוּ כָּל שֶׁהֵן, טְמֵאִים; וְאֵינָן נִצָּלִין, עַד שֶׁיִּסָּתֵם הַנֶּקֶב.
7When a jug that is filled with pure liquids has an earthenware20 tube in it,21 it is considered as sealed close. If it is located in an ohel where a corpse is found, the jug and the liquid are pure. The tube is impure,22 because one end of it is in the jug which is sealed close and the second end is open in the ohel where the corpse is found and it is not closed. Even though it is crooked, this does not cause it to be considered as closed.23זחָבִית שֶׁהִיא מְלֵאָה מַשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין, וּמְנִיקָת שֶׁל חֶרֶס בְּתוֹכָהּ, וְהֶחָבִית מֻקֶּפֶת צָמִיד פָּתִיל, וּנְתוּנָה בְּאֹהֶל הַמֵּת - הֶחָבִית וְהַמַּשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין, וְהַמְּנִיקָת טְמֵאָה; מִפְּנֵי שֶׁקְּצָתָהּ הָאַחַת בְּתוֹךְ הֶחָבִית הַמֻּקֶּפֶת, וְהַקָּצֶה הַשֵּׁנִי פָּתוּחַ לְאֹהֶל הַמֵּת, וְאֵינוֹ סָתוּם. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא עֲקֻמָּה, אֵין הֶעָקֹם כְּסָתוּם.
8When a jug that was sealed close had a hole on its side, but that hole was closed by wine dregs, it protects its contents from impurity.חחָבִית הַמֻּקֶּפֶת צָמִיד פָּתִיל שֶׁנִּקְּבָה מִצִּדָּהּ, וְסָתְמוּ שְׁמָרִים אֶת הַנֶּקֶב - הִצִּיל
If the owner plugged half the hole and the dregs closed the other half, there is an unresolved question whether the contents are protected or not. אָגַף חֲצִי הַנֶּקֶב, וְסָתַם חֶצְיוֹ - הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק, אִם הִצִּיל אִם לֹא הִצִּיל.
If one plugged the hole with a twig, it is not considered as closed unless one smears clay around the sides. If one closed it with two slivers of wood, one must smear clay from the sides and between one sliver and the other.סָתַם אֶת הַנֶּקֶב בִּזְמוֹרָה - עַד שֶׁיְּמָרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין. סְתָמוֹ בִּשְׁנֵי קִסָמִים - עַד שֶׁיְּמָרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין וּבֵין זְמוֹרָה לַחֲבֶרְתָּהּ.
Similarly, if a board was placed over the opening to an oven and one smeared clay at the sides, it is protected from impurity. If there were two boards, one must smear clay from the sides and between one board and the other.וְכֵן נֶסֶר שֶׁנָּתוּן עַל פִּי הַתַּנּוּר, וּמֵרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין - הִצִּיל; הָיוּ שְׁנֵי נְסָרִים, עַד שֶׁיְּמָרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין וּבֵין נֶסֶר לַחֲבֵרוֹ.
If, however, one joined the boards together with wooden pegs or the like or with cork,24 it is not necessary to smear clay in the middle.חִבֵּר אֶת שְׁנֵי הַנְּסָרִים בְּמַסְמְרִים שֶׁל עֵץ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן, אוֹ שֶׁלִּפֵּף עֲלֵיהֶן שֻׁגְמִין - אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְמָרֵחַ מִן הָאֶמְצָע.
With what can a jug be sealed close? With lime, clay, gypsum, pitch, wax, mud, filth,25 mortar, or any substance that can be smeared. We do not seal with tin or lead, because it will not be a seal, nor will it close the container tightly.בַּמֶּה מַקִּיפִין? בְּסִיד וּבְחַרְסִית וּבְגִפְּסִין, בְּזֶפֶת וּבְשַׁעֲוָה, בְּטִיט וּבְצוֹאָה וּבְחֵמָר, וּבְכָל דָּבָר הַמִּתְמָרֵחַ; וְאֵין מַקִּיפִין לֹא בְּבַעַץ וְלֹא בְעוֹפֶרֶת, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא פָתִיל וְאֵינוֹ צָמִיד.
A plump fig that was not prepared to contract ritual impurity26 may be used as a seal. This also applies with regard to a dough that was kneaded with fruit juice so that it will not become impure.27 These qualifications are necessary, -because an impure object does not intervene in the face of impurity.28וּמַקִּיפִין בִּדְבֵלָה שְׁמֵנָה שֶׁלֹּא הֻכְשְׁרָה, וּבְבָצֵק שֶׁנִּלּוֹשָׁה בְּמֵי פֵרוֹת כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִטַּמֵּא; שֶׁדָּבָר טָמֵא אֵינוֹ חוֹצֵץ.
9When the covering of a jug has become loose, even when it does not slip off, it no longer protects the contents, for it is not considered as sealed.29טמְגוּפַת הֶחָבִית שֶׁנִּתְחַלְחֲלָה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵינָהּ נִשְׁמֶטֶת - אֵינָהּ מַצֶּלֶת, שֶׁהֲרֵי נִתְרָעַע הַצָּמִיד.
When a rubber ball or strands tied together30 were placed on a jug and clay was smeared at the sides, it does not protect the contents unless clay was smeared on the entire ball or collection of strands from below upward.31הַכַּדּוּר וְהַפְּקַעַת שֶׁל גְּמִי שֶׁנָּתַן עַל פִּי הֶחָבִית, וּמֵרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין - לֹא תַצִּיל, עַד שֶׁיְּמָרַח עַל כָּל הַכַּדּוּר וְעַל כָּל הַפְּקַעַת מִמַּטָּה לְמַעְלָה.
Similar concepts apply with regard to a patch of cloth that was tied to a container.32וְכֵן בְּמַטְלֵת שֶׁל בֶּגֶד שֶׁקְּשָׁרָהּ עַל פִּי הַכְּלִי.
If a covering of paper or leather was tied over a container with string, it protects the contents if one merely smeared clay at the sides.33הָיְתָה שֶׁל נְיָר אוֹ שֶׁל עוֹר, וּקְשָׁרָהּ בִּמְשִׁיחָה - אִם מֵרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין, הִצִּיל.
10When a jug was enwrapped in a container made from the skin of a fish or from paper and it was tied close from below, the contents are protected.34 If it was not tied, it does not protect the contents, even if clay was smeared at the sides.35יחֵמֶת שֶׁל עוֹר הַדָּג אוֹ הַנְּיָר שֶׁהִלְבִּישׁ בָּהֶן אֶת הֶחָבִית וּצְרָרָהּ מִלְּמַטָּה - הֲרֵי זוֹ מַצֶּלֶת; וְאִם לֹא צְרָרָהּ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמֵּרַח מִן הַצְּדָדִין - לֹא הִצִּיל.
11The following rules apply when there was a jug that was covered with pitch from the inside and then a portion of the clay of the jug was peeled off, but the pitch remained standing.36 If one placed a covering on the pitch and pressed it down until it became attached to the pitch and thus the pitch was standing between the covering and the base of the jug, its contents are protected.37יאחָבִית זְפוּתָה, שֶׁנִּתְקַלֵּף הַחֶרֶס מִלְמַעְלָה וְהַזֶּפֶת שֶׁלָּהּ עוֹמֵד, וְנָתַן הַכִּסּוּי עַל הַזֶּפֶת, וּדְחָקוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּדְבַּק בַּזֶּפֶת, וְנִמְצָא הַזֶּפֶת עוֹמֵד בֵּין הַכִּסּוּי וּבֵין קַרְקַע הֶחָבִית - הֲרֵי זֶה מַצִּיל.
Similar concepts apply with regard to a container used for fish brine or the like. If one of the substances that is smeared as insulation for the container was standing between the covering and the container like a border, since everything was attached together, the contents are protected.וְכֵן בִּכְלֵי הַמֻּרְיָס וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן מִדְּבָרִים הַמִּתְמָרְחִין, שֶׁהָיָה הַמִּתְמָרֵחַ בֵּין הַכִּסּוּי וּבֵין הַכְּלִי כְּמוֹ זֵר, הוֹאִיל וְהַכֹּל דְּבוּקִין - הֲרֵי זֶה מַצִּיל.
Footnotes
1.
Our translation is based on the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 2:3). See also Hilchot Keilim 18:1.
2.
These handles are often large enough to serve as containers in their own right.
3.
And, as they are, the handles are not considered as keilim.
4.
The Rambam’s ruling is based on the Tosefta, Keilim 7:7. The Ra’avad interprets the Tosefta differently and hence, rejects the Rambam’s ruling. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the Rambam’s interpretation.
5.
The Rambam is developing the concept stated in the first halachah: A sealed covering protects only the contents of containers. If a container has large holes in it, it is no longer considered as a k’li and its contents are not protected from impurity.
Nevertheless, the Rambam’s wording has attracted the notice of the commentaries, for at the beginning of the halachah, he speaks about the hole being large enough for pomegranates to fall through, and in its conclusion, he speaks of olives falling through. The intent is, however, clarified on the basis of the Rambam’s statements in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 9:8) in which he contrasts that mishnah with the statements of Shabbat 95b.
The first clause is speaking about an instance where the container and the hole are sealed close. Therefore, for the container to be disqualified, the hole must be large enough for pomegranates to fall through if the container is small or must comprise the majority of the container if it is large. If, however, the hole is not sealed close, a much smaller hole can disqualify it, as the Rambam proceeds to explain in the later clause.
6.
See Hilchot Keilim 19:2.
7.
See Hilchot Keilim 18:10.
8.
See Hilchot Keilim 14:9; 19:1.
9.
Our translation is based on the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 9:7). Nevertheless, the commentaries question the intent of the phrase “the opening of the rod.”
10.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 8:7), the Rambam writes that it was customary to make a hole in the portion of the wall of the oven or range that is close to the ground through which wood was inserted and, at times, air was allowed to enter. When the oven would get very hot, this hole was plugged close so that none of its heat would escape. Since at times it was opened and at times it was closed, it was referred to as an eye.
11.
To preserve the oven’s heat.
12.
I.e., pulling it through the hole would not extinguish it.
13.
For the hole is considered large enough to allow impurity to enter.
14.
This halachah is also speaking about instances when the oven or the jug is sealed close and yet, there is a hole [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 9:8)].
15.
This is a smaller measure than were the reed to be burning.
16.
The second joint is slightly smaller than the first joint (ibid.).
17.
It would appear that the hole must be large enough for a liquid to seep in when the container is submerged in it. [This qualification indeed appears in the standard published text of the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.). Rav Kappach, however, maintains that there is an error in that version.]
18.
The Vilna Gaon explains why a larger hole is acceptable for a container for wine. Air entering the hole damages the flavor of the wine. Hence the owner will view such a hole as undesirable. With regard to other liquids, by contrast, a hole improves their flavor. Hence, the hole is appreciated.
19.
And thus the hole is considered as undesirable.
20.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 9:2), the Rambam states that sometimes such tubes are made from reeds or from glass as well, but in this instance, the tube is earthenware. The Ra’avad differs and maintains that here, the mishnah is speaking about a metal tube.
21.
I.e., one drinks from the jug by sucking on the tube.
22.
The Mishnah (ibid.) relates that originally, the School of Hillel ruled that the tube was pure, but later they accepted the more stringent ruling of the School of Shammai.
23.
The Rambam's words require qualification, for with regard to the jug and its contents, the fact that the tube is crooked causes the jug to be considered as closed. Nevertheless, the tube itself becomes considered as a separate utensil and it is not considered as closed (Kessef Mishneh).
24.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 10:6).
25.
Our translation is taken from the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.:2).
26.
That was not brought into contact with water (see Hilchot Tum'at Ochalin 1:2).
27.
Fruit juice does not make grain susceptible to ritual impurity (ibid.:3), nor is a dough kneaded with it susceptible to ritual impurity (ibid. 6:13).
28.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim, loc. cit.), the Rambam explains that originally, the Sages stated that these substances should not be used as seals. The rationale is that even though they are not susceptible to ritual impurity in their present state, it is possible that they will come in contact with water or a similar liquid in the future. Then they would become susceptible to impurity and indeed, contract it. And once, they contracted impurity, they would not be an effective seal. Afterwards, the Sages allowed these substances to be used as seals, because there is no obligation to maintain articles in a state of ritual impurity. Unquestionably, if such a substance was used as a seal, it protects the contents of the container until it contracts impurity.
29.
The Ra’avad objects to the Rambam’s ruling, offering a different interpretation of Keilim 10:4, the Rambam’s source. The Kessef Mishneh justifies the Rambam’s interpretation.
30.
Our translation is taken from Rav Kapach’s translation of the Arabic terms used by the Rambam in his Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid.).
31.
I.e., it is not sufficient to smear a small amount of clay above the opening, one must smear clay over the entire ball or strands, covering them entirely (ibid.).
32.
I.e., the clay must be smeared in a similar manner in this instance as well (ibid.).
33.
For unlike the other substances, the leather or the paper are not porous.
34.
It appears that according to the Rambam, this applies even if the covering was not sealed with clay.
The Kessef Mishneh interprets the Ra’avad as objecting to the Rambam’s ruling. Although it is based on a Tosefta, that Tosefta appears to contradict the mishnah cited in the previous halachah. For the mishnah requires that the covering be sealed and the Tosefta does not. It is possible to explain that there is not necessarily a contradiction, because here the entire jug is covered with the skin. The Kessef Mishneh, however, maintains that the Rambam would also require that a seal of clay be made where the covering was closed.
35.
Since it is untied, it is likely that the clay sealing at the sides will be broken.
36.
And thus the container was still functional.
37.
For the pitch that is standing is considered as a cover for the based of the jug [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 10:5)].
Rabbi Eliyahu Touger is a noted author and translator, widely published for his works on Chassidut and Maimonides.
Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
To purchase this book or the entire series, please click here.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
Vowelized Hebrew text courtesy Torat Emet under CC 2.5 license.
The text on this page contains sacred literature. Please do not deface or discard.
