ב"ה
Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day
Kelim - Chapter 19
Kelim - Chapter 19
1To 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,1 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.אכַּמָּה שִׁעוּר הַשֶּׁבֶר שֶׁיִּשָּׁבֵר כְּלִי חֶרֶס וְיִטְהַר מִטֻּמְאָתוֹ אִם הָיָה טָמֵא, אוֹ לֹא יְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה אִם הָיָה טָהוֹר? הֶעָשׂוּי לְאֹכָלִין, מִשֶּׁיִּנָּקֵב בְּמוֹצִיא זֵיתִים; וְהֶעָשׂוּי לְמַשְׁקִין, מִשֶּׁיִּנָּקֵב מַכְנִיס בְּמַשְׁקִין - כְּשֶׁמַּנִּיחִין אוֹתוֹ עַל הַמַּשְׁקֶה, יִכָּנֵס הַמַּשְׁקֶה לַכְּלִי בַּנֶּקֶב.
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.2הֶעָשׂוּי לְכָךְ וּלְכָךְ, מַטִּילִין אוֹתוֹ לְחֻמְרוֹ, וַהֲרֵי הוּא מְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה עַד שֶׁיִּנָּקֵב בְּמוֹצִיא זַיִת.
The measure “enough for liquids to seep out”3 was stated only with regard to a base for containers,4 because it is made to collect liquids that flow from containers and if liquids seep from it, it no longer serves its function.וְלֹא אָמְרוּ בְּמוֹצִיא מַשְׁקֶה אֶלָּא בְּגִסְטְרָא בִּלְבָד; לְפִי שֶׁהִיא עֲשׂוּיָה לְקַבֵּל הַמַּשְׁקִין הַנּוֹזְלִים מִן הַכֵּלִים, וְאִם הוֹצִיאָה מַשְׁקִין, הֲרֵי זֶה בָּטֵל תַּשְׁמִישָׁהּ.
2There 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,5 but it is still considered a container with regard to the consecration of water for the ashes of the red heifer;6בחָמֵשׁ מִדּוֹת בִּכְלִי חֶרֶס׃ נִקַּב בְּמוֹצִיא מַשְׁקֶה - טָהוֹר מִלְּהִתְטַמֵּא מִשּׁוּם גִּסְטְרָא, וַעֲדַיִן הוּא חָשׁוּב כְּלִי לְקַדֵּשׁ בּוֹ מֵי חַטָּאת.
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;7נִקַּב בְּכוֹנֵס מַשְׁקֶה - אֵינוֹ רָאוּי לְקַדֵּשׁ בּוֹ מֵי חַטָּאת, וַעֲדַיִן כְּלִי הוּא חָשׁוּב לְהַכְשִׁיר הַזְּרָעִים בְּמַשְׁקִין הַתְּלוּשִׁין בּוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ.
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;8 nevertheless, it is still considered as a container with regard to holding olives9 and hence, it is susceptible to impurity;נִקַּב כְּשֹׁרֶשׁ קָטָן - אֵין הַמַּיִם שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ מַכְשִׁירִין אֶת הַזְּרָעִים, וַהֲרֵי הֵן כְּמוֹ שֶׁאֵינָן בִּכְלִי; וַעֲדַיִן כְּלִי הוּא חָשׁוּב לְקַבֵּל בּוֹ זֵיתִים, וּמְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה.
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,10 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,11 as we explained in Hilchot Tum‘at Meit.12נִקַּב בְּמוֹצִיא זֵיתִים - טָהוֹר, וַהֲרֵי הוּא כִּכְלֵי גְלָלִים וַאֲבָנִים שֶׁאֵין מְקַבְּלִין טֻמְאָה; וַעֲדַיִן כְּלִי הוּא חָשׁוּב, לְהַצִּיל בְּצָמִיד פָּתִיל - עַד שֶׁיִּפָּחֵת רֻבּוֹ, כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּטֻמְאַת מֵת.
3The size of a hole necessary for a barrel not to contract impurity is one through which nuts would fall.13 The size of a hole necessary for a frying pan or a pot not to contract impurity is one through which olives would fall.14 Similarly, even when an earthenware kneading trough is large and contains 40 se’ah of iquids, 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.15גהֶחָבִית, שִׁעוּרָהּ כֶּאֱגוֹזִים. הָאִלְפָּס וְהַקְּדֵרָה, שִׁעוּרָן כְּזֵיתִים. וְכֵן עֲרֵבָה שֶׁל חֶרֶס, שִׁעוּרָהּ בַּזֵּיתִים; אֲפִלּוּ הָיְתָה גְדוֹלָה וּמַחֲזֶקֶת אַרְבָּעִים סְאָה בַּלַּח, וְנִפְחֲתָה בְּמוֹצִיא זֵיתִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מַטָּהּ עַל צִדָּהּ וְלָשׁ בָּהּ - טְהוֹרָה; שֶׁמִּתְּחִלָּתָהּ לֹא נַעֲשֵׂית לְכָךְ.
4The size of a hole necessary for a cruse and a container16 not to contract impurity is one through which oil can seep through,17 The size of a hole necessary for a pitcher18 not to contract impurity is one through which water can seep in.דהַפַּךְ וְהַטְּנִי, שִׁעוּרָן בְּשֶׁמֶן. וְהַצַּרְצוּר, שִׁעוּרוֹ בְּמַיִם.
5When the opening of a lamp19 is removed, it is pure.20 A lamp of earth21 whose mouth was fired by the wick22 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.23הנֵר שֶׁנִּטַּל פִּיו, טָהוֹר; וְשֶׁל אֲדָמָה שֶׁהֻסַּק פִּיו בַּפְּתִילָה, אֵינוֹ מְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה, וְאֵינוֹ בִּכְלַל כְּלֵי חֶרֶס, עַד שֶׁיֻּסַּק כֻּלּוֹ בַּכִּבְשָׁן כִּכְלֵי חֶרֶס.
6When a barrel is broken,24 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.25 If it became cracked26 and cannot be carried while holding half a kab27 of dried figs, it is pure.28וחָבִית שֶׁנִּפְחֲתָה, וּכְשֶׁמַּטִּין אוֹתָהּ עַל דָּפְנָהּ מְקַבֶּלֶת, אוֹ שֶׁנֶּחְלְקָה כְּמִין שְׁתֵּי עֲרֵבוֹת - עֲדַיִן הִיא מְקַבֶּלֶת טֻמְאָה; נִתְרָעֲעָה, וְאֵינָהּ יְכוֹלָה לְהִטַּלְטֵל בַּחֲצִי קַב גְּרוֹגְרוֹת - טְהוֹרָה.
7When the handles of a barrel are removed, it is considered as a base placed under a container.29 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.30 If initially it was made without handles, it is considered as a barrel.31זחָבִית שֶׁנִּטְּלוּ אָזְנֶיהָ - הֲרֵי הִיא כְּגִסְטְרָא, אֲפִלּוּ אֹזֶן אַחַת; נִסְדְּקָה לְמַטָּה מֵאָזְנֶיהָ, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאָזְנֶיהָ קַיָּמוֹת - הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּגִסְטְרָא. וְאִם עֲשָׂאָהּ מִתְּחִלָּה שֶׁלֹּא בְאָזְנַיִם, נִדּוֹנִית כְּחָבִית.
8The following laws apply when a barrel became cracked in the oven and thus two bases for containers were produced.32 If it cracked after the work necessary to fashion it was completed, each of the bases is susceptible to ritual impurity.33 If it was cracked before the work necessary to complete it was finished and afterwards, it was fired in the kiln, it is pure.34חחָבִית שֶׁנִּסְדְּקָה בַּכִּבְשָׁן, וְנִמְצָא שֶׁהִיא כִּשְׁתֵּי גִסְטְרָאוֹת: אִם מִשֶּׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתָּהּ נִסְדְּקָה, כָּל גִּסְטְרָא מֵהֶן מְקַבֶּלֶת טֻמְאָה; וְאִם נִסְדְּקָה קֹדֶם שֶׁתִּגָּמֵר מְלַאכְתָּהּ, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִשְׂרְפָה בַּכִּבְשָׁן - טְהוֹרָה.
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.וְהֵיאַךְ יִוָּדַע דָּבָר זֶה? אִם הָיוּ שְׁבָרֶיהָ שָׁוִין, וְתוֹכָהּ מַאְדִּים - עַד שֶׁלֹּא נִגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתָּהּ נִסְדְּקָה; אֵין שְׁבָרֶיהָ שָׁוִין, וְאֵין תּוֹכָהּ מַאְדִּים - בְּיָדוּעַ שֶׁאַחַר שֶׁנִּגְמְרָה מְלַאכְתָּהּ נִשְׁבְּרָה, וּמְקַבֶּלֶת טֻמְאָה כִּשְׁאָר שִׁבְרֵי כְּלֵי חֶרֶס הָרְאוּיִין לְתַשְׁמִישׁ.
9When 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 liquids35 that seep out as we explained.36 If it would leak, it would be useless, because a base is not placed under another base.טגִּסְטְרָא שֶׁנִּתְרָעֲעָה, וְאֵינָהּ מְקַבֶּלֶת מַשְׁקִין, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמְּקַבֶּלֶת אֹכָלִין - הֲרֵי זוֹ טְהוֹרָה; שֶׁאֵינָהּ עֲשׂוּיָה אֶלָּא לְקַבֵּל מַשְׁקִין הַדּוֹלְפִין, כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ - וְאִם הָיְתָה דוֹלֶפֶת, אֵין עוֹשִׂין גִּסְטְרָא לְגִסְטְרָא.
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.37 Instead, it is only the remnants of earthenware containers themselves that are susceptible to impurity.וְכֵן גִּסְטְרָא שֶׁנִּפְחֲתָה אוֹ שֶׁנֶּחְלְקָה לִשְׁנַיִם, טְהוֹרָה - שֶׁלֹּא אָמְרוּ שִׁירַיִם שֶׁל שִׁירַיִם מִתְטַמְּאִין, אֶלָּא שְׁיָרֵי כְּלֵי חֶרֶס בִּלְבָד הֵן שֶׁמִּתְטַמְּאִין.
10If there are protrusions emerging from a base, whether it is resting upright or leaning on its side, whenever the protrusions can hold olives,38 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.39 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.יגִּסְטְרָא שֶׁחִדּוּדִין יוֹצְאִין מִמֶּנָּה, בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה יוֹשֶׁבֶת בֵּין שֶׁהָיְתָה מֻטָּה עַל צִדָּהּ: כָּל הַמְקַבֵּל מִן הַחִדּוּדִין זֵיתִים כְּשֶׁיִּתְמַלֵּא הַגִּסְטְרָא זֵיתִים - מִטַּמֵּא בַּמַּגָּע, וּכְנֶגְדוֹ מִתְטַמֵּא בָּאֲוִיר; וְכֹל שֶׁאֵין מְקַבֵּל עִמָּהּ בַּזֵּיתִים - מִתְטַמֵּא בַּמַּגָּע, וְאֵין כְּנֶגְדּוֹ מִתְטַמֵּא בָּאֲוִיר.
11What 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?40 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.41יאכֵּיצַד מִתְטַמֵּא בַּמַּגָּע, וְאֵין כְּנֶגְדּוֹ מִתְטַמֵּא בָּאֲוִיר? שֶׁאִם נָגְעָה הַטֻּמְאָה בַּגִּסְטְרָא מִתּוֹכָהּ, מִתְטַמֵּא הַחִדּוּד; נִכְנְסָה הַטֻּמְאָה בַּאֲוִיר הַגִּסְטְרָא, אֲפִלּוּ הָיְתָה כְּנֶגֶד הַחִדּוּד - לֹא נִטְמָא הַחִדּוּד.
12What is meant by the statement42 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.יבוְכֵיצַד כְּנֶגְדּוֹ מִתְטַמֵּא בָּאֲוִיר? שֶׁאִם הָיְתָה הַטֻּמְאָה בַּאֲוִיר הַגִּסְטְרָא כְּנֶגֶד הַחִדּוּד, נִטְמָא הַחִדּוּד עִם הַגִּסְטְרָא.
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.וְעַל דֶּרֶךְ זֶה הוּא בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בִּכְלֵי חֶרֶס וּבְתַנּוּר וְכִירַיִם - מִתְטַמֵּא בַּמַּגָּע וּכְנֶגְדּוֹ בָּאֲוִיר, אוֹ אֵין מִתְטַמֵּא כְּנֶגְדּוֹ בָּאֲוִיר.
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 inside43 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.44וְכֵן כָּל טֻמְאַת מַגָּע הָאֲמוּרָה בְּעִנְיַן כְּלֵי חֶרֶס אוֹ תַּנּוּר וְכִירַיִם, הוּא שֶׁתִּגַּע הַטֻּמְאָה בָּהֶן מִתּוֹכָן; וְכָל טֻמְאַת אֲוִיר הוּא שֶׁלֹּא תִגַּע הַטֻּמְאָה כְּלָל, אֶלָּא תִּכָּנֵס לָאֲוִיר בִּלְבָד.
13When a barrel was cracked and one held it together by smearing animal turds45 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.46יגחָבִית שֶׁנִּתְרָעֲעָה, וּטְפָלָהּ בִּגְלָלִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא נוֹטֵל אֶת הַגְּלָלִים וְהַחֲרָסִים נוֹפְלִים - הֲרֵי זוֹ מְקַבֶּלֶת טֻמְאָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלֹּא בָטַל שֵׁם כְּלִי מֵעָלֶיהָ.
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.47נִשְׁבְּרָה, וְדָבַק חֲרָסֶיהָ אַחַר שֶׁפֵּרְשׁוּ, אוֹ שֶׁהֵבִיא חֲרָסִים מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר, וּטְפָלָם בִּגְלָלִים, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁנּוֹטֵל אֶת הַגְּלָלִים וְהַחֲרָסִים עוֹמְדִין - הֲרֵי זוֹ טְהוֹרָה, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁבָּטַל מֵעָלֶיהָ שֵׁם כְּלִי.
If one of the shards could hold a revi’it,48 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,49 because it is not a whole k’li.הָיָה בָהֶן חֶרֶס מַחֲזִיק רְבִיעִית: כְּנֶגֶד אוֹתוֹ הַחֶרֶס בִּלְבָד מִתְטַמֵּא בָּאֲוִיר, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא כְּלִי בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ; וּשְׁאָר הֶחָבִית אֵינוֹ מִתְטַמֵּא עַד שֶׁתִּגַּע בָּהּ הַטֻּמְאָה מִתּוֹכָהּ, מִפְּנֵי שֶׁאֵינָהּ כְּלִי שָׁלֵם.
14The following laws apply if a barrel was perforated, one plugged the hole with tar,50 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.ידחָבִית שֶׁנִּקְּבָה, וְסָתַם הַנֶּקֶב בְּזֶפֶת, וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִשְׁבְּרָה - אִם יֵשׁ בַּחֶרֶס הַסָּתוּם בַּזֶּפֶת כְּדֵי לְהַחֲזִיק רְבִיעִית, הֲרֵי זֶה מְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה; מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא מִשִּׁבְרֵי הֶחָבִית, וְלֹא בָטַל שֵׁם כְּלִי מֵעָלֶיהָ.
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.51אֲבָל חֶרֶס שֶׁנִּקַּב אַחַר שֶׁפֵּרֵשׁ מִן הַכְּלִי, וְסָתַם הַנֶּקֶב בְּזֶפֶת, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מַחֲזִיק רְבִיעִית - טָהוֹר; שֶׁהַחֶרֶס שֶׁנִּקַּב, בָּטַל שֵׁם כְּלִי מֵעָלָיו וְטָהַר - וְכֹל שֶׁטָּהַר בִּכְלִי חֶרֶס שָׁעָה אַחַת, אֵין לוֹ טֻמְאָה לְעוֹלָם.
15When a kettle was perforated and it was patched with tar, it is pure, because it cannot hold hot liquids as it holds cold ones.52 Similarly,53 keilim made from tar, beeswax, or the like are pure and are not considered as keilim.טוקֻמְקוּמוֹס שֶׁנִּקַּב, וַעֲשָׂאָהוּ בְּזֶפֶת - טָהוֹר, שֶׁאֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְקַבֵּל הַחַמִּין כַּצּוֹנֵן. וְכֵן כְּלֵי הַזֶּפֶת וְהַשַּׁעֲוָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָהֶן - טְהוֹרִין, וְאֵינָן בִּכְלַל הַכֵּלִים.
16When an earthenware funnel was plugged with tar,54 it is not susceptible to impurity, because the tar does not cause it to be considered as a container.55 If, however, a wooden funnel is plugged in this manner, it is considered as a container56 and it is susceptible to impurity.טזמַשְׁפֵּךְ שֶׁל חֶרֶס שֶׁפְּקָקוֹ בְּזֶפֶת - אֵינוֹ מְקַבֵּל טֻמְאָה, שֶׁאֵין הַזֶּפֶת מְשִׂימוֹ כְּלִי קִבּוּל; אֲבָל מַשְׁפֵּךְ שֶׁל עֵץ שֶׁסְּתָמוֹ - הֲרֵי זֶה כִּכְלִי קִבּוּל וּמִתְטַמֵּא.
Footnotes
1.
The bracketed additions are made on the basis of the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 3:1).
2.
See Chapter 14, Halachah 9.
3.
A hole that enables liquids to seep out is smaller than one that enables them to seep in. Thus the measure stated in this halachah is more stringent.
4.
See Chapter 18, Halachot 8 and 16, for a description of these bases. See also Halachah 9.
5.
As explained in the previous halachah.
6.
Sprinkling the ashes of the red heifer over water drawn for this purpose is referred to as consecration. This consecration must be performed while the water is held in a container. See Hilchot Parah Adumah 6:6.
7.
See Hilchot Tum’at Ochalin 2:8. There it is explained that liquid does not make food susceptible to impurity unless it was “uprooted” from the ground, like water in a container. Since the container is still significant despite the hole, liquid in a container with such a hole is considered as “uprooted” from the ground and would make produce susceptible to impurity.
8.
See ibid.:9.
9.
If it was made for foods, as explained in Halachah 1.
10.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 6, and the sources mentioned in the notes there.
11.
The fifth category would be when that larger portion is also broken.
12.
Hilchot Tum’at Meit 22:3.
13.
Nuts would be stored in barrels even if they had holes. Hence, the barrels would still be considered as keilim and susceptible to impurity.
14.
Since a pot and a frying pan are used both for foods and for liquids, we rule stringently and apply the measure appropriate for foods (see R. Ovadiah of Bartenura to Keilim 3:2).
15.
Even though it can be used for its original function in this position, since this was not the intent for which it was originally made, it is no longer considered as a container.
16.
See Hilchot Temidim UMusafim 3:4 which refers to a teni as a gold container used to collect the coals and the ashes from the altar. The term is used in several contexts in the Talmudic literature to refer to a metal container. In his gloss to Tamid 3:6, Rav Ovadiah of Bartenura states that it has the same root as the word tene used by Deuteronomy 26:2 to refer to the container used to carry the first fruits.
(Significantly, in his version of the Mishnah and his commentary to Keilim 3:2, the source for this halachah, the Rambam does not mention a teni and instead, speaks of a tipi. Some have suggested amending the text here to fit that version.)
17.
Oil is thicker than water and requires a larger hole to seep through.
18.
In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 3:2), the Rambam explains that the Hebrew term refers to a pitcher with screen over its opening. Thus when one pours, there are several streams of water. See also Chapter 13, Halachah 10, and Hilchot Mikva’ot 5:2.
19.
The opening through which the wick is placed [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (op. cit.)].
20.
For it is no longer fit to carry out its original function.
21.
Which was not fired in a kiln.
22.
I.e., as the wick burnt, it fired the earth around it.
23.
See Chapter 15, Halachah 1.
24.
A portion of it was removed and therefore it would not be able to hold anything when standing on its base (ibid. 4:1).
25.
Because it can still serve as a container.
26.
I.e., it did not have any one hole, but many cracks that prevent it from being carried.
27.
1376 cc according to Shiurei Torah and 2400 cc according to Chazon Ish.
28.
For it is no longer functional.
29.
Even if the entire container is intact, since its handles were removed and it is thus difficult to carry, it is considered as no more than the base to a container (R. Ovadiah of Bartenura to Keilim 4:3).
30.
Because it will break when one tries to pick it up.
31.
For the person had the intent of carrying it in that manner.
32.
I.e., because of the crack, the vessel produced was useless for anything more than placing below another container. Since it cracked in half, two such bases were produced.
33.
The rationale is that when the work to fashion the barrel was completed, it became susceptible to impurity. Afterwards, when it cracked, it is not removed from that category, as explained in Chapter 18, Halachah 10.
34.
Because it never entered the category of a container.
35.
Thus it would not be suitable for the function associated with it.
36.
Halachah 1; Chapter 18, 8.
37.
As the Rambam states in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 4:2), a base is considered like a remnant of a k’li even when it is whole, because it is only a portion of a k’li. Hence our Sages did not consider its remnants significant enough to contract impurity.
38.
I.e., the protrusions have a cavity large enough to hold an olive [the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 4:3).
39.
I.e., it is considered as part of the base in every sense. Diagram
40.
I.e., the last clause in the previous halachah.
41.
The Ra’avad objects to the Rambam’s ruling, offering a different interpretation of the Mishnah which is his source. The Kessef Mishneh and the Merchevet HaMishneh offer support for the Rambam’s interpretation.
42.
In Halachah 9, when the protrusions can hold olives.
43.
Touching their outside, by contrast, does not render these entities as impure.
This refers to being touched by the carcass of a crawling animal or the like [see the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 4:3)]. If, however, impure liquids touch the outside of a container, they impart impurity to it [i.e., to the outside alone]; see Hilchot Sha’ar Avot HaTum’ah, ch. 7.
44.
See Chapter 1, Halachah 5; Chapter 13, Halachah 1.
45.
Which are not susceptible to impurity.
46.
Although it was cracked and it would have fallen apart, since it never actually did, it always remained susceptible to impurity.
47.
Hence, even when reconstructed, it is not considered as a k’li.
48.
The minimum measure for it to be considered as a remnant of a container, as stated in Chapter 18, Halachah 13.
49.
Even then, the container is not contracting impurity in its own right, but only because it is considered as an “accessory” for the part that could hold a revi’it. See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 3:4) and Chapter 17, Halachah 1.
50.
See Chapter 14, Halachah 10, and Chapter 20, Halachah 5, from which it appears that an earthenware container plugged with tar is considered as intact. Note, however, Chapter 20, Halachah 3, which appears to contradict this principle.
51.
See Chapter 16, Halachah 8; Chapter 18, Halachah 11.
52.
The hot liquids will cause the tar to melt and then seep through the hole. Even though the kettle can hold cold liquids, that is not sufficient to cause it to be considered as a k’li. See the Rambam’s Commentary to the Mishnah (Keilim 3:7).
53.
I.e., because hot liquids will cause the k’li to melt.
54.
So that no liquid would flow through it.
55.
In his gloss to Keilim 3:8, R. Ovadiah of Bartenura explains the difference between the ruling in this halachah and Halachah 14 (where an object is considered a container if a hole is plugged by tar). When a funnel is made from earthenware, it is smooth and the tar will not stick well to it. When, by contrast, a hole is made in a k'li, it will never be entirely smooth and the tar will stick well.
56.
For the tar is an effective sealant for a wooden container.
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.
