Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

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.

Keilim that were originally made with holes large enough that pomegranates would fall from them, e.g., a basket and a rope-net carrier borne by camels or trellises for vines, are susceptible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 closed 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 also removed 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 there 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."