Get the best of Chabad.org content every week!
Find answers to fascinating Jewish questions, enjoy holiday tips and guides, read real-life stories and more!
ב"ה

Rambam - 3 Chapters a Day

She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 12, She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 13, She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 14

Show content in:

She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 12

1

Our Sages established eleven stringencies applying to consecrated foods that do not apply to terumah. They are the following:

A person may immerse keilim inside other keilim to use for terumah, but not those to be used for consecrated foods. This is a decree lest the opening of the container be narrow and not be as wide as the mouthpiece of a drinking pouch. Thus the keilim inside of it would be considered as if they were immersed in the waters of the k'li and not in the waters of the mikveh. When does the above apply? When the large container in which the small impure keilim were placed was pure. If, however, it was impure, since the immersion is valid for it, it is also valid for the keilim inside of it, even though they were to be used for consecrated foods.

א

אַחַת עֶשְׂרֵה מַעֲלוֹת עָשׂוּ חֲכָמִים לַקֹּדֶשׁ עַל הַתְּרוּמָה וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. יֵשׁ לְאָדָם לְהַטְבִּיל כֵּלִים בְּתוֹךְ כֵּלִים לִתְרוּמָה אֲבָל לֹא לְקֹדֶשׁ. גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִהְיֶה פִּי הַכְּלִי צַר וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בּוֹ כִּשְׁפוֹפֶרֶת הַנּוֹד וְנִמְצְאוּ הַכֵּלִים שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ כְּאִלּוּ טָבְלוּ בְּמַיִם שֶׁבַּכְּלִי לֹא בַּמִּקְוֶה. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים כְּשֶׁהָיָה הַכְּלִי הַגָּדוֹל שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּתוֹכוֹ הַכֵּלִים הַטְּמֵאִין טָהוֹר. אֲבָל אִם הָיָה טָמֵא מִתּוֹךְ שֶׁעָלְתָה לוֹ טְבִילָה עָלְתָה טְבִילָה לַכֵּלִים שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ אֲפִלּוּ לְהִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן בַּקֹּדֶשׁ:

2

When the outer surface of a container contracted impurity because it touched liquids, its inner space does not become impure, nor does the fingerhold on its rim. Any liquids in its inner space or on its fingerhold are pure. One may drink from it. There is no need to worry that the liquids in his mouth will touch the outer surface of the container and then flow back in, causing its inner space to become impure.

With regard to what does the above apply? To containers used for terumah. If, by contrast, they are used for consecrated foods, when the outer surface becomes impure, the k'li becomes impure in its totality.

ב

כְּלִי שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ אֲחוֹרָיו בְּמַשְׁקִין לֹא נִטְמָא תּוֹכוֹ וְלֹא בֵּית אֶצְבַּע שֶׁבָּעֳבִי שְׂפָתוֹ. וְהַמַּשְׁקִין שֶׁבְּתוֹכוֹ אוֹ שֶׁבְּבֵית צְבִיעָתוֹ טְהוֹרִין. וְשׁוֹתֶה בּוֹ וְאֵינוֹ חוֹשֵׁשׁ שֶׁמָּא יִגְּעוּ מַשְׁקִין שֶׁבְּפִיו בַּאֲחוֹרֵי הַכְּלִי וְיַחְזְרוּ וִיטַמְּאוּ תּוֹכוֹ. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים לִתְרוּמָה. אֲבָל לְקֹדֶשׁ נִטְמְאוּ אֲחוֹרָיו נִטְמָא כֻּלּוֹ:

3

When a person carries an article on which a zav had been supported, he is permitted to carry terumah together with it. Since the person carrying the support is not touching the terumah and the terumah is not touching the support, the terumah is pure. This leniency does not apply to consecrated foods.

An incident occurred with a person who was carrying a jug of consecrated wine and he caused it to contract impurity because of an impure support he was carrying with it. At that time, the Sages decreed that one who carries such a support should not carry consecrated food. The decree was only instituted with regard to carrying such a support with consecrated food, as in the incident that occurred. If the person transgressed and carried the two together, since the support did not touch the consecrated food, the consecrated food is pure.

ג

הַנּוֹשֵׂא אֶת הַמִּדְרָס מֻתָּר לוֹ לִשָּׂא עִמּוֹ תְּרוּמָה כְּאֶחָד וְהוֹאִיל וְאֵין הַנּוֹשֵׂא נוֹגֵעַ בַּתְּרוּמָה וְלֹא תְּרוּמָה נוֹגַעַת בְּמִדְרָס הֲרֵי הִיא טְהוֹרָה אֲבָל לֹא הַקֹּדֶשׁ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָגַע בּוֹ. מַעֲשֵׂה הָיָה בְּאֶחָד שֶׁנָּשָׂא חָבִית שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ טִמְּאָהּ בְּמִדְרָס שֶׁנָּשָׂא עִמָּהּ בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה גָּזְרוּ שֶׁהַנּוֹשֵׂא אֶת הַמִּדְרָס לֹא יִשָּׂא אֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ. וְלֹא גָּזְרוּ אֶלָּא בְּמִדְרָס עִם הַקֹּדֶשׁ כְּמַעֲשֶׂה שֶׁהָיָה. וְאִם עָבַר וְנָשָׂא הוֹאִיל וְלֹא נָגַע בְּקֹדֶשׁ הֲרֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ טָהוֹר:

4

The clothes of people who partake of terumah, even though they are pure and they are careful not to contract impurity, are considered as the support of a zav with regard to consecrated foods.

ד

בִּגְדֵי אוֹכְלֵי תְּרוּמָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן טְהוֹרִין וְנִזְהָרִין מִן הַטֻּמְאוֹת הֲרֵי בִּגְדֵיהֶן מִדְרָס לְקֹדֶשׁ:

5

When a k'li is made up of several component parts and its surfaces and beams are tied together, e.g., a bed or the like, if it contracts impurity and must be immersed for terumah, it may be immersed in its entirety, as one entity, while tied together. If it must be immersed for consecrated foods, he must untie all the component parts, wipe each of them down, lest there be an intervening substance upon them and immerse them one by one. Afterwards, he may retie them.

ה

כְּלִי שֶׁהוּא מְפֻצָּל וְלוּחוֹתָיו וְקוֹרוֹתָיו מְקֻשָּׁרוֹת כְּגוֹן מִטָּה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ. אִם נִטְמָא וְצָרִיךְ לְהַטְבִּילוֹ לִתְרוּמָה יֵשׁ לוֹ לְהַטְבִּילוֹ כֻּלּוֹ כְּאֶחָד כְּשֶׁהוּא מְקֻשָּׁר. אֲבָל לְקֹדֶשׁ מַתִּיר וּמְנַגֵּב שֶׁמָּא יֵשׁ שָׁם דָּבָר הַחוֹצֵץ וּמַטְבִּיל וְאַחַר כָּךְ קוֹשֵׁר:

6

When the fashioning of utensils is completed in a state of purity, even if the one fashioning them is a Torah scholar who was scrupulous in keeping them pure, they must be immersed before they are used for consecrated food. It is not, however, necessary to wait until nightfall. For terumah, however, they may be used without being immersed, because they were fashioned in a state of purity.

Why did the Sages require that such a k'li be immersed before being used for consecrated food? This is a decree, lest the spittle of an unlearned person have touched it while it was being fashioned and was still moist when it was completed.

ו

כֵּלִים הַנִּגְמָרִין בְּטָהֳרָה אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה הָעוֹשֶׂה אוֹתָן תַּלְמִיד חָכָם וְנִזְהָר בָּהֶן הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ צְרִיכִין טְבִילָה לְקֹדֶשׁ וְאֵינָן צְרִיכִין הַעֲרֵב שֶׁמֶשׁ. אֲבָל לִתְרוּמָה מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בָּהֶן בְּלֹא טְבִילָה שֶׁהֲרֵי נַעֲשׂוּ בְּטָהֳרָה. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה הִצְרִיכוּם טְבִילָה לְקֹדֶשׁ גְּזֵרָה מִשּׁוּם רֹק עַם הָאָרֶץ שֶׁיִּגַּע בָּהֶן בִּשְׁעַת מְלָאכָה וַעֲדַיִן הוּא לַח:

7

Everything inside of a container is considered as joined with regard to consecrated food, but not with regard to terumah.

What is implied? When there is a container filled with fruits that are separate from each other, e.g., raisins and dried figs, if a source of impurity touches one of them, everything that is in the container is impure with regard to consecrated foods, but not with regard to terumah.

All of these stringencies are Rabbinic in origin. There is, however, an allusion to this stringency in the Torah. Numbers 7:14 states: "One golden ladle, weighing ten shekalim, filled with incense." Our Sages said: Everything that is in the ladle is considered as one entity. Even if a k'li does not have a hollow space, everything that is upon it is considered as joined together with regard to consecrated foods. For example, figs were collected on a board or on a hide; even though they are not touching each other, they are considered as a single entity.

ז

אַחַר שֶׁנִּגְמַר הַכְּלִי מְצָרֵף מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ לְקֹדֶשׁ אֲבָל לֹא לִתְרוּמָה. כֵּיצַד. כְּלִי שֶׁהוּא מָלֵא פֵּרוֹת פְּרוּדִין זֶה מִזֶּה כְּגוֹן צִמּוּקִין וּגְרוֹגָרוֹת וְנָגְעָה טֻמְאָה בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶן. נִטְמָא כָּל מַה שֶּׁבַּכְּלִי לְקֹדֶשׁ אֲבָל לֹא לִתְרוּמָה. וְכָל הַמַּעֲלוֹת שֶׁל דִּבְרֵיהֶם הֵם. וְרֶמֶז יֵשׁ לְמַעֲלָה זוֹ בַּתּוֹרָה (במדבר ז יד) "כַּף אַחַת עֲשָׂרָה זָהָב מְלֵאָה קְטֹרֶת" אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים כָּל מַה שֶּׁבַּכַּף הֲרֵי הוּא כְּגוּף אֶחָד. אֲפִלּוּ שֶׁאֵין לוֹ תּוֹךְ מְצָרֵף מַה שֶּׁעָלָיו לְקֹדֶשׁ. כְּגוֹן שֶׁהָיוּ צְבוּרִין עַל גַּבֵּי הַלּוּחַ אוֹ עַל גַּבֵּי הָעוֹר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין הַפֵּרוֹת נוֹגְעִין זֶה בָּזֶה:

8

The following rules apply when there were two masses within a container, another entity separating them from each other, and one of the masses becomes impure. If the entity between them is required by the container, everything is joined together and it all becomes impure. If it is not required by the container, only the mass that was touched by the impurity contracts impurity.

ח

הָיוּ שְׁנֵי הַצִּבּוּרִין בְּתוֹךְ הַכְּלִי וְדָבָר אַחַר בֵּינֵיהֶן וְנִטְמָא אֶחָד מִשְּׁנֵיהֶן. אִם הָיָה הַדָּבָר שֶׁבֵּינֵיהֶן צָרִיךְ לַכְּלִי הַכְּלִי מְצָרְפָן וְנִטְמָא הַכּל. וְאִם אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לַכְּלִי לֹא נִטְמָא אֶלָּא זֶה שֶׁנָּגְעָה בּוֹ הַטֻּמְאָה בִּלְבַד:

9

If there were two masses in a container and one mass was connected to water that was behind the container, should an impure person touch the second mass, they both contract impurity, because they are joined by the container. Moreover, even though it is behind the container, the water that is behind the container becomes impure, because of the food that is connected to it.

If an impure person touched the water that is behind the container, the food that is connected to it contracts impurity. There is an unresolved question whether the other mass of food becomes impure because it is considered joined by the container or it is not considered as impure although it is joined.

ט

הָיוּ שְׁנֵי צִבּוּרִין בִּכְלִי וְהַצִּבּוּר הָאֶחָד מְחֻבָּר לַמַּיִם שֶׁאֲחוֹרֵי הַכְּלִי וְנָגַע טָמֵא בַּצִּבּוּר הַשֵּׁנִי נִטְמְאוּ שְׁנֵיהֶן בְּצֵרוּף הַכְּלִי וְנִטְמְאוּ הַמַּיִם שֶׁאֲחוֹרֵי הַכְּלִי מֵחֲמַת זֶה הָאֹכֶל הַמְחֻבָּר לָהֶן אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן אֲחוֹרֵי הַכְּלִי. נָגַע הַטָּמֵא בְּמַיִם שֶׁאֲחוֹרֵי הַכְּלִי נִטְמָא הָאֹכֶל הַמְחֻבָּר לָהֶן. וְהַדָּבָר סָפֵק אִם נִטְמָא הָאֹכֶל הַשֵּׁנִי בְּצֵרוּף הַכְּלִי אוֹ לֹא נִטְמָא מֵחֲמַת הַצֵּרוּף:

10

When consecrated food that became impure was placed in a container which also held other consecrated food that was pure, as long as they do not touch each other, the one that is pure remains pure and the one that is impure remains impure. If a person who immersed that day comes and touches the impure food, an unresolved doubt arises: Does the principle that a container joins the masses it holds cause the pure food to become disqualified because the impure food was touched by the person who immersed or is it not disqualified, because the person who immersed only touched food that had already been saturated with impurity and he did not add anything else to it.

י

אֹכֶל קדֶשׁ שֶׁנִּטְמָא וְהִנִּיחוֹ בִּכְלִי וּבְתוֹךְ הַכְּלִי אֹכֶל קֹדֶשׁ אַחֵר טָהוֹר וְאֵין נוֹגְעִין זֶה בָּזֶה. הַטָּהוֹר בְּטָהֳרָתוֹ וְהַטָּמֵא בְּטֻמְאָתוֹ. בָּא טְבוּל יוֹם וְנָגַע בָּאֹכֶל הַטָּמֵא יֵשׁ בְּדָבָר זֶה סָפֵק אִם נִפְסַל הַטָּהוֹר מֵחֲמַת מַגַּע טְבוּל יוֹם מִפְּנֵי צֵרוּף הַכְּלִי אוֹ לֹא נִפְסַל. שֶׁלֹּא נָגַע טְבוּל יוֹם אֶלָּא בָּאֹכֶל שֶׁשָּׂבַע מִן הַטֻּמְאָה וְלֹא הוֹסִיף לוֹ כְּלוּם:

11

Consecrated food that is a fourth degree derivative of impurity is disqualified, but if it were terumah it would be pure. Similarly, if terumah that was a tertiary derivative touched a consecrated liquid, it contracts impurity, as we explained. When, by contrast, terumah or consecrated food that is a tertiary derivative touched a liquid that is terumah, it is not disqualified.

יא

הָרְבִיעִי בְּקֹדֶשׁ פָּסוּל אֲבָל בִּתְרוּמָה טָהוֹר. וְכֵן שְׁלִישִׁי בִּתְרוּמָה אִם נָגַע בְּמַשְׁקֵה קֹדֶשׁ הֲרֵי זֶה נִטְמָא כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי שֶׁבִּתְרוּמָה אוֹ שֶׁבְּקֹדֶשׁ אִם נָגַע בְּמַשְׁקֵה תְּרוּמָה לֹא פְּסָלוֹ:

12

When one of a person's hands contracted impurity and he then touched his other hand or the hand of another person, he disqualified the other hand and it is considered as a tertiary derivative. If his hand was moist with liquid, the other hand contracts impurity even if it was not touched. He must immerse both of them in a mikveh. Only afterwards may he touch consecrated food.

With regard to terumah, by contrast, if one of his hands contracts impurity, the other does not, even if he touched it, provided the first was dry. He need not immerse the hand that contracted impurity. It is sufficient to wash it in the ritual manner. He may then touch terumah.

יב

מִי שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת יָדוֹ אַחַת וְנָגַע בָּהּ בְּיָדוֹ שְׁנִיָּה אוֹ בְּיַד חֲבֵרוֹ פָּסַל אֶת הַשְּׁנִיָּה וַהֲרֵי הִיא כִּשְׁלִישִׁי. וְאִם הָיְתָה יָדוֹ בְּלוּלָה בַּמַּשְׁקֶה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נָגַע נִטְמֵאת חֲבֶרְתָּהּ וְצָרִיךְ לְהַטְבִּיל אֶת שְׁתֵּיהֶן וְאַחַר כָּךְ יִגַּע בְּקֹדֶשׁ. אֲבָל בִּתְרוּמָה אִם נִטְמֵאת יָדוֹ הָאַחַת לֹא נִטְמֵאת חֲבֶרְתָּהּ. וַאֲפִלּוּ נָגַע בָּהּ כְּשֶׁהִיא נְגוּבָה. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לְהַטְבִּיל יָדוֹ שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת אֶלָּא נוֹטְלָהּ וְנוֹגֵעַ בִּתְרוּמָה:

13

Dry foods that have not become susceptible to contract impurity may be eaten with impure hands. With regard to what does the above apply? To terumah. With regard to consecrated food, by contrast, the cherished quality of consecrated food causes it to be considered as susceptible to impurity and it is forbidden for someone whose hands are impure to eat consecrated food even if it was not made susceptible to impurity by contact with liquids.

Even if the person with impure hands did not actually touch the consecrated food with his hands, only with a weaving needle or his friend inserted it into his mouth, this is forbidden. Needless to say, if a source of impurity touched consecrated food that was not made susceptible to impurity by contact with liquids, it becomes impure, because the cherished quality of consecrated food causes it to be considered as susceptible to impurity.

יג

אֳכָלִין נְגוּבִין שֶׁלֹּא הֻכְשְׁרוּ אוֹכְלִין אוֹתָם בְּיָדַיִם מְסֹאָבוֹת. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בִּתְרוּמָה. אֲבָל בְּקֹדֶשׁ חִבַּת הַקֹּדֶשׁ מַכְשַׁרְתָּן וְאָסוּר לְמִי שֶׁיָּדָיו טְמֵאוֹת לֶאֱכל קֹדֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא הֻכְשַׁר. וַאֲפִלּוּ לֹא נָגַע בּוֹ אֶלָּא בְּכוּשׁ אוֹ שֶׁתָּחַב לוֹ חֲבֵרוֹ לְתוֹךְ פִּיו הֲרֵי זֶה אָסוּר. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר שֶׁאִם נָגְעָה טֻמְאָה בָּאֳכָלִין שֶׁל קֹדֶשׁ שֶׁלֹּא הֻכְשְׁרוּ שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁחִבַּת הַקֹּדֶשׁ מַכְשַׁרְתָּן:

14

In which instances does the above principle apply? With regard to disqualifying the food itself and to cause it to become forbidden to be eaten. There is, however, an unresolved question with regard to counting primary or secondary derivatives if other entities come in contact with such consecrated food.

What is implied? If consecrated food contracted impurity without being made susceptible to impurity by contact with liquids with other food that was made susceptible to impurity by contact with liquids, there is an unresolved doubt, because the first food had not become susceptible to impurity because of contact with liquids.

יד

בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים לִפְסוֹל הָאוֹכֵל עַצְמוֹ וּלְאָסְרוֹ בַּאֲכִילָה. אֲבָל לִמְנוֹת בּוֹ רִאשׁוֹן וְשֵׁנִי הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק. כֵּיצַד. נָגַע אֹכֶל שֶׁנִּטְמָא בְּלֹא הֶכְשֵׁר בְּאֹכֶל שֵׁנִי שֶׁהֻכְשַׁר הֲרֵי זֶה הַשֵּׁנִי סָפֵק מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהָרִאשׁוֹן לֹא הֻכְשַׁר:

15

Even after a mourner's period of acute mourning ends or after a person who was lacking atonement brings the sacrifices that bring him atonement, he must immerse in a mikveh before partaking of consecrated food, but not before partaking of terumah. For a person in a state of acute mourning and one who is lacking atonement may partake of terumah.

Why did the Sages require immersion before partaking of consecrated food? Because until this time, such individuals were forbidden to partake of consecrated food. Hence it is possible that they diverted their attention from their bodies and contracted impurity without knowing of it. This stringency was imposed only with regard to eating, but not with regard to touching. Such individuals may touch consecrated foods before immersion.

טו

הָאוֹנֵן אַחַר שֶׁתָּם זְמַן אֲנִינוּתוֹ וּמְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים אַחַר שֶׁהֵבִיא כַּפָּרָתוֹ צְרִיכִין טְבִילָה לַאֲכִילַת הַקֹּדֶשׁ אֲבָל לֹא לִתְרוּמָה שֶׁהָאוֹנֵן וּמְחֻסַּר כִּפּוּרִים מֻתָּרִין לֶאֱכל אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה. וּמִפְּנֵי מָה הִצְרִיכוּם טְבִילָה לַקֹּדֶשׁ שֶׁהֲרֵי עַד עַתָּה הָיוּ אֲסוּרִין לֶאֱכל אֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ וְהִסִּיחוּ דַּעְתָּן וְשֶׁמָּא נִטְמְאוּ וְהֵם לֹא יָדְעוּ. וְלֹא עָשׂוּ מַעֲלָה זוֹ אֶלָּא לַאֲכִילָה אֲבָל לִנְגִיעָה נוֹגְעִים בְּקָדָשִׁים קֹדֶם טְבִילָה:

16

The first six stringencies were imposed both with regard to consecrated foods and with regard to ordinary foods prepared with the stringencies of consecrated foods. The last five stringencies, beginning with "everything inside a utensil is considered as joined" applies only to consecrated food alone, but not to ordinary foods prepared with the stringencies of consecrated foods. With regard to these five matters, such food is considered as ordinary food. Therefore, with regard to ordinary foods prepared with the stringencies of consecrated foods, a primary derivative is impure, a secondary derivative disqualified, and a tertiary derivative is pure with regard to ordinary foods, as we explained.

טז

שֵׁשׁ מַעֲלוֹת הָרִאשׁוֹנוֹת עֲשָׂאוּם בֵּין לְקֹדֶשׁ בֵּין לְחֻלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טָהֳרַת הַקֹּדֶשׁ. וַחֲמֵשׁ אַחֲרוֹנוֹת שֶׁהֵן מִן הַכְּלִי מְצָרֵף מַה שֶּׁבְּתוֹכוֹ וָהָלְאָה עֲשָׂאוּם בְּקֹדֶשׁ בִּלְבַד אֲבָל לֹא בְּחֻלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טָהֳרַת הַקֹּדֶשׁ. אֶלָּא הֲרֵי הֵן בְּחָמֵשׁ אֵלּוּ כְּחֻלִּין לְפִיכָךְ חֻלִּין שֶׁנַּעֲשׂוּ עַל טָהֳרַת הַקֹּדֶשׁ הָרִאשׁוֹן טָמֵא בָּהֶן וְהַשֵּׁנִי פָּסוּל. וְהַשְּׁלִישִׁי טָהוֹר בְּחֻלִּין כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 13

1

Our Sages established five categories with regard to the ritual purity of clothes. They are the following:

a) The clothes of an unlearned person are considered as a midras, an article on which a zav had been supported, for people who partake of ordinary food in a state of purity. Similarly, the unlearned people themselves are considered as zavvim with regard to pure substances, as we explained.

b) The clothes of people who partake of ordinary food in a state of purity are considered as a midras for those who partake of the second tithe. The people who partake of ordinary food in a state of purity themselves - they are called perushim - are not considered as zavvim. Even with regard to terumah, a perush is considered pure, even if he touches terumah with his hands.

c) The clothes of people who partake of the second tithe are considered as a midras for those who partake of terumah.

d) The clothes of people who partake of terumah are considered as a midras for those who partake of consecrated food. The people who partake of terumah themselves are, however, not considered as zavvim with regard to consecrated articles.

e) The clothes of those who partake of consecrated foods are considered as a midras with regard to the offering of the red heifer, as explained in Hilchot Parah Adumah. A person who is pure with regard to consecrated foods is not considered as a zav with regard to the offering of the red heifer.

א

חָמֵשׁ מַעֲלוֹת עָשׂוּ חֲכָמִים בִּבְגָדִים וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. בִּגְדֵי עַם הָאָרֶץ מִדְרָס לְאוֹכְלֵי חֻלֵּיהֶן בְּטָהֳרָה וְכֵן עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ עַצְמָן כְּזָבִין לְטָהֳרוֹת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ. וּבִגְדֵי אוֹכְלֵי חֻלֵּיהֶן בְּטָהֳרָה מִדְרָס לְאוֹכְלֵי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי אֲבָל אוֹכְלֵי חֻלֵּיהֶן בְּטָהֳרָה וְהֵן הַנִּקְרָאִים פְּרוּשִׁים אֵינָם כְּזָבִים אֲפִלּוּ לִתְרוּמָה הֲרֵי זֶה הַפָּרוּשׁ טָהוֹר אֲפִלּוּ אִם נָגַע בָּהּ בְּגוּפוֹ. וּבִגְדֵי אוֹכְלֵי מַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי מִדְרָס לְאוֹכְלֵי תְּרוּמָה. וּבִגְדֵי אוֹכְלֵי תְּרוּמָה מִדְרָס לְקֹדֶשׁ אֲבָל אוֹכְלֵי תְּרוּמָה עַצְמָן אֵינָן כְּזָבִין בְּקֹדֶשׁ. וּבִגְדֵי אוֹכְלֵי קֹדֶשׁ מִדְרָס לְחַטָּאת כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ בְּהִלְכוֹת פָּרָה אֲדֻמָּה אֲבָל הַטָּהוֹר לְקֹדֶשׁ אֵינוֹ כְּזָב לְחַטָּאת:

2

Similarly, our Sages established categories with regard to ritual immersion:

What is implied? If someone immersed himself without any intent, he is pure with regard to ordinary food, but he is forbidden to partake of the second tithe until he had the intent to immerse for the sake of the second tithe. If he immersed for the second tithe, he is assumed to be pure for the second tithe, but forbidden to partake of terumah. If he immersed for terumah, he is assumed to be pure for terumah, but forbidden to partake of consecrated foods. If he immersed for consecrated food, he is assumed to be pure for consecrated food, but forbidden to participate in the offering of the red heifer. If he immersed with the intent of participating in the offering of the red heifer, he is assumed to be pure for everything, for one who immerses for the sake of a more stringent circumstance is considered acceptable for a more lenient one.

If a person immersed without any intent, i.e., without thinking of any of these situations, he is pure only with regard to ordinary food and is considered impure as he was previously, even for the second tithe. Similarly, when a person washes his hands or immerses them, he must focus his attention, even if he desires only to partake of the second tithe. From that tithe and any level of sanctity higher, one must focus his intent. For ordinary food, however, it is not necessary for him to focus his intent.

All of these stringencies originate in Rabbinic Law. According to Scriptural Law, since the person immersed himself, he is pure with regard to all matters.

ב

וְכֵן עָשׂוּ חֲכָמִים מַעֲלוֹת בִּטְבִילָה. כֵּיצַד. מִי שֶׁטָּבַל בְּלֹא כַּוָּנָה הֲרֵי זֶה טָהוֹר לְחֻלִּין וְאָסוּר בְּמַעֲשֵׂר שֵׁנִי עַד שֶׁיִּתְכַּוֵּן לִטְבּל לְמַעֲשֵׂר. טָבַל לְמַעֲשֵׂר הֲרֵי זֶה בְּחֶזְקַת טָהֳרָה לְמַעֲשֵׂר וְאָסוּר בִּתְרוּמָה. טָבַל לִתְרוּמָה הֻחְזַק לִתְרוּמָה וְאָסוּר בְּקֹדֶשׁ. טָבַל לְקֹדֶשׁ הֻחְזַק לְקֹדֶשׁ וְאָסוּר לְחַטָּאת. טָבַל לְחַטָּאת הֻחְזַק לַכּל שֶׁהַטּוֹבֵל לְחָמוּר הֻחְזַק לְקַל. טָבַל סְתָם וְלֹא נִתְכַּוֵּן לְאֶחָד מִכָּל אֵלּוּ הֲרֵי זֶה טָהוֹר לְחֻלִּין בִּלְבַד וְטָמֵא כְּשֶׁהָיָה אֲפִלּוּ לְמַעֲשֵׂר. וְכֵן הַנּוֹטֵל יָדָיו אוֹ הִטְבִּילָן צָרִיךְ כַּוָּנָה אֲפִלּוּ לְמַעֲשֵׂר. וּמִן הַמַּעֲשֵׂר וָמַעְלָה צָרִיךְ כַּוָּנָה אֲבָל לְחֻלִּין אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ כַּוָּנָה. וְכָל הַמַּעֲלוֹת הָאֵלּוּ מִדִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים אֲבָל דִּין תּוֹרָה הוֹאִיל וְטָבַל מִכָּל מָקוֹם הֲרֵי הוּא טָהוֹר לַכּל:

3

When a person who was pure with regard to terumah diverted his attention from partaking of it, the diversion of attention causes him to contract impurity. He is forbidden to partake of terumah until he immerses himself a second time. He need not, however, wait until nightfall.

If his hands were pure for terumah, but he diverted his attention from eating, even though he says: "I know that my hands did not contract impurity," his hands are impure because of his diversion of attention, for hands are busy. If this applies with regard to terumah, it can be inferred that the same principles apply with regard to consecrated food. Anyone who diverts his attention must immerse himself.

When a person did not guard himself from the impurity associated with a human corpse, if he is not certain that he did not contract impurity, he must have the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled on him on the third and seventh days after the doubt arouse, because of his diversion of attention. If he is certain that he did not contract the impurity associated with a corpse, but diverted his attention from other forms of impurity, he must immerse himself and wait until nightfall even for terumah. It is clear that all these immersions are Rabbinic safeguards.

ג

מִי שֶׁהָיָה טָהוֹר לִתְרוּמָה וְהִסִּיחַ אֶת לִבּוֹ מִלֶּאֱכל נִטְמָא בְּהֶסֵּחַ הַדַּעַת וְאָסוּר לֶאֱכל תְּרוּמָה עַד שֶׁיִּטְבּל פַּעַם שְׁנִיָּה וְאֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ הַעֲרֵב שֶׁמֶשׁ. הָיוּ יָדָיו טְהוֹרוֹת לִתְרוּמָה וְהִסִּיחַ לִבּוֹ מִלֶּאֱכל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאוֹמֵר יוֹדֵעַ אֲנִי שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמְאוּ יָדַי הֲרֵי יָדָיו טְמֵאוֹת בְּהֶסֵּחַ הַדַּעַת שֶׁהַיָּדַיִם עַסְקָנִיּוֹת. אִם לִתְרוּמָה כֵּן קַל וָחֹמֶר לְקֹדֶשׁ שֶׁכָּל הַמַּסִּיחַ דַּעְתּוֹ צָרִיךְ טְבִילָה. וְאִם לֹא שָׁמַר עַצְמוֹ מִטֻּמְאַת מֵת וְלֹא יָדַע בְּוַדַּאי שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמָא הֲרֵי זֶה צָרִיךְ הַזָּאָה שְׁלִישִׁי וּשְׁבִיעִי מִפְּנֵי הֶסֵּחַ הַדַּעַת. וְאִם יָדַע שֶׁלֹּא נִטְמָא בְּמֵת וְהִסִּיחַ דַּעְתּוֹ מִשְּׁאָר טֻמְאוֹת הֲרֵי זֶה צָרִיךְ טְבִילָה וְהַעֲרֵב שֶׁמֶשׁ אַף לִתְרוּמָה. וְדָבָר בָּרוּר הוּא שֶׁכָּל אֵלּוּ הַטְּבִילוֹת מִדִּבְרֵיהֶן:

4

Similarly, our Sages decreed that keilim that are discovered in marketplaces and streets - even in deserts - should be assumed to be impure, lest they have contracted impurity from a corpse or a zav. Similarly, saliva found in such places is considered to be impure, lest it be the saliva of a zav or the like.

ד

וְכֵן גָּזְרוּ חֲכָמִים עַל הַכֵּלִים הַנִּמְצָאִים בַּשְּׁוָקִים וּבָרְחוֹבוֹת אֲפִלּוּ בַּמִּדְבָּרוֹת שֶׁיִּהְיוּ בְּחֶזְקַת טֻמְאָה. שֶׁמָּא בְּזָב אוֹ בְּמֵת נִטְמְאוּ. וְכֵן הָרֻקִּין הַנִּמְצָאִין שָׁם בְּחֶזְקַת טֻמְאָה שֶׁמָּא רֹק זָב וְכַיּוֹצֵא בּוֹ הוּא הָרֹק הַזֶּה:

5

All of the keilim found in Jerusalem are pure even if they were found on the way descending to a place of immersion. For the Sages did not institute a decree concerning keilim found in Jerusalem with the exception of knives for the slaughter of sacrificial animals. This was instituted because of the severity involving sacrificial animals.

When does the above stringency apply? To knives found in Jerusalem throughout the year. If, however, one finds a knife in Jerusalem on the fourteenth of Nisan, one may slaughter sacrificial animals with it immediately. This applies even if the fourteenth of Nisan fell on the Sabbath, for no decree was made with regard to knives found on that day. Similarly, if a knife was found on a festival, one may slaughter with it immediately. For it is assumed that all keilim are pure on the festivals.

ה

כָּל הַכֵּלִים הַנִּמְצָאִין בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם טְהוֹרִין אֲפִלּוּ נִמְצְאוּ דֶּרֶךְ יְרִידָה לְבֵית הַטְּבִילָה. שֶׁלֹּא גָּזְרוּ טֻמְאָה עַל הַכֵּלִים הַנִּמְצָאִים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם חוּץ מִן הַסַּכִּינִים לִשְׁחִיטַת הַקָּדָשִׁים מִפְּנֵי חֻמְרַת הַקָּדָשִׁים. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּסַכִּין הַנִּמְצֵאת בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בִּשְׁאָר יְמוֹת הַשָּׁנָה. אֲבָל אִם מָצָא סַכִּין בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּאַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן שׁוֹחֵט בָּהּ הַקָּדָשִׁים מִיָּד וַאֲפִלּוּ חָל אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר לִהְיוֹת בְּשַׁבָּת שֶׁלֹּא גָּזְרוּ עַל הַסַּכִּינִין הַנִּמְצָאִים בַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה. וְכֵן אִם מְצָאָהּ בְּיוֹם טוֹב שׁוֹחֵט בָּהּ מִיָּד שֶׁחֶזְקַת כָּל הַכֵּלִים בְּיוֹם טוֹב טְהוֹרִין:

6

If one found a knife on the thirteenth of Nisan, the ashes of the red heifer should be sprinkled on it, it should be immersed, and one may slaughter with it on the following day. For, on this day, our Sages considered it as if the thirteenth of Nisan was the seventh day of its purification with the ashes of the red heifer.

ו

מָצָא הַסַּכִּין בִּשְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר מַזֶּה עָלֶיהָ וּמַטְבִּילָהּ וְשׁוֹחֵט בָּהּ לְמָחָר מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעֲשָׂאוּהוּ בְּיוֹם זֶה כְּאִלּוּ יוֹם שְׁלֹשָׁה עָשָׂר שְׁבִיעִי שֶׁלָּהּ:

7

If one finds a knife tied to a knife whose status he knows, whether on a festival or on other days, its status is the same as that knife. If the one is pure, it is pure; if it is impure, it is impure.

ז

מָצָא סַכִּין קְשׁוּרָה לַסַּכִּין הַיְדוּעָה אֶצְלוֹ בֵּין בְּיוֹם טוֹב בֵּין בִּשְׁאָר הַיָּמִים הֲרֵי הִיא כָּמוֹהָ אִם טְהוֹרָה טְהוֹרָה וְאִם טְמֵאָה טְמֵאָה:

8

Our Sages decreed that any saliva of unknown origin found in the middle of the road in Jerusalem is impure like saliva of unknown origin found anywhere. Any saliva found on the side of the road in Jerusalem is pure, for the perushim walk on the sides so that they will not contract impurity through contact with unlearned people. During the festivals, the converse is true. Saliva in the middle of the road is pure, for all Israel are pure during the festivals. At the side of the road, it is impure. For there are few individuals who are impure during the festivals, and they move to the sides.

ח

כָּל הָרֻקִּין הַנִּמְצָאִים בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם בְּאֶמְצַע הַדֶּרֶךְ גָּזְרוּ עֲלֵיהֶן טֻמְאָה כִּשְׁאָר הָרֻקִּין הַנִּמְצָאִים בְּכָל מָקוֹם. וְכָל הָרֻקִּין הַנִּמְצָאִים בַּצְּדָדִין בִּירוּשָׁלַיִם טְהוֹרִים. שֶׁהַפְּרוּשִׁים הֵן שֶׁמְּהַלְּכִין בַּצְּדָדִין כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִתְטַמְּאוּ בְּמַגַּע עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ. וּבִשְׁעַת הָרֶגֶל שֶׁבְּאֶמְצַע הַדֶּרֶךְ טְהוֹרִים שֶׁכָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל טְהוֹרִים בָּרֶגֶל. וְשֶׁבַּצְּדָדִין טְמֵאִים שֶׁהַטְּמֵאִים בָּרֶגֶל מְעַטִּים וְהֵן פּוֹרְשִׁים לְצִדֵּי הַדְּרָכִים:

9

Just like a primary derivative of impurity creates a secondary derivative and a secondary derivative creates a tertiary derivative, when there is an unresolved doubt that an entity is a primary derivative it creates a secondary derivative of doubtful status, and a secondary derivative of doubtful status creates a tertiary derivative of doubtful status.

ט

כְּשֵׁם שֶׁהָרִאשׁוֹן עוֹשֶׂה שֵׁנִי וְהַשֵּׁנִי עוֹשֶׂה שְׁלִישִׁי כֵּן סְפֵק רִאשׁוֹן עוֹשֶׂה סְפֵק שֵׁנִי וּסְפֵק שֵׁנִי עוֹשֶׂה סְפֵק שְׁלִישִׁי:

10

When there is a question whether terumah or consecrated food contracted impurity from a primary source of impurity of Scriptural origin - there is a question if the foods touched the impurity or not - they should be burnt because of this impurity.

י

תְּרוּמָה וְקָדָשִׁים שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בִּסְפֵק אָב מֵאֲבוֹת הַטֻּמְאוֹת שֶׁל תּוֹרָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ נִשְׂרָפִין בְּטֻמְאָה זוֹ כְּגוֹן שֶׁנִּסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם נָגַע בְּאָב זֶה אוֹ לֹא נָגַע:

11

There are situations where there is a question about a food's status for which the ruling is held in abeyance; they are not eaten, nor are they burnt. And there are other questionable situations that warrant the burning of terumah and, needless to say, consecrated foods.

יא

וְיֵשׁ שָׁם סְפֵקוֹת שֶׁאֵין שׂוֹרְפִין עֲלֵיהֶן וְאֵין אוֹכְלִין אוֹתָן אֳכָלִין שֶׁנִּסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ בָּהֶן אֶלָּא תּוֹלִין לֹא אוֹכְלִין וְלֹא שׂוֹרְפִין. וְיֵשׁ שָׁם סְפֵקוֹת שֶׁשּׂוֹרְפִין עֲלֵיהֶן אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר קָדָשִׁים:

12

If, however, there is a compounded doubt concerning the impurity of terumah - and needless to say, of consecrated food - they should not be burnt. Instead, the ruling concerning them is held in abeyance. They are not eaten, nor are they burnt.

יב

אֲבָל עַל סְפֵק סְפֵק הַטֻּמְאָה אֵין שׂוֹרְפִין עָלָיו תְּרוּמָה לְעוֹלָם וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר קָדָשִׁים. אֶלָּא תּוֹלִין לֹא אוֹכְלִין וְלֹא שׂוֹרְפִין:

13

There are six doubtful situations for which terumah is burnt. These are all Rabbinic decrees: a) a beit hapras, b) earth from the Diaspora, c) the clothes of unlearned people, d) keilim that are discovered, e) saliva of unknown origin that is discovered, and f) the urine of an impure person that became mixed with an equal amount of urine from an animal and it is not known whether the appearance of the mixture was that of a person's urine was nullified or whether that appearance was nullified.

What is implied? If terumah contracted impurity due to contact with one of these entities, even though the fundamental dimension of their impurity is doubtful, the terumah should be burnt. The rationale is that were one certain that any of these impurities were present, the impurity would be Scriptural in nature, for a corpse and a zav are Scriptural sources of impurity.

Whether terumah touched one of these six entities or contracted impurity due to one of these entities and thus it is a tertiary derivative from them, the terumah should be burnt. If, however, there is a question whether or not the entity touched the beit hapras, the earth of the nations, or if it touched the garments, the saliva, the keilim, or the urine, the ruling concerning the terumah is held in abeyance. The rationale is that a) the fundamental dimension of their impurity is doubtful, perhaps it is impure, perhaps it is pure; and

b) even if you say they are impure, it is possible that there was contact with the terumah, but it is possible that there was no contact. Thus two unresolved questions are involved. When there are two unresolved questions, terumah is not burnt, the ruling concerning it is held in abeyance, as explained.

יג

עַל שִׁשָּׁה סְפֵקוֹת שׂוֹרְפִין אֶת הַתְּרוּמָה וְכֻלָּם גְּזֵרָה מִדִּבְרֵיהֶם וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. עַל בֵּית הַפְּרָס. וְעַל עָפָר הַבָּא מֵאֶרֶץ הָעַמִּים. וְעַל בִּגְדֵי עַם הָאָרֶץ. וְעַל הַכֵּלִים הַנִּמְצָאִים. וְעַל הָרֻקִּים הַנִּמְצָאִים. וְעַל מֵי רַגְלֵי אָדָם טָמֵא שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב בְּמֵי רַגְלֵי בְּהֵמָה מֶחֱצָה לְמֶחֱצָה וְאֵין יָדוּעַ אִם בָּטְלוּ מַרְאִיתָן אִם לֹא. כֵּיצַד. אִם נִטְמֵאת תְּרוּמָה מֵחֲמַת אֶחָד מִשִּׁשָּׁה אֵלּוּ אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעִקַּר טֻמְאָתָן בְּסָפֵק הֲרֵי זוֹ תִּשָּׂרֵף. הוֹאִיל וּוַדַּאי סְפֵקוֹת אֵלּוּ טֻמְאָתָן מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁהַמֵּת וְהַזָּב טְמֵאִין מִן הַתּוֹרָה. וְאַחַת תְּרוּמָה שֶׁנָּגְעָה בְּאַחַת מִשֵּׁשׁ טֻמְאוֹת הָאֵלּוּ. אוֹ שֶׁנִּטְמֵאת מֵחֲמַת אַחַת מֵהֶן וַהֲרֵי הִיא שְׁלִישִׁי לְאַחַת מֵהֶן הֲרֵי זוֹ תִּשָּׂרֵף. אֲבָל אִם נִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ בְּכָל מָקוֹם אִם נָגַע בְּבֵית הַפְּרָס וּבְאֶרֶץ הָעַמִּים אוֹ לֹא נָגַע. אִם נָגַע בִּבְגָדִים וְרֻקִּין וְכֵלִים וּמֵי רְגָלִים אוֹ לֹא נָגַע. הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ תּוֹלִין מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעִקַּר טֻמְאָתָן מִפְּנֵי הַסָּפֵק שֶׁמָּא טְמֵאִין הֵן אוֹ טְהוֹרִים וְאִם תֹּאמַר טְמֵאִין שֶׁמָּא נָגַע שֶׁמָּא לֹא נָגַע וְנִמְצְאוּ שְׁנֵי סְפֵקוֹת וְאֵין שׂוֹרְפִין עַל שְׁנֵי סְפֵקוֹת אֶלָּא תּוֹלִין כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:

She'ar Avot haTum'ah - Chapter 14

1

Our Sages deemed that twelve questionable situations are deemed as pure: They are:

a) A doubt concerning drawn water in a mikveh,

b) a doubt concerning impurity floating on water,

c) a doubt whether liquids imparted impurity to other entities; with regard to their own status, however, they are considered impure when a doubt arises,

d) a doubt concerning the impurity of hands whether regarding the impurity of the hands themselves, such hands imparting impurity to other substances, or a doubt regarding the purification of such hands from this impurity,

e) a doubt concerning impurity of Rabbinic origin,

f) a doubt concerning ordinary food prepared with the stringencies of consecrated food,

g) a doubt concerning sacrifices that are required to be brought,

h) a doubt concerning tzara'at blemishes,

i) a doubt when a person afflicted with tzara'at stood still or passed,

j) a doubt concerning the carcass of a creeping animal,

k) a doubt that arose in the public domain,

l) a doubt concerning two domains.

א

שְׁנֵּים עָשָׂר סְפֵקוֹת טהֲרוּ חֲכָמִים וְאֵלּוּ הֵן. סְפֵק מַיִם שְׁאוּבִים לְמִקְוֶה. סְפֵק טֻמְאָה צָפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם. סְפֵק מַשְׁקִין לְטַמֵּא אֲחֵרִים. אֲבָל לְטֻמְאַת עַצְמָן טְמֵאִים מִסָּפֵק. סְפֵק הַיָּדַיִם בֵּין לְטֻמְאַת עַצְמָן בֵּין לְטַמֵּא אֲחֵרִים בֵּין לְטָהֳרַת יָדַיִם מִטֻּמְאָתָן. סְפֵק דִּבְרֵי סוֹפְרִים. סְפֵק הַחֻלִּין. סְפֵק קָרְבָּנוֹת. סְפֵק נְגָעִים. סָפֵק עוֹבֵר וְעוֹמֵד. סְפֵק שְׁרָצִים. סְפֵק רְשׁוּת הָרַבִּים. סְפֵק שְׁתֵּי רְשׁוּיוֹת:

2

What is meant by the principle: a doubt concerning drawn water in a mikveh? Three lugim of drawn water that fall into a mikveh disqualify it. If there is a doubt whether or not such water fell into a mikveh or even if it is certain that the water fell, but there is a question whether the minimum measure was present or not, we consider an article immersed in the mikveh as pure and the mikveh as acceptable. Nevertheless, a person should not be instructed to immerse in such a mikveh and to be involved with pure substances as an initial preference. If he immersed and was involved with pure substances, they are considered to be pure.

ב

סְפֵק מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין לְמִקְוֶה כֵּיצַד. שְׁלֹשָׁה לוֹגִין מַיִם שְׁאוּבִין שֶׁנָּפְלוּ לַמִּקְוֶה פְּסָלוּהוּ. סָפֵק נָפְלוּ סָפֵק לֹא נָפְלוּ וַאֲפִלּוּ נָפְלוּ סָפֵק יֵשׁ בָּהֶן שִׁעוּר אוֹ אֵין בָּהֶן סְפֵקוֹ טָהוֹר וַהֲרֵי הַמִּקְוֶה בְּכַשְׁרוּתוֹ. וְאֵין מוֹרִין לוֹ לִטְבּל בְּמִקְוֶה זֶה וְלַעֲשׂוֹת טָהֳרוֹת לְכַתְּחִלָּה. וְאִם טָבַל וְעָשָׂה טָהֳרוֹתָיו טְהוֹרוֹת:

3

What is meant by the principle: a doubt concerning impurity floating on water? There was a carcass of a creeping animal floating on water, whether the water was in a container or in a pool in the earth and a person descended into the water, unless he is certain that he touched the carcass, he is considered as pure. This applies even if there is no space for anything in the container or the pool but the person and the impurity.

The principle, a doubt concerning impurity floating on water is pure, was stated only concerning a carcass of creeping animal. If the carcass of a creeping animal is suspended from above and floating on water or is being dragged over water, it is considered as being placed down and not as floating.

ג

סְפֵק טֻמְאָה צָפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם כֵּיצַד. שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁהָיָה צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם. בֵּין שֶׁהָיוּ הַמַּיִם בְּכֵלִים אוֹ בְּקַרְקָעוֹת וְיָרַד לַמַּיִם אֲפִלּוּ אֵין שָׁם אֶלָּא מְלֹא אָדָם וְטֻמְאָה הֲרֵי זֶה טָהוֹר עַד שֶׁיֵּדַע וַדַּאי שֶׁנָּגַע. וְלֹא אָמְרוּ סְפֵק טֻמְאָה צָפָה טָהוֹר אֶלָּא לְשֶׁרֶץ בִּלְבַד. וְכָל הַנִּתְלִים וְהַנִּגְרָרִין הֲרֵי הֵן כְּמֻנָּחִין:

4

When the carcass of a creeping animal is placed in a container and the container is floating on the surface of water or it was placed on a human corpse, an animal carcass - even if the carcass or the corpse below it has decomposed - or semen that is floating on the water, it is considered as if it was placed on the earth, in which instance, a doubtful situation that arises in a private domain is considered as impure, as will be explained.

If the carcass of one creeping animal was lying on that of another creeping animal that was floating on water, it is considered as thick impurity and a doubtful situation that arises is considered as pure. There is an unresolved doubt whether the carcass of a creeping animal that was floating on water on which the ashes of the red heifer had been sprinkled which in turn was floating on other water is considered as placed down on the earth or not. Therefore it appears to me that the doubtful situation is considered as pure.

ד

שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁהָיָה מֻנָּח בִּכְלִי וּכְלִי צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מֻנָּח עַל הַמֵּת אוֹ עַל הַנְּבֵלָה וַאֲפִלּוּ נִמּוֹחַ הַנְּבֵלָה אוֹ בָּשָׂר מֵת שֶׁתַּחְתָּיו אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מֻנָּח עַל שִׁכְבַת זֶרַע הַצָּפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמֻנָּח עַל הָאָרֶץ שֶׁסְּפֵקוֹ בִּרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד טָמֵא כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. הָיָה שֶׁרֶץ עַל גַּבֵּי שֶׁרֶץ צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם הֲרֵי זֶה כְּטֻמְאָה עָבָה שֶׁצָּפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם וּסְפֵקוֹ טָהוֹר. הָיָה מֻנָּח עַל גַּבֵּי מֵי חַטָּאת וּמֵי חַטָּאת צָפִין עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם הֲרֵי זֶה סָפֵק אִם הוּא כְּמֻנָּח אוֹ אֵינוֹ כְּמֻנָּח. לְפִיכָךְ יֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁסְּפֵקוֹ טָהוֹר:

5

Just as our Sages deemed a doubtful situation concerning impurity that was floating on water, whether in a container or on the earth, as pure, so too, they deemed as pure a situation involving something pure that was floating on water, whether in a container or on the earth.

What is implied? There was a kneading trough that was impure due to contact with a human corpse and there was a loaf of bread that was terumah wrapped in tree-bast or in paper placed inside of it. Water descended into the kneading trough and filled it. The paper spread out and thus the loaf was floating on the water with the paper separating between it and the water. If there is a question whether or not the loaf touched the side of the kneading trough, it is considered as pure, because it is floating.

ה

כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁטִּהֲרוּ סְפֵק טֻמְאָה צָפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם בֵּין בְּכֵלִים בֵּין בְּקַרְקָעוֹת כָּךְ טִהֲרוּ סְפֵק טָהֳרָה הַצָּפָה עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם בֵּין בְּכֵלִים בֵּין בְּקַרְקָעוֹת. כֵּיצַד. עֲרֵבָה שֶׁהִיא טְמֵא מֵת וְכִכַּר תְּרוּמָה כָּרוּךְ בְּסִיב אוֹ בִּנְיָר וְנָתוּן בְּתוֹכָהּ וְיָרְדוּ לְתוֹכָהּ מֵי גְּשָׁמִים וְנִתְמַלֵּאת וְנִפְשַׁט הַנְּיָר וַהֲרֵי הַכִּכָּר צָף עַל פְּנֵי הַמַּיִם וְהַנְּיָר מַבְדִּיל בֵּינוֹ לְבֵין הַמַּיִם וְסָפֵק נָגַע צִדּוֹ בַּעֲרֵבָה סָפֵק לֹא נָגַע. הֲרֵי הוּא בְּטָהֳרָתוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא צָף:

6

The following laws apply when the carcass of a creeping animal was floating on a cistern in a winepress. With regard to terumah, when there is a doubt, it is deemed impure. With regard to the workers, when there is a doubt, it is deemed pure, because the impurity is floating.

ו

שֶׁרֶץ שֶׁנִּמְצָא צָף עַל גַּבֵּי בּוֹר בְּתוֹךְ הַגַּת לִתְרוּמָה סְפֵקוֹ טָמֵא. וְלַפּוֹעֲלִין סְפֵקָן טָהוֹר. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהִיא טֻמְאָה צָפָה:

7

When a doubt arises whether liquids imparted impurity to other entities, they are considered as pure. With regard to their own status, however, they are considered impure.

What is implied? A person was holding a staff that contained impure liquids on its top and he threw it among pure loaves of bread. If there is a doubt whether the liquids touched the loaves or not, they are deemed pure. Similarly, if a doubt arose whether impure liquids touched a given container or not, the container is pure. Similarly, if a doubt arose if these impure liquids touched other liquids or not, the other liquids are pure. If, however, an impure person extended his hand or his foot into a place where there are pure liquids and there is a doubt whether or not he touched the liquids, they are impure because of the doubt. Similar laws apply in all analogous situations.

ז

סָפֵק מַשְׁקִין לְטַמֵּא אֲחֵרִים טָהוֹר. לְטֻמְאַת עַצְמָן טָמֵא. כֵּיצַד. הָיָה מַקֵּל בְּיָדוֹ וּבְרֹאשׁוֹ מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִים וּזְרָקָן לְתוֹךְ כִּכָּרוֹת טְהוֹרוֹת. סָפֵק נָגְעוּ הַמַּשְׁקִין בַּכִּכָּרוֹת סָפֵק לֹא נָגְעוּ טְהוֹרוֹת. וְכֵן אִם נִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם נָגְעוּ מַשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין בִּכְלִי זֶה אוֹ לֹא נָגְעוּ הֲרֵי הַכְּלִי טָהוֹר. וְכֵן אִם נִסְתַּפֵּק לוֹ אִם נָגְעוּ מַשְׁקִין אֵלּוּ הַטְּמֵאִין בְּמַשְׁקִין אֲחֵרִים אוֹ לֹא נָגְעוּ הֲרֵי הַמַּשְׁקִין הָאֲחֵרִים טְהוֹרִין. אֲבָל טָמֵא שֶׁפָּשַׁט יָדוֹ אוֹ רַגְלוֹ לְבֵין מַשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין. אוֹ שֶׁזָּרַק כִּכָּר טָמֵא לְבֵין מַשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין סָפֵק נָגַע בַּמַּשְׁקִין סָפֵק לֹא נָגַע הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ טְמֵאִין בְּסָפֵק. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:

8

The following rule applies when there was a jug that was filled with liquids and an impure person extended his hand into its inner space. If there is a doubt whether or not he touched the liquids, the liquids are impure, but the jug is pure, for liquids whose purity is of a doubtful status do not impart impurity.

Similarly, if liquids which are questionably impure enter into the inner space of a jug, the jug is pure and the liquids in it are pure, for they contract impurity only from the jug. If the liquids that were questionably impure became mixed with the liquids in the jug, all of the liquids are questionably impure, but the jug is pure. Similarly, if these liquids fall into an oven, any bread that is in the oven and the oven itself are pure.

ח

חָבִית שֶׁהִיא מְלֵאָה מַשְׁקִין וּפָשַׁט הַטָּמֵא אֶת יָדוֹ לַאֲוִירָהּ סָפֵק נָגַע בַּמַּשְׁקִין סָפֵק לֹא נָגַע בָּהֶן הַמַּשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין וְהֶחָבִית טְהוֹרָה שֶׁאֵין סְפֵק הַמַּשְׁקִין מְטַמֵּא. וְכֵן אִם נִכְנְסוּ מַשְׁקִין שֶׁהֵן טְמֵאִין מִסָּפֵק לַאֲוִיר הֶחָבִית הֲרֵי הֶחָבִית טְהוֹרָה וְהַמַּשְׁקִין שֶׁבְּתוֹכָהּ טְהוֹרִין שֶׁאֵינָן מִתְטַמְּאִין אֶלָּא מִן הֶחָבִית. וְאִם נִתְעָרְבוּ מַשְׁקִין אֵלּוּ הַסָּפֵק בְּמַשְׁקִין שֶׁבֶּחָבִית הֲרֵי כָּל הַמַּשְׁקִין טְמֵאִין בְּסָפֵק וְהֶחָבִית טְהוֹרָה. וְכֵן אִם נָפְלוּ מַשְׁקִין אֵלּוּ לְתוֹךְ הַתַּנּוּר הֲרֵי הַפַּת וְהַתַּנּוּר טְהוֹרִין:

9

When a person poured or sprinkled impure liquids in his house and there were ritually pure objects there, if there is a question whether some of the liquid sprayed on them or not, they are considered pure despite the doubt.

ט

הַמְרַבֵּץ בֵּיתוֹ בְּמַיִם טְמֵאִים אוֹ שֶׁזִּלְּפָן וְהָיוּ שָׁם טָהֳרוֹת סָפֵק נִתְּזוּ עֲלֵיהֶן סָפֵק לֹא נִתְּזוּ סְפֵקוֹ טָהוֹר:

10

If one sprinkled both pure and impure liquids in a house and, afterwards, liquids were found on a loaf of bread that was terumah, should one take it and inquire about its status, it is deemed pure, for when there is a question whether liquids imparted impurity, the object is deemed pure. If, however, one left the bread until the water dried, it contracts impurity because of the doubt. For when there is a question concerning impurity in a private domain, the object is deemed impure, as will be explained. At the time the inquiry is being made, no liquids are present, only the loaf and there is a question whether it is pure or impure.

י

זִלֵּף מַשְׁקִין טְהוֹרִין וּטְמֵאִים בְּתוֹךְ הַבַּיִת וְנִמְצְאוּ אַחַר כָּךְ מַשְׁקִין עַל כִּכָּר שֶׁל תְּרוּמָה. נְטָלָהּ וְנִשְׁאַל עָלֶיהָ הֲרֵי זוֹ טְהוֹרָה שֶׁסְּפֵק הַמַּשְׁקִין לְטַמֵּא טָהוֹר. הִנִּיחַ הַכִּכָּר עַד שֶׁיִּנָּגְבוּ הַמַּיִם שֶׁעָלֶיהָ הֲרֵי זוֹ טְמֵאָה בְּסָפֵק שֶׁסְּפֵק טֻמְאָה בִּרְשׁוּת הַיָּחִיד טָמֵא כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. וַהֲרֵי אֵין כָּאן מַשְׁקִין אֶלָּא כִּכָּר שֶׁהִיא סָפֵק טְמֵאָה סָפֵק טְהוֹרָה:

11

When there is a doubt concerning the impurity of hands whether regarding the impurity of the hands themselves, such hands imparting impurity to other substances, or a doubt regarding the purification of such hands from this impurity, the object in question is deemed pure.

What is implied? If a person's hands were pure and there were two impure loaves before him, should a question arise whether he touched the loaves or not, the status of his hands and the loaves is the same as it was previously. This same ruling applies if:

a) a person's hands were impure and there were two pure loaves before him and there is a question whether he touched the loaves or not;

b) one of the person's hands was pure, the other was impure; there were two pure loaves before him, he touched one of them and it was unknown whether he touched it with the impure hand or the pure hand;

c) both his hands were pure; there were two loaves before him, one pure and one impure; he touched one of them and he did not know whether he touched the one that was impure or the one that was pure;

d) one of his hands was pure and one was impure and there was both an impure and a pure loaf before him; he touched both of them and he is unsure whether the impure hand touched the impure loaf and the pure hand, the pure loaf or whether the impure hand touched the pure loaf and the pure hand, the impure loaf.

Similar concepts apply if a person's hands were impure and he immersed them in a mikveh or washed them in the ritual manner. If there is a doubt whether or not the water with which he purified them is acceptable for hands or unacceptable, whether or not the required measure of water was present, whether or not there was an intervening substance on his hands, his hands are considered as pure.

יא

סְפֵק יָדַיִם בֵּין לְהִתְטַמֵּא בֵּין לְטַמֵּא אֲחֵרִים בֵּין לְטָהֳרָתָן טָהוֹר כֵּיצַד. הָיוּ יָדָיו טְהוֹרוֹת וּלְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי כִּכָּרִים טְמֵאִין סָפֵק נָגַע סָפֵק לֹא נָגַע. אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ יָדָיו טְמֵאוֹת וּלְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי כִּכָּרִים טְהוֹרִים סָפֵק נָגַע סָפֵק לֹא נָגַע. אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ יָדָיו אַחַת טְהוֹרָה וְאַחַת טְמֵאָה וּלְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי כִּכָּרִים טְהוֹרִים וְנָגַע בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶן וְסָפֵק בַּטְּמֵאָה נָגַע סָפֵק בַּטְּהוֹרָה. אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ יָדָיו טְהוֹרוֹת וּלְפָנָיו שְׁנֵי כִּכָּרִים אֶחָד טָהוֹר וְאֶחָד טָמֵא וְנָגַע בְּאֶחָד מֵהֶם סָפֵק בַּטָּמֵא נָגַע סָפֵק בַּטָּהוֹר נָגַע. אוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ יָדָיו אַחַת טְהוֹרָה וְאַחַת טְמֵאָה וּלְפָנָיו כִּכָּר טָמֵא וְכִכָּר טָהוֹר וְנָגַע בִּשְׁנֵיהֶן סָפֵק טְמֵאָה בַּטָּמֵא וְהַטְּהוֹרָה בַּטָּהוֹר אוֹ טְמֵאָה בַּטָּהוֹר וְהַטְּהוֹרָה בַּטָּמֵא. הַיָּדַיִם כְּמוֹ שֶׁהָיוּ וְהַכִּכָּרִים כְּמוֹת שֶׁהָיוּ. וְכֵן אִם הָיוּ יָדָיו טְמֵאוֹת וְהִטְבִּילָן אוֹ נְטָלָן סָפֵק שֶׁהַמַּיִם שֶׁטִּהֲרוּ בָּהֶן כְּשֵׁרִים לְיָדַיִם סָפֵק שֶׁהֵן פְּסוּלִין. סָפֵק יֵשׁ בָּהֶן כְּשִׁעוּר סָפֵק אֵין בָּהֶן. סָפֵק שֶׁהָיָה דָּבָר חוֹצֵץ עַל יָדוֹ סָפֵק שֶׁלֹּא הָיָה. הֲרֵי יָדָיו טְהוֹרוֹת:

12

If one of a person's hands was impure and he did not know which one it was, he is instructed not to be involved with pure articles until he washes both his hands. If he touches pure objects with one hand before he washed them, the pure articles remain pure.

יב

הָיְתָה יָדוֹ אַחַת טְמֵאָה וְאֵינוֹ יוֹדֵעַ אֵי זוֹ הִיא אוֹמְרִין לוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יַעֲשֶׂה טָהֳרוֹת עַד שֶׁיִּטּל שְׁתֵּי יָדָיו. וְאִם נָגַע בְּאַחַת מֵהֶן בְּטָהֳרוֹת קֹדֶם שֶׁיִּטּוֹל יָדָיו טָהֳרוֹתָיו טְהוֹרוֹת:

Published and copyright by Moznaim Publications, all rights reserved.
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 Mishneh Torah was the Rambam's (Rabbi Moses ben Maimon) magnum opus, a work spanning hundreds of chapters and describing all of the laws mentioned in the Torah. To this day it is the only work that details all of Jewish observance, including those laws which are only applicable when the Holy Temple is in place. Participating in one of the annual study cycles of these laws (3 chapters/day, 1 chapter/day, or Sefer Hamitzvot) is a way we can play a small but essential part in rebuilding the final Temple.
Download Rambam Study Schedules: 3 Chapters | 1 Chapter | Daily Mitzvah