Shulchan Aruch: Chapter 161 - Laws Governing Intervening Substances and Immersion

SECTION 161 The Laws Governing Intervening Substances and Immersion. (1–8)

1 Any1 entity that is considered as an intervening substance with regard to the immersion of one’s entire body2 is considered as an intervening substance with regard to washing one’s hands.3 For our Sages established all their ordinances in a manner resembling Scriptural practice.4 Therefore, one must be meticulous concerning5 any entity that he is particular about removing from his body on occasion.6 For example, if there is filth underneath one’s nail above the flesh of one’s finger — i.e., he has a large nail that extends above the flesh of his finger and there is filth under this additional portion7 — [the filth] must be removed before washing.8 [The rationale is] that most people are particular about removing [such filth] because they consider it disgusting. Thus it is not considered inconsequential with regard to the hand and is categorized as an intervening substance — even for one who personally is not bothered by [the presence of such filth].9

Most individuals are bothered when there is dough under their nails, even under the portion that is opposite the flesh.10 [Such dough] is therefore considered an intervening substance for all people with regard to the washing of hands.

2 When one’s flesh is bandaged, if the bandage does not cover a wound, but [was placed there because of] an ache and may be removed whenever he desires, he must remove it before washing.11 If, however, it covers a wound, he need not wash the bandaged area at all, as will be explained in sec. 162[:15].11

3 Mud from mud-holes12 and potters’ clay which adhere very tightly [to one’s flesh] and prevent water from seeping under them are considered intervening substances, whether [found] on the surface of one’s hand or under one’s nail, even on the portion opposite one’s flesh. [This ruling also applies to] all other types of mud and clay that have dried and cling to one’s flesh.10

When, however, there is only a small bit [of mud], which people would not be particular about removing (when they wash and clean their hands), they need not remove it before washing for a meal. The same concept applies concerning small amounts of dough or filth: If most people are not particular [about removing them], they are not considered intervening substances, even if they are located [on the upper part of the nail that is] above the flesh [of the finger]. If a given person is particular [about removing even such a small amount], it is considered as an intervening substance [for him], even though most people are not particular [about removing it].

The reason people are not meticulous in cleaning out the mud under their nails before the ritual washing is because people (in these countries) are not particular (about removing [such mud] when they wash and clean their hands [for ordinary purposes]. Therefore, such mud — even mud from mud-holes and potters’ clay — is not considered an intervening substance if it is opposite one’s flesh. Nevertheless, if a given person is particular [about removing such mud under ordinary circumstances], he must remove it [before the ritual washing]. There are authorities who [differ and] maintain that whenever most people are not meticulous (about removing a substance), even when a given person is, his personal preferences are of no consequence, because they are insignificant in light of the approach of people at large. [Hence, the substance is not considered as intervening.] One may rely on their words concerning the ritual washing of hands, since it is primarily a Rabbinic ordinance, but not with regard to the immersion of one’s entire body, as will be stated in Yoreh Deah, sec. 198.)13

All people must clean nails that are long and protrude above the flesh from the mud and filth under them, because most people are careful about such substances when they are not opposite the flesh. Hence, they are considered as intervening substances even for someone who is not concerned [about doing so], unless the substance is so small that most people would not be particular about [removing] it. (On Shabbos, one should press the flesh under the nail so that one will not scrape the nail while removing the mud.)14

4 When the lesser part of a nail is hanging, one must be careful to cut it off, because it is considered an intervening substance, as will be stated in Yoreh Deah, sec. 198.15

5 Moist ink and paint are not considered intervening substances since they will be dissolved in water. If these substances are dry, they do intervene,16 unless the paint on one’s hands has actual substance. If, however, there is nothing but the tint of the paint, it is not considered an intervening substance.

When a person is a painter, paint is not considered an intervening substance on his hands, even if the paint is substantial.17 Similarly, when a person is employed as a ritual slaughterer or butcher and his hands are continuously soiled with blood, blood is not considered as an intervening substance for him.18 Similar laws apply to one who sells fat. Although generally people are particular [about removing such substances from their hands], since most people employed in these professions are not meticulous [about removing these substances], they are not considered as intervening substances for them. For another person who does not regularly perform such activities, these substances are considered as intervening, even though he personally is not particular [about removing these substances].

When the practice of women is to color their nails to enhance their appearance and the like, this coloring is not considered as an intervening substance.19

All the above applies when the intervening substances cover the lesser portion of one’s hand. If, however, the majority of one’s hand is covered with an entity of substance, it is considered as an intervening substance even for people who generally are not particular [about removing it].

6 When a discharge that emerges from a wound dries and forms a scab, if the person is not bothered by it and would not remove it, it is not considered as an intervening substance with regard to the ritual washing of hands. Similar rules apply to a scabthatis painful to remove, since, from that moment on, the person does not intend to remove it. As long as the current state prevails, it is considered as if his tendency is not to remove it and it is not considered an intervening substance with regard to the ritual washing.20 [In contrast,] with regard to the immersion [of one’s entire body], we are stringent regarding such scabs.21

7 When a ring is fitted tightly on one’s finger, it is considered an intervening substance. If it is loosely fitting, it is not considered an intervening substance,22 because water seeps between the ring and the finger. Nevertheless, as an initial practice, one should remove [any] ring before washing, even one that is loosely fitting, for we are not knowledgeable regarding the precise definition of [the term] “loosely fitting” and one might act leniently even with regard to a ring that is fitted tightly. After the fact, a washing is considered valid if one wore a ring that is loosely fitting, provided he poured a reviis over it at one time, as will be explained in sec. 162[:14].23

If, however, the ring is fitted tightly, the washing is not valid if the person is particular about removing the ring at times, e.g., the ring has a precious stone and he is careful about removing the ring before washing so that the water does not soil it. Women are careful to remove even a ring that does not have a precious stone when kneading dough. Therefore,24 [for a woman,] a ring is always considered an intervening substance, even though she is not concerned about removing it lest water soil it. Since a man, by contrast, does not usually knead dough,25 he is not required to remove a ring that does not have a stone before washing even if it is not loosely fitting, because he is never particularaboutremoving it.

8 The measure of the hands that must be washed is the entire hand until the wrist, the measure that was required for the sanctification of the hands [of the kohanim] in the [Beis Ha]Mikdash.26 Other authorities maintain that [the Sages] were lenient with regard to the washing of the hands and did not require washing beyond the joint where the fingers reach the palm of the hand.

It is preferable to follow the first opinion.27 Since it is a matter that does not involve any exertion, why not act in a manner that is acceptable to all authorities? It is, however, correct to stipulate that one is not accepting this practice as an obligation, but rather as a voluntary act. Thus if on a given occasion, he does not have sufficient water, he need not observe this stringency as is his ordinary practice. Indeed, it is proper to make a similar stipulation regarding all stringencies that a person desires to accept upon himself.28

If a person [who has accepted the stringency of washing until the wrist,] washes his hands in public in a locale where the custom is to wash only until the joint where the fingers reach the palm of the hand, he should not act stringently in their presence, lest it appear to them, Heaven forbid, that there are two sets of Jewish laws.29 If one’s hands are filthy, all authorities agree that one must wash until the wrist.30