Kommentar zu Parah 7:16

חמשה. לקדשן חמשה קידושין – each and every jar on its own.

Introduction This mishnah deals with a person who draws water multiple times from a live source of water and either wants to use all five jars for one mixture or for five different mixtures. The potential problem that he could encounter is the prohibition of doing "work" while preparing the hatat water.

ונמלכו לקדשן קידוש אחד – to empty five of them into one large vessel and to mix the [the water with the ashes] at once/simultaneously.

If five men filled five jars to prepare with them five mixtures, and then they changed their minds to prepare one mixture from all of them, or if they filled the jars to prepare with them one mixture and then they changed their minds to prepare with them five mixtures, all the water remains valid. There are two scenarios here. In the first, five different people draw five different jars of water with which to make five different mixtures of hatat water and then they change their mind and decide to make one mixture. Alternatively, five different men want to make one mixture and then they change their mind and decide to make five different mixtures. In both cases, all of the water is valid. As stated in the introduction, the potential problem is that one person would be preparing hatat water and at the same time doing something else, even preparing a separate mixture of hatat water. In these cases, that did not happen, because there were five different men, and each was occupied with preparing his own jar of hatat water.

הרי כולן כשרים – for since each pone fills his vessel there isn’t here labor invalidating in water whether in filling/drawing water to casting the ashes in the water.

If one man filled five jars intending to prepare five [separate] mixtures, [even though] he changed his mind to prepare one mixture from all of them, only the last is valid. Here, one man wanted to make five different jars but then changed his mind and decided to prepare one jar of hatat water. The problem is that after he filled each jar, he then went and filled another jar and this is considered "work" which disqualifies the validity of the hatat water. Only the last jar's water is valid because he didn't occupy himself with anything else after filling that jar.

היחיד שמליא חמש חביות כו' – nothing is fit/appropriate other than the last. For the first filling is invalidated with the work that he did when he filled the second [jar] prior to putting the ashes in the first [jar], and similarly, the second [filling] is invalidated when he fills the third [jar], and similarly all of them. But if from the outset he would fill five jars one after another or even one-[hundred jars in order to mix ashes and water in one mixing, as for example, that he needs to sprinkle upon many vessels, they would not invalidate each other and all of them are fit/appropriate, for all are considered one filling/drawing water. But when he filled from the outset for the sake of five mixings, all of them invalidate each other for reason of the labor, for it invalidates in the water until he casts in the ashes, therefore, nothing is fit/appropriate other than the last.

If he intended to prepare one mixture from all of them and then he changed his mind to prepare five separate mixtures, only the water in the one that was mixed first is valid. At the outset, he intended to make one large mixture of hatat water and then he changed his mind and decided to make the water that he had drawn into five separate mixtures. The first drawing remains valid. But the latter four drawings of water are all invalid because the first mixing was considered work done in between their drawing and their mixing.

ונמלך לקדשן חמשה קדושין – that he mixed this one on its own and that one on its own.

If he said to another man, "Prepare mixtures from these for yourself," only the first is valid; In this case a person fills up five jars and then says to another, "Prepare them for yourself." The preparer now takes possession of the water, thereby taking the place of the drawer. And just as only the first was valid in section three, so too here, only the first is valid because work was done in between their drawing their mixing.

אין כשר אלא זו שקידש ראשון – for the first mixing [of ashes and water] is considered labor for the others that would be filled ‘with water] but he did not place the ashes into them, for until he places the ashes, the labor invalidates in the water.

But if he said, "Prepare a mixture from these for me," all are valid. In this case, the drawer says to the one who will mix the water and ashes, "Prepare them for me." Here, the preparer does not take the place of the drawer, for he hasn't given possession of the water over to him. It turns out that the owner of the water (the one who drew it) didn't do any labor in between the drawing and the mixing. Therefore, all of the mixtures are valid.

אמר לאחד קדש לך את אלו – the individual that filled five jars to perform one mixing [of ashes and water], and he said to another person: “Mix for yourself these,” and he mixed [ashes and water] for five mixings, nothing is fit/appropriate other than the first, for since he said to him: “Mix for yourself and he gave them (i.e., the ashes and the water) to him, they became his and it is as if he filled them, and the mixing [of ashes and water] that he first did became [extrinsic] work to invalidate the others.

אבל אם אמר קדש לי את אלו כולן כשרים – that the person who fills [the jars] did not do work, and the person who mixes [ashes and water] that is not his in order that they will become invalidated by [the actions of] his hand.

ועשה מלאכה בידו אחת – the filling/drawing water is invalid for reason of the [extrinsic] work.

One who filled the water with one hand and did some other work with the other hand, or filled the water for himself and for another man, or filled two jars at the same time, the water of both is invalid, for work causes invalidity whether one acts for oneself or for another person. In all of these cases a person is engaged in some sort of work while he is occupied with filling water for the red cow ritual. Either he works with one hand while filling with the other, or fills for himself and another person at the same time, or fills two at the same time. In all cases, all of the water is invalid for as we have learned, one can't perform work and fill the water at the same time. The general rule is that when one is filling the water and he at the same time does work, the water is invalid not just for him, but even if he is doing it on behalf of another person. This is not true when it comes to mixing, as we saw in mishnah one.

לו ולאחר – (etc. at the same time).

שניהם פסולים – for since that for two people he is filling water, it is considered that one does work for his fellow.

בין לו בין לאחר – that even though the water is not his, he has invalidated them with the [extrinsic] work/labor that he did at the time of the drawing of the water.

אם לו פסול - if the mixing [of ashes and water] is his, it is invalid, for perhaps, the labor/work preceded the mixing [of the ashes and water] and the water was invalidated.

Introduction Today's mishnah describes situations where a person prepares the mixture of hatat ash and water and at the same time performs another act, and yet the mixture is still valid.

ואם לאחר – is the mixing [of ashes and water].

One who prepared the mixture with one hand and did some other work with the other hand, the mixture is invalid if he prepared it for himself, but if he prepared it for another man, it is valid. Performing work while mixing the ash and water doesn't disqualify the mixture if the preparation is being made for another person, as we saw in mishnah one. However, if he makes it for himself, it is invalid.

כשר – for the owner of the water did not perform any labor/work.

If he prepared a mixture both for himself and for another man, his is invalid and that of the other man is valid. The same principle is operative here he invalidates his own mixture because he is engaged in some other work, but he doesn't invalidate that of the other person.

המקדש לו ולאחר – both of them are as one. Alternatively, he mixed [ashes and water] for his fellow prior to his own.

If he prepares mixtures for two men simultaneously, both are valid. Since none of the preparations were being made for himself, both are valid.

שלו פסול – for the mixing [of ashes and water] of his fellow is considered work to invalidate his waters.

שניהם כשרים – for the water is not his that it can be invalidated through him.

קדש לי ואקדש לך – as for example, that each one filled water for himself, and this one came and mixed [with ashes] the water of that one, and that one mixed the water [with ashes] of this one, the one who mixed [the water with ashes] first what he mixed for his fellow is kosher/fit, for his fellow did not do any work other than until after his waters were mixed [with ashes], but when they (i.e., the waters) were mixed with ashes, no work/labor invalidates it. But what the second [person] who mixed [ashes in the water] for the first [person] is invalid, for the first invalidated in that he mixed [water and ashes] in the water of the second ‘person] before his waters were mixed [with ashes].

Introduction Beware! This mishnah might be a bit confusing, but it should all work out in the end. A classic example of rabbinic conundrums!

מלא לי ואמלא לך – the latter drawing of water/filling is kosher/fit, but the first drawing of water/filling is invalid, that is, that the waters that were filled were invalidated through the work of filling/drawing that he filled for his fellow.

[If one said to another] "Prepare the mixture for me and I will prepare the one for you," the first is valid. Two people drew water to use it for that hatat. Then one said to the other, "You mix the ashes for me and I will mix for you." The first mixture is valid but the second mixture is not because the second person was occupied with mixing the first person's ash and water between his filling his water and its being mixed with ash.

קדש לי ואמלא לך – that he had the waters filled/drawn and said to his fellow, “mix for me my waters [with ashes] and afterwards, I will draw [water] for you.”

[If he said,] "Fill the water for me and I will fill the water for you," that of the latter is valid. The second filling is valid, but the first filling is invalid for the owner of the water was occupied with filling the other person's water between his own water being filled and their mixing.

שניהם כשרים – for the work/labor does not invalidate after the mixing [of ashes with water]. And this also when the waters were drawn/filled for him, his waters are fit/kosher, that from when the waters were filled/drawn for him, he did not do any work.

[If he said,] "Prepare the mixture for me and I will draw the water for you," both mixtures are valid. The first mixture is valid for the owner didn't draw the water for the second person until his mixture was already prepared. And the drawing of water for the second guy only began after the first mixture was already prepared, so it too is valid.

מלא לי ואקדש לך – that the other that had waters filled/drawn and he said to him: “Fill for me [waters] first, and afterwards I will mix [the ashes in the water] for you.”

[If he said,] "Fill the water for me and I will prepare the mixture for you’, both mixtures are invalid. In this case both are invalid. The first mixture is invalid for the owner of the first water prepared the second person's mixture between the filling of his own water and their mixture. The second mixture is invalid for the second person was occupied with drawing water for the first person between the drawing of his own water and their mixture.

שניהם פסולים – this one who filled until his waters were not mixed [with ashes], and this one who mixed [ashes with water] for his fellow from when his waters were filled up/drawn.

הממלא לו ולחטאת – the person who fills/draws water, some of them he wants for his own needs and some of them he wants to place ashes for the rite of purification (i.e., sin offering).

Introduction This mishnah deals with a person who wants to draw water for a hatat mixture and at the same time draw some water for himself. How can he do it without invalidating the hatat water?

באסל (on a pole/yoke – fastening the bucket to the pole)- on a balancing pole/staff. And it was the practice of those who draw water that they would place a balancing pole/staff on their shoulders and a full pitcher was suspended on the top of the pole from in front of him and another pitcher from behind him.

One who is drawing water for his own use and for the mixture of the hatat, he must draw for himself first and fasten [the bucket] to the carrying pole and then he can draw the water for the hatat. If he drew first the water for the hatat and then he drew the water for himself, it is invalid. First he must draw his own water and then attach it to the pole that he uses to carry the water, and then he can draw the water for the hatat. If he drew water first for the hatat and then drew for himself, the hatat water will be invalid because he performed work in between drawing the hatat water and mixing it with the ashes.

ואח"כ מילא את שלו, פסול- because of work/labor.

He must put his own behind him and that for the hatat before him, and if he put that for the hatat behind him it is invalid. The hatat waters have to go in front of him where they can be better watched. This is derived from the word, "for a watch" found in Numbers 19:9.

ואת של חטאת לפניו – in order to do with them a greater level of guarding/protection.

If both were for the hatat, he may put one before him and one behind him and both are valid, since it is impossible to do otherwise. If he has two jars of hatat water that he needs to carry then he has no choice but to carry one behind him. Both remain valid.

ואם נתן של חטאת לאחוריו פסולה – as it is written (Numbers 19:9): “to be kept for water of lustration for the Israelite community. It is for purification,” at the time that the are guarded/protected, they are the waters of lustration, [but] at the time that they are not guarded/protected, they are not the waters of lustration.

היו שניהן של חטאת כו' – for since he has in mind that which is in front of him, he is reminded also about what is behind him. And that is because it is possible, meaning to say, it is possible to guard/protect that which is in back of him on account of what is in front of him.

המוליך את החבל בידו לדרכו (if one carries the rope – borrowed for drawing water) in his hand to restore it to the owner – on his way to perform the rite – and gave it to him) – after he had filled the bucket with a rope, he returned the rope to its owners, on his way, that it was not necessary to make a circuit/go out of his way or to lengthen his path, but rather, according to his walking , he found the owner of the rope and returned to him what was his, this is not labor (i.e., intermediate act of work) and the filling is kosher/fit/acceptable.

One who carries the rope in his hand, If in his usual manner, the mixture is valid; But if not in his usual manner, it is invalid. If after filling the water into a jar that was hanging from a rope he returned in his usual way and didn't go out of the way to return the rope somewhere else, the mixture remains valid. But if he went out of his way to carry the rope somewhere else, the mixture is invalid because this is considered work.

שלא לדרכו – that he went out of his way in order to return the rope, it is work/labor and the drawing [of water] is invalid.

The question was sent on to Yavneh on three festivals and on the third festival, it was ruled that the mixture was valid, as a temporary measure. The question about walking the rope out of its way and was asked (according to the Tosefta by pilgrims from Asia Minor) for three consecutive festivals in the yeshiva in Yavneh and finally on the third festival they gave an answer. The answer was that as a temporary measure they will validate cases in which this was done in the past, but in the future if one carries the rope out of its way, it will invalidate the water. As an aside, this mishnah is, according to some scholars (notably Gedaliah Alon), evidence that there was a center of rabbinic learning in Yavneh before the destruction of the Temple. Yavneh's ascent as a famous and legendary rabbinic academy seems to have largely occurred after the destruction (this was where R. Yohanan ben Zakkai went after the destruction) but it seems that there were some sages there even before the destruction and that some Jews turned to those sages with questions on their way to the Temple in Jerusalem. However, beyond these scant details, there is little we really know.

זה הלך – meaning to say, that on this matter, one Sage went to ask from the Sages of Yavneh, the y are the Great Sanhedrin that were exiled there.

הוראת שעה(a special dispensation) – it was a special case of an emergency. But if I was not this, it is not [allowed].

המכנן את החבל (he who winds around his hand the rope – for drawing the bucket up – until a sufficient length is wound up) – it is the manner of those who let down a bucket to fill with water, that when he raises the bucket, he surrounds the rope in his hand like a kind of ring so that it is doesn’t drag on the ground. And [the word] "מכנן" – is he language of the coils of the ileum. But if in the midst of raising the bucket, he winds the rope around his hand more than once, it is the need of raising it and this is not work and the drawing/filling of water is kosher/fit/appropriate. But if he winds it after he has completed drawing [the water], it is considered work and is invalid.

If a man coils the rope around his hand little by little, [the mixture] is valid; If when the person draws the full bucket out of the water he wraps the rope around his hand one coil at a time as he is lifting up, the mixture is still valid. This is not considered to be work.

לזה הכשירו הוראת שעה – what they validated in Yavneh as a special dispensation, not to bring the rope while not on his way [to the rite], but rather for this [individual] who wound the rope [around his hand] after he finished drawing they validated for him as a special dispensation/emergency.

But if he coiled it afterwards, it is invalid. However, if he coils it up completely after he has already raised up the basket, then it counts as work and the mixture is invalid.

Rabbi Yose said: this also had been ruled to be valid as a temporary measure. Rabbi Yose says that as a temporary measure, they validated the water in a case where someone coiled the rope up after the water had been drawn. It is interesting that the term "as a temporary measure" appears in today's mishnah and yesterday's mishnah and nowhere else in the Mishnah (it does appear one additional time in the Tosefta). Perhaps the rabbis are setting up a system here where actions are on the one hand considered to be work and therefore should invalidate the mixture and yet on the other hand they don't want to actually claim that the mixture is invalid. So they set up a situation where the stringency is the rule but as a "temporary measure" validity is bequeathed. However we interpret the appearance of this phrase here, it is curious that it appears basically only in Parah.

המצניע את החבית – that he draws water with it to put in the trough, and after he emptied [the water] from it, he put it away/hid it prior to mixing the water [with the ashes] in the trough, this putting away [of the bucket] is not considered work, because he still needs it to fill it up [with water], and it is the need of drawing/filling water. And similarly, he inverted/bent it over on its mouth also to dry it because he still wants to fill [water] in it, it is not considered work, and it is fit/appropriate for filling/drawing. But, if he did so to bring the mixed ashes and water, that is, the water that is mixed [with ashes], since it is not for the purpose of filling/drawing water, it is considered work and the filling/drawing [of water] is invalid.

One who puts the jar away in order that it shall not be broken, or if he inverted it in order to dry it, [If he did one of these things] so that he might draw more water with it, [the water he had already drawn] is valid; But if he intended to carry in it the ashes, it is invalid. There are two actions described here, each that can invalidate the water if they were done with a certain intention, but won't invalidate the water if done with another intention. The actions are both done for the sake of the jar either to protect it or to dry it and they are both done between the emptying of the water into a trough and the mixing of the water with the ashes. If he did one of these things with the intention to draw more water for the same mixture, then this is not "work" done in between filling and mixing and the water remains valid for use. However, if he is protecting or drying the jar to use it for any other purpose, even a purpose connected to the mixing of the ashes, such as carrying in it the ashes, the water is invalid.

בשביל שתחזיק מים הרבה – this emptying is not considered work.

One who cleared potsherds from a trough: If in order that it may hold more water, the water is valid; But if he intended that they should not hinder him when he pours out the water, it is invalid. The idea of this section is similar to that above. Someone clears potsherds from the trough into which he has put the water to use it for mixing the ashes. If he clears them in order to make more room in the trough, the water is valid. However, if he is removing them because he doesn't want them to bother him when he pours the mixture from the trough into a flask (from which he will sprinkle) then this action counts as work and it invalidates the mixture. Again, although this is done for the sake of the mixture, it still invalidates it.

בשעה שהוא זולף -when he sprinkles.

פסול – this emptying out is considered work.

והורה הוראה – to permit or to forbid, to defile or to purify, to make exempt or to make liable.

One was carrying his water on his shoulder and he ruled in a matter of law, or showed others the way, or killed a snake or a scorpion, or picked up food in order to store it, it [the water] is invalid; But [if he picked up] food to eat, it is valid. [And if he killed] a snake or a scorpion that hindered him, it remains valid.
Rabbi Judah said: this is the general rule: If the act was is in the nature of work, the mixture is invalid whether the man stopped or not, If it was not in the nature of work: If he stopped, it is invalid;
But if he did not stop it remains valid.
Section one: In all of these cases, the action is considered work and it invalidates the water that he is carrying from being used for the red cow ritual. However, the mishnah goes on to list circumstances in which said action doesn't invalidate the water.
When it comes to picking up food, it depends what his purpose is. If he picked it up to store it away, it counts as work and the water is invalid. However, if he picked it up in order to eat it, it doesn't count as work. Eating, in other words, is not work.
If he killed the snake or scorpion because it was hindering his progress, the water remains valid. Actions he needs to do in order to simply progress on his way do not invalidate the water.
Section two: Rabbi Judah sets up a general principle that relates to these types of situation, and show that issuing a ruling or giving someone directions also do not always disqualify the water. If an action was done in the nature of work, meaning it is something that is generally considered to be work, then it doesn't matter whether he stopped on the path or not, it disqualifies the water he is carrying. In other words, the mere action itself is disqualifying.
However, if it is not a matter of work, such as issuing a ruling or showing someone the way, then it depends on whether he stopped or not. If he stopped, then this stoppage to perform another action can invalidate the water. But if he did not stop, then the water remains valid.

ודבר שאינו משום הלכה – as for example, a lesson and showing [others] the way.

אם עמד – if he was delayed there because of this.

פסול – because of distraction. And this is the Halakha.

המוסר מימיו לטמא – to guard/protect them.

If one gave over his water to someone who was unclean, it is invalid. But if to a clean one it is valid. If a person gives over the water he is watching to an unclean person to watch, the water is invalid because we can't trust that it remained pure. However, if he gives it to a clean person the water remains valid. In addition, the clean person can perform work while watching the water since it is not his water.

פסולים – whether the first owners did work [or] whether the first owners did not do work, for it was in the possession of the guardian they exist and he was not strict to guard them because he is impure, but the Torah stated (Numbers 19:9): “to be kept for water of lustration.”

Rabbi Eliezer says: even if it was entrusted to an unclean man it is valid, provided the owner did no other work in the meantime. According to Rabbi Eliezer, if he gives the water to an unclean person, the water remains valid, for we consider the water to have stayed in the possession of the owner. However, this leniency is accompanied by a stringency. Since the water is still in the possession of the owner, if he does work before the mixing, he renders it invalid. In contrast, if he gave it to a clean person, the clean person assumes possession and if the owner does work, it does not render it invalid.

ולטהור כשרים – and even if the first owners did work, for they (i.e., the waters with the ashes) had already left the domain of the owners and existed in the domain of the guardian. But however, if the guard did work, they are invalid.

אף לטמא כשרים – for Rabbi Eliezer holds that a person who gave his water over to someone who is unclean, they exist in the possession of the first owners, therefore, if the owners did not do work, they are fit/appropriate. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Eliezer.

והגביהו זה על זה – that they assisted each other to lift up/raise [the bucket].

Two men who were drawing water for the hatat and one assisted the other to raise it or one pulled out a thorn for the other: For one mixture, it is valid; For two mixtures, it is invalid. Two men help each other in drawing the water for the hatat red cow ritual. They help each either in raising the buckets or in pulling thorns out of each other's hands while the other raises the bucket. If they are making one mixture, then the water is valid because these "labors" are both for the mixture being prepared. Neither man does any work to draw water that will not be used in the mixture he is preparing. However, if they are making two separate mixtures then each man's helping the other is considered an interruption and the water is invalid.

ונטל זה לזה קוצו – or that that each one took the thorn that was inserted in his hand.

Rabbi Yose says: even if there are to be two mixtures it is valid if they had made a mutual agreement between them. Rabbi Yose says that if they made a prior arrangement to help each other then both drawings are valid. This is because when A helps B he is really helping to get help in return. It turns out that his help of A was really for his own drawing, and in such a case the water remains valid.

בקידוש אחד – that both of them were filling [water] for the purpose of one mixing, it is kosher/fit. For each one can assist his fellow, and removing the thorn that is in his hand also - requires filling/drawing water.

בשני קידושין פסול – for each one of them invalidated his water in how he assisted his fellow or removed from him a thorn, because of work.

אם התנו ביניהן – that each one said to his fellow: “when I lift up for you, it will become mine yours in your domain (and similarly the other [person] said to him). But after he lifted/raised it up, each one acquires one of them in his domain. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi.

הפורץ על מנת לגדור (he who breaks down a fence [while carrying water] on condition of putting up a fence) – meaning to say, even on the condition of putting up a fence, is not considered work, and the filling [of water] is kosher/fit.

One who broke down a fence [even] with the intention of putting it up again, the water remains valid; But if he put a fence up, the water becomes invalid. The person broke down a fence to get to where he needed to go after filling up the water. Breaking down the fence obviously does not invalidate the water for it was done in order to put up the fence. The mishnah goes a bit further. Even if he intends to put up the fence again, the water is still valid. Although we might have thought that tearing something down in order to rebuild it does count as work, since he needed to tear down the fence, the water is still valid. However, if he went even a step further and actually built the fence, this certainly counts as work and the water is invalid.

האוכל על מת לקצות (the person who eats on the condition of storing up [dates and figs}- after he filled up water prior to his mixing [the water with ashes], he would collect/harvest figs on the condition to dry them on condition to make from them dried figs, and after he collected them, eat them, the thought that he wanted to make of them packed figs does not invalidate them in water, but they are as if he harvested/collected them to eat, and he do es not invalidate them, it is similar to someone who breaks down a fence [while carrying water] on the condition to put up a fence, for the thought that he thinks to to put up a fence does not invalidate it until he puts up the fence, the same applies here [as well].

If he ate figs intending to store some of them, the water is valid; But if he stored figs it is invalid. If someone eats someone else's figs in between filling and mixing the water, and he intends to repay that person by preparing the other figs for storage (this involves cutting them in order to dry them or press them into a cake) the water is still valid, for eating is considered something done for the mixture itself. The quid pro quo arrangement eating figs in return for drying them, does not count as work. However, if he actually went ahead and stored some figs in between drawing and mixing, the water is invalid.

אם קצה (if he stored) – if he placed them in a place where they put the figs to dry, it is invalid.

If he was eating figs and, leaving some over, threw what was in his hand under the fig tree or among drying figs in order that it shall not be wasted, the water is invalid. In this case he is eating and storing them away for later at the same time. Although eating doesn't invalidate the figs, the storing does.

בשביל שלא יאבד פסול (in order that it not be wasted, it is unfit) – for the person who hides food in order that they not be wasted, is considered work.