Talmud zu Kelim 28:17

HALAKHAH: Mishnah⁹⁶Quote from Mishnah 3.. “One does not kindle with any wood product but flax,” etc. Rebbi Simeon⁹⁴Read: R. Samuel ben Rav Isaac. bar Rav Isaac said it is written⁹⁷Ex. 27:20.: to raise permanent light. They estimated to say that nothing makes a flame like flax⁹⁸The wick in the lamp which was burning through the night had to be of flax.. It was stated⁹⁹Babli 26a, Tosephta 2:4. According to Rashi this implies that hemp fibers and cloth are impervious to impurity.: “Rebbi Simeon ben Eleazar said, no wood product is subject to the three-by-three rule¹⁶Cloth of the minimal size of a handkerchief [which is defined as (3 finger-widths)²] is subject to all kinds of impurity. If the cloth wears out and is shredded to yield thread to make wicks, it is no longer subject to impurity. Once the threads are reassembled into a wick they become susceptible of impurity once the wick is usable. In R. Aqiba’s view, a wick will not burn unless its end has been singed and turned into charcoal; therefore the manufacture of the wick is not complete until it has been singed. Unfinished products do not become impure. except flax and one may use it as roofing¹⁰⁰It is a strict rabbinic rule that the roof of a sukkah may not be made with anything susceptible to impurity. Wooden logs as well as stems of plants may be used but not fruits., except flax.” Rebbi Yose said, they made it like coarse or soft, as we have stated¹⁰¹Mishnah Kelim 28:8. Cloth which is either very coarse or very fine cannot be used as handkerchief. Therefore it cannot become impure in the size of (3 fingers)². The minimum size for such fabric to be susceptible to impurity is that of a towel, (3 handbreadths)².: “the coarse and the soft are not subject to the three-by-three rule.” Rebbi Eleazar said, they learned it¹⁰²The fact that linen textile is called “tent” and therefore brings impurity is implied by the instructions for the building of the Tabernacle. from the Tabernacle as it is written¹⁰³Ex. 26.1., the Sanctuary you shall make ten gobelins, twilled byssus; and it is written¹⁰⁴Ez. 44:16., linen turbansshall be on their heads. You learn byssus from byssus, and byssus from turbans, and turbans from turbans¹⁰⁵There is a quote missing for the chain of reasoning. The gobelins which formed the walls of the Tabernacle were partially made of שֵׁשׁ “byssus”. The problem is to prove that byssus was made of linen. Since the same word was used in Ex. 26.1 and Ex.39:28, speaking of the priestly vestments, the hat-turbans of byssus, one may assume that the same turbans and the same materials are mentioned in Ez. 44:16, where it is explicitly stated that the priests’ turbans are made of linen. Similarly in the Babli Yoma71b; a different derivation in the name of R. Eleazar is in the Babli Šabbat 27b/28a..

There, we have stated¹¹⁵Mishnah Kelim 28:2. Babli 29a.: “A [cloth] less than three by three [fingerwidths] which he took to plug the bath or to pour a pot¹¹⁶To use it as a potholder. or to clean a millstone, whether it was prepared or not prepared can become impure¹¹⁷For him the rule that textiles of area less that 9 (fingerwidth)² cannot become impure is an empirical one since such a small piece in general is of no use. If somebody finds a use, the piece becomes a regular piece of textile and is subject to all laws of impurity., the words of Rebbi Eliezer. Rebbi Joshua says, (also a new rag)¹¹⁸Probably the words in parenthesis should be deleted; they are not found in any Mishnah ms. and are copied here from the quote later of Mishnah 27:12. whether prepared or not prepared, is pure¹¹⁹For him the three-finger rule is a permanent rabbinic decree which cannot be changed.. Rebbi Aqiba says, prepared it may become impure, not prepared it is pure.” What is the difference between prepared and not prepared? Whether he made it ready in the house or threw it into the garbage¹²⁰A single use does not bring on impurity. If the rag was used once and then thrown away it cannot become impure. But if it is prepared for re-use it becomes valuable and is susceptible to impurity.. But did we not state¹²¹Mishnah Kelim 27:12. תנן is Babylonian spelling.: “Rebbi Eliezer says, also a new rag follows the same rule.¹²²The Mishnah states that an impure piece of (3 fingerwiths)² which was torn loses its impurity only if it is thrown away, with the exception of purple strips which are valuable also in minute sizes and never lose their impurity. R. Eliezer extends the latter rule to unused textiles.” Nobody says “also”, “even”, unless he agree with the preceding; whether he prepared it to hang it up or did not prepare it to hang it up¹²³For re-use.. This learns from the other and the other learns from this. This learns from the other; the words of Rebbi Eliezer if he folded it¹²⁴For the first use; Babli 29b. If it never was intended for use he agrees that it is not susceptible to impurity.. And the other learns from this; if he did not prepare it to hang it up. But if he prepared it to hang it up it may become impure.

Rebbi Aḥa, Rebbi Simon in the name of Rebbi Simeon the nazir¹³¹In G correctly: R. Simeon the nazir’s son.: If he made it into a bandage it is pure¹³²Mishnah Kelim 28:2. The medication makes the bandage unusable otherwise.. If one dipped it in oil is it not as if he made a bandage¹³³Then the wick already is pure and R. Eliezer’s reason does not apply.? Rebbi Zeˋira, Rebbi Yannai¹³⁴In G one reads “R. Joḥanan” before the mention of R. Yannai; there is a lacuna preceding this word; it is not clear whether it read “R. Zeˋira in the name of R. Joḥanan.” One has to wonder why R. Jeremiah, the student of R. Zeˋira, reports a different tradition., Rebbi Jeremiah in the name of Rebbi Joshua ben Levi, logically practice should follow Rebbi Aqiba who is similar to both¹³⁵In Mishnah Šabbat 2:3 practice certainly follows R. Aqiba against R. Eliezer. For consistency the practice also should follow R. Aqiba in Mishnah Kelim28:1 where he partially follows R. Eliezer and partially R. Joshua. In general, R. Joshua is an overriding authority., but in fact it follows Rebbi Joshua who is lenient in the matter of three-by-three. Not only pure but even impure, because of Rav, since Rav said one heats with vessels, but one does not heat with pieces of vessels¹³⁶Vessels may become impure but potsherds are pure. Rav permits to use combustible vessels as fuel even though they become pure by losing their qualities as vessels in the fire. He forbids using shards as fuel, which cannot become impure, since they may not be moved on the Sabbath because they are of no use (Chapter 17). There is no connection between susceptibility to impurity and use as wick on the Sabbath. The statement of Rav is quoted in the Babli 28a, 29a, 124b, 143a; Beṣah 32a, 33a..