Talmud zu Kelim 28:2
פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁלֹשָׁה עַל שְׁלֹשָׁה שֶׁהִתְקִינוֹ לָפוֹק בּוֹ אֶת הַמֶּרְחָץ, לְנַעֵר בּוֹ אֶת הַקְּדֵרָה, לְקַנֵּחַ בּוֹ אֶת הָרֵחַיִם, בֵּין מוּכָן בֵּין שֶׁאֵינוֹ מוּכָן, טָמֵא, דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ אוֹמֵר, בֵּין מִן הַמּוּכָן, בֵּין שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִן הַמּוּכָן, טָהוֹר. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא אוֹמֵר, מִן הַמּוּכָן, טָמֵא. שֶׁאֵינוֹ מִן הַמּוּכָן, טָהוֹר:
In Bezug auf ein [Stück Stoff] von weniger als drei mal drei [Handbreiten], das zum Anschließen eines Badehauses, zum Entleeren eines Kochtopfs [durch Verwenden an einem Griff zum Schutz vor Hitze] oder zum Abwischen des Badehauses geeignet ist Mühlensteine damit, unabhängig davon, ob sie für einen solchen Gebrauch beiseite gelegt und bereit sind oder nicht, sind laut Rabbi Eliezer unrein. Rabbi Yehoshua sagt: Ob es für einen solchen Gebrauch bereit ist oder nicht, es ist rein. Rabbi Akiva sagt: Wenn es fertig ist, ist es unempfindlich; und wenn es nicht fertig ist, ist es rein.
Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat
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.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Jerusalem Talmud Shabbat
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..
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy