Commentary for Eduyot 5:3
רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל אוֹמֵר, שְׁלֹשָׁה דְבָרִים מִקֻּלֵּי בֵית שַׁמַּאי וּמֵחֻמְרֵי בֵית הִלֵּל. קֹהֶלֶת אֵינוֹ מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדַיִם, כְּדִבְרֵי בֵית שַׁמָּאי. וּבֵית הִלֵּל אוֹמְרִים, מְטַמֵּא אֶת הַיָּדָיִם. מֵי חַטָּאת שֶׁעָשׂוּ מִצְוָתָן, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מְטַהֲרִין, וּבֵית הִלֵּל מְטַמְּאִין. הַקֶּצַח, בֵּית שַׁמַּאי מְטַהֲרִין וּבֵית הִלֵּל מְטַמְּאִין. וְכֵן לַמַּעַשְׂרוֹת:
R. Yishmael adduces three instances of the leniencies of Beth Shammai and the stringencies of Beth Hillel: The Book of Koheleth does not render one's hands unclean, [it being Solomon's wisdom and not having been stated by the Holy Spirit.] And Beth Hillel say: It does render the hands unclean. [They hold that Koheleth, too, was stated by the Holy Spirit, wherefore it renders one's hands unclean, as do the other holy writings.] The waters of cleansing (of the red heifer), whose mitzvah has been completed [i.e., after they were sprinkled on the unclean one and he were cleansed by them, if they dripped from his body upon a man or upon vessels], Beth Shammai rules (them) clean, and Beth Hillel, unclean.
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
קהלת אינו מטמא את הידים – because it is the wisdom of [King] Solomon, and it was not stated in the Holy Spirit.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Introduction
This mishnah contains Rabbi Yishmael’s list of three instances in which Beth Shammai ruled more leniently than Beth Hillel.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
מטמא את הדים – Because they (i.e., the School of Hillel) hold that Kohelet/Ecclesiastes was stated in the Holy Spirit. Therefore, it imparts impurity to the hands like the rest of Holy Scripture.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Rabbi Yishmael says: there are three instances of lenient rulings by Beth Shammai and strict rulings by Beth Hillel.
The book of Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands, according to the opinion of Beth Shammai; But Beth Hillel say: it defiles the hands. According to the Rabbis the Holy Scriptures, meaning any canonized book in the Bible, cause ones hands to be ritually defiled. According to the Talmud the reason is that people used to put the scrolls into arks with terumah food, reasoning that both were holy. Mice would come to eat the food and they would destroy the scrolls. By decreeing that the scrolls would defile the terumah, people stopped this practice. There are several debates in the Mishnah about what books are included in the Biblical canon such that they defile the hands. According to Beth Shammai, Ecclesiastes (Koheleth) does not defile the hands. This is probably due to the deeply pessimistic, bordering on heretical, tone of the book. At times the author of the book has at least serious doubts about whether or not the performance of good deeds brings with it rewards, a doctrine held as true by the Rabbis. Beth Hillel includes it in the Biblical canon probably for two reasons: 1) it was, according to tradition, written by King Solomon; 2) the last verse of the book exhorts the reader to listen to God’s word and to do good, a message that was certainly acceptable to the Rabbis.
The book of Ecclesiastes does not defile the hands, according to the opinion of Beth Shammai; But Beth Hillel say: it defiles the hands. According to the Rabbis the Holy Scriptures, meaning any canonized book in the Bible, cause ones hands to be ritually defiled. According to the Talmud the reason is that people used to put the scrolls into arks with terumah food, reasoning that both were holy. Mice would come to eat the food and they would destroy the scrolls. By decreeing that the scrolls would defile the terumah, people stopped this practice. There are several debates in the Mishnah about what books are included in the Biblical canon such that they defile the hands. According to Beth Shammai, Ecclesiastes (Koheleth) does not defile the hands. This is probably due to the deeply pessimistic, bordering on heretical, tone of the book. At times the author of the book has at least serious doubts about whether or not the performance of good deeds brings with it rewards, a doctrine held as true by the Rabbis. Beth Hillel includes it in the Biblical canon probably for two reasons: 1) it was, according to tradition, written by King Solomon; 2) the last verse of the book exhorts the reader to listen to God’s word and to do good, a message that was certainly acceptable to the Rabbis.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
שעשו מצותן – After they had sprinkled them on the impure individual and he became pure through them (the ashes of the sin-offering), if they dripped from his body on to a person or on to utensils. (this section of the Mishnah, according to the commentary of Tosafot Yom Tov is not like the anonymous Mishnah taught in Tractate Parah, Chapter 12, Mishnah 4 as well as Mishnah 5).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Water of purification which has done its duty: Beth Shammai pronounces it pure, But Beth Hillel pronounces it impure. “Waters of purification” refers to the water that has been mixed with the ashes of a red heifer, and was used to rid a person of corpse impurity. According to Beth Shammai, the water remains pure even after it has been sprinkled on the impure person. Although before it has been used it causes impurity to one who touches it unnecessarily (see Numbers 19:21), according to Beth Shammai once it has been used it is no longer impure. Beth Hillel holds that these waters remain impure even after they have been used.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
הקצח – black seed that we call it NEELO in a foreign language, and it is customarily placed on bread and whomever uses this regularly does not have heart pains. [Tis is also taught in in the Tractate Uktsin, Chapter 3, Mishnah 6 and also at the end of chapter 1 of Tractate Tevul Yom, Mishnah 6).
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Eduyot
Black cumin: Beth Shammai pronounces it not liable to become impure, But Beth Hillel pronounces it liable to become impure. So, too, with regard to tithes. In this section Beth Shammai and Beth Hillel debate about the status of black cumin. If black cumin is considered a food, then it should be receptive to impurity and one who wishes to eat it would have to first separate the necessary tithes and terumah. Beth Shammai does not consider black cumin to be “food” and therefore holds that it is not receptive to impurity nor subject to the laws of tithes and terumah. Beth Hillel holds that it is food and is therefore receptive to impurity and one who eats it must separate tithes and terumah.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
ב"ש מטהרין – for it is not considered food.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
וב"ה מטמאין – because it is customary to put it on foods and is considered food.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Eduyot
וכן למעשרות – just as they disputed regarding ritual defilement, they similarly disagree in the question of tithes which it defiles by the ritual impurity of foods, that one is obligated in tithing.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy