Commentary for Kelim 25:10

כל הכלים יש להם אחוריים ותוך – vessels that were defiled through impure liquids, if the liquids came in contact from the vessel’s outsides, their outsides where defiled but not their insides, because the defilement of liquids to defile vessels is not from the Torah, the Sages were lenient in their defilement. But if their inside was defiled, as for example, that the impure liquids touched their insides, their outsides are also defied. And this is what is taught [in our Mishnah[“"יש להן אחוריים ותוך/“they have outsides and an inside,” meaning to say that the law of the outsides is separate from the law of the insides.

Introduction Most of chapter twenty-five deals with the differences between cases in which an impure liquid touched the inside of a vessel and cases in which the liquid touched the outside of a vessel. Mishnah six will teach this rule explicitly if the liquid touched the outside of the vessel, the inside remains pure. But if it touches the inside of the vessel, the outer side is impure as well. Our mishnah, as well as the subsequent ones discuss which vessels are deemed to have "insides" and "outsides" such that these rules apply.

כגון הכרים והכסתות – and even though that we use their insides and their outsides, and that it is fit to reverse them and to make their insides outsides and their outsides insides, nevertheless, the law of their outsides is separate from the law of their insides.

All vessels have [different laws] for outer and inner sides, as for instance, cushions, coverings, sacks and packing-bags, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: any vessel that has loops has [different laws] for inner and outer sides but one that has no loops does not have different laws for outer and inner sides. According to Rabbi Judah all vessels have different laws depending on whether the impure liquid touched them on the inside or the outside. This includes even cushions etc, which might not seem to have insides and outsides because they can be reversed. Rabbi Meir however limits the distinction to cases where the vessel has loops on the outside through which one can put a belt or something else. If a vessel has loops sewn on the outside, then it is clear what side is supposed to face out and what side is supposed to face in. However, if there are no loops than the vessel could be turned inside out and used either way. In such a case there is no way to determine what is inside and what is outside. Therefore, it doesn't matter what side the impure liquid comes into contact with. It is impure.

מרצופין (packing bags, leather bags – adapted for ship-loads) – large leather sacks that they cary in them wares on ships.

A table and a side-board have [different laws] for outer and inner sides, the words of Rabbi Judah. Rabbi Meir says: they do not have a different law for their outer sides. According to Rabbi Judah, the side of a table or side-table that is used is considered to be the inside. If an impure liquid touches this side, both sides are impure. However, the back side is the outside and if the liquid touches there, the inside remains pure. Rabbi Meir rules that such rules do not apply tables.

כל שיש לו תוברות (all that have loops/hems/hangers) – loops, couplings, like that of undergarments/drawers, that are sewn on the outsides of the clothing.

The same applies to a frame. Rabbi Judah and Rabbi Meir have the same argument concerning a tray. Rabbi Judah says that the face of the tray is considered its "inside" whereas Rabbi Meir holds that both sides are considered "inside."

יש לו אחוריים ותוך – for since it has loops/couplings, it is not fit to turn inside out, and its inside is separate from its outside, but when they don’t have loops/couplings/hems, it is fit to turn them inside out, for its inside is not separate from its outside, but rather, when impure liquids came in contact with it whether from its outside or whether from its inside, everything is ritually impure/unclean. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

השלחן והדלפקי – For Rabbi Yehuda holds, since its walls are slanted and separate, their insides are judged as insides. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

מרדע (handle of the plough-having on one end a broad iron blade/חרחור and on the other a spud/דרבן) – It is a long, round staff that is a third of a handbreadth thick. And at its one end, is a wide piece of sharpened iron to sever/cut the roots, and its name is חרחור/broad iron blade, and its other end is a piece of iron like an awl/borer, whose name is דרבן /spud/point, through which leads the heifer to its furrow/ridge.

An ox-goad has different laws for its outer and inner parts, [The outer part is] the seven handbreadths from the broad blade and four handbreadths from the point, the words of Rabbi Judah. An ox-goad is the stick which was used to drive the oxen (to goad them on). On one end was a point. The other end was a broad piece of iron that was also used for plowing and for cleaning the dirt off the plow. According to Rabbi Judah beyond seven handbreadths on the piece of iron and four handbreadths on the point is considered the outer part of the ox-goad. If impure liquids come into contact with the ox-goad beyond these two points, the "inner" part of the ox-goad remains pure.

משבעה לחרחור מארבעה לדרבן – if impure liquids fell upon the broad iron blade, it is not impure from the handle of the plough other than seven handbreadths, but if they fell on the spud/point, it is not impure other than four-handbreadths. But Maimonides explained/expounded, that if if impure liquids fell on the handle of the plough seven handbreadths outside from the broad iron blade or outside four handbreadths from the spuds, it is like a vessel whose outsides had been defiled, but its inside was not defiled, and those seven handbreadths that are next to the broad iron blade and the four [handbreadths] that are next to the spud were not defiled.

Rabbi Meir says: it is not to [subject to such distinction], the four and the seven handbreadths were mentioned only in regard to its remnants. Rabbi Meir again disagrees and holds that there is no "inner" or "outer" portion for an ox-goad. He does admit that the numbers four and seven handbreadths were mentioned by earlier generations of sages. But he holds that these numbers were mentioned with regard to the remnants of an ox-goad, not with regard to the "inner" or "outer" sides. According to Rabbi Meir, if seven handbreadths of the blade or four handbreadths of the point remain, the ox-goad is still impure (or susceptible to impurity). Less than that and the ox-goad is pure.

אלא לשיריים – when the Sages gave measurements for the broad iron blade of seven [handbreadths] and for the spud four [handbreadths], it was not given other than regarding this matter that if the handle of the plough was broken and there remained next to/adjacent to the broad iron blade seven handbreadths, or adjacent to the spud four [handbreadths, it is impure, because it is appropriate to do some kind of its work. Less than this, it is like the shards of a vessel and is pure. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

זומא ליסארא (soup-ladle, with a spoon on one side and a fork on the other) – a vessel that on one head is a spoon and the other head is a fork; with the spoon one raises the soup from the bowl, and with the fork one lifts with it the meat.

Measures of wine or oil, a fork-ladle, a mustard-strainer and a wine-filter have an outer and inner side, the words of Rabbi Meir. A "fork-ladle" is an instrument with a ladle on one end and a fork on the other end. According to Rabbi Meir, all of these vessels have inner and outer sides, so if an impure liquid touches them on the outer side, the inner side remains pure.

ר' יהודה אומר אין להם – an outside and inside. The reasoning of Rabbi Yehuda, because that all of these vessels have on their outsides engraved a receptacle similar to what they do for a silver vessel, and sometimes, that they bend it on its opening and use the hollowed out area on the backside.

Rabbi Judah says: they do not have. Rabbi Judah disagrees and holds that they do not have inner and outer sides. No matter where the liquid touches, the entire vessel is impure.

ר' שמעון אומר יש להם – regarding the matter of what is inside the vessel, they have the law of outside and inside, for if its outsides were defiled, what was inside the vessel was not defiled But reading the matter of the vessel itself, there is no separation of the law of its outside from the law of its inside, for if the outsides had been defiled, one must immerse all of it [In a Mikveh] as if the inside was defiled. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehuda.

Rabbi Shimon says: they do have, for if their outer parts contracted uncleanness that which is inside remains clean, and immersion is required. Rabbi Shimon seems to bridge between these two opinions. These vessels do, in some sense, have inner and outer sides, and if an impure liquid comes into contact with the outer side, the content on the inside remains clean. However, the entire vessel requires immersion in order to purify it, even the inside of the vessel. In other words, the paradox is the inside of the vessel requires immersion, but the contents are clean.

הרובע וחצי רוצע – as for example, a piece of wood that is thick and long, and it has two measurements engraved one next to the other, one holds a quarter and the other holds half-a quarter, and there is a wall that separates between this one and that one.

If [in a measure consisting of] a quarter [of a log] and half a quarter [of a log] the quarter measure contracted uncleanness, the half-quarter measure does not become unclean, and if the half-quarter contracted uncleanness the quarter does not become unclean. Today's mishnah deals with a measuring vessel that has two measures built into one vessel one that measures a quarter-log of liquid (about 1/2 a liter) and the other that measures a half-quarter of a log (about 250 ml). There is a partition that separates the two sides of the vessel. According to the first opinion, which later will be identified with Rabbi Akiva, both sides are basically considered to be independent vessels. If one measure becomes unclean, the other measure remains clean. In other words, one vessel is not the inside vessel and the other the outside.

כלי שנטמא תוכו – in astonishment! For if a vessel whose inside was defiled, its outsides were not defiled., but why does it teach in the Mishnah that one-half of the quarter was not defiled? For isn’t its outside the quarter?

They argued before Rabbi Akiva: since the half quarter measure is the outer part of the quarter measure, should not the outer side of the vessel whose inner side contracted uncleanness become unclean? Some other figures, whose names are not mentioned, argue in front of Rabbi Akiva. These are probably students, as can be sensed from the way that Rabbi Akiva addresses them. In any case, they argue that since the main measuring cup is the half-quarter log, it should be considered the "inner" vessel. So if the inner, half-quarter log is defiled, the outer measure, the quarter-log, should also be considered impure.

[שלות] קודמין היא (is this the class of those that takes precedence?) – each one of them, takes precedence over its partner, meaning to say, that none has precedence over the other. And just as you say that one-half of a quarter of its backsides to a quarter, so you should say that the quarter is backsides to one-half of quarter. And when the quarter is defiled, its backside of the one-half quarter is defiled but not its insides. But the reading of my teachers/Rabbis is that each group/band takes precedence, because the groups of the students would sit before him (i.e., the teacher) in rows, he asked to them this question already which was asked of me by the group of students that sits in the first row, and such is how I responded them, or perhaps [the quarter’s backside to the half-quarter], etc.

He answered them: Are you sure that it belongs to the category [of vessels] that have inner [and outer] parts? Perhaps the quarter is to be regarded as the outer side of the half quarter and, surely, the inner side of a vessel does not become unclean if the outer side contracted uncleanness. Rabbi Akiva responds by noting that their assumption that the half-quarter is the inner vessel may not be correct. Rather, the half-quarter might be the outer vessel, in which case the other side is pure. Therefore, we have to treat each side as if it might be the outside, in which case no matter which side is defiled, the other side remains pure.

הרובע ואחוריו טמאים – the quarter – that is the inside. And the backsides are the walls that surround the quarter from outside. But the wall that forms a partition between both of them, is included in the inside of the half-quarter, and it is pure to the side that is towards the one-half quarter. And similarly, when the one-half quarter is defiled, the half-quarter and its outsides are impure. The half-quarter is the insides, and the outsides are the walls that surround that half-quarter from the outside, but the wall that forms a partition, the side that is towards the quarter is included with the inside of the quarter.

Introduction This mishnah continues to discuss the measuring vessel that has two sides one of a quarter log and one of a half-quarter.

נטמאו אחורי הרובע – that is, the walls that surround from the outside.

If the [inside of the] quarter contracted uncleanness, the quarter and its outer side are unclean, but the half quarter and its outer side remain clean. Having determined in yesterday's mishnah that each vessel is independent, the mishnah now deals with the thorny issue of their shared wall. If the inside of the quarter log became unclean, its own outer side is also unclean. However, the walls of the vessel that surround the half-quarter measuring cup remain clean.

אין חולקין את הגביים (they do not divide the hind parts/outside parts [of the utensil] – that is the outside parts, for all the outside parts are impure when one of the outside parts became impure.

If the [inside of the] half quarter contracted uncleanness, the half quarter and its outer side are unclean, but the quarter and its outer side remain clean. The same rules apply if the inside of the half-quarter vessel become unclean.

מטביל את כולו – the quarter and one-half of the quarter. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir. And the law of the middle wall is explained above at the end of Chapter Two (Tractate Kelim, Chapter 2, Mishnah 7) for “Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: They divide its thickness. The [half that] serves the unclean [portion] is unclean; the [half that] serves the clean [part] is clean.”

If the outer side of the quarter contracted uncleanness,the outer side of the half quarter remains clean, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: the outer side cannot be divided. According to Rabbi Meir, if the outer wall of the quarter vessel becomes unclean, only this outer wall is unclean. The outer wall of the half-quarter remains clean. In other words, although this wall surrounds the entire vessel, we look at it as if it were divided in half and only the part that surrounds the quarter is unclean. The other sages disagree and say that you can't divide the wall of a vessel in half. So if the outer wall of either side becomes unclean, both outer walls are considered unclean.

When he immerses the vessel, he must immerse the whole thing. Despite the fact that it is possible for one side to be clean and the other to be unclean, when he immerses the vessel, he must immerse both sides. If he does not do so, the vessel remains unclean. Note that this is similar to the end of mishnah three.

כני הכלים – the bases of the vessels. The phrase (Exodus 30:28): “and its stand,” we translate into Aramaic, “and its base.”

The bases, rims, hangers or handles of vessels that have a receptacle upon which an unclean liquid fell, one dries them and they remain clean. If an unclean liquid falls on an ancillary part of a vessel, such as its base, rim, hanger or handle, the entire vessel need not be immersed in the mikveh. It is sufficient to dry off the liquid and the vessel will remain clean. However, this is true only if the vessel is one that has a receptacle. In such a case we can distinguish between the main part of the vessel and its ancillary parts.

והוגניהן – just likeואוגניהן /its border, that is to say, its rim.

But [if unclean liquid fell] on any part of any other vessel which cannot hold pomegranates (or in which no distinction is made between its outer and inner, the whole becomes unclean. If the vessel cannot hold pomegranates, meaning it does not have a proper receptacle (see 17:1, 4), then no matter where the unclean liquid falls the whole vessel is impure. Alternatively, if the vessel is the type that is not considered to have an inside or an inside, which would preclude vessels with receptacles, then similarly the impure liquid defiles the whole thing. In such cases we can't distinguish between the main part of the vessel (the receptacle) and the ancillary parts, so we must treat the entire vessel as impure.

ואזניהן (its hangers) – the place where they insert a handle in it.

If the outer side of a vessel contracted uncleanness from a liquid, only its outer side is unclean but its inner side, rim, hanger and handles remain clean. If its inner side contracted uncleanness the whole is unclean. This section contains the general rule that has been mentioned throughout the chapter. If the outside becomes unclean, the inside is still clean, but if the inside becomes unclean, the outside is unclean. It is interesting to note that the Mishnah waits a full six mishnayot before providing us with the background which we need in order to understand what we're talking about. This demonstrates that the Mishnah is not a didactic text meant to teach students who do not know the Mishnah's laws. Rather, the Mishnah is better understood as a recording of the main halakhot and some discussions that serve as the background to rabbinic law and culture. Put another way in order to understand the Mishnah, you have to already know the Mishnah. If this makes it a bit frustrating for the beginning student, you can be thankful that we have two thousand years of commentary to help us along the way!

המקבלין – that have an inside.

מנגבן והן טהורין – and these are not considered attached to bring the defilement of liquids for a vessel that has a receptacle. And drying is enough. But for a vessel that does not have an inside, it requires ritual immersion.

ואזניו וידיו טהורין – The Rabbis made this for recognition, for just as/in order that it won’t burn upon them heave-offering [for the Kohanim] and Holy Things, especially, it was made as a recognition for Terumah/heave-offering, but not for Holy Things, as is taught in the Mishnah further on in our chapter (see Mishnah 9).

בית הצביטה (that part of the vessel by which it is seized, handle, neck, cavity for the fingers) – We have the reading [בית הצביטה ] )whereas the Mishnah has the reading of "בית הצביעה"). It is the place where we hold the vessel, when we move it to and fro. It is the language of (Ruth 2:14): “He (i.e., Boaz) handed her roasted grain, [and she ate her fill and had some left over],” whose meaning is that he handed to her. And there are those who have the reading "בית הצביעה", the place where one holds it with his finger.

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with the "bet tzviah" the rabbinic word for the place where the vessel is held. This is not a handle but rather an indentation in the wall of the vessel from where the vessel can be held. It is considered part of both the inner and outer sides of the vessel. If unclean liquids touch the bet tzviah the inner and outer sides remain pure. And if the outer part of the vessel becomes impure, the bet tzviah is still pure. But if the inner side of the vessel becomes impure, the entire vessel is impure. In the mishnah various sages debate the applicability of this law.

ויש להן בית צביטה – if the backsides were defiled, the place of the handle is ritually pure. But if the handle became defiled, its backsides are ritually pure.

All vessels have outer and inner sides and have a part by which they are held. According to the first opinion in the mishnah, all vessels have a part by which they are held. This means that the rule reported in the introduction can apply to any vessel that has an indentation by which the vessel may be held.

לערבה גדולה של עץ [(the distinction in the outer parts applies] only in a large wooden trough) – it has a part of the vessel by which it is seized. But not with the rest of the vessels. That the large trough has a separation between the place where it is seized and its backsides, that if there are liquids on the backsides of the trough and his hands are impure, he holds on to the part of the vessel by which it is seized, and he doesn’t worry lest he come in contact with the liquids on its backside, and once again defile the trough.

Rabbi Tarfon says: this applies only to a large wooden [kneading] trough. Rabbi Tarfon limits this rule to a large wooden trough. The result is that if impure liquids came into contact with the outside of the trough, he can hold the trough by this part without his hands being defiled. This might be important if the kneader wants to ensure the purity of the bread, such that pure hallah could be separated from it and given to the kohen. But when it comes to other vessels, they are not considered as having a bet tzviah.

ר' עקיבא אומר לכוסות – even for cups they have a place where he grabs hold of the vessel.

Rabbi Akiva says: it applies to cups. Rabbi Akiva says that the rule [also] applies to cups. This will allow one to drink from a cup whose outer side has become impure without defiling one's hands and perhaps defiling the contents of the cup.

לידים הטמאות והטהורות – there is a distinction between the place where one grabs hold of the vessel and its backsides, for impure hands, as has been explained. But for pure hands, it is as it explains further on how so (see the next Mishnah). But Rabbi Yossi holds that for pure hands alone we should not be concerned, but for impure hands, we should be concerned. And the Halakha is according to the first Tanna/teacher, as Rabbi Yossi explains.

Rabbi Meir says: it applies to unclean and clean hands. According to Rabbi Meir, if one's hands are unclean and the outer side of the vessel is clean and there is some liquid on the outside of the vessel, one can hold the bet tzviah and need not be concerned lest these liquids become unclean and defile the vessel. This is what Rabbi Meir means when he says that these laws apply to unclean hands. Tomorrow's mishnah will explain how they apply to clean hands, so stay tuned!

Rabbi Yose says: they said this only concerning clean hands. Rabbi Yose limits the applicability of these laws to clean hands. This shall be explained in tomorrow's mishnah. But if he has clean hands and he holds the vessel by its bet tzviah, he must be concerned lest the liquids were defiled and they would thereby defile the cup.

היו ידיו טהורות – and upon them was dripping liquid.

Introduction Today's mishnah teaches how the laws of the "bet tzviah" the indentation on a cup (or other vessel) through which the vessel may be held applies to clean hands. This was a point of agreement between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose at the end of yesterday's mishnah.

אינו חושש שמא נטמאו – that liquid that was on his hands [were defiled] on the outside of the cup and will return and defile the hands.

How so?
If one's hands were clean and the outer side of a cup was unclean, one may hold it by its holding-place and need not be concerned lest his hands have contracted uncleanness from the outer side of the cup. If one has clean hands that have some liquid on them, and he wants to hold an impure cup without defiling the liquids on his hands which would then defile his hands, he can hold the cup by the bet tzviah, the holding place. In such a case he need not be concerned lest his hands accidentally touched the outside of the cup.

If one was drinking from a cup whose outer side was unclean he need not be concerned lest the liquid in his mouth contracted uncleanness from the outer side of the cup and that it then conveyed uncleanness to the cup. This section is independent of the halakhah taught in section one. It is brought here because of the similar formula "he need not be concerned." If one is drinking from a cup whose outer side is impure and whose inner side is pure he does not have to be concerned that the liquid in his mouth became impure and then conveyed impurity to the inside of the cup.

If a kettle was boiling one need not be concerned lest liquid should come out from it and touch its outer side and return again within it. The kettle is impure on the outside and pure on the inside. If one is boiling water in the kettle he need not be concerned lest the water boils over, becomes impure upon contact with the outside of the kettle and then spills back inside and conveys impurity to the inside of the kettle.

אין להם אחוריים ותוך – that a person who comes in contact with [a Holy Vessel] is like one who comes in contact with all of it. And they do have an outside and an inside as is taught in the Mishnah above (see Mishnah 7 of this chapter), and especially for heave-offering [for the Kohanim].

Introduction The final mishnah of chapter twenty-five gives a few general rules concerning the purity of vessels.

ואין מטבילין כלים לתוך כלים – when both of them are ritually impure, because of the heaviness of an interposing vessel. And they were worried/concerned about Holy Things more than with the heave-offering.

Holy vessels do not have outer and inner sides or a part by which they are held. The laws concerning holy vessels are more stringent than the laws governing regular vessels. Therefore, if one side of a holy vessel becomes impure, the entire vessel is impure. Similarly, the holding place is not considered separate from the rest of the vessel. If any part of the vessel is impure, even the holding place is impure.

יורדים לידי טומאתן במחשבה (see also Tractate Kelim, Chapter 12, Mishnah 1) as for example, the ring of an animal is not susceptible to receive ritual defilement, if he thought to place it on the finger of a person, it receives ritual defilement from here onwards by this thought. But, the ring of a person that he thought about to give it to an animal, it always is susceptible to receive ritual defilement, until he performs a change of action to change its form.

One may not immerse vessels within one another for sacred use. It is possible to purify multiple non-sacred vessels by immersing one vessel within another one in a mikveh. But the laws governing holy vessels are more stringent. Each vessel must be immersed separately.

ומחשבה אינה מבטלת לא מיד מעשה ולא מיד מחשבה – if after he thought about the ring of an animal to make it for a person that it is susceptible to receive ritual impurity though this thought, he retracted and thought about returning it to the animal, this second thought does not lift it from the status of defilement that it descended to in the first thought.

All vessels become susceptible to uncleanness by intention, but they cannot be rendered insusceptible except by a change-effecting act, for an act annuls an earlier act as well as an earlier intention, but an intention annuls neither an earlier act nor an earlier intention. This section contains a crucial general principle with regard to the purity of vessels. Generally, a vessel is susceptible to impurity once its manufacturing has been completed. However, a vessel can become susceptible to impurity merely by intention, even if its manufacturing does not seem to be complete. For instance, if one has not fully completed the manufacturing of a vessel, but then decides that he is not going to work on it anymore and that he is going to use it as is, it is susceptible at that point to impurity (see 22:2, 26:5, 7). But if he has a vessel that is already susceptible to impurity and then he decides to modify it into a vessel that is not susceptible, it remains susceptible until he actually changes it. In other words, intent to use something as a vessel is sufficient to make it susceptible to impurity, but intent to change a vessel into a non-vessel is not sufficient. The mishnah further clarifies physical changes wrought on a vessel can annul both the original manufacturing of the vessel or the intent the person had to use the vessel before it was ready. Put another way physically modifying a vessel can make it no longer susceptible to impurity (see 20:6, 26:9). However, intent cannot annul the original intent to use the vessel in a certain manner, or the original manufacturing. Intention is weaker than action (a good motto for life, if you ask me).