Commentary for Yadayim 2:7

נטל את ידו משטיפה אחת – we call it one rinsing all the while that he didn’t pour other than on one hand until the joint/wrist, and it is sufficient once with his one hand, even though there isn’t in the vessel one-quarter of a LOG other than it comes from the remnants of purity. But for both of his hands, even though they come from the remnants of purity, they are not effective until he pours twice. The first [rinsing] until the joint/wrist and the second time up until the joint/wrist. But Maimonides explains: from one pouring is from one rinsing [of water on his hands]. But when he pours both of his hands with one rinsing, the waters become defiled on his one hand, and it is found hat he washes the second with water that became defiled, and his hands were not purified until he poured a second [rinsing] of water from one-quarter of a LOG. But when he pours [water] on only one hand, through that rinsing, his hand is purified, but when he pours water a second time to purify the water that is on his hand, it is sufficient with less than one-quarter of a LOG. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Meir.

If he poured water over one of his hands with a single rinsing his hand becomes clean. The person poured water over only one hand, because he intended to eat with only one hand. He also only poured one pouring, and not two. His hand is pure even if he didn't pour the full 1/4 log because the water comes from a vessel with a pure 1/4 log. However, if the water came from a vessel with a lesser amount, his hand would not be pure.

נפל ככר של תרומה – where he poured the first waters from one-quarter of a LOG [of a single rinsing] and a loaf of heave-offering/Terumah fell up upon them, or a loaf of heave-offering came in contact with the waters that were on his hand prior to his drying them, or prior to his pouring upon them a second time [for consuming heave-offering].

If over both his hands with a single rinsing: Rabbi Meir declares them to be unclean until he pours a minimum of a quarter of a log of water over them. If he tries to do this with both hands, meaning pour water over them only once, there must be at least 1/4 of a log poured over the two hands. Rabbi Meir holds that if one uses the full 1/4 log, he doesn't need to wash off the first water that he poured onto his hands. However, if he pours water twice over his hands, then his hands are pure even if he didn't pour a full 1/4 log as long as they came from a vessel with at least 1/4 of a log in it.

טהור – for just as they are effective to purify his hands, they are also effective to purify themselves.

If a loaf of terumah fell on the water the loaf is clean. Rabbi Yose declares it to be unclean. If a loaf of terumah falls on the water that he used to wash his hand, the first opinion holds that the loaf is still clean. According to this opinion the water is clean. Rabbi Yose holds that the water purified the hands, but it itself has become impure.

ר' יוסי מטמא – for he holds that they are effective to purify his hands, but they themselves are impure.

נטל את הראשונים למקום אחד – that he pour the waters for the first [rising of the hands] with less than one-quarter of a LOG , as for example that they came from remnants of purity and he needs to pour the second [rinsing[. Or he poured the first [rinsing] in this corner and the second [rinsing] in another corner.

If he poured the first water over his hands [while standing] in one place, and the second water over his hands [while standing] in another place, and a loaf of terumah fell on the first water, the loaf becomes unclean. But if it fell on the second water it remains clean. The first water that pours off his hands is impure. Therefore, if a pure loaf of terumah falls onto this water, it is impure. But the second water is pure and purifies the water on his hands. Therefore if the loaf falls onto this water, it is pure.

ונפל ככר של תרומה – in the place where the first waters fell.

If he poured the first and the second water [while standing] in one place, and a loaf of terumah fell onto the water, the loaf becomes unclean. In this case, both the first and second water fall onto the same place on the ground. If a loaf falls into this water, it is defiled because the second water cleanses only the water that is on his hands. It does not cleanse the water that is on the ground.

טמא – the loaf [of heave-offering is impure]. And the same law applies if the loaf [of heave-offering] came in contact/touched the first waters that are upon his hands that the loaf is impure.

If he poured the first water over his hands and a splinter or a piece of gravel is found on his hands, [his hands] remain unclean, because the latter water only makes the first water on the hands clean. In this case there is something on his hands when he washes them. The second washing purifies only the water that is on his hands, not the water that is on something else, such as a splinter or piece of gravel. This water remains impure and it would go back and defile his hands.

על השניים טהור – for the second [rinsing] are pure. But if he poured the first [rinsing] and the second [rinsing] in one place and a loaf of heave-offering fell on the water, it is impure, as it is taught in the concluding clause [of the Mishnah], that the second [rinsing] does not purify anything other than the water that is on his hand, meaning to say the first [rinsing] that is on his hands, the second [rinsing] purifies, but the firs [rinsing] that fell to the ground, the second [rinsing] does not purify.

Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: if any creature from the water [was on the hands while they are being cleaned] they are clean. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel seems to think that creatures that are from the water, like a little worm, count as if they were water. So if one finds a worm on his hand after washing, the water that's on the worm doesn't go back and defile his hands. It might be a bit yucky though.

ונמצא על ידיו קיסם או צרור – even though that they are loose and do not form a partition [between the body and the water so as to make immersion ineffective], when the water comes upon them.

ידיו טמאים – even though he placed upon them the second [rinsing], because the water that is on the pebgle became defiled on account of his hand, and the second [rinsing] of the water do not purify anything other than the water that is upon his hand, but not the water that is upon the pebble or the splinter/chip. Another explanation: “and there is found on his hands a chip or a pebble, and everything that interposes/forms a partition in the pouring water on the hands, even though he placed a second [rinsing] on his hands, the hands are ritually impure, and he did not purify it on account of the second [rinsing] of water, for the second [rinsing] of water does not purify other than the water that is upon the hand, gut not the hands themselves.

כל שהוא מבריית המים טהור (whatever originates in water is clean) -as for example gnats and mosquitos that grow in the water, if they fell upon the hands at the time of pouring [of water for ritual washing], they do not interpose, for since they originate in the water. But the Halakha is not according to Rabban Simeon ben Gamaliel.

חזרו ליד טהורה - for since the first [rinsing of the hands] did not go past the wrist, the second [rinsing of the hands] were not defiled through their going out beyond the rest But when the first [rinsing of the hands] and the second [rinsing of the hands] went out beyond the wrist and returned to the hand, it is defiled, because the second [rinsing of the hands] with the first that went beyond the wrist, for the second [rinsing of the hands] does not purify the first [that go forth] beyond the wrist, but rather only until the wrist alone they purify.

Hands become unclean and are made clean as far as the joint. For matters of purity, the hand goes up to the "joint." There are two explanations of this. The first is the middle joint of the fingers and the second is the joint where the fingers join the hand. Below, I will simply use the word "joint."

נטל את הראשונים לידו אחת – that he poured the first [rinsing of the hands] on each individual hand separately, and afterwards combined the two hands to pour upon them the second [rinsing of the hands], his hands are impure. For when he combined his hands, his hands wee defiled through their contact/touching one another, for eh water that was on this one defiles the water that was on top of its fellow [hand], like that they defiled a loaf of heave-offerings, and the hands were defiled on account of the impure liquids. But when he poured the second [rinsing of the hands], they did not purify the first [rinsing of the hands], because they were defiled on account of the waters of its partner, but on the contrary also the second [rinsing of the hands] were defiled by them. And especially when he poured the first [rinsing of the hands] this one (i.e., one hand) for itself and that one (i.e., the other hand) for itself, but if he poured the first [rinsing of the hands] for the two hands as one, the two hands are considered as one hand and hey don’t defile one another. Such is what I found as an explanation of this Mishnah in the explanations/commentaries of my Rabbis/Teachers. But Maimonides explained, that if he poured the first [rinsing of the hands] on only one hand alone, and afterwards combined both hands to pour upon them the second [rinsing of the hands], his hands are impure, for the second [rinsing of the hands] are defiled by the hand that was not purified, and they return and defile the pure hand.

How so? If he poured the first water over the hands as far as the joint and poured the second water over the hands beyond the joint and the latter flowed back to the hands, the hands are clean. The mishnah now explains some ramifications of this ruling. If he pours water the first time over his hands as far as the joint and then the second time beyond the joint, and the second water goes back onto his hand, his hands are pure. This is because beyond the joint the hand is not impure. So the second water was not made impure by going beyond the joint.

ושפשפה בחברתה (and rubbed his other hand) – that he had not poured [water upon to ritually cleanse], the water that was on it was defiled on account of the other hand that had not been poured upon, and they return and defile the hand that he poured [water upon].

If he poured the first and the second water over the hands beyond the joint and they flowed back to the hands, the hands remain unclean. In this case he pours both beyond the joint and then the water flows back onto his hands. His hands remain impure because the first water that went beyond the joint wasn't purified by the second water that was also beyond the joint, because this water is only purified when it is on the hand. When the water goes back it defiles his hand again.

בראשו או בכותל – if he rubbed it on his head or on a wall in order to dry it.

If he poured the first water over one of his hands and then changed his mind and poured the second water over both his hands, they are unclean. The mishnah now deals with a different subject one who changes his mind about how many hands to wash. If the first time he washes, he washes only one hand and then the second time he washes both hands and the water from the second hand goes on to the first hand, the first hand is defiled. This is because the water that went on the second hand was only there for the first time.

טהורה – but if after he rubbed it he returned and touched the same water that had come from his hand to his head or to the wall, it is defiled.. For those waters are defiled and they return and defile the hand that touched them. Even though that all the while that he did not rub, they are [purified/ as we need to say] with the rubbing, for when he rubbed and went back and touched, he made it worse.

If he poured the first water over both his hands and then changed his mind and poured the second water over one of his hands, his one hand becomes clean. However, in the opposite case, where he first washed both hands and then only one, the one hand that was washed twice is pure.

נוטלים ארבעה וחמשה זה בצד זה – and we don’t worry because of four things, because lest they were defiled that they (i.e., the water) fell from one hand to the other, or lest they have the law of water that work had been done with them, or because lest they didn’t pour from a vessel, or because perhaps they didn’t pour from one-quarter of a LOG.

If he poured water over one of his hands and rubbed it on the other hand it remains unclean. If he washes one hand (even twice) and then rubs it on the other, the water becomes impure on the second hand. This water then goes back and defiles the first hand.

ובלבד שירפו (that they lie loosely) – that their hands [would lie loosely] so that there wouldn’t be an interposition/an intervening object there.

If he rubbed it on his head or on the wall it is clean. However, if he rubs his hands on his head or the wall, the water is not defiled. The water that then goes back onto his hands does not defile them again.

Water may be poured over the hands of four or five persons, each hand being by the side of the other, or being one above the other, provided that the hands are held loosely so that the water flows between them. One can pour water over several people's hands at once and we are not concerned that one person's hands would defile another person's. The only important rule is that the hands shouldn't be tightly clenched with one another. Water must be allowed to flow in-between.

ספק נעשה בהן מלאכה – for work defiles the water for pouring, as is taught in the first chapter [of Tractate Yadayim, see Mishnah 3].

Introduction This long mishnah is about cases of doubtful impurity involving hands. While the mishnah is quite long, it is not actually too difficult.

טמאים – invalid for pouring [water for ritual cleansing of the hands].

If there was a doubt whether any work has been done with the water or not, A doubt whether the water contains the requisite quantity or not, A doubt whether it is unclean or clean, In these cases the doubt is considered to be clean because they have said in a case of doubt concerning hands as to whether they have become unclean or have conveyed uncleanness or have become clean, they are considered to be clean. Rabbi Yose says: in a case [of doubt as to] whether they have become clean they are considered to be unclean. There are three types of "doubts" that could cause the water not to have purified his hands. As we learned in 1:3, if work was done with the water it cannot be used to wash his hands. There must be a quarter of a log (1:1) and the water must be pure. In all of these cases, if there is a doubt as to whether his hands were purified, the law is lenient and we treat them as pure. Below the mishnah will explain the meaning of "become unclean" and "convey uncleanness." To become pure means that if he isn't sure whether he effectively purified his hands, they are considered pure. This refers to the cases in the beginning of the mishnah cases where there was a doubt whether the water he used could purify his hands. Rabbi Yose disagrees with the ruling concerning doubt over whether his hands have become pure. Because his hands are presumed to be impure, they cannot be considered pure unless we are sure that they have been purified. The status quo remains.

ספיקו טהור – even if there is with the water that he poured [for the ritual cleansing of the hands] so many of these doubts. And is the doubt of its being purified as the Rabbis and Rabbi Yossi argue in the concluding clause [of the Mishnah]. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi.

How so? If his hands were clean and there were two unclean loaves before him and there was a doubt whether he touched them or not; Or if his hands were unclean and there were two clean loaves before him and there was a doubt whether he touched them or not; Or if one of his hands was unclean and the other clean and there were two clean loaves before him and he touched one of them and there was a doubt whether he touched it with the unclean hand or with the clean hand; Or if his hands were clean and there were two loaves before him one of which was unclean and the other clean and he touched one of them and there was a doubt whether he touched the unclean one or the clean one; Or if one of his hands was unclean and the other clean and there were two loaves before him one of which was unclean and the other clean, and he touched both of them, and there is a doubt whether the unclean hand touched the unclean loaf or whether the clean hand touched the clean loaf or whether the clean hand touched the unclean loaf or whether the unclean hand touched the clean loaf The hands remain in the same state as they were before and the loaves remain in the same state as they were before. The mishnah now goes through a long list of cases in which an impure hand might have touched a pure loaf of terumah or vice versa. Note that this is a different type of doubt than in section one. In section one, the doubt was whether his hands had been purified. Here the doubt is whether he defiled a loaf of terumah. The mishnah rules that in all of these cases his hands and the loaves remain in their previously assumed state. The hand or hands that were pure remain pure and the loaf or loaves that were pure remain pure. In other words, in cases of doubt the status quo remains.

ספק ידים ליטמא ולטמא – (see Tractate Taharot, Chapter 4, Mishnah 7 as this Mishnah explains the general principle learned there) further on in the other segment [of the Mishnah] it explains it].

שני ככרים טמאים - that impure foods defile the hands, as it is taught in the Mishnah [of Tractate Yadayim] in Chapter 3 [Mishnah 2]: “Whatever imparts unfitness to heave-offering imparts uncleanness to the hands to become second-degree of ritual uncleanness.”

שני ככרים טהורים – we are speaking of Terumah/heave-offering, that the hands invalidate the heave-offering.

הידים כמו שהיו והככרים כמות שהיו – that which is defiled in its defilement and that which is pure in its purity.