Commentaire sur Kéilim 28:2

לפוק\ (to fill up a gap) – to stop up holes that are in the bath house so that the heat doesn’t leave.

[A piece of cloth] less than three [handbreadths] square that was adapted for the purpose of stopping up a hole in a bath house, of emptying a cooking-pot or of wiping with it the mill stones, whether it was or was not kept in readiness for any such use, is susceptible to uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. According to Rabbi Eliezer, any time a worn-out piece of cloth that was too small to be impure was adapted for a specific use it goes back to being susceptible to impurity. The cloth might be used to stop up a hole in the floor of a bath-house. It might be used to hold a hot pot so that one could pour out its contents. Or it might be used to wipe up millstones. Rabbi Eliezer says that the cloth is impure whether or not it was previously designated for such usage. In other words, as long as it is being used, it is susceptible.

ולנער בו את הקדרה (to empty out the contents of the pot/dish) – to hold on to the pot in order to pour from it into a dish or into a tray.

Rabbi Joshua says: whether it was or was not kept in readiness it is pure. Rabbi Joshua completely disagrees and holds that since the cloth is less than three handbreadths and it is worn out, it is no longer susceptible.

בין מוכן בין שאינו מוכן (whether kept in readiness or not) – in the Chapter, “With what [wicks] do we kindle [Sabbath lights]” {Tractate Shabbat folio 29a--b, chapter 2) it proves that when he places it in a box, everyone doesn’t argue about it that it is ritually impure, for it is his intention. But when he throws it into the trash, everyone doesn’t argue about it that it is ritually pure, for he has voided it. Where they argue is where he suspended it upon a frame to spread clothes on, KOYLIYA in the foreign language, or left it behind the door. Rabbi Eliezer holds that whether he left it upon a frame to spread clothes on, that it appears as ready to throw it in the garbage, or whether he left it behind the door, that it appears that is not ready concerning leaving it in a box, it is always impure as long as he didn’t throw it into the garbage. But Rabbi Yehoshua holds that it is always pure all the time that he did not put it in a box. But Rabbi Akiba holds that suspending it upon a fame to spread clothes on, it is [considered] ready and it is as if he placed it in a box and it is impure, but if he left it behind the door, it is [considered] that it is not ready, for it is as if he threw it into the garbage and it is ritually pure. But there (in Tractate Shabbat 29a-b), it concludes that Rabbi Akiba retracted in favor of the opinion of Rabbi Yehoshua. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yehoshua.

Rabbi Akiba ruled: if it was kept in readiness it is susceptible, and if it was not kept in readiness it is pure. Rabbi Akiva mediates between these two warring sages. If it was designated for such usage, then it was intentionally not thrown away (see 27:12). In this case it is still susceptible to impurity. However, if it was not designated for such usage, then even using it in such a manner does not change the fact that the cloth was discarded. In such a case, it is not susceptible to impurity.