פירוש על כלים 18:12

השידה. נמדדת מבפנים – as it is taught in the Mishnah above (Tractate Kelim, Chapter 15, Mishnah 1), all wooden utensils that hold forty Seah in something moist, which are iron tools for crowding olives into the vat when dry, is ritually pure, that is a cubit by a cubit by a height of three cubits. And here there is a matter of dispute – how does one measure it? According to the School of Shammai, they measure the hollow that is within, and not the thickness of the walls and rims. But according to the School of Hillel, they measure except from the thickness of the legs and the vertical rim/edge (by which a flat vessel is made into a vessel-like receptacle) which he pressed/molded on the rim. And according to Rabi Yossi, hey measure the thickness of the legs of the chest and the vertical rim. But according to Rabbi Shimon, if its legs are not a handbreadth high, they measure even the airspace that is between each leg. But the Halakha is according to the School of Hillel in accordance with the first Tanna/teacher.

Introduction Above in 15:1 we learned that if a chest or box can contain 40 seahs of liquids it is too big to be susceptible to impurity. The sages say that the dimensions of such a box are: 1 x 1 x 3 cubits. In our mishnah the rabbis debate how such measures are taken.

A wooden chest: Beth Shammai says: it is measured on the inside; And Bet Hillel says: on the outside. According to Bet Shammai when measuring the chest, one measures it from the inside. Meaning it must actually be able to hold 40 seahs to be pure. Bet Hillel holds that the thickness of the walls is included in the measurement because the box is measured from the outside.

Both agree that the thickness of the legs and the thickness of the rim are not included in the measurement. Rabbi Yose says: both agree that the thickness of the legs and the thickness of the rim are included in the measurement, but the space between them is not included. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri ruled: if the legs are one handbreadth high the space between them is not included in the measurement, otherwise it is included. The mishnah now discusses whether the thickness of the legs or the rim are included in the measurement. There are three different opinions in this section. According to the first opinion, both Bet Shammai and Bet Hillel agree that the area of the legs and the rim are not included in the measurement to get to forty seahs. This makes sense since this area does not add to the weight of the box. According to Rabbi Yose, Bet Hillel only agrees that the area between the legs is not counted in the measurement. The thickness of the legs is counted in measurement to get to forty seahs. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says that if the legs are only one handbreadth away from the chest, then the space in between them is counted in the measurement. In such a case we look at it as if the legs were simply an extension of the walls of the chest. But if they are more than one handbreadth high, then the space in between them is not counted. We can see in this mishnah the progressive leniencies. Bet Hillel is more lenient than Bet Shammai and "fictionalizes" the traditional forty seah amount. The box doesn't even have to hold forty, it just has to have the dimensions of forty seah. The later sages extend the leniency of Bet Hillel even further. The box doesn't even have to be that big for one can occasionally even count the spaces in between the legs despite the fact that this space is empty! Note how far this halakhah has developed from its original rational a large box is too heavy to be moved therefore it isn't considered a vessel.Empty spaces don't weigh anything so it's not going to be any harder to move the box.

המוכני (the machine for lifting weights, wheel-work) – it is a wheel, like a sort of wheels of a wagon, and since the chest is carried upon it, it is called a מוכני/wheel-work. It is the language of (Exodus 30:28): “and the laver and its stand.”

Introduction Today's mishnah continues to deal with how the box is measured.

בזמן שהיא נשמטת(at the time when it may slipped off) – that a person may remove it from the wheel.

Its carriage: if it can be slipped off, is not regarded as connected, nor is it included in its measurement, nor does it afford protection together with it in the tent of a corpse, nor may it be drawn along on Shabbat if it contains money. The word I have translated as "carriage" is interpreted by some to mean the box's wheels and by others to mean the box's base. In any case, as we shall see, the rules differ depending on whether the carriage can be detached. If the carriage can be slipped off then it is not regarded as connected to the box, even when it is connected. This means that its status as far as purity goes is independent of the box. If the box is small enough to become impure, the carriage remains pure. And if the carriage becomes impure, the box is pure. And if the box is too large to become impure, the carriage is still susceptible. When measuring the size of the box, the carriage is not included, since it can be taken off. Vessels that are in a box are not defiled if the box is found in the tent of a corpse. However, if the carriage is what separates the vessels from the air of the tent, the carriage does not offer such protection and the vessels will be defiled. If the carriage has coins it, it may not be drawn on Shabbat because the carriage is the base for an object that cannot be used on Shabbat (the coins).

אינה חבור לה (and it is not connected to it) – and it is considered a vessel to itself. But if is a chest with a receptacle, it is a defilement that does not hold forty Seah, and the chest is defiled, but the wheel-work is not defiled, but if it is not a receptacle, it is defilement, and the defilement came in contact with the wheel-work, the wheel-work is ritually impure, because it is not considered from the chest, and it is carried full and empty and there is a receptacle.

If it cannot be slipped off, it is regarded as connected, it is included in its measurement, it affords protection together with it in the tent of a corpse, it may be drawn along on Shabbat even if it contains money. If the carriage cannot be slipped off, all of the above halakhot are reversed. It is regarded as connected and therefore has the same purity status as the box. It is measured with the box and it affords protection as if it was part of the box. It can be drawn on Shabbat even though there are coins in it. This is because there are permitted things in the box (clothes, etc.) and when something has permitted and forbidden things in it, it may be moved.

ואינה נמדדת עמה – in the accounting of a cubit by a cubit at the height of three cubits, for it is considered like the thickness of the legs, and even according to Rabbi Yossi, it is not measured with it.

Its arched top, if it is fixed [to the box], is considered connected and is measured with it, but if it is not fixed it is not connected and is not measured with it. The box's arched top is considered to be part of the box only if it is fixed to the box with nails. In such a case its purity status goes with the box itself and it is measured with the box. If it is not nailed to the box, it is not considered part of the box.

ואינה מצלת עמה באוהל המת (and does not offer protection with it in the tent of the corpse) – for if the chest is in the cemetery, it protects over the vessels that are within it, since it supports/strengthens forty Seah. But if vessels protrude from it corresponding [to the height] of the wheel-work from above, the wheel-work does not protect it, for a wheel-work is susceptible to receive defilement and does not interpose before the defilement.

How is it measured? As an ox-head. How do they measure the arched top when it measurements are included with the box? They measure it with a sharp angle called "an ox head." Picture a half circle with a triangle inside it. Whatever is in this triangle is counted as far as the dimensions of the box.

בזמן שבתוכה מעות – it is a vessel of is own accord, and is the base for a prohibited thing, but it is permitted if it is not detached, for after that they were not within the chest which is the essence of the vessel.

Rabbi Judah says: if it cannot stand by itself it is clean. Rabbi Judah says that if the box cannot stand without the aid of the arched top, then the box is pure even if it cannot contain forty seahs.

קמרון (arched lid) – like a kind of arched compartment over the chest.

נמדד עמה – to complete the forty Seah.

מודדים אותו – when it is fixed.

ראש תור (how is an arched top-piece measured? By drawing an equilateral triangle circumscribing the curve) – a diagonal line. For this arched lid does not correspond to the entire chest, but rather it covers over part of the empty space, and he comes to measure the airspace, we view it as if a chord is placed in the diagonal line from the wall of the chest until the top of the arch, and the empty space that is below it is measured.

אם אינה יכולה לעמוד בפני עצמה – the chest without the arched lid that is fixed in it.

טהורה – even though it does not hold forty Seah. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.

אע"פ שמקבלים (even though they contain/retain) – that is to say, even though they did not make an incision while taking the legs, and they have a receptacle as at the outset.

If one of the legs was missing from a chest, a box or a cupboard, even though it is still capable of holding [things], it is clean, since it cannot hold [things] in the usual manner. But Rabbi Yose says: it is susceptible to impurity. According to the first opinion, if a leg is missing the box, chest or cupboard is no longer susceptible to impurity, even if it can still hold things in it. The reason it is clean is that it can no longer be used in its usual fashion. Rabbi Yose says that as long as the box, chest or cupboard is usable, it is still susceptible.

טהורין – that since he took one of their legs off, they were no longer regarded as a vessel, because they do not receive/retain in their manner, but rather lean to one side and are like they are broken.

The poles of a bed, its base, and [its] covering are clean. The mishnah now begins to discuss the various parts of beds. The poles, the base and the bed covering are all clean, because they are no truly necessary for the bed's functioning. The poles stand one at each end of the bed and they hold up the canopy.

ר' יוסי מטמא – since no incision had been made in them with the removal of one of their legs. But the Halakah is not according to Rabbi Yossi. But Maimonides had a different reading:"ושאינן מקבלים כדרכן ר' יוסי מטמא." (i.e., instead of saying: “even though that they do not contain something according to their usual fashion. Rabbi Yossi declares ritually impure/unclean,” Maimonides’ version of the text states, “they do not contain something according to their usual fashion.”). But it is something for itself, and this is how he understood it. A chest, a box and a turret which do not contain forty Seah when they sit in the prescribed manner, if one tilts them/causes them to lean, they contain forty Seah, Rabbi Yossi declares them unclean/impure since they don’t contain according to their usual fashion, but the Sages state for since that they do contain/retain, nevertheless, they are considered and containing forty Seah and are pure.

Only the bed itself and its rectangle [frame] are susceptible to uncleanness. The rectangular frame is put into the empty area of the bed and the bedding is placed on it. Since the frame and the bed are actually slept upon, they are susceptible to impurity.

נקליטי המטה (poles of the bed) – two pillars, one from about the head of the bed and one at its foot and they place a staff from one to the other and cast a sheet over it and it becomes a tent.

The rectangle frames of the Levites are clean. The Levites would take their rectangular frames with them when they went to Jerusalem and sleep on them without putting them into a real bed. Since they were not used with a bed, they are not susceptible to impurity.

וחמור (a stand on which the bedstead is placed) – under the frame of the bed, they place a hallow piece of wood that he frame is lying upon, and it is called a חמור/a stand.

וחפוי (a covering) – as for example, a covering that cover the bed and its poles.

טהורים – that is metal which serves the wood.

מלבן (frame) – hollow tablets made to be placed under the legs of the bed so that they do not rot from the moistness of the ground, and they are carried with the bed, therefore they are ritually impure, for they are similar to the bed.

ומלבני בני לוי טהורין – because they would regularly go to Jerusalem and would go from city to city and they don’t bring the beds with them but they do bring the frames, therefore, even though they are fixed in the bottoms of the bed, for since they will ultimately be taken up, they are not considered like the bed.

מלבן שנתנו על לשונות – wood made like a longue that the bed frame is lying upon.

A bed frame that was put on props: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Judah say it is susceptible to uncleanness. But Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon say that it is clean. The rectangle frame was not put into a proper bed but rather propped up so that it stood off the ground. According to Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Judah this setup is enough like a bed that it is susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon disagree and say that it is clean.

ר' מאיר ור' יהודה מטמאין – that even this is carried with the bed like the frame.

Rabbi Yose said: Why is this different from the rectangle frames of the Levites which are clean? Here Rabbi Yose argues out his point, by referring to the end of yesterday's mishnah, where we learned that the rectangle frames used by the Levites are clean. Rabbi Yose says that if those frames are clean since they were not put into a bed, then the frames put on props should also be clean because they too were not put into a bed.

ר' יוסי ור' שמעון מטהרין – that it is not carried with the bed all that much. And the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yossi and Rabbi Shimon.

שמלבני בני לוי טהורין – for even though that they are fixed in the legs of the bed, since that ultimately they are taken off, they are ritually pure, these tongues are also sometimes removed from the frames of the bed, and are not considered like the bed.

מטה שהיתה טמאה מדרס (a bed that was ritually impure through treading) – that a person with gonorrhea who lay on it or was suspending from it or leaning on it.

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with how much of a bed must be removed for it to be considered defective and therefore no longer unclean (or susceptible to impurity).

קצרה (the short board, the board at the head and at the foot of the bed) – those pieces of wood that are at the width of the bed to the side from its head or from its feet.

A bed that had contracted midras uncleanness: If a short side was removed and its two legs still remains it is unclean. But if a long side and two legs were removed it becomes clean. Rabbi Nehemiah says: it is unclean. Midras impurity is impurity conveyed when an object is sat upon or laid upon by a zav (one with abnormal genital discharge). If the board on the short side of the bed, meaning the head or foot of the bed, was removed and with it its two legs the bed is still unclean, because it can still be used. However, if one of the long sides is removed the bed can no longer be used because the person lying on it will fall off. Therefore the bed is clean. Rabbi Nehemiah says that what remains is still unclean because he can use it by leaning it up against the wall or in some other way. If we were to summarize the principle that emerges from this debate, the sages would say that a vessel that is broken and can no longer be used without support of another vessel is clean. Rabbi Nehemiah holds that as long as it can still be used, it is still unclean.

ארוכה – those pieces of wood that are at the length of the bed from the right or from the left, and they are called ארוכות המטה/long board, long side of the bedstead.

If two props at opposite corners were cut off, or if two legs at opposite corners were cut off, or if the bed was reduced to a level of less than a handbreadth, it becomes clean. The "props" referred to here are the supports upon which the rectangle rests. If two props or two legs at opposite corners were cut off then the bed won't be able to stand. In both cases the bed is clean because it is unusable. In addition, if he cuts down the legs so that the bed is lower than a handbreadth high, the bed is clean because it is considered unusable.

טהורה – for they further are not proper and they are like shards of vessels that are ritually pure.

ר' נחמיה מטמא – But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Nehemiah.

גדר – he severed and broke off (i.e., cut) like cut down a tree.

שתי לשונות לוכסן (two tongues diagonally – two pieces of wood that are made like a tongue, that the frames of the bed are placed upon them, he cuts them with crosswise/diagonally, one that is in the southeastern corner and one that is in the northwest corner, are ritually pure, for they are not appropriate. And similarly if he cut two legs a handbreadth by a handbreadth diagonally, from the leg that is in the southeast corner he cut a handbreadth, and from the leg in the northwest corner he cut a handbreadth, it is like it is broken.

או מיעטה מטפח (or he diminished it by a handbreadth) – that he cut its legs and there is no handbreadth from the bed to the ground, it is not considered [of value, and hence is pure].

ותיקנה טמאה מדרס – it still stands in its defilement/impurity, since the second side exists.

Introduction Our mishnah continues to deal with a bed that has contracted midras impurity. In order to understand this mishnah we should note that there is a difference between "midras impurity" and "contact with midras." Midras impurity is a "father of impurity" and it defiles other things. "Contact with midras" is a first degree impurity and its defiling powers are limited.

טהורה מן המדרס – even though the first was repaired prior to the second side being broken. Nevertheless, it is ritually pure/clean, for new faces had appeared here, for after it went down through the defilement of treading/Midras, these faces renewed themselves and this is not the first, for after it had been ruined enough in order that it be voided.

A bed that had contracted midras impurity:
If a long side of it was broken and then he repaired it, it still retains its midras impurity. If the long side broke and then he repaired it, the bed still retains its madras impurity.

אבל טמאה מגע מדרס – because the long side of the bedstead was first when it was broken and fixed and he brought a new long side in place of the broken one and attached it below, it became defiled through contact via treading/Midras, for it (the person with gonorrhea) had touched the bed who was impure through treading, and when the second [board] was broken, that it sprouting from it the defilement of treading, there remained in it the defilement of contact, for the entire bed is connected to the first board when it was fixed.

If the second side was also broke and then he repaired it, it becomes pure from midras impurity but is unclean by virtue of contact with midras. However, if the second long side broke and then he repaired it as well, the bed sheds its original midras impurity because it is considered new. In other words, when does a repaired bed become a new bed? When both long sides were fixed. Although the original midras impurity is gone, the bed does have a lesser degree of impurity because it was in contact with something that had midras impurity. I shall explain. When the first long side was repaired and put back into the bed it contacted impurity from the rest of the bed. And even when the second side broke, and the bed lost the impurity it had by being in contact with a zav, it does not lose the impurity it had by being in contact with other impure parts of the bed. This is because the bed continued to be usable.

עד שנשברה שניה טהורה ([if one did not have the time to repair the first] before the second was broken – it – the bed is pure) – for since the two long bedsteads were broken, they are no longer fit for use. And it is not similar to where it was taken apart and all of it exists, for there, it will be eventually be put back together with its fellow parts.

If before one could manage to repair the first side the second one broke, the bed becomes clean. If both sides were broken at the same time, then the bed is completely pure, even from contact with midras. This is because when both sides are broken, the bed cannot be used.

כרע – [leg] of a bed which was impure with defilement by treading. That the person with gonorrhea tread on the bed leg when he was on its own and it was not connected to the med.

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with a bed leg that has a high level of impurity that is attached to a clean bed and then removed from the bed. Commentators explain that the leg was leaned or sat upon by the zav while it was separate from the bed.

כולה טמאה מדרס – for attachment was done to it, as if it is all one body.

If a [bed] leg that had contracted midras uncleanness was joined to a bed, all the bed contracts midras uncleanness. If it was subsequently taken off, it retains its midras uncleanness while the bed is unclean from contact with midras. Once the leg with the midras uncleanness becomes part of the bed the whole bed contracts midras uncleanness. However, if he removes the leg, the midras uncleanness, the higher level of impurity, is removed from the bed. The bed continues to retain the status of unclean by virtue of contact with midras because it was once in contact with the leg. This, as we learned in yesterday's mishnah, is a lower level of impurity.

היתה טמאה טומאת שבעה – such as, for example, that it came in contact with a corpse.

If a bed leg that was subject to a seven-day uncleanness was joined to a bed, all the bed contracts seven-day uncleanness. If it was subsequently taken off it remains subject to seven-day uncleanness while the bed is only subject to evening-uncleanness. "Seven day uncleanness" is contracted by coming into contact with a dead body. If the leg had seven day uncleanness and then it was attached to the bed, the bed is also considered to have seven day uncleanness. When the leg is removed, it still has seven day uncleanness, but the bed only has the lesser uncleanness of "evening uncleanness" (uncleanness that only lasts until night). When the bed came into contact with the leg the bed was defiled, but only for one day.

טומאת ערב – that it came in contact with someone who was defiled through contact with a corpse.

If a leg that was subject to evening uncleanness was joined to a bed, all the bed contracts evening uncleanness. If it was subsequently taken off it is still subject to evening uncleanness while the bed becomes clean. In this case, the leg only has a lower state of impurity evening uncleanness. When the leg is attached to the bed, the bed takes on the status of the leg. But when the leg is removed, the bed becomes fully clean. A vessel that only has evening uncleanness does not defile other vessels.

והמטה טהורה – that it (8.e. the bed) was not defiled through contact of the leg [of the bed]. For it was first [degree of ritual impurity], and a person nor vessels are susceptible to defilement other than from a primary source of defilement.

The same law applies also to the prong of a mattock. The same relationship between leg and bed would also apply in similar situations to the prong of a mattock. The mattock is a tool used for loosening the soil and cutting through roots. The prong is equivalent to the leg of the bed and the mattock is equivalent to the bed.

מעדר (mattock, share of the plough/pitchfork for the first stage of winnowing – passing the grain from one side to the other) – a wooden vessel/utensil that has teeth that turn over the straw, and its teeth are metal. And because the teeth are of joints inserted therein, its law is like that of a bed which is of links. And this and similar to it, it is referring to the defilement for seven days, for the share of the plough does not defile through treading.

תפלה – it is speaking of the Tefillin of the head that came in contact with a corpse, for it has four compartments, and every compartment is called a קציצה/capsule, compartment.

Introduction The tefillin box worn on one's head has four compartments to hold four scrolls. The box was defiled with corpse impurity. Our mishnah deals with cases where one replaces the compartments, eventually causing the entire tefillin box to be pure.

התיר קציצה (he untied/loosened the compartment) – he removed one compartment and brought another in its place.

A tefillin box consisting of four vessels: if the first compartment was unloosed, and then he mended it, it retains its corpse uncleanness. So is it also the case with the second and the third. If he opens up the first compartment and removes it, and then makes a new compartment, the whole box of tefillin retains its corpse impurity. The same is true if he removes and then repairs all three of the first boxes. Since one compartment is still there, the tefillin is not considered new and it retains the same level of impurity.

טמאה טמא מת – that their connection/attachment makes them one body.

If he unloosed the fourth it becomes free from corpse uncleanness but it is still unclean from contact with corpse uncleanness. If after having replaced all three of the first compartments, he now replaces the fourth compartment, then the box loses it corpse impurity because it is an entirely new tefillin box. However, the box still has some level of uncleanness. When he replaced each of the first three compartments he put them back into contact with a compartment that has corpse uncleanness. The unclean compartment which is a "father of impurity" defiles by contact the compartment that it touches, giving it first degree impurity. So all of the first three compartments have this status, and therefore the whole box has this status.

וכן שניה וכן שלישית – all the time that the fourth [compartment] exists. On account that it is attached to the fourth [compartment]. But when he removed also the fourth and exchanged it for another, the defilement from [contact with] the dead flies out from it, and there remains in the three compartments/capsules [of the Tefillin of the head] the defilement from contact with something which had been defiled through contact with a corpse, for it came in contact with the fourth [capsule/compartment] when they attached them and it still exists. But the Fourth [capsule/compartment], when it was switched out, there is no defilement in its body at all, for if it was because it come in contact with the three [other] compartments, contact [uncleanness] does not cause contact uncleanness, since the first three [compartments] are new, that came in contact with someone who had been in contact with a corpse, the new forth [compartment] does not receive defilement from them, and there is no defilement in the new fourth [compartment] other than on account that is attached to the three which are defiled through contact. Therefore, when he return and switched out the three [compartments] a second time, all of them are pure, and there is no contact [with defilement] in them.

If he went back to the first compartment and unloosed and mended it, it remains unclean from contact. So also in the case of the second compartment. Going back and undoing the first compartment and then replacing it, and then doing the same with the second department, will not cause the box to be entirely clean. Because some of the compartments are unclean, the whole box is unclean.

If he then unloosed the third compartment and mended it becomes clean, since the fourth is unclean from contact, and what is unclean from contact cannot convey uncleanness by contact. However, if he goes back and replaces the third compartment, the whole box becomes completely pure. As long as one of the first three replacement boxes was still around, the whole box is impure with first degree impurity, because these three replacement compartments came into contact with something that was a "father of impurity." The first came into contact with the second, the second witht the third and the third with the fourth. However, once the first three compartments are replaced again, none of the compartments left was ever in contact with something that was a "father of impurity." All that is left is the fourth compartment which also was never in contact with a "father of impurity." It has "first degree impurity" only because it was part of a box that had "first degree impurity." The fourth compartment does not now return to defile the new third compartment, because something with "first degree impurity" does not defile other vessels. And since the first three compartments are completely pure, the fourth one is also pure.

טהורה – and even where there is a longboard/bedside and two legs, but it is not their intention to restore, and where they benefit, is specifically in a place that everything belongs to one person.

A bed half of which was stolen or lost, or one which brothers or joint owners divided between themselves, becomes clean. If a bed was half stolen or lost (perhaps he lost it under the bed?) or if it was divided up by two different owners (I would want the side closest to the TV) the bed is clean because it is unlikely that it will ever be restored to its whole state.

מקבלת טומאה מכאן ולהבא – but not retroactively, for when they (i.e., the brothers or joint owners) divided it half, the defilement flew off from it.

If it was restored it is susceptible to uncleanness henceforth. If it is restored, then the bed is only clean from that point and onward. The impurity it had before half of it was lost, stolen or divided does not return to it.

מיטמאה חבילה (becomes unclean only when combined) – if the leg [of the bed] was removed from the longboard/beside and stands with the short board/the board at the head and at the foot of the bed, it is combined/connected, but if the leg is defiled, the longboard is defiled. For just as when it is complete/whole, if one of its pieces is defiled, all of it is defiled, so also when they remove the leg from the longboard and it stands with the shortboard, and when the leg is defiled, the shortboard is defiled as well.

A bed may contract uncleanness and be rendered clean when all its parts are bound together, the words of Rabbi Eliezer. But the sages say: it can contract uncleanness and is rendered clean in single parts. I am going to explain this section according to Albeck's commentary. Others explain it differently. According to Rabbi Eliezer, if a bed is broken into pieces and then one part of the broken piece is defiled, the whole broken piece is defiled. In other words, just as all of a bed is considered defiled if one of its pieces is defiled, so too all of a piece of a bed is considered to be defiled if any one of its components is defiled. If one immerses an entire piece of a bed in a mikveh (a piece made up of several components) then the whole piece is pure, and the pieces do not serve as a barrier for the effectiveness of the mikveh (this is called hatzitzah in Hebrew). The other rabbis disagree. If a bed is broken into pieces and one component becomes impure, the whole piece is not thereby impure. A piece of a bed does not have the same rules as the whole bed. Similarly, if one immerses a piece of a bed in a mikveh, he must immerse each part separately. If he does not, each part will serve as a barrier (hatzitzah) for the part that it is connected to.

ומטהרת חבילה – and if he immersed the leg [of the bed] in a Mikveh/ritual bath with the shortboard of the bed, the shortboard does not interpose upon it, for just as it does not interpose upon it when we immerse it (i.e., the bed) when it is whole/complete.

וחכמים אומרים מטמא איברים – and not when combined, that if the leg [of the bed] had become defiled, it [alone] is defiled and not the shortboard [of the bed], for it is not combined like something whole/complete.

ומטהרת אברים – when he comes to immerse it [in a Mikveh/ritual bath], the leg is by itself, and not the combination with the short board [of the bed] for the short board interposes upon it. That which is not connected is like a whole [bed], for when one immerses a whole bed [in the Mikveh] it is ritually pure even though he did not break it apart, but now that it separated the leg from the long board, it is not combined with the shortboard, and it is necessary to immerse it [in a Mikveh] on its own. The Halakha is according to the Sages. So it appeared that the explanation of this Mishnah is from the Tosefta (Tractate Kelim Bava Metzia, Chapter 8, Halakha 8), such is how my teachers/Rabbis explained it.