Commento su Tohorot 1:10

שלשה עשר דבר. צריכה מחשבה – that he would intend upon it for human consumption. For all foods that are permitted do not require intention/thought. But this because it is prohibited for eating requires intention and afterwards it defiles. And especially in villages where there aren’t a multitude of people, but in the markets, it does not require intention/thought, for since there are a multiple of people that come to the market, there are a lot [of people] who eat the carrion of a clean bird. And this is explained sin in the last chapter of [Tractate] Utkzin [Mishnayot 1 and 3].

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with purity rules that govern the carrion of a clean bird. Leviticus 17:15 states, "Any person, whether citizen or stranger, who eats what has died or has been torn by beasts shall wash his clothes, bathe in water, and remain unclean until evening, then he shall be clean." The rabbis interpret this verse as referring to clean birds, meaning birds that can be eaten if slaughtered in a valid manner. This distinguishes the impurity of the carrion of a bird from the carrion of a beast which is referred to in Leviticus 11:39-40. There are thirteen rules with regard to the carrion of a clean bird. They are outlined in today's mishnah and in tomorrow's.

ואינה צריכה הכשר (but does not require fitness/preparation) – but defiles the ritual impurity of foods like all other foods that came in contact with/touched a creeping animal which are made first-degree of ritual impurity, but they don’t require that water or other liquids come upon them and that they don’t come in contact with a creeping animal, for their rendering produce susceptible to ritual impurity is with seeds, as it is written (Leviticus 11:38): “But if water is put on the seed, etc. [i.e., and any part of the carcass falls upon it, it shall be impure for you],” and we (i.e., through the Rabbis) expound that just as seeds whose end is not to become defiled with a grave defilement requires preparation/fitness, even all whose end is not to become defiled with a grave defilement, that it defiles humans and garments in the esophagus, that does not require preparation.

Thirteen rulings govern the carrion of a clean bird:
There must be intention; For the carrion of the clean bird to be impure he must have thought about using it for food. For instance, he might have thought about giving it to a non-Jew. In contrast, regular food that is permitted to a Jew need not have been intended to be eaten for it to be susceptible to impurity.

ומטמאה טומאת אוכלין בכביצה (and renders unclean with food uncleanness when it is the size of an egg) – that is like the size of an egg from it that came in contact with ritually pure foods they were defiled.

It need not be rendered susceptible; The carrion need not be rendered susceptible to impurity through contact with a liquid for it to defile. This is because it itself is impure, unlike other foods that are merely susceptible to impurity. The bird carrion is treated like impure food even though it did not come into contact with anything impure.

וכזית בבית הבליעה – a person who ate from it an olive’s bulk is defiled, and his garments were defiled when it reached the esophagus, as it is written (Leviticus 17:15): Any person, whether citizen or stranger who eats what has died or has been torn, etc. [i.e., shall wash his clothes, bathe in water, and remain impure until evening; then he shall be pure].” And the verse is speaking of someone who consumes that carrion of a clean bird,’ and it is written, "תאכל"/”who eats”. But there is no consumption less that of an olive’s bulk.

It conveys food uncleanness if its minimum bulk is that of an egg; If clean food comes into contact with a piece of bird carrion the size of an egg, the clean food becomes defiled with second degree impurity.

And it conveys uncleanness when in one's gullet if its minimum bulk is that of an olive; If a person eats of this carrion (it is forbidden to do so, but he does so anyway) as long as the carrion is in his gullet he is a "father of impurity." During this period he will defile clothes and vessels which he is contact with. This is how the rabbis interpreted the verse quoted in the introduction above.

וחייבים עליה על ביאת המקדש – like the rest of all of the defilements, as it is written regarding the defilement of the Sanctuary and its Holy Things (Leviticus 5:4): “[Or when he touches human impurity] – any such impurity whereby one becomes impure” and we expound to include swallowing the carrion of a clean bird.

He that eats of it must wait until sunset [to be clean]; The person who eats the carrion remains impure until the evening. He is not purified just by immersing in the mikveh. This is stated explicitly in the verse above.

ושורפין עליה את התרומה (and they burn heave-offering on its account) – if the carrion of a clean bird touched heave -offering, it is burned, that when it is not in the esophagus, it has the law of first degree of ritual impurity and it defiles the heave-offering through its contact to become second-degree of ritual impurity.

Guilt is incurred on account of it for entering the sanctuary; If one eats the carrion and then unwittingly enters the Temple while still impure, he is liable for entering the Temple while impure. He will need to bring a sacrifice to atone for his sin.

והאוכל אבר מן החי ממנה סופג את הארבעים - and even if the limb was less than an olive’s bulk. But the anonymous Mishnah is not according to Rabbi Meir, for if it were according to Rabbi Meir, we would learn of it from the end of the [chapter] of “The Sciatic Nerve”/גיד הנשה (Chapter 7 of Tractate Hullin, folio 102a and see Mishnah 6) as he said that the [the law of a] limb from a living animal does not apply other than with pure cattle alone.

שחיטתה ומליקתה מטהרת את טריפתה (slaughtering it and wringing its neck render it no longer unclean even if it is Terefah) – and removes it from [the status] of a carrion that it would not defile. For the wringing/pinching of the neck permits the inside to the Kohanim, as the ritual slaughter permits the outside. And just as its ritual slaughter purifies it, so its pinching/wringing of the neck purifies it. And the ritual slaughter that purifies the torn animal/Terefah from the status of a carrion we derive from Scripture, as it is written (Leviticus 11:39): “If an animal [that you may eat] has died, anyone who touches its carcass shall be impure [until evening],” there is what from the animal that defiles and there is that which does not defile, excluding the torn animal/Terefah that was slaughtered, and the same law applies to the torn bird.

Terumah is burned on account of it; If the carrion touches terumah it defiles it and the terumah must be burned. Similarly, if a person eats the carrion and then touches terumah, it must be burned.

He who eats a limb of it while it is alive suffers forty lashes; If one eats a limb torn from a living clean bird he is liable for eating a limb torn from a living animal. Elsewhere we learn that other sages say that this law is applicable only to limbs torn from beasts. The punishment for this is forty lashes, the same punishment that is, at least theoretically, applicable to one who transgresses any negative commandment.

ר' יהודה אומר אינן מטהרות – that we don’t derive the torn bird from the torn cattle/animal.

Slaughtering it or nipping [off its neck] cleanses it even if it is terefah, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Judah says: they do not cleanse it. Rabbi Yose says: the slaughtering does cleanse it but nipping does not. A terefah is a bird/animal that has been found to have a defect that would have caused it to die (for a list of such defects see chapter three of Hullin). A bird that is a terefah defiles, as does carrion. According to Rabbi Meir, if one slaughters a bird correctly, or if it is a sacrificial bird one nips off the head at the neck (this is how birds were sacrificed), and then it turns out that the bird is a terefah, the bird is not impure. In other words, since the bird was properly slaughtered, it doesn't defile, even if in the end, it was not edible. Rabbi Judah says that since the bird is after all inedible, it still defiles. Rabbi Yose argues that melikah (nipping off the head of a bird sacrifice) does not cause it to be pure, if it is found to be a terefah. Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yose argue out their logic in Zevahim 7:6, see there for more information.

רבי יוסי אומר שחיטתה מטהרת ולא מליקתה – and the Halakha is according to Rabbi Yossi.

מיטמאות (become susceptible to uncleanness) – if a creeping animal touched them (i.e., the large feathers and down) they are defiled. And if they are impure, and the large feathers and down touched pure foods, they are defiled. For they are considered a handle to bring in and to remove/take out, and anything which is a handle becomes susceptible to becoming defiled and defiles.

Introduction This mishnah is a continuation of the list of 13 rules regarding the carrion of a clean bird.

ולא מצטרפות (but they do not join together) – if the food was less than an egg’s bulk, the large feathers and the down do not combine to complete it to an egg’s bulk to defile through the ritual impurity of foods, as is taught in the beginning of [Tractate] Uktzin (see Chapter 1, Mishnah 1 – as it is not considered a protective part of the plant).

The large feathers and the down contract uncleanness and convey uncleanness but do not combine [with the flesh to constitute the prescribed minimum]. Rabbi Ishmael says: the down does combine [with the flesh]. When it comes to matters of purity and impurity, the large feathers and the downy feathers both count as part of the bird. Therefore, they can both be defiled and defile other things. However, when it comes to making up enough to have a minimum measure to defile (the amount of an egg if the issue is food defilement, or the amount of an olive if the issue is the defilement caused in the gullet) the feathers do not join together with the flesh of the bird. In other words, let's say one has 3/4 of an egg's worth of bird flesh and 1/4 of an egg's worth of feathers, the total amount if impure does not convey impurity because it is not sufficient. You would need a sufficient amount of flesh or feathers alone. The reason seems to be that the feathers and flesh are both part of the bird but they are off different categories. Therefore, they don't join together. Rabbi Yishmael says that the downy feathers are like the flesh and therefore they do join together to convey impurity.

הנוצה מצטרפת – for it is considered like a protective part of the animal. But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yishmael.

The beak and the claws contract uncleanness and convey uncleanness and also combine [with the flesh to constitute the prescribed minimum]. The beak and the claws are considered to be part of the bird for all purposes. They even join with the flesh to constitute a minimum measure. Perhaps this is because, unlike feathers which can't be eaten, the beak and claws could either be eaten (I'm pretty sure that I read a story about how claws were a delicacy in China) or at least put into some kind of soup.

החרטום (nose/beak) – that the bird gnaws/bites it.

Rabbi Yose says: also the ends of the wings and the end of the tail combine [with the flesh to constitute the minimum] since they are left unplucked on fattened birds. Rabbi Yose adds that the tips of the wings and tip of the tail are left on fattened birds and eaten with them. Therefore, they too join with the rest of the flesh to convey impurity and to become impure.

ראשי אגפים הראש הזנב (tips of the wings and the tip of the tail)- that remain attached to the body after it plucks off the down, and it is customary to cut/sever them and cast them away for they are not appropriate for eating. But on the fattened birds, we leave them and eat them with the bird, and that is what it states [by Rabbi Yossi at the conclusion of the Mishnah]: "שכן מניחים בפטומות"/”for so they are allowed to remain on fattened birds.” But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yossi. And these thirteen matters that are considered in our Mishnah, in the first section, there are night, for its ritual slaughter and its pinching/wringing of the neck are considered one, and both of them are pure for its torn animal, and the large feathers and the down and the nose/beak and the nails a, these [make up] the thirteen matters.

נבלת עוף טמא – that its end is not to defile a stringent defilement/uncleanness which does not defile humans and garments.

The carrion of an unclean bird requires intention; and it must be rendered susceptible;
It conveys food uncleanness if its minimum bulk is that of an egg;
The consumption of a half of half a loaf's bulk of it renders one's person unfit to eat terumah;
There is no rule that an olive's worth defiles in the gullet;
He who eats of it need not wait for sunset;
No guilt is incurred on account of it for entering the sanctuary;
But on account of it terumah must be burnt.
He who eats a limb of it while it is alive is not subject to the penalty of forty stripes;
Slaughtering it does not render it fit.
The large feathers and the down contract uncleanness and convey uncleanness and combine with the flesh to constitute the prescribed minimum.
The beak and the claws contract uncleanness and convey uncleanness and combine [with the flesh to make up the prescribed minimum].
The mishnah now proceeds to talk about the purity rules governing the carrion of an unclean bird, one that is not "kosher." As we will see, some of these rules are the same as those we saw with regard to the carrion of a clean bird, but some are different.
Section one: The carrion of an unclean bird (a bird that one is not allowed to eat) is not unclean in a ritual purity sense, in and of itself. In order for it to become unclean, first one would have to have the intention to eat it and then it would have to be rendered susceptible to impurity through contact with a liquid. If these two things happen, and then it comes into contact with a source of impurity, it is impure. This differs from the carrion of a clean (edible) bird, which is a source of defilement in and of itself.
Section two: If it becomes impure, it now conveys impurity if there is the minimum size of an egg.
Section three: If a person eats an amount of carrion of unclean bird that is equivalent to the size of two eggs (half of the size of half of a loaf of bread) he cannot eat terumah until he immerses in a mikveh. This is the usual amount to cause a person to become impure through eating something impure.
Section four: Unlike the carrion of a clean bird, there is no special rule concerning one who swallows the amount of an olive. Such a person remains pure.
Section five: One who eats an amount the size of half of a half of a loaf of bread is impure, but he is pure immediately after he goes to the mikveh. He need not wait for the sun to set.
Section six: The defilement caused by eating this amount is only rabbinic. Therefore, if someone enters the sanctuary after having done so, he is not liable for transgressing a biblical commandment.
Section seven: Nevertheless, if this person touches terumah, the terumah must be burned. This is because terumah can be burned even if the level of the impurity is only rabbinic.
Section eight: The biblical prohibition of eating the limb of a living animal refers only to clean animals (and birds). Therefore, one who eats the limb of a living unclean bird is not liable for transgressing the biblical commandment. [Please understand this doesn't mean that one can do so, just that one who has done so is not liable for transgressing that particular negative commandment. He has transgressed another.]
Section nine: Obviously, slaughtering it does not render the unclean bird fit for consumption. This type of bird is unclean and forbidden for eating in all cases. The truth is that this clause is overly obvious. It is only here because it contrasts with the case of the clean bird.
Sections ten and eleven: When it comes to the unclean bird, since it is never permitted to be eaten, the edible and inedible parts combine to convey uncleanness.

צריכה מחשבה – that he will intend to eat/consume it.

והכשר (and preparation)– of water or the rest of the liquids [for susceptibility to defilement], and afterwards it will come in contact with a creeping animal.

לפסול את הגויה (to render the body unfit) – if it had been defiled, and he ate from half a loaf’s bulk, which is an egg and a half [of an egg], his (i.e., that of a Kohen) body is made unfit to eat heave-offering until he immerses [in a Mikveh].

ואין בה כזית בבית הבליעה – as it is written (Leviticus 22:8): “He shall not eat anything that died or was torn by beasts.” He whose prohibition is because of the food of a carrion defiles through eating in the esophagus, excluding this whose prohibition is not because of eating carrion but rather because of eating anything that is impure/

והאוכלה אין טעון הערב שמש – the person who consumes half of a loaf of it after it was defiled, for he invalidates the body to eat heave-offering, if he immersed [in a Mikveh] after he consumed it, he is permitted [to consume] heave-offering immediately, and does not require [the arrival of] a sunset.

ואין חייבין עליה על ביאת מקדש – if he ate one-half a loaf of carrion of an impure bird and entered into the Sanctuary, it is defilement of the Rabbis, and even though that burn heave-offering upon it.

והאוכל אבר מן החי ממנה סופג את הארבעים – and even though that eat an olive’s bulk whether it is flesh or sinews and bones, for now even according to the one who holds that [eating] the limb of a living animal requires an olive’s bulk for eating is written regarding it, here there is an olive’s bulk, nevertheless, he does not receive forty (really, thirty-nine) lashes. But because of something impure, he is not obligated, for there isn’t an olive’s bulk of flesh.

ואין שחיטתה מטהרתה (for slaughtering it does not render it clean) – for eating. For a son of Noah who is permitted [to consume] an impure bird but is prohibited from [consuming] the limb of a living animal, but if he slaughtered it and it is moves convulsively/kicks, his slaughtering of it does not purify it for eating until it dies. Even though that with a clean [animal] even it is convulses, the slaughter is permitted for a son of Noah, in consequence of that it would be fit for an Israelite (i.e., the legal status required for its legitimacy might have easily been obtained). And this is how our Mishnah is explained at the end of the chapter, “The Sciatic Nerve”/גיד הנשה (see Talmud Tractate Hullin 102a).

ובבהמה העור והרוטב – all of this Mishnah is explained in Tractate Hullin, in the Chapter "העור והרוטב"/The Hide and the Fat/Juice (Chapter 9 of Tractate Hullin, Mishnah 1).

Introduction This entire mishnah, save for the first word, can be found in Hullin 9:1. After having explained the rules governing the purity/impurity of the carrion of clean and unclean birds, the mishnah discusses cattle, meaning large herd animals (sheep, goats and cows).

The hide, meat juice, sediment, dried-up meat, bones, sinews, horns and hooves join together [to make up the minimum quantity in order] to convey food-uncleanness, but not to [make up the minimum quantity in order to] convey nevelah-uncleanness. These are all parts of the animal that are not generally or ever eaten. However, these parts, joing together with the generally edible parts of the animal to create a minimum volume the size of an egg to convey uncleanness to other foods if the animal was rendered unclean. The reason is that all although these parts are not eaten on their own, they are sometimes eaten with other parts of the meat. Alternatively, some of these things protect the meat of the animal, even if they themselves are not eaten. Therefore, they join with the meat in adding up to this minimum value. However, these things do not join together with the rest of the meat to cause nevelah-uncleanness, which requires the minimum volume of an olive.

Similarly, if a man slaughtered an unclean animal for a Gentile and it still has convulsions, it can convey food-uncleanness, but it conveys nevelah-uncleanness only after it is dead, or its head has been chopped off. This animal cannot be eaten by a Jew or by a Gentile. It can’t be eaten by a Jew because it is an unclean animal, for instance a camel. It can’t be eaten by a Gentile because it is still convulsing and is therefore prohibited under the Noahide prohibition of eating the limb of a living animal. Nevertheless, this animal is considered food because just as when a Jew slaughters a kosher (clean) animal he causes it to be able to receive impurity, so too when he slaughters a non-kosher animal, he causes it to be able to receive impurity. However, it is not considered a nevelah in order to convey nevelah uncleanness until it is truly dead or has its head cut off. If its head is cut off, it is considered dead even if it is still convulsing.

[Scripture] has [thus] made more cases that convey food-uncleanness than those that convey nevelah-uncleanness. The mishnah closes by noting there are more cases where something conveys food-uncleanness than nevelah uncleanness.

מצטרפין זה עם זה לטמא – if there isn’t in one of them the equivalent of an egg’s bulk, they combine to the measurement to defile according to the lighter/lenient of the two of them, for if it came in contact with/touched heave-offering, it invalidated it, according to the law of food that was defiled by the offspring of uncleanness that invalidates the heave-offering but does not defile it.

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with food that has become unclean and how much of it needs to be gathered together to convey uncleanness.

כחצי ביצה וכו' – that they mixed this one with that one.

Food that contracted uncleanness from a "father of uncleanness" and one that contracted uncleanness from a derived uncleanness may be combined together to convey uncleanness according to the lighter grade of the two. Food that has become unclean by contact with a "father of uncleanness" such as a sheretz, has first degree impurity. If it had contact with derived uncleanness, then it has second degree impurity. The mishnah now will illustrate how 1/2 of an egg's worth of food with one level of impurity can combine with another half of an egg's worth of food with another level of impurity to create the requisite amount to convey impurity.

שני – this mixture/combination has the law of second degree [of ritual impurity] upon it and it invalidates the heave-offering.

How so? If the amount of half an egg of food that has first grade uncleanness and the amount of half an egg of food that has second grade uncleanness were mixed together, the two are regarded having second grade uncleanness. The two half eggs that are mixed are considered only to have second degree impurity. This is the lighter form of impurity. If this piece of food comes into contact with terumah it will render the terumah invalid.

שלישי – and invalidates the Holy Things.

And if the amount of half of an egg of food that has second grade uncleanness and the amount of half an egg of food that has third grade uncleanness were mixed together, the two are regarded as having third grade of uncleanness. The piece of food with third degree uncleanness will render sacred things (such as sacrifices) invalid, but it will not disqualify terumah.

ראשון – and makes [through] its contact, second-degree [of ritual impurity]. For there is a measurement that first-degree [of ritual impurity] on the body to grant defilement.

If the amount of an egg of food having first grade uncleanness and the amount of an egg of food having second grade uncleanness were mixed together, both are regarded as having first grade uncleanness; But if they were then divided, each part is regarded as having second grade uncleanness. If each part separately fell on a loaf of terumah, they cause it to become unfit. But if the two fell together they cause it to have second grade uncleanness. In this case, both pieces of food are the size of an egg. Here, both are treated more stringently, as if both have first degree uncleanness. If after they were mixed together he separated them, then both are treated as if they have only second degree uncleanness, because both pieces now have less than an egg's worth of the original piece that had first degree uncleanness. If each of these pieces now falls separately on a piece of terumah, both are treated as if they have second degree impurity and they render the terumah invalid. They do not, however, cause it to be impure. However, if they both fall on one piece of terumah, then we know that an egg's worth of food that has first degree impurity fell on the terumah and the terumah now has second degree impurity.

חלקן זה שני וזה שני – for in each of them is half of the measurement of the first, and half the measurement of the second. And it is taught in the Mishnah above (see this Mishnah, Tractate Taharot, Chapter 1, Mishnah 5) that first-degree [of ritual impurity] and second-degree [of ritual impurity] combine to the lighter of the two of them.

(all of these sections/segments are simple.) And every place where I am able to suspend that there is the bulk of an egg, it is the more severe of this one and that one, we follow after the more severe/stringent. But if not, we follow after the lenient/lighter.

Introduction This mishnah continues yesterday's mishnah which discussed quantities of food that have different levels of impurity that were mixed together.

An egg's worth of food that has second degree uncleanness and an egg's worth of food that has third decree uncleanness that were mixed together are regarded as having second degree uncleanness. If they were then divided, each part is regarded as having only third degree uncleanness. If each part separately fell on a loaf of terumah they do not render it invalid. But if the two fell together they convey to it third degree uncleanness. This section is the same as the last section in yesterday's mishnah, only here the two pieces of food have second and third degree impurity. Food with third degree impurity does not invalidate terumah. But food with second degree impurity does invalidate terumah, although it doesn't defile it.

An egg's worth of food that has first degree uncleanness and an egg's worth of food that has third degree uncleanness that were mixed together are regarded as having first degree uncleanness. If they were then divided, each part is regarded as having only second grade uncleanness, for even the third grade that touched the first has become only a second grade. In this case one piece has first degree and one piece has third degree. When the piece with third degree touches the piece with first degree, it now has second degree impurity. This now becomes a case of one piece with first degree and one piece with second degree, the same case as we had in yesterday's mishnah.

If two eggs worth of food that have first degree uncleanness and two eggs worth of food that have second degree uncleanness were mixed together they are regarded as having first degree uncleanness. If they were then divided, each part is still regarded as having first degree uncleanness. But if they were divided into three or four parts, each is regarded as having second grade. Here there are two eggs with first degree and two eggs with second degree. The difference between this situation and the previous ones is that even when the piece is divided into two, it still has first degree impurity because there is still an egg's worth that has the higher degree. The pieces go down to the lower degree of impurity only if they are further divided up into three or four pieces.

If two eggs worth of food having second degree uncleanness and two eggs worth of food having third degree uncleanness were mixed together, they are regarded as having second degree uncleanness. If they were then divided, each part is still regarded as having second degree uncleanness. But if they were divided into three or four parts, each is regarded as having only third degree uncleanness. The same situation as in section three only the two pieces have second and third degree impurity and not first and second.

מקרצות (pieces of dough – separated from the main dough in the trough) – pieces of dough. It is language of (Jeremiah 46:20): “[Egypt is a handsome heifer] A gadfly from the north is coming, coming!.”

Introduction Today's mishnah deals with loaves or pieces of dough that are stuck together. The principle is that if one loaf or piece of bread is defiled, they are all regarded as defiled. They retain this impurity even if they are later separated.

נושכות זו את זו (stick to one another) – that they are attached to each other and it is impossible to separate them unless they are stuck together.

Pieces of dough which are stuck to each other or loaves stuck to each other, if one of them was defiled from a sheretz, they all become unclean in the first degree; If they were then separated they are still regarded as having first degree uncleanness. All of the loaves have first degree impurity because one had contact with the sheretz. They retain this even when they are separated.

כולן תחילה – for they are considered as one and is if they touched all of them

If one of them was defiled by a liquid they all have second degree uncleanness; If they were then separated they are still regarded as have second degree uncleanness. Impure liquids always have first degree impurity. Therefore, the loaves or dough has second degree impurity.

פירשו (if they were separated) – the pieces, this one from that one.

If one of them was defiled from the hands, they all become have third degree uncleanness; If they were then separated they are still regarded as having third degree of uncleanness. Hands are considered to have second degree impurity. If the loaves are of terumah, they will be invalidated but not made impure. If the loaves were holy, then they are impure.

במשקין כלן שניות – for as liquids they were first-degree [of ritual impurity] and they make [other things] second-degree [of ritual impurity].

בידים כלן שלשיות – for hands are second degree [of ritual impurity] and make heave-offering third-degree [of ritual impurity].

מקרצת – a piece of dough that was first degree [of ritual defilement] and he attached to it other pieces.

Introduction Today's mishnah continues to deal with pieces of dough that have different levels of impurity and then become stuck together.

כולן תחילה – and one who has contact with the others is like one who touches the first degree [of ritual defilement], and it is considered connection/junction. And similarly, also, if it was second degree [of ritual defilement], they are considered connection/junction, for after if they separated, the defilement remains in them. But if it was third degree [of ritual defilement], if they separated, they don’t have defilement, for [something] third degree [of ritual defilement] does not make heave-offering fourth degree [of ritual defilement], even if they didn’t separate, they are not considered a connection/junction, and they are ritually pure.

A piece of dough that had first degree uncleanness, and then others became stuck to it, they all become unclean in the first degree. If they were separated, it still remains unclean in the first degree but all the others are have only second degree uncleanness. The pieces of dough that are stuck to the original piece of dough are considered to become part of the original piece. Therefore they too have impurity in the first degree. If they are subsequently separated, the original piece retains its first degree impurity. The other pieces have second degree impurity because they came into contact with the piece that had first degree impurity.

If [the original piece] had second degree uncleanness and then others became stuck to it, they all become unclean in the second degree; If they were separated, it still remains unclean in the second degree but all the others are only unclean in the third degree. The same situation as in section one, just the original piece has second degree impurity. [This tractate seems to enjoy doing this repeating the same scenarios over and over again with foods that have different levels of impurity.]

If [the original piece] had third degree uncleanness, and then other became stuck to it, it remains unclean in the third degree but all the others remain clean, whether they were subsequently separated from it or whether they were not separated. Something that has only third degree impurity does not defile other things, even if the other thing is attached to it. It only invalidates holy food and the bread referred to here is probably terumah.

ככרות הקודש – as, for example the two loaves (brought as a communal offering on Shavuot – see Leviticus 23:27 – which were leavened, resembling that of the shewbread which, however was unleavened, together with two lambs, ceremonially waved, and afterwards, divided among the priests and eaten in the Temple courtyard) and the shewbread (see Leviticus 24:5-9 – describing the twelve shewbread loaves that were placed on the sacred table in the Sanctuary each Shabbat; the bread of the previous week was divided among the priests and eaten; it was placed on the table in two arrangements of six loaves with frankincense placed between them or atop them) and similar kinds of things.

Holy loaves in whose hollows there was holy water, if one contracted uncleanness from a sheretz, they all become unclean. The holy loaves are for instance the showbread or the two loaves brought on Shavuot. There is holy water, meaning water whose purity was preserved in order to be used with sacrifices, in the hollows within the loaves. This water, as we shall see, can act as conveyor of impurity. The first loaf has contact with a sheretz, which causes it to have first degree impurity. The next loaf has second degree impurity and the third loaf has third degree impurity. The third loaf defiles the water in its hollows such that the water has first degree impurity. The reason for this is that anything that defiles holy food, meaning even something with third degree impurity, causes holy water to have first degree impurity. The water then ups the level of defilement within that very loaf causing it to have second degree impurity, which will then defile the next loaf. Thus all the touching loaves will be defiled, if all of them are holy loaves.

שבתוך גומותיהן מים המקודשים (that within their indentations is preserved water in cleanness fitting for Holy Things)- that there were within the indentations that are on top of the loaf water that was made on the purity of Holy Things, and one loaf was defiled by a moving creature/unclean reptile, and the loaf that was defiled touched something that was second degree [of ritual impurity] , and the second [touched] that which was third degree [of ritual impurity] and even if they are one-hundred, all of them are ritually impure, and even though they didn’t touch the water that was in the loaf but rather all of the loaf touched/came in contact with its neighbor/fellow [loaf], all of them were defiled, for the honor in which sacred objects are held makes them [fit for Levitical uncleanness (even without contact with liquids)], as if the liquid that is within each loaf that is made first degree [of ritual impurity]that which touched the loaf and defiled it. But heave-offering is not such, but rather, the first loaf [of heave-offering] that is defiled by a moving creature/unclean reptile alone defiles its neighbor/fellow loaf to become second degree [of ritual impurity], and the second-degree invalidates the third-degree, but not further, and we don’t worry about the liquid that is within the hole/indentation.

In the case of loaves of terumah, uncleanness is conveyed to two loaves and one is invalidated. If the loaves are terumah, the process is arrested quicker. The first loaf has first degree impurity and the loaf that touches it has second degree impurity. The third loaf is invalid, although not impure. It doesn't convey impurity to the fourth loaf. It also doesn't defile the water in its hollows. This is because this loaf, or anything with third degree impurity in cases of terumah, doesn't cause water to become impure.

אם יש בין הככרות משקה טופח אף תרומה כולן טמאות (if there is between the loaves dripping liquid, even in the case of heave offering, the whole is ritually unclean) – that the liquid dripping that is between each and every loaf returns to become first degree [of ritual impurity], and defiles the loaf that it touches to make it second degree [of ritual impurity], and similarly, forever. Another interpretation: Holy loaves that are placed on a plank/board that are made with indentations/holes, and each loaf is placed within its hole/indentation. But the מים המקודשים/preserved water in cleanness fitting for Holy Things, we have the reading, meaning, and similarly, the preserved water in cleanness fitting for Holy Things that are placed in a vessel that is made with indentations/holes, if one of them is defiled by a moving insect/unclean reptile, all of them are defiled, for the vessel combines/joins what is within it to the Holy Things. But not for heave-offering, for heave offering does not defile other than first degree [of ritual impurity] and second degree [of ritual impurity] and invalidates third-degree [of ritual impurity] where they touched one another, but the vessel does not combine/join. But if there is dripping liquid between the holes/indentations, everything is ritually impure, for the loaf which is second degree [of ritual impurity] makes the liquid first-degree [of ritual impurity] and returns and defiles another loaf, and similarly all of it.

If there was dripping liquid between them, even in the case of terumah all become unclean. In this case the liquid is dripping, meaning that if one puts one's hand on it, it will become moist. The first loaf has first degree impurity and every subsequent loaf has second degree impurity. This is because since there is a greater quantity of water it becomes defiled with first degree impurity. It then causes the loaf that touches it have second degree impurity and on and on, no matter how many loaves there are. In sum, we can see that water is a great conduit for impurity and that things that are really moist are even better conduits of impurity.