Komentarz do Kelim 3:8
חָבִית שֶׁנִּקְּבָה וַעֲשָׂאָהּ בְּזֶפֶת יָתֵר מִצָּרְכָּהּ, הַנּוֹגֵעַ בְּצָרְכָּהּ, טָמֵא. יָתֵר מִצָּרְכָּהּ, טָהוֹר. זֶפֶת שֶׁנָּטְפָה עַל הֶחָבִית, הַנּוֹגֵעַ בָּהּ, טָהוֹר. מַשְׁפֵּךְ שֶׁל עֵץ וְשֶׁל חֶרֶס שֶׁפְּקָקוֹ בְזֶפֶת, רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה מְטַמֵּא. רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְטַמֵּא בְשֶׁל עֵץ, וּמְטַהֵר בְּשֶׁל חֶרֶס. רַבִּי יוֹסֵי מְטַהֵר בִּשְׁנֵיהֶם:
Słoik, który został przedziurawiony i naprawiony większą ilością smoły niż potrzeba, cokolwiek dotknie [smoły, która jest] konieczna, może stać się nieczyste. [Cokolwiek dotknie] dodatkowa wysokość pozostaje czysta. Smoła, która spada na słoik, cokolwiek go dotknie, jest czyste. Lejek [wykonany z] drewna lub gliny, który jest zatkany smołą, rabin Eliezer ben Azariah oświadcza, że może stać się nieczysty. Rabin Akiva oświadcza, że może stać się nieczysty, jeśli jest z drewna, ale nie, jeśli jest z gliny. Rabin Yose ogłasza, że oba są czyste.
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
יותר מצרכה – corresponding to the hole/perforation it needs it, and what is not corresponding to the hole/perforation is more than its needs, and it is not considered an attachment/joining, since it is not needed for the jar. But Maimonides explained that more that is its need as for example that he made the closure most thick until one would be able to remove from it and it would remain closed, and even if everything is corresponding to the hole/perforation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kelim
A jar which which was pierced and the hole stopped up with more pitch than was necessary: That which touches the needed portion is unclean, But that which touches the unneeded portion is clean. If one used more pitch than necessary to stop up an earthenware jar, only the part of the pitch that is necessary to stop up the hole is considered to be part of the jar. The unnecessary part is not part of the jar and therefore even if the jar is impure, this part remains pure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
זפת שנטפה על החבית (pitch which dripped on the jar) – that is not perforated.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kelim
Pitch which dripped upon a jar, that which touches it is clean. Pitch that simply dripped onto a jar has no function and is not considered to be part of the jar and therefore it remains pure even if the jar is impure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
הנוגע בה – with the drop of pitch.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kelim
A wooden or earthen funnel which was stopped up with pitch: Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah says that it is unclean. Rabbi Akiva says that it is unclean when it is of wood and clean when it is of earthenware. Rabbi Yose says that both are clean. By plugging the funnel with pitch he has now created a receptacle. The rabbis debate whether this makes the funnel (not just the pitch) susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Elazar ben Azaryah says that this does indeed turn it into a receptacle, thereby making it susceptible to impurity (a susceptible receptacle this should remind you of a Supertramp song). Rabbi Akiva notes that since pitch is made of wood extract, it can turn a wooden funnel into a receptacle. However, it does not turn an earthenware funnel into a receptacle because it is of a different kind, so therefore the funnel remains pure. Rabbi Yose holds that since the plug is not permanent, in neither case is the funnel susceptible to impurity.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
טהור – even though the jar is impure. For the pitch is not in a connection/attachment to the jar, since the jar does not require it.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
שפקקן בזפת – he closed up the mouth of the hole/perforation of the funnel that is made to bring wine from it into the jar.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
רבי אלעזר בן עזריה מטמא – because it (i.e., the pitch) is considered for it as a closure, whether of wood or whether of earthenware.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
ר"ע מטמא בשל עץ – because the pitch is of its [same] species/kind, for the pitch comes out from the tree.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
ומטהר בשל חרס – which is not its kind/species and is not considered an attachment. And the closing of the mouth of a funnel is not similar to the closing of the perforation of a jug which is considered an attachment, because the perforation in the mouth of the funnel that was made by the artisan from the outset was smooth and the pitch was peeled from it and does not endure, but the jug that was perforated after it was heated in a kiln, it is impossible to perforate to be smooth and even, and the pitch is not peeled from it, or alternatively, the perforation that is at the mouth of the funnel, its function is to remove its covering/closure when he wants to pour wine from the jug. Therefore, it is not considered a closing other than with a wooden funnel because it is its kind/species, but a jug that is perforated, its function is not to remove the closure.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
רבי יוסי מטהר בשניהם – for the closing of the mouth of the funnel is not considered a closure, and it is as if it was not closed and lacks a receptacle. But the Halakha is according to Rabbi Akiva.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy