Comentário sobre Kelim 27:1
הַבֶּגֶד מִטַּמֵּא מִשּׁוּם חֲמִשָּׁה שֵׁמוֹת. הַשַּׂק, מִשּׁוּם אַרְבָּעָה. הָעוֹר, מִשּׁוּם שְׁלֹשָׁה. הָעֵץ, מִשּׁוּם שְׁנַיִם. וּכְלִי חֶרֶס, מִשּׁוּם אֶחָד. כְּלִי חֶרֶס מִטַּמֵּא מִשּׁוּם כְּלִי קִבּוּל. כֹּל שֶׁאֵין לוֹ תוֹךְ בִּכְלֵי חֶרֶס, אֵין לוֹ אֲחוֹרָיִם. מוּסָף עָלָיו הָעֵץ, שֶׁהוּא מִטַּמֵּא מִשּׁוּם מוֹשָׁב. וְכֵן טַבְלָא שֶׁאֵין לָהּ לִזְבֵּז, בִּכְלֵי עֵץ, טְמֵאָה, וּבִכְלֵי חֶרֶס, טְהוֹרָה. מוּסָף עָלָיו הָעוֹר, שֶׁהוּא מִטַּמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אֹהָלִים. מוּסָף עָלָיו הַשַּׂק, שֶׁהוּא מִטַּמֵּא מִשּׁוּם אָרִיג. מוּסָף עָלָיו הַבֶּגֶד, שֶׁהוּא מִטַּמֵּא מִשּׁוּם שָׁלֹשׁ עַל שָׁלֹשׁ:
As roupas podem ficar impuras devido a cinco razões diferentes; pano de saco [pode ser alugado impuro] devido a quatro; couro devido a três; madeira devido a dois; e um vaso de barro devido a um. Um vaso de barro pode ficar impuro [apenas] devido a [ser] um receptáculo. Em relação aos vasos de barro, qualquer um que não tenha interior, não tem exterior [que pode ser tornado impuro]. Além disso, a madeira também pode ficar impura devido a ser um assento. Da mesma forma, no caso de um comprimido que não tem aro, se for um vaso de madeira, ele é [suscetível de se tornar] impuro; e se for um vaso de barro, é puro. Além disso, o couro pode ficar impuro devido a tendas [se formar um recinto sobre certas coisas impuras]. Além disso, o pano de saco pode ficar impuro devido a ser uma obra tecida. Além disso, as roupas podem ficar impuras devido a [ser] um pedaço de tecido com três a três [pedaços de dedos].
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
הבגד מיטמא משום חמשה שמות – as it is explained further on: because of receptacle, because of sitting, because of overshadowing [of a tent], because of a web [and] because of three fingerbreadths square. And each one of them, its measurement is different one from the other. How so? A cloth [of wool or linen] that has a receptacle, such as the piece of leather in which jewels are bound up, that is taught In the Mishnah above (Tractate Kelim, Chapter 26, Mishnah 2), or a receptacle of [olive] oil or a receptacle of wax, its measure is with a little bit., [and because of defilement by sitting, if it was defiled] though the treading of a person with gonorrhea, its measure is not less than three handbreadths by three handbreadths square. But if it became a tent of overshadowing for a corpse, as it is written (Numbers 19:18): “[A person who is pure shall take hyssop, dip it in the water,] and sprinkle on the tent [and on all the vessels and people who were there],” there is no defiling with less than a handbreadth by a handbreadth square. But if it is a belt/אבנט or a girdle/חגור, it becomes defiled because of the web, even though it does not have the measurement to be fit to be called a cloth, for it does not have the width of three fingers, even so, it is impure because it is a web. And we derive it from a sack. Just as a sack is spun and woven, even all that is spun and woven. And all of the rest of the defilements, the cloth is not defiled nor does it defile with less than three fingers square, for it is not important neither to the poor nor the rich and is not called a cloth.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Kelim
Cloth is susceptible to five categories of uncleanness;
Sack-cloth is susceptible to four;
Leather to three;
Wood to two;
And an earthenware vessel to one.
An earthenware vessel is susceptible to uncleanness [only] as a receptacle; any earthen vessel that has no inner part is not susceptible to uncleanness from its outer part.
Wood is subject to an additional form of uncleanness in that it is also susceptible to uncleanness as a seat. Similarly a tablet which has no rim is susceptible to uncleanness if it is a wooden object and insusceptible if it is an earthenware one.
Leather is susceptible to an additional form of uncleanness in that it is also susceptible to the uncleanness of a tent.
Sack-cloth has an additional form of uncleanness in that it is susceptible to uncleanness as woven work.
Cloth has an additional form of uncleanness in that it is susceptible to uncleanness when it is only three by three fingerbreadths.
Section one: There are five different ways in which cloth can become impure, and each way differs from the other in respect to how large a piece of cloth there needs to be for it to be susceptible. The first is a piece of cloth that has a receptacle. In such a case even the smallest piece of cloth is susceptible. The second is cloth that is either sat or laid upon. Such cloth is susceptible if it is three handbreadths. The third is a piece of cloth that functions as a "tent," meaning an overhanging. In such a case, the smallest piece of cloth is sufficient. The fourth is a woven piece of cloth; again, the smallest piece is susceptible. The fifth is that a piece of cloth that is three by three handbreadths is susceptible.
Sections two-five: Below, the mishnah will explain these categories.
Section six: If an earthenware vessel does not have a receptacle, meaning an "inside," then even its outside is not susceptible to impurity.
Section seven: Wood can become impure by having a receptacle, like earthenware. Even without a receptacle, it is impure if it is made for sitting.
If one makes a wood tablet without a frame it is susceptible to impurity, whereas an earthenware tablet without a frame is pure because it does not have a receptacle.
Section eight: Leather that hangs over a dead body is impure, but if a wood or earthenware vessel hangs over a dead body, the vessel remains pure.
Section nine: If sack-cloth is woven, even the smallest piece is susceptible to impurity.
Section ten: As explained in section one, a piece of cloth is susceptible to impurity if it is three handbreadths by three handbreadths.
Sack-cloth is susceptible to four;
Leather to three;
Wood to two;
And an earthenware vessel to one.
An earthenware vessel is susceptible to uncleanness [only] as a receptacle; any earthen vessel that has no inner part is not susceptible to uncleanness from its outer part.
Wood is subject to an additional form of uncleanness in that it is also susceptible to uncleanness as a seat. Similarly a tablet which has no rim is susceptible to uncleanness if it is a wooden object and insusceptible if it is an earthenware one.
Leather is susceptible to an additional form of uncleanness in that it is also susceptible to the uncleanness of a tent.
Sack-cloth has an additional form of uncleanness in that it is susceptible to uncleanness as woven work.
Cloth has an additional form of uncleanness in that it is susceptible to uncleanness when it is only three by three fingerbreadths.
Section one: There are five different ways in which cloth can become impure, and each way differs from the other in respect to how large a piece of cloth there needs to be for it to be susceptible. The first is a piece of cloth that has a receptacle. In such a case even the smallest piece of cloth is susceptible. The second is cloth that is either sat or laid upon. Such cloth is susceptible if it is three handbreadths. The third is a piece of cloth that functions as a "tent," meaning an overhanging. In such a case, the smallest piece of cloth is sufficient. The fourth is a woven piece of cloth; again, the smallest piece is susceptible. The fifth is that a piece of cloth that is three by three handbreadths is susceptible.
Sections two-five: Below, the mishnah will explain these categories.
Section six: If an earthenware vessel does not have a receptacle, meaning an "inside," then even its outside is not susceptible to impurity.
Section seven: Wood can become impure by having a receptacle, like earthenware. Even without a receptacle, it is impure if it is made for sitting.
If one makes a wood tablet without a frame it is susceptible to impurity, whereas an earthenware tablet without a frame is pure because it does not have a receptacle.
Section eight: Leather that hangs over a dead body is impure, but if a wood or earthenware vessel hangs over a dead body, the vessel remains pure.
Section nine: If sack-cloth is woven, even the smallest piece is susceptible to impurity.
Section ten: As explained in section one, a piece of cloth is susceptible to impurity if it is three handbreadths by three handbreadths.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
משום ארבעה שמות – that it lacks the measurement of three fingerbreadths square.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
העור משום שלשה – for it lacks [the measurement] because of three fingerbreadths square and because of a web.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
העץ משום שנים – that it lacks the defilement of tents, as it is taught I the Mishnah in [Tractate Shabbat, Chapter 2, Mishnah 3] the Chapter במה מדליקין/With what do we kindle [Shabbat candles]? “No product from a tree can contract “tent” uncleanness [except for flax].” And it also doesn’t have because of a web, and also because of three fingerbreadths square.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
החרס משום אחד – because it is a receptacle alone But it doesn’t have all of these that we have mentioned (of the rest of the five). And it also does not have [defilement through] treading, as it is written concerning the treading of a person with gonorrhea (Leviticus 15:5): “Anyone who touches his bedding [shall wash his clothes, bathe in water, and remain impure until evening].” He makes an analogy between “his bedding” to him, just as he who has ritual purity in the ritual bath/Mikveh, even all who have purity in the ritual bath, excluding earthenware that does not have purity in a ritual bath that does not become lying for a person with gonorrhea/a flux.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
איל לו אחרויים – that an earthenware vessel is not susceptible to receive ritual impurity from its outside, as it is written (Leviticus 11:33): “And if any of hose fall into an earthen vessel, everything inside shall be impure [and -the vessel – itself you shall break].” If it came in contact with defilement from its outside, it was not defiled at all.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Kelim
שהוא מיטמא משום אריג – which is not the case with a hide, for even if he cut it into thin straps and wove them, it is not considered a web/weaving.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy