Talmud sobre Kelim 24:18

Rebbi Ḥisda in the name of Ashi^113*As shown by G and the quote later in this Chapter (Note 170) one has to read: Rav Ḥisda in the name of Assi.: If a stick stuck in the public domain ten hand-breadths high, anybody who uses anything from in it into the public domain or from the public domain into it is liable¹¹⁴As explained later in this paragraph, the top of the stick must be at least four-by-four hand-breadths wide. Since the public domain extends only to a height of ten hand-breadths, the airspace is available for the creation of other domains. A surface of less than four-by-four hand-breadths is not usable; but if it has the minimal size it creates a new private domain and all the prohibitions of transport to and from a public domain do apply. If the surface area is less than the required minimum it is exempt space and all transports to and from it do not create liability; cf. Note 170. Babli 5a, 101a, Eruvin 33b.. Rav said, a leather container¹¹⁵In Mishnah Kelim 24:5, the sources read תרבוס which the Geonic Commentary explains as دُرج “box (for money or jewels)”; the translation follows Maimonides who defines it as a leather box (more appropriate for the text of the Mishnah). which stands in the public domain, ten hand-breadths high and four wide; anybody who uses anything from in it into the public domain or from the public domain into it is liable. Rebbi Hoshaia stated¹¹⁶Tosephta (ed. Liebermann) 10:7.: “A candelabra which stands in the public domain, ten hand-breadths high and its flower four [wide]; anybody who uses anything from in it into the public domain or from the public domain into it is liable.” Rebbi Mana said, not only a candelabra but even a stick stuck in the public domain ten hand-breadths high with a tablet¹¹⁷Latin tabula. Cf. Erubin 3(3) (21a line 30). fixed to its head, anybody who uses anything from in it into the public domain or from the public domain into it is liable.

HALAKHAH: “Hand towels, etc.” There⁵³Mishnah Kelim 24:12. The entire chapter deals with classification of the types of impurity of כלים, i. e., vessels, tools, and garments. Vessels can only acquire original impurity if they are made to be sat on; they become actually impure if a person with gonorrhea sits on them, if they carry his “load”. In all other cases, vessels can only acquire derivative impurity; this is exemplified by a vessel standing in the same tent with a corpse. Hence, “impure by the dead” in these Mishnaiot simply means “may acquire derivative impurity.” Vessels or textiles that are only used to serve other vessels, not humans directly, cannot become impure (Mishnah Kelim 16:7). Cf. also Demay, Chapter 2, Note 136, and above Chapter 2, Note 180., we have stated: “There are three kinds of towels. Hand towels may become impure by load; scroll wraps may become impure by the dead; the wrappings of the Levites’ harps⁵⁴The mss. of the Maimonides tradition read “wrappings (of the dead) and covers of Levites’ harps.” are always pure.” Rebbi La in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan, because one may put them on the pillow and sleep on them. Rav said, because he puts them under his upper arms⁵⁵A reason has to be found why hand towels are considered manufactured for the purpose that either one should sit or lie on them or exert pressure (“load”) on them, for only this can make them susceptible to the impurity of “load”..

Did not the snake of king Sapor swallow camels and carts⁴³A toned down version of King Sapor’s snake is in the Babli, 25a and Šebuot 29a. There, the story of the snake is discussed by Samuel, which shows that the reference is to Sapor I.? When they wanted to kill it, they filled camel bags⁴⁴In Mishnah Kelim 24:9 פָּחֲלָץ. with straw and put glowing coals inside; it swallowed them and died. Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, I saw a snake skin which filled⁴⁵Reading עומני from Arabic عمن “to stay”. Cf. also Note 40. the space between two columns. Rebbi Samuel bar Jacob said, I saw a snake skin which covered the genii⁴⁶Possibly statues of emperors who after death became divi. But cf. Note 41. of government. Samuel said, square⁴⁷The snake was perhaps not particularly large but it had the form of a beam with square cross-section.. Could you say it was not square⁴²In Šebuot וְאִם בִּמְרוּבַּע “if square, why must it be large?”, why must it be large? Even if it was small! Rebbi Mattaniah said, it is the way of this Tanna to speak only about large things. You should know that it is so, for we have stated⁴⁸Mishnah Šebuot 3:8, example of something impossible.: “A flying camel”. Could he not have stated “a flying rat”?

There⁴⁷Mishnah Kelim 26:4. The only things that may be impure are living humans, dead humans and animals, vessels and garments, food and drink, and houses. Tractate Kelim deals with the impurity of vessels and textiles. In that tractate, “pure” means that the vessel in question cannot possibly become impure; “impure” means that it may become impure if exposed to impurity.
If a vessel is used as a container, it can become impure as long as it can be used as container. If an impure vessel springs a leak large enough to make it unusable for its primary purpose, it becomes pure. Animal hides used as containers for water or wine are obtained by skinning slaughtered lambs or sheep. The skin then is open at the neck, the tail, and the four feet. If the feet and tail end are sown tight, there is no doubt that a permanent container was formed which may become impure. If the feet are only tied with rope, they also can become untied; the vessel so created is temporary and cannot become impure. The anonymous Tanna states that Arabs never sow their skins; they have developed a technique to tie the skins with rope to create permanent vessels. R. Meïr extends the rule to all skins whose knots are not supposed to be opened. R. Yose notes that any knot can be untied without damaging the skin; hence, no knot is permanent., we have stated: “All tied-up water skins are pure except those of Arabs. Rebbi Meïr says, temporarily tied ones are pure, permanently tied ones are impure. Rebbi Yose says, all tied ones are pure.” Some Tannaïm state it inverted⁴⁸They switch the statements attached to the names of R. Meïr and R. Yose. This invites comparison with the Mishnah here.. Rebbi Jacob bar Aḥa in the name of Rebbi Yasa: Like our Mishnah. Rebbi Yudan said, the indicator of Kelim is Kilaim⁴⁹In Kilaim, a “futile” tree is turned into a prop for the vine and loses its character of tree by the vintner’s intention as stated in the preceding paragraph; so likewise the knots with which the skin is tied are temporary or permanent according to the intention of the owner. If we do not change the names in Kelim, the arguments of R. Meïr become consistent; the Mishnah Kelim should not be changed., for if it were not so, what would be the difference between permanent and temporary tie? In the House of Rebbi Yannai they said: A permanent tie must be cut, a temporary tie does not have to be cut⁵⁰The House of Yannai disagree with R. Yasa: The difference between temporary and permanent knots is not one of intent but of fact. A temporary knot is one that may be untied by hand, even if it is intended to be permanent. A permanent knot is one that cannot be untied with one’s fingers; it is so tight that it can be removed only by cutting the rope. In that case, a tool was needed to create the openings; this action is as if one used a drill to make a hole in a pot, which destroys the vessel and makes it pure. As a consequence, the permanently tied skin is a vessel and can become impure; there are parallel arguments in Kelim and Kilaim..

Rebbi Shiloh from Kefar-Tamarta in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: The reason of Rebbi Eliezer: And you shall cover it with pure gold²¹⁴Ex. 30:3., etc. The Torah called it real estate²¹⁵Since the Torah mentions its roof and its walls, it is described as a house.. So far the golden altar. From where the altar of the elevation sacrifices? It is a logical argument. Since the golden altar which is one cubit square is called real estate, the altar of elevation sacrifices which is five cubits square not so much more? Some want to say, square, square²¹⁶Ex.30:3 (the golden altar), 27:1 (the brass altar).. Since here it is real estate, also there it is real estate. Rebbi Hila said, the reason of the rabbis²¹⁷These rabbis are not mentioned in the Mishnah. The argument is that the Sages mentioned in the Mishnah could use R. Eliezer’s argument in the inverse direction to establish their rule., the altar is of wood, three cubits its height²¹⁸Ez. 41:22. The altar there is called “table”, a movable implement., etc. The Torah called it movable²¹⁹In the Torah both altars are movable, to be carried travelling in the desert.. So far the altar of the elevation sacrifices. From where the golden altar? It is a logical argument. Since the the altar of the elevation sacrifices which is five cubit square is called soil, the golden altar which is one cubit square not so much more? Some want to say, square, square. Since here it is movable, also there it is movable. “But the Sages say, because they are covered.” But is it not cover which stands because of it²²⁰If the cover could not stand alone it cannot be separated from the implement it covers which is a rectangular box of wood, enclosing a volume and therefore susceptible of impurity.? Did not Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish say in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: Its thickness was that of a Gordian denar²²¹The only honest gold denar minted during the military anarchy (in the 240’s by Gordianus III.) The implication is that the gold cover could stand by itself; the objection cannot be sustained. Rebbi La said, for its purpose it does not stand because of it²²²The previous argument can be reinforced; the gold is the essential carrier of the altar and the wood is ancillary.. This parallels what Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish said, you shall make an altar for incense smoke²²³Ex. 30:1. is not written here but burning incense; the altar was burning the incense²²⁴No fire was used on the golden top of the altar (which if used would have melted the top in no time). The golden top transformed the incense into smoke.. But is it not like a table^224aLatin tabula. made to be moved and deposited? Does not Rebbi Immi say in the name of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish: why is the table impure²²⁵In all this arguments, “pure” means “not susceptible to impurity” and “impure” “able to become impure”.? Not because one was removing it and showing it to the pilgrims²²⁶The table was not fixed; it cannot be considered a fixed part of the building. In addition, the rim around the table makes it a container which is “impure”. But once a permanent Temple was built, the altars are fixed and should be “pure” as fixtures of the building.? But this one remains in its place. It also served as a vessel in the Sanctuary. Then it should be pure, why is it impure²²⁵In all this arguments, “pure” means “not susceptible to impurity” and “impure” “able to become impure”.? Rebbi Mana said, as what we have stated there,²²⁷Mishnah Kelim24:9. “there are three baskets²²⁸A basket for manure may become impure by body fluids, a box for straw only becomes impure by the impurity of the dead, a cover for camels is pure.”. Rebbi Ze`ira said, because one uses it for its bales; so also here one uses it for its bales²²⁹Since the Mishnah classifies the baskets by their use, also here the altar has to be classified by the “impure” incense..