Perek IX . 84a 15 . ט טפ דב דד

Alternatively, there is a difference between them regarding a Jordan ship,B which is a small boat used on the Jordan River. According to the one who said that it is derived from the verse: “A ship in the midst of the sea,” this is also a ship in the midst of the sea. A river is pure like the sea and the boat will remain pure. According to the one who said that it is derived from the halakha of a sack, and in order to be-come impure it must be carried full and empty, this is also carried both full and empty, and can become ritually im-pure. As Rabbi Ĥanina ben Akavya said: For what reason did they say that a Jordan ship can become impure? Be-cause they load it on dry land and carry it on land and then lower it into the water. It is carried on land when full. Rav Yehuda said that Rav said: One should never prevent him-self from attending the study hall for even one moment, as this mishna which states that a Jordan ship can become ritually impure was taught for several years in the study hall, but its reason was not revealed until Rabbi Ĥanina ben Akavya came and explained it.

Following Rav’s statement, the Gemara cites that which Rabbi Yonatan said: One should never prevent himself from attending the study hall or from engaging in matters of Torah, even at the moment of death, as it is stated: “This is the Torah: A person who dies in a tent” (Numbers 19:14). That is an allusion to the fact that even at the moment of death, one should engage in the study of Torah. Reish La-kish said: Matters of Torah only endureH in a person who kills himself over the Torah, one who is ready to devote all his efforts to it, as it is stated: “This is the Torah: A person who dies in a tent,” meaning that the Torah is only attained by one who kills himself in its tent. Rava said:

And according to Ĥananya, who holds that a boat carried both full and empty can become ritually impure, is carrying by oxen considered carrying? He answered his own ques-tion. Yes, as we learned in a mishna: In terms of the halakhot of ritual purity and impurity, there are three distinct types of wagons:BH A wagon built like a chair, meaning closed on the sides, can become ritually impure with impurity im-parted by treading. Since it is designated for sitting, it be-comes impure if a zav sits on it, even if he does not touch it. A wagon built like a bed can become ritually impure with impurity imparted by a corpse. It contracts all types of impurity, except for impurity imparted by the treading of a zav. A wagon made of stone, whose bottom is netting, re-mains ritually pure and does not become impure from any type of impurity. And Rabbi Yoĥanan said: And if in the stone wagon there is a receptacle for pomegranates, i.e., the holes are not large enough for a pomegranate to fall through, it is considered a utensil and it can become impure with impurity imparted by a corpse. Even though a stone wagon is not carried full, but is pulled by oxen, it can become ritually impure. Apparently, carrying by oxen is considered carrying.

אמט ד למאן ן היטד ס ינת נמי: אי אניה נמי הא – היא ים לב ב אניה לטלת מיט אמט ד למאן היא, ים לב בלטלת מלא מלא וטי ן – הא נמי מיטע ביא: ן ב חנינא י טב אמט ד וטי ןד ן טמאה – ני מה אמטו ס ינת היטד מ ה, ומוטידין ש יב טוענים אותה ב ני ש מ יםד אמט טב יהודה אמט טב: אותה למית לעולם אל ימנע אדם את עצמו מבה מ הטי כ עה אחת, ש דטש וא ילו ש המדטש המ בית ב זו נה מש נית נש נים שי חנינא א טב ב ה טעמה עד ש ל ולא נתג

הד ן ע ביא ו יטש ב

י יונתן: לעולם אל ימנע אדם אמט טבבטי תוטה דטש ומד ית המ את עצמו מב“זאת אמט: נ ש מיתה, עת ש ב וא ילו אהל״ – א ילו י ימות ב התוטה אדם כתוטהד אמט הא עוס ב עת מיתה ת ש במת יימין בטי תוטה ד ל יש: אין טיש אמט: נ מית עצמו עליה, ש מ מי ש א ב אלאהל״ד ב ימות י כ אדם התוטה “זאת

אמט טבא:

NOTESDoes idolatry have the capacity to transmit impurity through limbs or does it not have the capacity to transmit impurity through its limbs – נה לאבטין, או אינה לאבטין ,Idolatry that one broke :עבודה זטה ישor that broke on its own, no longer has the legal status of idolatry. It is no longer prohibited to derive benefit from its shards, and it is not ritually impure. Rav Ĥama’s dilemma is whether or not idolatry that was disassembled has the legal status of idolatry that was broken.

Baal Berit – טית על ב -Baal Zevuv seems to be the source for the ha :בlakha that even a minuscule idol is prohibited. In the Jerusalem Talmud, apparently, there was a tradition with regard to the size and shape of Baal Berit, independent of the tradition of Baal Zevuv.

The way of a ship in the midst of the sea – טך אניה בלב ים The :דverse states: “There are three things which are too wondrous for me, yea, four which I know not: The way of an eagle in the air, the way of a serpent upon a rock, the way of a ship in the midst of the sea, and the way of a man with a young woman” (Proverbs 30:18–19). If the verse is understood at face value, what is so wondrous about the way of a ship? Therefore, according to some commentaries, the Gemara derives a new halakha from this verse. Even if a ship is made of materials sus-ceptible to ritual impurity, it remains pure, if it is in the midst of the sea. Other commentaries suggest that all of the wonders cited in this verse should be understood along the same lines. A snake causes death, but unlike other creeping animals, it does not transmit impurity when it dies. An eagle is a non-kosher bird but its legal status is like that of a kosher bird, which does not transmit impurity when eaten. The way of a man with a young woman means that a seminal emission is only impure after it has been discharged by the woman, as explained later in this chapter (Me’iri).

The opinions of Ĥananya and the Rabbis – יטת חנניה והחכמים The :שdispute between Ĥananya and the Rabbis is based on the question of whether a vessel that can be carried full by a team of oxen, but not by a person, satisfies the requirement of being carried full and empty. Is

such an object susceptible to impurity? According to the Rabbis, an object can only become impure if it can be carried by a person when it is full. Therefore, a Jordan ship is not susceptible to impurity. Ĥananya, on the other hand, holds that since the ship can be carried full by oxen, it can become impure (Penei Yehoshua).

HALAKHAAll impure items that move other objects – סיטות מאות המ ל הט :כThe only primary sources of ritual impurity that transmit impurity by moving an object without touching it are a zav, a zava, and a men-struating woman (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Metamei Mishkav UMmoshav 8:1–2).

Idol that is dismantled – מ וט ת זטה -If an idol was disas :עבודה sembled into its component parts, with each part remaining intact, it does not transmit impurity. This remains correct even if the idol could be reassembled by a common person, in accordance with the variant reading cited in the Gemara. The ruling is lenient even though the dilemma remains unresolved, because the impurity in question is rab-binic in nature. Some commentaries explain that the entire dilemma arises only according to the opinion of Rabbi Akiva as interpreted by Rabba. Since that approach was rejected, the ruling is lenient (Rab-beinu Ĥananel; Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot She’ar Avot HaTumot 6:4).

Idolatry that is less than an olive-bulk – זית חותה מכ -Idola :עבודה זטה try that is less than an olive-bulk does not transmit impurity even if it is whole, because the Sages did not rule more stringently with regard to the impurity of idolatry than they did with regard to impurity imparted by a corpse (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot She’ar Avot HaTumot 6:2).

The impurity of idolatry is by rabbinic law – נן טב טומאת עבודה זטה ד The impurity of idolatry is by rabbinic law, and therefore several :היאrulings in that regard are lenient (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot She’ar Avot HaTumot 6:1).

From where is it derived that the ship is ritually pure – ינה ין לס מנהיא טהוטה ,Any ship, whether made from earthenware or from wood :ש

big or small, is pure by Torah edict (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 18:9).

Matters of Torah only endure – בטי תוטה מת יימין Matters of Torah :דdo not endure in one whose learning is pampered and comfortable. They only endure in one who afflicts himself, exerts himself beyond his comfort level, and deprives himself of sleep in the study of Torah (Rambam Sefer HaMadda, Hilkhot Talmud Torah 3:12; Shulĥan Arukh, Yoreh De’a 246:21).

BACKGROUNDJordan ship – ן -The mosaic map of Madaba, Jordan, con :ס ינת היטדtains depictions of boats sailing on the Jordan River.

Mosaic map of Madaba, Jordan

דד

Perek IXDaf 84 Amud a

מיה ווטים ש ולחנניא טילטול על ידי שלש עגלות הן: תנן, ש טילטול? )אין(, דמדטס, טמאה – ידטא ת כ עשויה ל אבנים – ה – טמאה טמא מת, ש מט כואם יוחנן: י טב ואמט לום, מכ טהוטה טמאה – טמונים בול ית ב ה ב יש

טמא מתד

Jordan ship – ן ,A detail of the mosaic map of Madaba :ס ינת היטדJordan, which contains depictions of boats sailing on the Jordan River.

Jordan ship

BACKGROUND

Matters of Torah only endure – בטי תוטה מת יימין Matters of Torah :דdo not endure in one whose learning is pampered and comfortable. They only endure in one who afflicts himself, exerts himself beyond his comfort level, and deprives himself of sleep in the study of Torah (Rambam Sefer HaMadda, Hilkhot Talmud Torah 3:12; Shulĥan Arukh, Yoreh De’a 246:21).

HALAKHA

There are three types of wagons – הן עגלות לש A :שwagon in the shape of a throne-like chair is suscep-tible to impurity imparted by treading. A wagon in the shape of a bed can become impure by means of the

impurity imparted through contact with a corpse. A wagon made of stone cannot become ritually impure at all, as stated in the mishna (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 27:3).

HALAKHA

Wagons – עגלות

Wagon built like a chair

Wagon built like a bed, from Pompeii

BACKGROUND

16 Perek IX . 84a . ט טפ דב דד

By association, the Gemara now cites the second part of the mishna: With regard to laws of impurity, there are three types of chests:H A chest that opens from the side, on which one can sit or lie, because it can be used for sitting, it can become ritually impure with impurity imparted by treading if a zav sits on it. Even if one needs to open the chest, a person can keep sitting on it. A chest that opens from the top does not become ritually impure with impurity imparted by treading because it cannot be opened with somebody on it. However, it can become impure with impurity im-parted by a corpse. And a chest that comes in a very large size,N and can hold more than forty se’a, remains ritually pure and does not become im-pure from any type of impurity.

The Sages taught in a baraita: With regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure.H If a zav sits on an earthenware vessel and does not touch the inside of it, it does not become impure. Rabbi Yosei says: That is even the status of a ship. The Gemara asks: What is the baraita saying? Rav Zevid said that the baraita is saying the follow-ing: According to the first tanna, with regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure; however, if the zav touches the vessel it becomes impure. And an earthenware shipB can be-come impure with impurity imparted by the treading of a zav, in accor-dance with the opinion of Ĥananya. Rabbi Yosei says: Even a boat is ritually pure, in accordance with the opinion of the tanna of our mishna. Rav Pappa strongly objects to this explanation: If so, what is the meaning of the word evenN employed by Rabbi Yosei, indicating that he is adding to the opinion of the first tanna of the baraita? According to the above expla-nation, the first tanna says that a boat can become ritually impure and Rabbi Yosei says that it is pure. Rabbi Yosei is not adding to the previous opinion but disagreeing with it. Rather, Rav Pappa said that the baraita is saying the following: With regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure, and with regard to its contact with a source of ritual impurity, it is impure. And as far as a wooden vessel is concerned, with regard to both its impurity imparted by treading and its contact with a source of ritual impurity, it is impure. And a Jordan ship is ritually pure in accordance with the opinion of the tanna of our mishna. Rabbi Yosei says: Even the boat is impure like other wooden vessels, in accordance with the opinion of Ĥananya.

The Gemara questions what was stated: And from where do we derive that with regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure? Ĥizkiya said: It is as the verse states: “And whoever touch-es his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 15:5). The verse juxtaposes his bed to himself. Just as he has the possibility of purificationN through immersion in a ritu-al bath, so too, his bed is referring to a vessel that has the possibility of purification in a ritual bath. Since an impure earthenware vessel cannot be purified in a ritual bath, unlike other vessels, it does not become ritually impure when a zav lies on it.

Similarly, the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught that the verse states: “Every bed on which she lies all the days of her zava emission shall be for her like the bed of her menstrual period” (Leviticus 15:26). The verse juxtaposes her bed to herself: Just as she has the possibility of purification in a ritu-al bath, so too, her bed is referring to a vessel that has the possibility of purification in a ritual bath. This is to the exclusion of an earthenware vessel,N which does not have the possibility of purification in a ritual bath. Rabbi Ila strongly objects to this from what we learned: From where is it derived that a reed mat becomes ritually impure from contact with a corpse?

תחה ש יבה ת הן: יבות ת לש ש – מעלה מל מדטס, טמאה – ה ד מצ – ה ד מ ב אה והב מת, טמא טמאה

לוםד טהוטה מכ

טהוט, – חטס לי כ מדטס נן: טב נו תמאי ינה, הס אב אומט: יוסי י טב אמט, הכי זביד: טב אמט אמט? עו טמא, לי חטס – טהוט, ומג מדטס כחנניאד ל חטס – טמאה, כ וס ינה ש ינה טהוטה, י יוסי אומט: אב הס טבא: טב לה מת יב ידןד ד א תנ כא: טב אמט א אל – ‘אבפ? מאי לי חטס – טהוט, הכי אמט, מדטס כמדטסו ין ב עץ ל וש טמא, עו ומג – ן היטד וס ינת טמא, – עו מג ובין י יוסי אומט: ידןד טב א ד תנ טהוטה, כ

חנניאד ינה טמאה, כ אב הס

טהוט? אמט לי חטס מנלן ד ומדטס כט אש “ואיש טא: אמט ד חז יה, לו; בו כ מש יש מ בו״ כ מש ב ע יגמ וה, מה הוא – אית ליה טהטה בטהטה ליה אית – נמי בו כ מש אב

מ והד ב

ב כ מש “כ נא: ת מעאל יש י טב בי דבה לה; כ יש מש תה יהיה לה״ מ נדמ וה, ב טהטה לה אית – היא מה טהטה לה אית – נמי בה כ מש אב לית ליה לי חטס ד מ וה, לא ו י כ באילעא: י טב מתיב מ והד ב טהטה

ין, ת מנ מ ץ ב מ

NOTESA chest that comes in a very large size – ה ד מ ב אה All of the :והבcommentaries agree that a chest that comes in a very large size is one that holds more than forty se’a of liquid. However, it is not clear what is meant by the expression of comes in a very large size. Some say it refers to a chest that is so large that it is no longer considered a vessel. Others suggest that it refers to a vessel used to measure large quantities (Rabbeinu Ĥananel).

What is the meaning of the word even – מאי אב: All of the explana-tions here unnecessarily emend the details of the baraita. Indeed, care-ful examination reveals that the additions are merely stylistic changes that do not alter the baraita’s original structure. However, there is one clear principle that is applied in interpreting a text. A sentence begin-ning with the word even must be a continuation of that which preced-ed it. An interpretation is rejected if does not satisfy that requirement.

Has the possibility of purification – אית ליה טהטה: The language here is imprecise, since a zav is not purified by immersion in a ritual bath, but in the water of a running spring. Apparently, the Gemara means that just as a zav is purified from any other ritual impurity by immersion in a ritual bath, so too, the vessels rendered impure by a zav must have some possibility of purification by immersion in a ritual bath (Ramban).

To the exclusion of an earthenware vessel – לי חטס Some :לא ו י כcommentaries explain that earthenware utensils are not subject to impurity imparted by treading because they are not vessels suited for sitting or lying. The juxtaposition is not the actual source for this halakha, it is a mere support (Rashi).

HALAKHAThere are three types of wagons – לש עגלות הן A wagon in the :שshape of a throne-like chair is susceptible to impurity imparted by treading. A wagon in the shape of a bed can become impure by means of the impurity imparted through contact with a corpse. A wagon made of stone cannot become ritually impure at all, as stated in the mishna (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 27:3).

There are three types of chests – יבות הן לש ת A chest that opens :ש

from its side can become impure through impurity imparted by tread-ing. One that opens from the top can become impure by means of impurity imparted by a corpse. A chest that comes in a very large size cannot become ritually impure at all (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 27:1).

With regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure – לי חטס טהוט כ An earthenware vessel :מדטס that is not a receptacle cannot become ritually impure even with impurity imparted by the treading of a zav (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 1:8 and 18:1).

BACKGROUNDWagons – עגלות

Wagon built like a chair

Wagon built like a bed, from Pompeii

An earthenware ship – ל חטס It is difficult to imagine that :וס ינה שthere were boats actually made from earthenware. Even though it is waterproof, earthenware is an extremely fragile material, and using a boat made of that material would be dangerous. Some commentar-ies hold that the Gemara is referring to small boats that were used as models when constructing ships, or for fortune-telling. These model boats were also set afloat. Conceivably, the Gemara is referring to boats made of braided plant fibers that were coated internally with clay and mortar, which accorded the boat earthenware status.

There are three types of chests – יבות הן לש ת :שA chest that opens from its side can become im-pure through impurity imparted by treading. One that opens from the top can become impure by means of impurity imparted by a corpse. A chest that comes in a very large size cannot become ritually impure at all (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 27:1).

With regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure – מדטס לי חטס טהוט An earthenware vessel that is not a :כreceptacle cannot become ritually impure even with impurity imparted by the treading of a zav (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 1:8, 18:1).

HALAKHA

A chest that comes in a very large size – ה ד מ אה ב All of :והבthe commentaries agree that a chest that comes in a very large size is one that holds more than forty se’a of liquid. However, it is not clear what is meant by the expression of comes in a very large size. Some say it refers to a chest that is so large that it is no longer considered a vessel. Others suggest that it refers to a vessel used to measure large quantities (Rabbeinu Ĥananel).

What is the meaning of the word even – מאי אב: All of the explanations here unnecessarily emend the details of the ba-

raita. Indeed, careful examination reveals that the additions are merely stylistic changes that do not alter the baraita’s original structure. However, there is one clear principle that is applied in interpreting a text. A sentence beginning with the word even must be a continuation of that which preceded it. An interpreta-tion is rejected if does not satisfy that requirement.

Has the possibility of purification – אית ליה טהטה: The lan-guage here is imprecise, since a zav is not purified by immersion in a ritual bath, but in the water of a running spring. Apparently,

the Gemara means that just as a zav is purified from any other ritual impurity by immersion in a ritual bath, so too, the vessels rendered impure by a zav must have some possibility of purifi-cation by immersion in a ritual bath (Ramban).

To the exclusion of an earthenware vessel – לי חטס :לא ו י כSome commentaries explain that earthenware utensils are not subject to impurity imparted by treading because they are not vessels suited for sitting or lying. The juxtaposition is not the actual source for this halakha, it is a mere support (Rashi).

NOTES

And an earthenware ship – ל חטס It is :וס ינה שdifficult to imagine that there were boats actu-ally made from earthenware. Even though it is waterproof, earthenware is an extremely fragile material, and using a boat made of that material would be dangerous. Some commentaries hold that the Gemara is referring to small boats that were used as models when constructing ships, or for fortune-telling. These model boats were also set afloat. Conceivably, the Gemara is referring to boats made of braided plant fibers that were coated internally with clay and mortar, which ac-corded the boat earthenware status.

BACKGROUND

Perek IX . 84b 17 . ט טפ דב ד:

And it is derived through an a fortiori inference: We know that small vessels do not become ritually impure through the impurity of a zav because they are not designated for sitting, and are too small for the zav to insert his finger into their airspace. If small earthenware pitchersB remain pure and are not susceptible to the impurity of a zav, but they do become ritually impure from contact with a corpse; is it not logical that a reed mat,H which contracts impurity from a zav, will become ritually impure from contact with a corpse? And why should the reed mat become impure? Isn’t it true that it does not have the possibility of purification in a ritual bath? Rabbi Ĥanina said to him: There, in the case of the mat, it is different because there is purification in other vessels of its kind, i.e., other wooden vessels that are made from materials that grow from the earth can be purified in a ritual bath.

Rabbi Ila said to Rabbi Ĥanina: May the all-Merciful save us from this opinion. Rabbi Ĥanina responded: On the con-trary, may the all-Merciful save us from your opinion. And what is the reason that this is relevant? What is the signifi-cance of the fact that other vessels of its kind can be purified in a ritual bath if the vessel itself cannot be purified in a ritual bath? It is because two verses are written. In one verse it is written: “And whoever touches his bed shall wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and be impure until the evening” (Leviticus 15:5). The verse juxtaposes his bed to himself. Just as he has the possibility of purification through immersion in a ritual bath, so too, his bed has the possibility of purification in a ritual bath. This teaches that his bed has the same legal status as he does; in order for a bed on which a zav lies to be subject to the impurity imparted by lying, it must be immers-ible in a ritual bath. And in another verse it is written: “Every bed on which the zav lies shall be impure; and every vessel on which he sits shall be impure” (Leviticus 15:4). This verse includes all beds on which a zav might lie, even one that can-not be purified in a ritual bath. How can these two verses be reconciled? If there is purification in other vessels of its kind,N even though it itself does not have purification in a ritual bath, it is subject to the impurity imparted by lying. However, if there is no purification in other vessels of its kind, the verse juxtaposes his bed to himself. Any vessel that is not like him in the sense that it cannot be purified in a ritual bath, is not subject to impurity imparted by lying.

ד:

Perek IXDaf 84 Amud b

הוטין ט ים ש ין טנ כ ודין הוא: ומה מא ט ש ץ מ ת, מ ב טמאים – זב בת?! מ ב יהא טמא ש ין ד זב – אינו במ וה! אי, הא לית ליה טהטה ב ואמ – התם אני ש חנינא: י טב ליה אמט

מינוד א ב הואיל ואיכ

מהאי ליצלן טחמנא ליה: אמט ליצלן טחמנא ה, טב אד – עתא דטי ת מאי? וטעמא ידך! ד עתא מדט אש “ואיש תיב: כ תיבי, כ טאי ב כ ש בו״ וכתיב: “וכל המ כ מש ע ב יגהא יטמא״ד הזב עליו ב כ יש ט אשלית ד ב ג על אב – מינו ב יש יצד, כ – מינו ב אין מ וה, ב טהטה ליה

בו לוד כ יש מש מ

Small pitchers – ים ין טנ כ : A pitcher is a small, typically earthen-ware vessel, used as a receptacle for liquids. The pitcher’s opening is narrow, making it impossible to insert one’s finger.

Small pitcher from the Second Temple era

BACKGROUND

Impurity of a reed mat – ץ By Torah law, a mat :טומאת מ made of rope, reeds, papyrus, or similar materials becomes impure through impurity imparted by the treading of a zav. However, it is only by rabbinic law that a reed mat

can become impure from contact with a corpse, because the a fortiori inference is not accepted as absolute proof that there is impurity by Torah law in this case (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 23:1).

HALAKHA

There is purification in other vessels of its kind – יש מינו :This rationale aroused the intense opposition of :בMay the all-Merciful save us from this opinion. The same rationale appears with slight variation in other areas

of halakha. From a logical standpoint, this represents a shift from a comparison of the individual vessels to a comparison of the categories to which the individual vessels belong.

NOTES

18 Perek IX . 84b . :ט טפ דב ד

Rava said: The fact that with regard to impurity imparted by treading, an earthenware vessel is ritually pure is derived from here, as it is stated: “And any open vessel that does not have a sealed cover on it becomes impure” (Numbers 19:15). By inference, if there is a sealed cover on it, it is pure. Are we not dealing even with a case where one designated the vessel for use by his wife, when she has the status of a menstruating woman? And even so, the Torah states that it is ritually pure? Apparently, an earthenware vessel with a sealed cover is not subject to impurity from any source.

mishna The Gemara continues to discuss an additional halakha based on a biblical allusion. From where is it derived

that in a garden bedHN that is six by six handbreadths, that one may plant five different types of seeds in it? He may do so without violating the prohibition of sowing a mixture of diverse kinds of seeds in the following manner. One sows four types of plants on each of the four sides of the garden bed and one in the middle. There is an allusion to this in the text, as it is stated: “For as the earth brings forth its growth, and as a garden causes its seeds to grow, so will the Lord God cause justice and praise to spring forth before all the nations” (Isaiah 61:11). Its seed, in the singular, is not stated; rather, its seeds, written in the plural. Apparently, it is possible that several seeds may be planted in a small garden.

gemara The Gemara questions this allusion: From where is it inferred that the verse refers to five types of seeds? Rav

Yehuda said that it is derived as follows: “For as the earth brings forth its growth” indicates five types of seeds because “brings forth” represents one and “its vegetation” represents one, and that totals two. “Its seeds,” written in the plural, represents at least two, and that totals four. “Cause to grow” is one more. This verse includes terms connoting planting and seeds in a single garden bed that total five species of seeds.

טהוט חטס לי כ מדטס אמט: טבא ט אין צמיד תוח אש לי מהכא – “וכל כתיל עליו – תיל עליו״ הא יש צמיד יחדינהו ד עס ינן לא מי הוא, טהוט ה, ו אמט טחמנא – טהוטד תו נד לאש

ה ש ש היא ש לעטוגה, ין מנ מתניפ תוכה ב זוטעין ש ט חים, ה ש ש על ע אטב על עה אטב זטעונין, ה חמש – אמצע ב ואחת העטוגה טוחות ה י כאטץ תוציא צמחה וכגנ אמט: “כ נ שא צמיח״ ‘זטעהפ לא נאמט, אל זטועיה ת

‘זטועיהפד

י מע? אמט טב יהודה: “כ גמפ מאי מש‘תוציאפ – חד, צמחה״, תוציא כאטץ טי, טי, ‘זטועיהפ – ת ‘צמחהפ – חד, הטי תהד צמיחפ – חד, הא חמש ע, ‘ת הא אטב

NOTESThere is purification in other vessels of its kind – מינו ב -This ra :יש tionale aroused the intense opposition of: May the all-Merciful save us from this opinion. The same rationale appears with slight variation in other areas of halakha. From a logical standpoint, this represents a shift from a comparison of the individual vessels to a comparison of the categories to which the individual vessels belong.

The discussion with regard to a garden bed – סוגיית עטוגה: The dis-cussion here is not particularly clear. As a result, there are many diver-gent opinions among the commentaries. The fundamental problem is that with no diagrams accompanying the Mishna or Gemara, it is difficult to understand precisely what each is describing and to cite proof from the Talmud for or against any of the proposed explanations.

There is also a dispute in terms of the content of this passage. On one extreme is the opinion that at least three handbreadths must separate the different species of plants. This opinion is cited by Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam in Sefer HaYashar.

At the other extreme is the opinion that the various species do not need to be distanced from one another. The fundamental requirement is to prevent seeds from intermingling and each species must be easily discernible from the others.

An intermediate approach holds that a handbreadth and a half distance must separate the plants on each side (Rashi and Tosafot). Others say that it is necessary to maintain that distance only on certain sides. According to Rabbeinu Shimshon of Saens, one must plant the species so that each row of plants is at least a handbreadth and one-tenth from the edge of the garden bed, ensuring that there will be a distance of a handbreadth and a half between each set of plants on all sides. Some ge’onim explain that a distance of one handbreadth between the various species is sufficient. Others explain that there is no need to keep a distance between them and it is sufficient to plant the seeds on different sides and in different patterns (see Melekhet Shlomo and Tiferet Yisrael).

Garden bed discussed in the mishna according to the approaches of Rabbeinu Ĥananel and Me’iri

Opinion of the Rambam

Opinion of the Rosh

Opinion of the ge’onim

Opinion of Tiferet Yisrael

HALAKHAImpurity of a reed mat – ץ By Torah law, a mat made of :טומאת מ rope, reeds, papyrus, or similar materials becomes impure through impurity imparted by the treading of a zav. However, it is only by rabbinic law that a reed mat can become impure from contact with a corpse, because the a fortiori inference is not accepted as absolute proof that there is impurity by Torah law in this case (Rambam Sefer Tahara, Hilkhot Kelim 23:1).

From where is it derived that a garden bed that is six, etc. – ין וכופ מנ It is permitted to plant up to five species of vegetables in a :לעטוגהgarden bed that is six by six handbreadths as long as one plants each species along the various sides of the bed with one row in the middle, and there is a distance of a handbreadth and a half between the spe-cies (Rambam Sefer Zera’im, Hilkhot Kilayim 4:9).

BACKGROUNDSmall pitchers – ים ין טנ כ : A jug is a small, typically earthenware, vessel, used as a receptacle for liquids. The jug’s opening is narrow, making it impossible to insert one’s finger.

Small pitcher from the Second Temple eraThe discussion with regard to a garden bed – סוגיית עטוגה: The discussion here is not particularly clear. As a result, there are many divergent opinions among the commentaries. The fundamental problem is that with no diagrams accompa-nying the Mishna or Gemara, it is difficult to understand precisely what each is describing and to cite proof from the Talmud for or against any of the proposed explanations.

There is also a dispute in terms of the content of this passage. On one extreme is the opinion that at least three handbreadths must separate the different species of plants. This opinion is cited by Rashi and Rabbeinu Tam in Sefer HaYashar.

At the other extreme is the opinion that the various spe-cies do not need to be distanced from one another. The fundamental requirement is to prevent seeds from inter-mingling and each species must be easily discernible from the others.

An intermediate approach holds that a handbreadth and a half distance must separate the plants on each side (Rashi and Tosafot). Others say that it is necessary to maintain that distance only on certain sides. According to Rabbeinu Shimshon of Saens, one must plant the species so that each row of plants is at least a handbreadth and one-tenth from the edge of the garden bed, ensuring that there will be a distance of a handbreadth and a half between each set of plants on all sides. Some ge’onim explain that a distance of one handbreadth between the various species is sufficient. Others explain that there is no need to keep a distance between them and it is sufficient to plant the seeds on dif-ferent sides and in different patterns (see Melekhet Shlomo and Tiferet Yisrael).

Garden bed discussed in the mishna according to the approaches of Rabbeinu Ĥananel and Me’iri

Opinion of the Rambam

Opinion of the Rosh

Opinion of the ge’onim

Opinion of Tiferet Yisrael

NOTES

From where is it derived that a garden bed, etc. – ין לעטוגה וכופ It is permitted to :מנplant up to five species of vegetables in a garden bed that is six by six handbreadths as long as one plants each species along the various sides of the bed with one row in the middle, and there is a distance of a handbreadth and a half between the species (Rambam Sefer Zera’im, Hilkhot Kilayim 4:9).

HALAKHA

Opinion of the ge’onim