Commentary for Chullin 142:26

כי קאמר רבה כגון שבלע שתי טבעות אחת טמאה ואחת טהורה דלא מטמיא לה מטמאה לטהורה

immersed himself, and then vomited it forth, it remains as it was before!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., clean; thus proving that a swallowed clean matter cannot contract uncleanness. For had the ring suffered uncleanness when the man entered under the same roof as the corpse, at which time the ring was swallowed within him, it would not now when vomited forth be clean, for the immersion and purification of the man could be of no avail in regard to the ring.');">¹⁸</span> - Rabbah had in mind the case where a person swallowed two rings, one clean and the other unclean, [and he teaches that] the unclean ring will not render the clean ring unclean.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' This is a special case which could not so readily have been inferred from the cases stated in the above quoted Mishnahs. For it might have been suggested that the reason for the ruling in those two cases was that the contact between the ring and the person was made in the secret parts of the body, and such contact is not accounted as contact in order to contract or convey uncleanness. In the case, however, where two rings were swallowed and both now lie in the secret parts, the argument of secret contact cannot apply for it is as though they are together in a chest when one would certainly render the other unclean. Rabbah, however, by stating his view that even in the case of two rings one cannot render the other unclean, strikingly informs us that the ground for the rulings in the Mishnah is that the matter is swallowed and for that reason it hf cannot contract or convey uncleanness. V. Tosaf. s.v. .');">¹⁹</span>

Explore commentary for Chullin 142:26. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.