Shabbat 190

אלא להכשיר זרעים בלבד א"ל לכל מילי רבי שמעון כתלוש משוי ליה ושאני לענין טומאה דהתורה ריבתה טהרה אצל זרעים שנאמר (ויקרא יא, לז) על כל זרע זרוע אשר יזרע

is in respect of making [its] plants fit [to become unclean]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Edibles, e.g., grain, vegetables, etc-, can be defiled only if moisture has fallen upon them after they were detached from the soil. Now, a perforated pot is regarded as attached to the soil, and therefore its plants cannot become susceptible to uncleanness; whereas an unperforated pot is detached, and so if moisture falls upon its plant, when grown it is henceforth fit to become unclean — This shows that R. Simeon too recognizes this difference. ');">¹</span> — In all respects, answered he, R. Simeon treats it as detached, but in the matter of uncleanness it is different, because the Torah extended [the scope of] cleanness in the case of plants [seeds], for it is said, [And if aught of their carcase fall] upon any sowing seed which is to be sown, [it is clean].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XI, 37, i.e., if it is in any way attached to the soil it is clean, and this includes a perforated pot. ');">²</span> A certain old man asked R. Zera: If the root is over against the hole, what is R. Simeon's ruling then?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If one tears out that root on the Sabbath (Rashi). Here the root draws sustenance directly from the ground. ');">³</span>

בעא מיניה ההוא סבא מרבי זירא שורש כנגד נקב מה לי א"ר שמעון אישתיק ולא אמר ליה ולא מידי זימנא חדא אשכחיה דיתיב וקאמר ומודה ר"ש שאם ניקב בכדי טהרתו א"ל השתא שורש כנגד נקב בעאי מינך ולא אמרת לי ולא מידי ניקב בכדי טהרתו מיבעיא

He was silent and answered him nought. On a [subsequent] occasion he found him sitting and teaching: Yet R. Simeon admits that if it is perforated to the extent of making it clean, [there is culpability].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a utensil becomes unclean and then a hole is made in it large enough for an olive to fall through. It technically ceases to be a utensil and becomes clean. Thus here too, if the perforation is if that size, R. Simeon admits that the pot and its contents, even such as are not over against the perforation. are regarded as attached to the soil. ');">⁴</span> Said he to him, Seeing that I asked you about a root that is over against the perforation and you gave me no reply. can there be a doubt concerning [a pot that is] perforated to the extent of making it clean?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is certain that such a case is doubtful and one cannot positively state R. Simeon's views thereon. ');">⁵</span> Abaye observed: If this [dictum] of R. Zera was stated, it was stated thus: Yet R. Simeon agrees that if it is perforated below [the capacity of] a rebi'ith, [there is culpability].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if the perforation is so low in the sides of the pot that the portion of the pot beneath it cannot hold a revi'ith. Then it is certainly not regarded as a utensil, and its plants are held to grow direct from the ground. Accordingly the perforations spoken of hitherto, and in the Mishnah, are high up in the sides of the pot, and certainly not in the bottom, as is the case with our pots. ');">⁶</span>

אמר אביי ואי איתמר להא דרבי זירא הכי הוא דאיתמר ומודה רבי שמעון שאם ניקב למטה מרביעית

Raba said: There are five principles in the case of an earthen utensil: [i] If it has a perforation sufficient [only] for a liquid to run out, it is clean in that it cannot be defiled when already a mutilated vessel,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If the vessel is sound, such a small hole does not deprive it of its character as a utensil and it is still susceptible to uncleanness. But if it was already mutilated, e.g..cracked, this added perforation renders it incapable of becoming unclean. ');">⁷</span> yet it is still a utensil in respect of sanctifying the water of lustration therein.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If otherwise sound, v. Num. XIX, 17: putting the water in a utensil is designated sanctification. ');">⁸</span> [ii] If it has a perforation sufficient for a liquid to run in,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That is naturally somewhat larger than the preceding. ');">⁹</span>

אמר רבא חמש מדות בכלי חרס ניקב כמוציא משקה טהור מלטמא גיסטרא ועדיין כלי הוא לקדש בו מי חטאת ניקב ככונס משקה טהור מלקדש בו מי חטאת ועדיין כלי הוא להכשיר בו זרעים ניקב כשורש קטן טהור מלהכשיר בו זרעים ועדיין כלי הוא לקבל בו זיתים ניקב כמוציא זיתים טהור מלקבל בו זיתים ועדיין כלי הוא לקבל בו רימונים ניקב כמוציא רימונים טהור מכלום ואם הוקף צמיד פתיל עד שיפחת רובו

it is 'clean' in respect of sanctifying the water of lustration therein,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Clean' is employed idiomatically to imply that it is not a utensil in respect of what follows; thus one cannot sanctify, etc. ');">¹⁰</span> yet it is still a utensil to render its plants fit [to become unclean].<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 456. n. 6. Even the Rabbis admit that if the perforation is not larger the pot and is contents are treated as detached. ');">¹¹</span> [iii] If it has a perforation as large as a small root, it is 'clean' in respect of making its plants fit [to become defiled], yet it is still a utensil in that it can hold olives.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And hence susceptible to defilement. If a utensil is not designated for any particular purpose, it must be able to hold olives in order to be susceptible to defilement. ');">¹²</span>

אמר רב אסי שמעתי כלי חרס שיעורו כמוציא רימון אמר ליה רבא שמא לא שמעת אלא במוקף צמיד פתיל והא רבא הוא דאמר מוקף צמיד פתיל עד שיפחת רובו לא קשיא

[iv] If it has a perforation large enough to allow olives to fall out, it is clean in that it cannot hold olives, yet it is still a utensil to contain pomegranates.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., if it was explicitly designated for holding pomegranates, it is still a utensil and susceptible to defilement. ');">¹³</span> [v] If t has a perforation large enough to allow pomegranates to fall through, it is clean in respect of all things.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' It is no longer susceptible, or, if it was defiled before it was perforated, it becomes clean. Henceforth it is susceptible to defilement only if its owner puts it aside to use as a mutilated vessel (Rashi). ');">¹⁴</span> But if it is closed with an airtight lid — [it ranks as a utensil] unless the greater portion thereof is broken.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The reference is to Num. XIX, 15, q v. If the vessel is closed with a tight-fitting lid, its contents too remain clean, unless the greater portion is broken, in which case it does not rank as a vessel and cannot protect its contents from the contamination spread by the corpse. ');">¹⁵</span> R. Assi said: I have heard that the standard of an earthen vessel is [a hole] large enough to allow a pomegranate to fall out.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e. — unless it has such a large hole it ranks as a utensil. ');">¹⁶</span> Said Raba to him: Perhaps you heard [this] Only of [a vessel] closed with a tight-fitting lid!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e. — that it affords no protection if it has such a large hole. ');">¹⁷</span> But it was Raba himself who said: If it is closed with a tight-fitting lid, [it ranks as a utensil] unless the greater portion thereof is broken? — There is no difficulty: