meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Mishnah/Seder Tahorot/Mishnah Kelim/English/Sefaria Community Translation.txt"}
text: Mishnah Kelim
  משנה כלים
  Sefaria Community Translation
  
  
  Mishnah Kelim
  
  
  
  
  
  The Origins of impurity: the <em>sheretz</em> [one of eight creeping creatures, whose identities are debated, and whose carcasses transmit ritual impurity upon contact], semen, that which is rendered impure by a dead body, the <em>metzora</em> [victim of a Divinely inflicted skin disease] while he is in his days of counting, a small amount of purifying water that is not enough to perform the sprinkling ceremony -  can render persons and vessels impure through touch, and pottery vessels through the air, but they do not render impure when they are carried.
  Higher than these: the <em>nevelah</em> [an animal which died without proper slaughter] and purifying water of which there is enough to perform the sprinkling ceremony, as they render impure a person through carrying and clothing through touch, and without clothes [on an unclothed area of a person], by touch.
  Higher than these: one who has intercourse with a <em>niddah</em> [a woman who is menstruating or has menstruated, but has not yet immersed], for he renders impure the bottom [layer] of what lies beneath him in like degree to the top. Higher than this: the abnormal genital discharge of a <em>zav</em> [man with an abnormal genital discharge], his spittle, his semen, and his urine, and the blood of the menstruant, for they convey impurity both by contact and by carrying. Higher than these: the impurity of a saddle, for it conveys impurity even to what lies beneath a heavy stone. Higher than a saddle: what one lies upon, since contact with it is equal to carrying it. Higher than what one lies upon: a <em>zav</em>; for a <em>zav</em> conveys impurity to what he lies upon, while what he lies upon does not convey the same level of impurity to that upon which it lies.
  Higher than the <em>zav</em> is the <em>zavah</em> [a woman with an abnormal genital discharge], for she conveys impurity to one who has intercourse with her. Higher than the <em>zavah</em>: the <em>metzora</em>, for he renders impure by entering. Higher than the <em>metzora</em>: bone the size of a barley grain, for it coneys seven-day impurity. More severe than all of these: a corpse, for it conveys impurity via overshadowing, which nothing else can do. 
  Ten degrees of impurity are derived from a person: the one whose atonement is incomplete [who has not brought a required sacrifice] is prohibited to eat <em>kodesh</em> [portions of offerings assigned to the priests], but permitted to eat <em>terumah</em> [portion of crops, wine, etc. required to be given to a priest] and <em>ma'aser</em> [tithes]. Should he become a <em>tevul yom</em> [immerses in the day and becomes pure upon nightfall], he is forbidden to eat <em>kodesh</em> and <em>terumah</em>,  but permitted to eat <em>ma'aser</em>. Should he have a nocturnal emission, he is prohibited in all three. Should he have intercourse with a <em>niddah</em>, he transmits impurity to the bottom layer lying beneath him as he does to the top. Should he become a <em>zav</em> and has seen two appearances [of discharge], he transmits impurity to the bed and the chair and needs to immerse in running water, but he is exempt from [bringing] an offering. If he sees a third [appearance], he is bound [to bring] an offering. Should he become a quarantined [suspected] <em>metzora</em>, he transmits impurity by entering [a house], but is exempt from loosening [hair], from tearing [of clothing], from shaving, and from the [offering of the] birds. But if he is declared a <em>metzora</em>, he is obligated in all of them. If a limb without enough flesh on it is separated from him, it transmits impurity through contact and through carrying, but it does not transmit impurity in a tent. And if there is enough flesh on it, then it transmits impurity through contact, and through carrying and in the tent. The measure of flesh that is sufficient is enough to bring up a scab. Rabbi Yehuda says, If there is enough [flesh] in one place to surround it with the thread of the woof, it is able to bring up a scab. 
  There are ten degrees of holiness. The land of Israel is holier than any other land. Wherein lies its holiness? In that from it are brought the <em>omer</em> [barley offering brought on the second day of Passover], the first fruits, and the two loaves [offered on Shavuot], which may not be brought from any other land.
  The walled cities are still more holy, in that they must send forth the <em>metzoraim</em> from their midst, and they may carry around a corpse therein as far as necessary, but once it is taken out, they may not bring it back.
  Inside the wall [of Jerusalem] is more holy than these, because there the less holy [offerings] and the second tithe are eaten. The Temple Mount has greater sanctity, because men and women with discharges, menstruating women, and women who have given birth may not enter there. The <i>Cheil</i> [a low fence around the Temple, which served as a boundary, beyond which entry to those impure was prohibited] has higher sanctity, because gentiles and people contaminated with corpse impurity may not enter there. The women's courtyard has higher sanctity, because a <em>tevul yom</em> may not enter there, but they are not liable for a sin offering for doing so. The Israelites' courtyard has higher sanctity, because one who lacks atonement may not enter there, and is liable for a sin offering for doing so. The priests' courtyard has higher sanctity, because the Israelites may not enter there except at the time of their [ritual] requirements: the laying on of hands, the slaughter, and the wave-offering. 
  Between the porch and the altar has still higher sanctity, because [priests] with blemishes and loosened hair may not enter there. The sanctuary has higher sanctity, because no one may enter there who has not washed their hands and feet. The holy of holies has greater sanctity than these, because no one may enter there except the High Priest on the Day of Atonement at the time of the service. Rabbi Yose said: In five ways [the area] between the porch and the altar is equal to the sanctuary because [priests] with blemishes, loosened hair, who have consumed wine, and who have not washed their hands and feet may not enter there, and they separate themselves from between the porch and the altar at the time of [the offering of the] incense. 
  
  
  
  Wooden vessels, leather vessels, bone vessels and glass vessels - their flat surfaces are pure and their concave surfaces are impure. If they break [and are impure], they become pure. If someone went back and made vessels from [the broken pieces], they can be rendered impure from then and onward. Clay vessels and lye vessels are equal in [the manner of their] impurity - they can be rendered and render [objects] impure in its interior space; and render impure by [contact] with its exterior, but do not become impure by [contact] from its outside; and their breaking [if they are impure] is their purification.
  The smaller clay vessels or their bottoms or their sides - [if they] sit upright without something to support them - their measurement [to be eligible for impurity] is enough [to store oil] to smear an infant. [This is in the case that these items only ever had the capacity of] up to a <i>log</i> (about a third of  liter); from a <i>log</i> to a <i>seah</i> (slightly over eight liters), [the measurement required for eligibility] is a <i>revi'it</i> (about 86 cubic centimeters); from one <i>seah</i> to two <i>seah</i>, half a <i>log</i>; from two <i>seah</i> to three [or even] to five <i>seah</i>, a <i>log</i> - these are the words of Rabbi Yishmael. Rabbi Akiva says, "I do not give them a measurement [to determine what is required for eligibility], but rather the smaller clay vessels or their bottoms or their sides - [if they] sit upright without something to support them - their measurement is enough to smear an infant. [This is in the case that these items were ever only] up to a small pot; from small pots to Lyddean barrels, [the measurement required] is a <i>revi'it</i>; from Lyddean [barrels] to Bethlehemite ones, half a <i>log</i>; from Bethlehemite ones to large vats, a <i>log</i>." Rabban Yochanan be Zakkai says, "The measurement for large vats is two <i>log</i>." Gallilean jars and firkins - the [required measurement] of their bottoms is any bit, but they do not have sides [that can become impure by themselves].
  The pure ones (that cannot be rendered impure) among clay vessels are: a tray that does not have a rim; a split poker; a roaster's rack; pipes - even though [they are] bent, [or] even though [they have sections that] accumulate; a cover that is made for a bread basket; jars that are designed [to cover] grapes; a sailor's [floating] barrel; inner barrels at the bottom of the crushing [vats]; a bed; a chair; a bench, a table; a boat; a clay lamp - behold, these are pure. This is the general principle - every clay vessel that does not have an interior does not have an exterior [that can become impure].  
  A lantern that has a receptacle for oil [can become] impure; and one that does not is pure. A mold of craftsmen - when he begins [his work] with it - it is pure; and when he finishes with it - it [can become] impure. A funnel of homeowners is pure; and of peddlers [can become] impure, because it is [used] for measurement. These are the words of Rabbi Yehuda ben Betira. Rabbi Akiva says, "Because he leans it on its side and has the customer smell from it." 
  The covers of wine jugs and oil jugs and covers of Nurean barrels are pure. But if they are made fit for usage [in their own right], they [can become] impure. A pan cover - when it is perforated or [its back] is pointed - is pure. If it is not perforated and does not have a pointed [back], it [can become] impure, because [a woman] strains the vegetable into it. Rabbi Eliezer bar Tsadok says, "Because she flips the vegetable concentrate onto it."  
  A chipped vessel found in the kiln - until its production is finished - is pure; from when its production is finished - it [can become] impure. A <i>titros</i> (a particular type of perforated vessel) - Rabbi Eliezer bar Tsadok determines it to be pure; Rabbi Yose determines it to be [able to become] impure because it releases [slowly].
  The impure ones (that can be rendered impure) among clay vessels are: a tray with a rim; a full (unsplit) poker; a tray full of pans (connected to it). If one of [the pans] is rendered impure by a crawling creature (<i>sherets</i>), not all of them became impure. If there is surplus to the lid (above the tops of the pans), if one of them became impure, they all became impure. And so [too] a spice-tray of clay and quillsets. And a spice-tray of wood in which one [compartment] became impure from a liquid, its fellow did not become impure. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says, "We divide its thickness - that [part] which serves the pure is pure and that which serves the impure is impure. If there is a surplus rim - if one [compartment] becomes impure, its fellow becomes impure. 
  A lamphead [can become] impure. And the hollow of a lamp renders [objects] impure in its interior space. The comb of a holding vessel - Rabbi Eliezer determines it to be pure and the sages determine it to be [able to become] impure.
  
  
  
  The measure of [a hole in] a clay vessel to make it pure, if it is used for foods, its measure is with olives. If it is used for liquids, its measure is with liquids. If it is used for this [foods] and for that [liquids], they impose the stringent ruling on it, with olives. 
  Concerning a jug, its measure [of a hole large enough to render it ritually pure] is with dried figs, [these are] the words of Rabbi Shimon. Rabbi Yehudah says, with nuts. Rabbi Meir says, with olives. Concerning a stew pot and a cooking pot, their measure is with olives. Concerning an [oil] cruse and a pitcher, their measure is with oil. Concerning a jug [for oil or wine], its measure is with water. Rabbi Shimon says, concerning these three, [their measure] is with seeds. Concerning a lamp, its measure is with oil. R. Eliezer says "with a small perutah."  Concerning a lamp whose spout has been taken, it is clean. And one [made] of clay whose spout is burned by the wick, it is clean.   
  A jug which had a hole which was repaired with pitch, and it was then broken: if there is in the place of the pitch [an area large] enough to hold a <em>revi'it</em>, it is still impure because it did not lose the status of a vessel.  If it was made of earthenware and it was pierced and repaired with pitch, even if it holds a <em>revi'it</em> it is pure because it lost the status of a vessel. 
  A jar that is broken, and it is plastered with dung, even if when the dung is removed the shards will fall apart, [can become] impure because it retains the status of a vessel. If it was broken and shards from it are stuck together, or shards are brought from another place and plastered with dung, even if when the dung is removed the shards remain together, it is pure, because it has lost the status of a vessel. If there is a shard that can hold a <em>revi'it</em>, the whole [vessel] is susceptible to impurity by contact, and [what is] opposite from it is made impure through the air. 
  If an intact clay vessel is plastered, Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Shimon [declare] it susceptible to impurity. The Sages say, if an intact clay vessel is plastered, it is not subject to impurity. And an unsound vessel  may become impure [if plastered].  And so also for the [clay] lining of a gourd. 
  The pulp used to line large jars is subject to ritual impurity through touch.  The stopper of a jar is not [considered] connected [to the jar].  Whatever touches the plaster of the oven [may become] impure. 
  If a vessel for heating water is plastered with potter's clay or kaolin, whatever touches the clay is subject to impurity, but whatever touches the kaolin is not subject to impurity. A kettle that was perforated and repaired with pitch, Rabbi Yose [declares it] pure because it is not able to hold hot water as [it can hold] cold [water]. And so he says with regard to vessels of pitch. Vessels of copper plastered with pitch, they are pure. But if [they are] for wine, they are subject to impurity. 
  A jar which was perforated and repaired with more pitch than needed, whatever touches the [pitch that is] necessary may become impure.  [Whatever touches] the extra pitch remains pure. Pitch that drops on a jar, whatever touches it is pure. A funnel [made of] wood or of clay which is plugged with pitch, Rabbi Eliezer ben Azariah declares it subject to become impure. Rabbi Akiva declares it subject to become impure if it is of wood, but not if it is of clay. Rabbi Yose declares both of them pure. 
  
  
  
  A piece of pottery, which cannot stand because of its handle or because it has a pointed bottom, is pure [i.e., not susceptible to ritual impurity]. If the handle broke off or the point was broken off, it is pure. Rabbi Yehudah says it is impure [i.e., capable of contracting ritual impurity]. A jug which lost a piece but can still contain with its sides, or became divided like two troughs - Rabbi Yehudah says it is pure, but the Sages say it is impure.  
  A jug which broke and cannot be carried while holding half a <em>kav</em> of dried figs is pure. A defective vessel which cracked and can no longer hold liquids, even though it can still hold food, is pure, because a broken utensil cannot be considered to become further broken. 
  What is considered a defective vessel?  Any whose handles were broken off. If it had hollow knobs, if it can hold olives it can become impure by touching and can make things opposite it impure through the air. If it cannot hold olives it can become impure by touching but does not make things opposite it impure.  If it was laying on its side like a <em>katedrah</em> chair - if it can hold olives, it can become impure by touching and can make things opposite it impure through the air; if it cannot hold olives, it can become impure by touching but does not make things opposite it impure through the air. The bottom of a pointed vessel and the bottom of Sidonian cups, even though they cannot rest without support, they are impure because they were made this way. 
  An earthenware vessel that has three lips, if the inner one extends, everything is pure; if the outer one extends, everything is impure.  If the middle one extends, from it to the inside is impure, and from it to the outside is pure.  If they were all even, Rabbi Yehudah says the middle one is divided, but the Sages say the entire vessel is pure. When does an earthenware vessel become susceptible to impurity? When it is fired in the kiln, and this completes its work. 
  
  
  
  An oven's minimum size [to be able to become ritually impure] is four  <em>tefachim</em> [handbreadths in height] and its remainder [that remains impure when it is broken] is four <em>tefachim</em>; the words of Rabbi Meir. The Sages say, this is only true regarding a large oven; regarding a small oven, however, it beginning [point] is any [size] and its remainder is a majority [of its size] once its manufacture has been completed. What is the completion of its manufacture? Once it is kindled enough to bake a sponge cake in it. Rabbi Yehudah says, once it is kindled enough to bake a sponge cake [as] in an old oven.
  A stove's minimum size [to become ritually impure] is three [fingerbreadths in height] and its remainder [that remains impure when it is broken] is three [fingerbreadths , once its manufacture is complete. What is the completion of its manufacture? When it is kindled enough to cook the easiest-cooking of eggs on it, scrambled and placed in a pot. A <em>kupach</em> [small stove or brazier] that is made to bake has the same measurement requirements as an oven. If it was made to cook, its measurement requirements are that of a stove. A stone that protrudes a <em>tefach</em> from the oven or a distance of three fingers from a stove is connected. If it protrudes from a <em>kupach</em> made for baking, the measurement is that of the oven. If from a <em>kupach</em> made to cook, its measurement is that of a stove. Rabbi Yehudah says, they did not say tefach except [when the protrusion is] between the oven and the wall. If there were two ovens next to each other, give each one a <em>tefach</em> and the rest is pure.
  The rim of a stove is pure. The surrounding brickwork of an oven, when it is [at least] four <em>tefachim</em> tall, becomes impure through [an impure object's] touch or through [the object] in its air[space]. Less than this, it is pure. If it is attached [to the oven], even if on three stones, it is impure. The holder for an oil jug, the holder for a spicebox or the holder of a light on a stove, become impure through [an impure object's] contact [with the stove] but are not impure through its air[space]. These are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yishmael says they are pure.
  An oven that was heated from its outside, or that was that was heated without intent to complete it, or that was heated [while still] in the craftsman's house, is susceptible to impurity. There was a story that a fire fell on the ovens of Kfar Signa, and the story came to Yavneh, and Raban Gamliel ruled them susceptible to impurity.
  The extension on a householder's oven [a thick rim on top] is pure. But that of a baker's oven is impure because he rests a spit on it. Rabbi Yochanan Hasandlar says: [It is impure] because he bakes with it [by placing dough on the inside of the rim] when he is pressured. Similarly, the extension of an olive cooker's cauldron is impure. But that of a dyer's cauldron is pure.
  An oven half filled with earth - the part from the earth downwards contracts impurity by contact; the part from the earth upwards contracts impurity [also] from its air-space. If the oven is placed over the mouth of a cistern or over that of a cellar and a stone is placed at its side:  Rabbi Yehudah says: if when heated from below it becomes also heated above it is susceptible to impurity. But the Sages say: since it was heated in any case it is susceptible to impurity.   
  An oven which contracted impurity - how is it purified?  It is divided into three parts and the plastering is scraped off so that [the oven] touches the ground. Rabbi Meir says: it is not necessary to scrape off the plastering nor is it necessary for [the oven] to touch the ground. Rather he reduces it within to a height of less than four <em>tefachim</em>.  Rabbi Shimon says: it must be moved [from its position]. If it is divided into two parts, one large and the other small, the larger remains impure and the smaller becomes pure. If it is divided into three parts one of which was as big as the other two together, the big one remains impure and the two small ones become pure. 
  If [the oven] is cut up by its width into rings that are each less than four <em>tefachim</em> in height, it is pure.  If it is subsequently plastered over with clay, it becomes susceptible to impurity when it is heated to a degree that is enough for baking sponge cakes.  If he distanced the plastering, and he put sand or gravel between it and the oven sides — of such an oven they said, "A menstruant as well as a ritually pure woman may bake in it and it remains ritually pure."  
  An oven which came cut up in sections from the craftsman's house and hoops are made for it and put on it, is pure. If it contracts impurity, and then the hoops are removed, it is pure. If he put them back on, it remains pure. If it is plastered with clay, it becomes susceptible to impurity, and there is no need to heat it since it was once heated. 
  If an oven is cut into rings, and sand is placed between the rings,   Rabbi Eliezer says it is pure. But the sages say it is susceptible to impurity. This is the oven of Akhnai. Arabian vats, which are holes dug in the ground and plastered with clay - if the plastering can stand by itself it is susceptible to impurity; otherwise, it is not susceptible.  This is the oven of Ben Dinai. 
  An oven of stone or of metal is pure [according to the rules applied to ovens], but [the metal one] is subject to impurity as a metal vessel. If a hole was made in it, or if it was damaged or cracked, and lined with plaster or with a rim of clay, it is subject to impurity. What must be the size of the hole [for it to be pure]? It must be big enough for the flame to come through.  The same applies also to a stove: a stove of stone or of metal is not subject to impurity [according to the laws for a stove]. But [the metal one] is subject to impurity as a metal vessel. If a hole was made in it or if it was damaged or cracked but he made props for it, it is impure. If he lined it with clay, whether inside or outside, it remains pure.  Rabbi Yehudah says: if [the lining was] inside, it is subject to impurity; but if outside, it remains pure. 
  
  
  
  One who puts three props into the ground and joins them [to the ground] with clay so that he can set a pot on them, [the structure] is susceptible to impurity. If he set three nails in the ground so that he could set a pot on them, even though he made a place on the top for the pot to rest, [the structure] is not susceptible to impurity. One who makes a stove of two stones, and joins them [to the ground] with clay, it is susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Yehudah says it is not susceptible to impurity unless he makes a third stone or he places it against a wall.   If one stone [was joined] with clay and the other was not joined with clay, it is not susceptible to impurity.  
  A stone on which he placed [a pot] on it and on an oven, or on it and on a double stove, or on it and on a stove, is susceptible to impurity. [If he set the pot] on it and on another stone, on it and on a rock, or on it and on a wall, it is not susceptible to impurity. And such was the stove of the Nazirites in Jerusalem which was set up against a rock. The stove of the butchers: when the stones are placed side by side, if one of the stoves contracted impurity, the others do not become impure.   
  Three stones on which two ovens are made: if one of the outer ones became impure, the half of the middle one that serves the impure one is impure, but the [half of it] that serves the pure one remains pure.  If he removed the pure one, the middle one is completely transferred to the impure one. If he removed the impure one, the middle one is completely transferred to the pure one. If the two outer ones become impure, if the middle stone was large, one outer stone is assigned a part of it that suffices for the support of a pot and the other outer stone a part of it that suffices for the support of a pot, and the remainder is pure. But if it was small, all of it is impure. If he removes the middle stone, if he can set a big pot on it [the stove], they [the outer stones] are impure. If he put it back, they all are pure. If he plastered it [the middle stone] with clay, it becomes susceptible to impurity when it is heated to a degree that suffices for the cooking of an egg.  
  Two stones upon which a stove is made that become impure: if he put a stone near the outer side of the one and another stone near the outer side of the other, [the inner half] of each [of the inner stones] remains impure while [the outer] half of each [of these stones] is pure. If he removed the pure stones, the others return to their impurity. 
  
  
  
  The fire-basket of a householder which was decreased in size to less than three <em>tefachim</em> is susceptible to impurity, because when it is heated from below a pot above would still boil. If [it was decreased in size] further, it is not susceptible to impurity. If [subsequently] a stone or gravel was put into it, it is still not susceptible to impurity. If it was plastered over with clay, it may contract impurity from that point onward. This was Rabbi Yehudah's reply regarding the oven that was placed over the mouth of a cistern or over that of a cellar.   
  A hob that has a receptacle for pots is not subject to impurity under the laws of a stove, but subject to impurity as a receptacle. Whatever touches its sides does not become impure under the laws of a stove.  Its wide side: Rabbi Meir holds it to be pure, but Rabbi Yehudah holds it to be impure. The same law applies also when one turns over  a basket and makes a stove upon it. 
  A double stove which was split into two parts along its length is not subject to impurity.  [If it is split along] its breadth, it is subject to impurity. A one-pot stove which was split into two parts, by its length or by its width, is not susceptible to impurity. The extension around a stove, whenever it is three finger-breadths high, contracts impurity by contact and also through its air-space, but if it is less than this it contracts impurity through contact and not through its air-space. How do they determine the air-space ? Rabbi Yishmael says: He puts a spit from above to below and through that distance it contracts impurity through the air-space. Rabbi Eliezer ben Ya'acov says: If the stove contracted impurity, the extension is also impure, but if the extension becomes impure, the stove does not become impure. 
  If it [the extension] was detached from the stove, if it is three finger-breadths high it contracts impurity by contact and through its air-space; if it was lower or if it was smooth, it is not subject to impurity. If the clay tripod of a stove is three finger-breadths high, it contracts impurity by contact and through its air-space. If it is lower, all the more so does it contract impurity, even if [its props] were four in number.    
  If he removed one of them [i.e. the props of the tripod], the remaining ones contract impurity by contact but not through air-space; the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says that they are not subject to impurity.  If he made two props, one opposite the other, they contract impurity by contact and through air-space; the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says that they are pure. If they were more than three finger-breadths high, the parts that are three finger-breadths high and below contract impurity by contact and through air-space, but the parts that are more than three finger-breadths high contract impurity by contact and not through air-space; the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says that they are pure. If they extend beyond the rim [of the stove], the parts which are within three finger-breadths [of the rim] contract impurity by contact and through air-space, and those parts that extend out more than three finger-breadths contract impurity by contact but not through air-space; the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon says that they are pure.  
  How do they measure them [the three finger-breadths at issue]? Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: he puts the measuring-rod between them, from the measuring-rod and outwards is pure; from the measuring-rod and inwards, including the place of the measuring-rod itself, is impure. 
  
  
  
  An oven which they partitioned with boards or hangings, and in it was found a <em>sheretz</em> [one of a number of species of reptiles and rodents] in one compartment, the entire oven is impure. If a hive is broken and its gap stopped up with straw, and it was suspended within the air-space of an oven while a <em>sheretz</em> was within it [the hive], the oven becomes impure. If a <em>sheretz</em> was within the oven, any food within the hive becomes impure. But Rabbi Eliezer says that it is pure. Rabbi Eliezer said: If it affords protection in the case of a corpse, which is more consequential, should it not afford protection in the case of an earthenware vessel, which is less consequential? They said to him: If it affords protection in the case of a corpse, it is because tents may be divided; should it also afford protection in the case of an earthenware vessel, which may not be divided? 
  If the hive was complete, and so too in the case of a basket or a skin-bottle, and a <em>sheretz</em> was within it, the oven remains pure.    If the <em>sheretz</em> was in the oven, any food in the hive remains pure. If a hole was made in it: A vessel that is used for food must have a hole large enough for olives to fall through. If it is used for liquids the hole must be large enough for liquids to pass through it. And if it is used for either, they place upon it the greater restriction: the hole need only be large enough for liquids to pass through it.   
  Netting placed over the mouth of an oven and slightly sinking into it, and having no frame: If a <em>sheretz</em> was in it, the oven becomes impure; if the <em>sheretz</em> was in the oven, the food in the netting becomes impure, since only vessels afford protection against an impurity in an earthen vessel. If a barrel full of pure liquids is placed beneath the bottom of an oven, and a <em>sheretz</em> is in the oven – the barrel and the liquids remain pure. If it was inverted, with its mouth over the air-space of the oven, and a <em>sheretz</em> was in the oven, the liquid that clings to the sides of the barrel remains pure.  
  A pot which was placed in an oven—if a <em>sheretz</em> was in the oven, the pot remains pure, since an earthenware vessel does not impart impurity to vessels. If it contained dripping liquid, it [the liquid] contracts impurity and the pot also becomes impure. It is as if this one says, "That which made you unclean did not make me unclean, but you have made me unclean." 
  If a rooster swallowed a <em>sheretz</em> and fell within the air-space of an oven, the oven remains pure. If the rooster died, the oven becomes impure. If a <em>sheretz</em> was found in an oven, any bread in it contracts second degree impurity since the oven is of the first degree.  
  If a leavening pot with a tightly fitting lid was put in an oven, and there was some leaven and a <em>sheretz</em> within the pot, but there was a partition of inedible bread between them, the oven is impure but the leaven is pure. But if there was an olive's bulk of a corpse [in the pot] both the oven and the house are impure, but the leaven remains pure. If in the partition [in the leaven pot] there was an opening of one handbreadth, all become impure. 
  If a <em>sheretz</em> was found in the eye-hole of an oven or of a double stove or of a single stove: If it was outside the inner edge, [the oven or stove] is pure. If it [the oven] was in the open air, even if it was an olive's bulk of corpse, it is pure. If there was [in the eye-hole] an opening of one handbreadth, it is all impure. 
  If [a <em>sheretz</em>] was found in the [place in a stove] where wood is put - Rabbi Yehudah says: If it was within the outer edge, [the stove] becomes impure. But the Sages say: If it was outside the inner edge [the stove] remains pure. Rabbi Yose says: If it was found beneath the spot where the pot is placed and inwards, [the stove] becomes impure, but if it is beneath the spot where the pot is set and outwards, it remains pure. If it was found on the place where the bath-keeper sits, or where the dyer sits, or where the olive-boilers sit, [the stove] remains pure. It only becomes impure when [the <em>sheretz</em>] is found in the enclosed part and inwards. 
  A pit [smelting furnace] which has a place on which a pot may be set is subject to ritual impurity. And so also an oven of glass-blowers, if it has a place on which a pot may be set, it is subject to impurity. The furnace of lime-burners, or of glaziers, or of potters is not subject to impurity.  A large oven: If it has a rim, it is subject to impurity. Rabbi Yehudah says: If it has coverings. Rabban Gamliel says: if it has edges.   
  If a person who came in contact with one who has contracted corpse impurity had food or liquids in his mouth, and he put his head into the air-space of an oven that was pure, they cause the oven to become impure. If a person who was ritually pure had food or liquids in his mouth, and he put his head into the air-space of an oven that was impure, [the food and drink] become impure. If a person was eating a pressed fig with impure hands, and he put his hand into his mouth to remove a small stone: Rabbi Meir declares [the fig] to be impure. But Rabbi Yehudah declares it pure. Rabbi Yose says: If he turned it over [in his mouth] it [the fig] is impure, but if he did not turn it over [the fig] is pure. If the person had a coin in his mouth, Rabbi Yose says: if he kept it there to relieve his thirst, it becomes impure.  
  If [an impure] woman had milk dripping from her breasts, and it fell into the air-space of an oven, the oven becomes impure, since a liquid conveys impurity regardless of whether one wanted it there or not. If she was sweeping [the oven] out, and a thorn pricked her and she bled, or if she burnt herself and put her finger into her mouth, the oven becomes impure.   
  
  
  
  A needle or a ring which was found in the floor of an oven, and they can be seen but do not protrude into the oven - if one bakes dough and it touches them, [the oven] is impure. Regarding which dough did they speak? With regard to ordinary dough. If they are found in the plaster of an oven with a tightly fitting lid: If [the oven is] impure, they are impure; if [the oven is] pure, they are pure. If they are found in the stopper of a jar: If on the sides, they are impure. If opposite the mouth, they are pure. If they can be seen in it, but they do not enter its airspace, they are pure. If they sink into it, and there is [plaster] underneath them as thick as garlic peel, they are pure. 
  A jar that was full of pure liquids, with a siphon in it, and it had a tightly fitting cover and it was in a tent in which there was a corpse:  Beit Shammai says: Both the jar and the liquids are pure, but the siphon is impure. And Beit Hillel says: The siphon also is clean. Beit Hillel reversed its position and ruled in agreement with Beit Shammai.  
  If a <em>sheretz</em> [one of a number of small creatures which transmit impurity] is found beneath the bottom of an oven, the oven remains pure, for I can say that it fell there while it was still alive and that it died only now. If a needle or a ring is found beneath the bottom of an oven, the oven remains pure, for I can say that they were there before the oven arrived.  If they were found in the wood ashes, the oven is impure since there is nothing upon which to base an assumption [of purity]. 
  If a sponge absorbed impure liquids and its outer surface became dry, and it fell into the air-space of an oven, the oven is impure, for the liquid would eventually come out. And the same with regard to a piece of turnip or reed grass. Rabbi Shimon declares [the oven] pure in both these cases.  
  If potsherds that had been used for unclean liquids fell into the air-space of an oven, if the oven was heated, it becomes impure, for the liquid would eventually come out. And the same with regard to fresh olive pomace, but if it was old, the oven remains pure. If it was known that liquid comes out, even after three years, the oven becomes impure.  
  If olive or grape pomace was prepared in purity, and unclean persons trod upon them and afterwards liquids came out from them, they remain pure, since they had originally been prepared in conditions of purity. A spindle hook which was sunk into the spindle, or the iron point into the ox goad, or a ring into a brick, and all these were pure, and then they went into a tent in which there was a corpse, they become impure. If a <em>zav</em> [male suffering from abnormal genital discharge] shifted them they become impure. If they then fell into the air-space of a clean oven, they cause it to be impure. If a loaf of <em>terumah</em> bread [made from the priest's portion, which must remain ritually pure] came in contact with them, it remains pure. 
  If netting was placed over the mouth of an oven, forming a tightly fitting lid, and a split appeared between the oven and the netting, the minimum size [to allow impurity to enter] is that of the circumference of the tip of an ox goad that cannot actually enter it. Rabbi Yehudah says: [Even if it] can enter. If the netting was split, the minimum size is the circumference of the tip of an ox goad that can enter it. Rabbi Yehudah says: [Even if it] cannot enter. If the split was round they do not regard it as straight, and still the minimum size must be the circumference of the tip of an ox goad that can actually enter. 
  If an oven has a hole made in its "eye", the minimum size [for it to leave the category of being tightly closed] is the circumference of a spindle staff that can enter and come out while burning [without being extinguished]. Rabbi Yehudah says: [Even if it] cannot burn. If the hole was at its side, the minimum size must be that of the circumference of a spindle staff that can enter and come out while it is not burning.    Rabbi Judah says: While burning. Rabbi Shimon says: if the hole is in the middle its size must be large enough so that it can actually enter, but if it was at the side it need not be able to actually enter. And similarly he used to say concerning the stopper of a jar which was pierced: The minimum size is the circumference of the second knot in a rye stalk. If the hole was in the middle the stalk must be able to enter, and if at the side it need not be able to enter. And similarly he used to say concerning large stone jars whose stoppers became pierced. The minimum size is the circumference of the second knot in a reed. If the hole was in the middle the reed must be able to enter it, and if it was at the side the reed need not be able to enter it. When is this so? When the jars were made for wine, but if they were made for other liquids, if they have even the smallest hole, they are impure. When is this so? When the holes were not made by a person, but if they were made by a person, if they have even the smallest hole, they are impure. If [a different vessel] was pierced [the rule to render it not tightly covered] is as follows: If the vessel was used for food, [the hole] must be large enough to let olives fall out; if for liquids, [a hole] that lets out liquids; if for both, they impose the greater restriction, that for a tightly fitting cover, [the size of the hole need only be] one that admits a liquid.  
  
  
  
  The following vessels protect their contents when they have a tightly fitting cover:  those made of cattle dung, of stone, of clay, of earthenware, of sodium carbonate, of the bones of a fish or of its skin, or of the bones of any animal of the sea or of its skin, and wooden vessels that not subject to impurity. They protect whether [the covers close] their mouths or their sides, whether they stand on their bottoms or lean on their sides. If they were turned over with their mouths downwards they afford protection to all that is beneath them to the deep. Rabbi Eliezer declares this impure. These protect everything, except that an earthen vessel protects only foods, liquids and earthen vessels.    
  How do they tightly fit the cover? With lime or gypsum, pitch or wax, mud or excrement, crude clay or potter's clay, or any substance that is used for plastering. One may not make a tightly fitting cover with tin or with lead because though it is a covering, it is not tightly fitting. One may not make a tightly fitting cover with swollen fig-cakes or with dough that was kneaded with fruit juice, since it might cause it to become unfit. If he did make a tightly fitting cover [from such material] it protects. 
  A stopper of a jar that is loose but does not fall out: Rabbi Yehudah says: it protects. But the Sages say: it does not protect. If its finger-hold was sunk within the jar and a <em>sheretz</em> was in it, the jar becomes unclean. If the <em>sheretz</em> was in the jar, any food in it becomes unclean. 
  A ball or coil of reed grass which was placed over the mouth of a jar: if its sides were plastered, it does not protect unless it was also plastered above and below. The same is true with regard to a patch of cloth. If it was of paper or leather and bound with a cord - if he plastered it from the sides, it protects. 
  A jar whose outer layer had been peeled off but its pitch [lining] remained intact, or also pots of fish brine which were sealed up with gypsum at a level with the brim: Rabbi Yehudah says: they do not protect. But the Sages say: they do protect. 
  A jar which had a hole in it and wine lees stopped it up, they protect it.    If he stopped it up with a vine shoot [it does not protect] until he plasters it at the sides. If there were two vine shoots, [it does not protect] unless he plastered it at the sides and also between the one shoot and the other. If a planed board was placed over the mouth of an oven, it protects if he plastered it at the sides. If there were two planed boards [it does not protect] unless he plastered at the sides and also between the one board and the other. If they were fastened together with pegs or with bamboo joints there is no need for them to be plastered in the middle.  
  If an old oven was within a new one, and netting was over the mouth of the old [some versions: new] one: If removing the old one would cause the netting to drop, all of it it is impure; but if not, it is all pure. If a new oven was within an old one and netting was over the mouth of the old one: If there was not a <em>tefach</em> of space between the new oven and the netting, all the contents of the new one are pure.   
  [Earthenware] pans one placed within the other and their rims were on the same level, and there was a <em>sheretz</em> in the upper one or in the lower one, that pan alone becomes impure but all the others remain pure. If [they were perforated] to the extent of admitting a liquid, and the <em>sheretz</em> was in the uppermost one, all become impure. If in the lowest one, that one is impure while the others remain pure. If the <em>sheretz</em> was in the uppermost one and the lowest projected above it, both are impure [and any between them are pure]. If the <em>sheretz</em> was in the uppermost and the lowest projected above it, any that have liquid enough to wet a hand in them become impure.
  
  
  
  Metal vessels, whether they are simple or form a receptacle, are susceptible to impurity. If they break, they become clean. If they were re-made into vessels, they revert to their former impurity. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: this does not apply to every form of impurity but only to that contracted from a corpse. 
  Every metal vessel that has a name of its own is susceptible to impurity, except for a door, a bolt, a lock, a socket under a hinge, a hinge, a clapper, and the [threshold] groove under a door post, since these are intended to be attached to the ground.  
  One who makes vessels from iron ore, from smelted iron, from the hoop of a wheel, from sheets, from plating, from the bases, rims or handles of vessels, from chippings or filings, they are pure. Rabbi Yochanan ben Nuri says: even from those made of pieces of vessels.  From pieces of vessels, from pieces of old vessels, or from nails that were known to have been made from vessels, are impure. From ordinary nails: Beit Shammai says: they are impure; and Beit Hillel says that they are pure. 
  Ritually impure iron which was smelted together with pure iron: if the greater part was from the impure iron, [the vessel made from the mixture] is impure; if the greater part was from the pure [iron], [the vessel is] pure. If each was half, it is impure. The same law also applies to a mixture of cement and cattle dung. A door bolt is susceptible to impurity, but [one of wood] that is covered with metal is not susceptible to impurity. The clutch and the crosspiece [of a lock] are susceptible to impurity. A door-bolt: Rabbi Yehoshua says: he may remove it from one door and hang it on another on Shabbat. Rabbi Tarfon says: it is to him like all other vessels and it may be carried about in a courtyard. 
  The scorpion [-shaped] bit of a bridle is susceptible to impurity, but the cheek-pieces are not susceptible. Rabbi Eliezer declares the cheek-pieces susceptible to impurity. But the Sages say that only the scorpion-bit is susceptible to impurity. And when they are joined together it is all susceptible to impurity. 
  A metal spindle-knob: Rabbi Akiva declares it susceptible to impurity, but the Sages declare it not susceptible. If it was only plated [with metal] it is pure. A spindle, a distaff, a rod, a double flute and a pipe: if they are of metal they are susceptible to impurity, but if they are only plated [with metal] they are pure. A double flute: if it has a receptacle for the wings it is susceptible to impurity in either case.   
  A curved horn is susceptible to impurity but a straight one is not susceptible to impurity. If its mouthpiece was covered with metal it is impure. If its broad side [is covered with metal]: Rabbi Tarfon says it is susceptible to impurity, but the Sages say it is not susceptible to impurity. When they are joined together it is all susceptible to impurity. Similarly: the branches of a candlestick are not susceptible to impurity, but the cups and the base are susceptible to impurity. When they are joined together it is all susceptible to impurity. 
  A helmet is susceptible to impurity but the cheek-pieces are not susceptible. But if they have a receptacle for water they are susceptible to impurity. All weapons of war are susceptible to impurity: a javelin, a spear-head, metal boots, and a breastplate are susceptible to impurity.  All women's ornaments are susceptible to impurity: a "city of gold" [a kind of tiara], a necklace, earrings, finger-rings, a ring whether it has a seal or does not have a seal, and nose-rings. A necklace which has metal beads on a thread of flax or wool and the thread broke, the beads are still susceptible to impurity, since each one is a vessel in itself. A thread of metal and the beads were of precious stones or pearls or glass, and the beads were broken while the thread alone remained, it is still susceptible to impurity. The remnants of a necklace [are susceptible] as long as there is enough for the neck of a little girl.  Rabbi Eliezer says: even if only one ring remained it is susceptible, for they hang it around the neck. 
  If an earring was shaped like a pot at its bottom and like a lentil at the top and it fell apart, the pot-shaped section is susceptible to impurity because it is a receptacle, while the lentil shaped section is susceptible to impurity in itself. The hook is pure. If it was in the shape of a cluster of grapes and it fell apart, they are pure. 
  
  
  
  A ring for a person is susceptible to impurity. A ring for cattle or for vessels and all other rings are not susceptible to impurity. A beam for arrows is susceptible to impurity, but one for prisoners is pure. A prisoner's collar is susceptible to impurity. A chain that has a lock-piece is susceptible to impurity. But that used for tying up cattle is pure. The chain used by wholesalers is susceptible to impurity. That used by householders is pure. Rabbi Yose said: When is this so? When it comes from one door, but when it comes from two doors or if it had a snail[-shaped] piece at its end, it is susceptible to impurity.   
  If one purchases the scales of wool-dealers, they are subject to impurity, because of the hooks. Of householders, if they have hooks, they are impure. Carriers' hooks are pure. Of merchants, impure. Rabbi Yehudah says, [hooks] of merchants, what is before him is impure, and what is behind him is pure. The hooks of a footstool are impure. Of poles on a bedstead, pure. Of a strongbox, impure. Of a reed-basket, pure. Of a table, impure. Of a wooden lamp, pure. This is the rule: All [hooks] that are attached to something subject to impurity are also subject to impurity. All [hooks] that are attached to something not subject to impurity are also not subject to impurity. All [hooks] that are [detached so that] each one is by itself, are pure.
  The metal cover of a householder's box: Rabban Gamliel declares it impure, and the Sages declare it pure. [Covers of boxes] belonging to doctors are impure. The door to a cabinet: belonging to householders, pure. Belonging to doctors, impure. Potholders are impure. Bars of a grate are pure. The iron-shod press beam of an olive press is impure. Hooks that are in the wall are pure.
  A blood letter's lancet is impure. The style of a sundial is pure. Rabbi Zadok declares it impure. The pin of a weaver is impure. The chest of grist-makers: Rabbi Zadok declares it impure and the Sages declare it pure. If its wagon is made of metal, it is impure.
  A pin that was prepared to be used [as a key] to open and shut is impure. One that is made for guarding is pure. A pin that was prepared to open a jug: Rabbi Akiva declares it impure and the Sages declare it pure, unless they are attached. The pin of a money changer is pure; Rabbi Zadok declares it impure. Three things Rabbi Zadok declares impure that the Sages declare pure: The pin of a money changer, the chest of grist-makers, and the style of a sundial; Rabbi Zadok declares them impure and the Sages declare them pure. 
  Four things Rabban Gamliel declares impure that the Sages declare pure: The metal cover of a householder's box, the hooked handle of a scraper, unfinished metal utensils, and a plank that has split in two. The Sages agree with Rabban Gamliel on a plank split in two, one [part] large and one small, that the large is impure and the small is pure.
  An invalid dinar that was prepared to be hung around a child's neck is impure. So too, an invalid sela that was prepared to be used as a weight is impure. How much can be invalid and be permissible to use? Up until [a] two dinar [coin]. Less than that, it should be cut up.
  The pen-knife, the writing pen, the plumb-line, the plummet, the tool for crowding olives into a vat, the ruler, and the base of the scale are impure. All unfinished wooden instruments are impure except those made of [wood of] the boxwood tree. Rabbi Yehudah says, even one made of an olive shoot is pure until it is trimmed.
  
  
  
  The sword, the knife, the dagger, the spear, the hand sickle, the grain sickle, the hair-pincers, the pair of scissors that were separated - these are subject to impurity. Rabbi Yosi says: [the portion] close to the hand is impure; [the portion] close to the head is pure. Scissors that have been separated in two - Rabbi Yehuda declares them impure, but the Sages declare them pure.
  A <em>koligrifon </em> [tool with one end for placing bread into, and removing it from, the oven, and the other end for raking coals] whose spoon has been removed is susceptible to impurity on account of its teeth [of the rake end]. If its teeth have been removed, it is still susceptible on account of its spoon. A <em>mikchol</em> [used for cleaning out ears and applying eye makeup] whose spoon is missing is susceptible to impurity on account of its point; if its point was missing, it is still susceptible on account of its spoon. A stylus whose writing point is missing is susceptible to impurity on account of its eraser; if its eraser is missing, it is susceptible on account of its writing point. A <em>zoma listra</em> [kitchen tool with a ladle at one end and fork at the other] whose ladle is removed is susceptible to impurity on account of its fork; if its fork is missing, it is susceptible on account of its ladle.  So too with regard to the prong of a mattock. The minimum for all these instruments [to render them subject to ritual impurity]: so long as they can perform their usual work. 
  A coulter [of a plow] that is damaged is susceptible to impurity until its greater part is removed. But if its shaft-socket is broken it is pure.  A hatchet whose cutting edge is lost is susceptible to impurity on account of its splitting edge. If its splitting edge is removed, it remains susceptible on account of its cutting edge. If its shaft-socket is broken it is pure. 
  An ash-rake whose shovel end was removed is susceptible to impurity, since it is like a hammer: the words of Rabbi Meir. The Sages declare it pure. A saw missing every other tooth is pure. But if a <em>m'lo hasit</em> [distance between the splayed thumb and forefinger] of consecutive teeth remained, it is susceptible to impurity. An adze, scalpel, plane, or drill that was damaged is susceptible to impurity. If its steel edge was missing it is clean.  In all these cases if it was split into two, both [parts] remain susceptible to impurity, except for the drill.  The block of a plane by itself is pure. 
  A needle whose eye or point was removed is pure. If he fixed it for stretching [a garment] it is susceptible to impurity. A pack-[needle] whose eye was removed is still susceptible to impurity since one writes with it. If its point was removed it is pure. A stretching-pin is in either case susceptible to impurity. A needle that has become rusty: If the rust blocks it from sewing it is pure, but if not it remains susceptible to impurity. A hook that was straightened out is pure; if it is bent back it resumes its susceptibility to impurity. 
  Wood that serves a metal vessel is susceptible to impurity, but metal that serves a wooden vessel is pure. How so? If a lock is of wood and its clutches are of metal, even if only one of them is so, it is susceptible to impurity; but if the lock is of metal and its clutches are of wood, it is pure. If a ring was of metal and its seal of coral, it is susceptible to impurity; but if the ring was of coral and its seal of metal, it is pure.  The tooth in the plate of a lock or in a key is susceptible to impurity by itself.   
  Ashkelon grappling-irons which broke, but their hooks remained, are susceptible to impurity. If a pitch-fork, winnowing-fan, or rake, and similarly a hair-comb, lost one of its teeth and it was replaced by one of metal, it is susceptible to impurity. And concerning all these Rabbi Yehoshua said: The scribes have here introduced a new principle of law, and I have no explanation to offer.  
  A flax-comb whose teeth were removed but two remained is still susceptible to impurity. If only one [remained] it is pure. As regards all the teeth, each one individually is susceptible to impurity. A wool-comb: if one tooth out of every two was removed it is pure. If three consecutive teeth remained, it is susceptible to impurity. If the outermost tooth was one of them, [the comb] is pure. If two teeth were removed from the comb and made into a pair of tweezers, they are susceptible to impurity. Even if one [was removed] but it was fixed it to be used for a lamp or as a stretching-pin, it is susceptible to impurity.   
  
  
  
  [Broken] metal vessels: what is the minimum size of [for them to be susceptible to impurity]? A bucket - large enough to draw water with it. A kettle - large enough so that water can be heated in it. A boiler - large enough to hold <em>selaim</em> [coins]. A cauldron - large enough to hold jugs. Jugs - large enough to hold <em>perutot</em> [small coins]. Wine-measures - [large enough to hold] wine, and oil-measures - [large enough to hold] oil. Rabbi Eliezer says: for all these, large enough to hold <em>perutot</em>. Rabbi Akiva says: a vessel that lacks trimming its edges is susceptible to impurity, but one that lacks polishing is pure. 
  A staff that he attached to its end a pin like an adze is susceptible to impurity. If he studded it with nails it is susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Shimon says: [it is not subject] until he makes three rows. In all cases if he put them in as ornamentation the staff is pure. If he made a tube on its end, and so also in the case of a door, it is pure. If it was once an independent vessel and then it was fixed to the staff, it remains susceptible to impurity. When does it become pure? Beit Shammai says: when it is damaged; Bet Hillel says: when it is joined on. 
  A builder's staff and a carpenter's axe are susceptible to impurity.    Tent-pegs and surveyors’ pegs are susceptible to impurity. A surveyor's chain is susceptible to impurity. One used for wood is clean. The chain of a big bucket [is susceptible to impurity to a length of] four <em>tefachim</em> [handbreadths], and that of a small one [to a length of] ten <em>tefachim</em>. A blacksmith's stand is susceptible to impurity. A saw whose teeth he made in a hole susceptible to impurity. If he made them from below upwards it is pure. All covers are pure except that of a boiler.
  The parts of a wagon that are susceptible to impurity: the metal yoke, the cross-bar, the side-pieces that hold the straps, the iron bar under the necks of the cattle, the pole-pin, the neck-chain, the trays, the clapper, the hook, and any nail that holds any of its parts together.
  The parts of a wagon not subject to impurity: the yoke that is plated [with metal], side-pieces made for ornamentation, tubes that make noise, the lead at the side of the necks of the cattle, the rim of the wheel, the plates and mountings, and all other nails, all of these are pure. Metal shoes for cattle are susceptible to impurity but those made of cork are pure. A sword: when does it become susceptible to impurity? When it has been polished. And a knife? When it has been sharpened. 
  A metal basket-cover which he made into a mirror: Rabbi Yehudah rules that it is pure, but the Sages rule that it is susceptible to impurity.    A broken mirror: if it does not reflect the greater part of the face, it is pure. 
  Metal vessels become impure and are purified even when broken: the words of Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: they can be made pure only when they are whole. How so? If he sprinkled upon them [the purifying water made with ashes of the red heifer] and on the same day they were broken, and then they were recast, and he sprinkled upon them again on the same day, they are pure, the words of Rabbi Eliezer.  Rabbi Yehoshua says: there can be no effective sprinkling except on the third and the seventh day. 
  A knee-shaped key that was broken off at the knee is pure. Rabbi Yehudah declares it impure because he can open with it from within.    A gamma-shaped [key] that was broken off at its gamma (shorter) arm is pure. If it had the teeth and the gaps it remains impure. If the teeth were removed it is still impure on account of the gaps; if the gaps were blocked up it is impure on account of the teeth. If the teeth were removed and the gaps were blocked up, or if they were merged into one another, it is pure. A mustard-strainer in which three holes opened up in its bottom, and they merged into one another, is pure. And a metal mill-funnel is impure.    
  
  
  
  Wooden vessels, leather vessels, bone vessels or glass vessels: those that are simple are clean and those that have a receptacle are susceptible to impurity. If they are broken they become pure again. If he remade them into vessels they are susceptible to impurity from that point on. A chest, a box, a cupboard, a straw basket, a reed basket, or the tank of an Alexandrian ship, that have flat bottoms and can hold a minimum of forty <em>se'ah</em> in liquid measure, which is equivalent to two <em>kor</em> in dry measure, are pure. All other vessels, whether they can contain the minimum or cannot contain it, are susceptible to impurity: the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehudah says: the large barrel [fixed to] a wagon, the food chests of kings, the tanners trough, the tank of a small ship, and an ark, even though they are able to contain [the minimum], are susceptible to impurity, since they were made to be moved around only with their contents. As to all other vessels, those that can contain [the minimum] are pure and those that cannot contain it are susceptible to impurity. There is no difference between Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah except a baking trough which belongs to a householder.  
  Bakers’ baking-boards are susceptible to impurity, but those of householders are clean. If he dyed them red or saffron they are susceptible to impurity. A bakers’ shelf which was fixed to a wall: Rabbi Eliezer rules that it is pure, and the Sages rule that it is susceptible to impurity. The bakers' frame is susceptible to impurity but one used by a householder is pure. If he made a rim for it on four sides it is susceptible to impurity. If one side was opened it is pure. Rabbi Shimon says: if he fixed it so that he could cut dough on it, it is susceptible to impurity. Similarly, a rolling-pin is susceptible to impurity.   
  The container of the flour-dealers’ sifter is susceptible to impurity, but the one of a householder is pure. Rabbi Yehudah says: also one that is used by a hair braider is susceptible to seat impurity, since girls sit in it and have their hair braided. 
  All hangers are susceptible to impurity, except for a hanger used for a sifter or a sieve that belong to householders: the words of Rabbi Meir.  But the Sages say: all hangers are clean, except for a hanger used for a sifter of flour-dealers, a hanger used for a sieve used on threshing-floors, a hanger used for a hand-sickle and a hanger for a constable's staff, since they aid when the instrument is in use. This is the general rule: [a hanger] that is made to aid when the instrument is in use is susceptible to impurity and one made only for hanging is pure. 
  The grist-dealers’ shovel is susceptible to impurity. The one used in grain stores is pure.  The one used in wine-presses is susceptible to impurity. The one used on threshing- floors is clean. This is the general rule: [a shovel] that is intended to hold anything is susceptible to impurity but one intended only to gather together is pure. 
  Ordinary harps are susceptible to impurity, but the harps of the Levites are pure. All liquids are susceptible to impurity, but the liquids in the [Temple] slaughtering house are clean. All <i>sefarim</i> [books of the Tanach written in holiness, on parchment, and used for personal or public study, or for reading aloud in public. Sometimes the intent is specifically Torah scrolls] convey impurity to the hands, except the scroll [kept in] the Temple courtyard. A wooden toy horse is clean. The belly-lute, the donkey-shaped musical instrument and the <em>erus</em> [a musical instrument used at weddings and funerals] are susceptible to impurity.  Rabbi Judah says: the <em>erus</em> is susceptible to sitting impurity since the wailer sits on it.  A weasel-trap is susceptible to impurity, but a [trap] for mice is pure.  
  
  
  
  A wooden vessel that was broken into two becomes clean, except for a folding table, a dish with compartments for [different kinds of] food, and a householder's footstool. Rabbi Yehudah says: also a double dish and a Babylonian drinking vessel are the same. When do wooden vessels begin to be susceptible to impurity?  A bed and a cot, after they are sanded with fish skin. If the owner determined not to sand them they are susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Meir says: a bed [becomes susceptible to impurity] when he knits three rows of meshes.
  Wooden baskets [become susceptible to impurity] as soon as he rounds their rims and smooths the edges. But those that are made of palm-branches [become susceptible to impurity] even though their ends were not smoothed off on the inside, since they leave them like this. A basket [of reed-grass becomes susceptible to impurity] as soon as he rounds its rims and smooths the edges, and finishes its hanger. A wicker basket for flasks or for cups [is susceptible to impurity] even if he did not smooth the rough ends on the inside, since they leave them like this. 
  Small reed baskets and baskets [become susceptible to impurity] as soon as he rounds off their rims and smooths their rough ends. Large reed baskets and large hampers, as soon he makes two rows for their wide sides. The container of a sifter or a sieve and a cup of the balances, as soon as he makes one circling band for their wide sides. A willow basket, as soon as he makes  two twists around its wide sides. And a rush sieve basket, as soon as he makes one twist around it. 
  When do leather vessels become susceptible to impurity?  A leather pouch, as soon as he stitches its hem, and smooths its rough ends and makes its straps.  Rabbi Yehudah says: so soon as he makes its ears.  A leather apron  [becomes susceptible to  impurity] as soon as he stitches its hem, and smooths its rough ends and makes its strings. Rabbi Yehudah says: as soon as he makes its loops.  A leather bed cover [becomes susceptible] as soon as he stitches its hem and smooths its rough ends. Rabbi Yehudah says: as soon as he makes its straps.  A leather cushion or mattress [becomes susceptible] as soon as he stitches its hem and smooths its rough ends. Rabbi Yehudah says: as soon as he sews it up and leaves open less than five <em>tefachim</em>. 
  A basket [for figs] is susceptible to impurity, but a basket for wheat is not susceptible. Small baskets made of leaves are pure, but those made of branches are susceptible to impurity. The palm wrapping [in which dates are left] and into which they can be easily put and from which they can easily be taken out is susceptible to impurity, but if this cannot be done without tearing it or untying it, it is pure. 
  The leather glove of winnowers, of travelers, or of flax workers is susceptible to impurity. But the one for dyers or blacksmiths is pure.  Rabbi Yose says: the same applies to the glove of grist dealers. This is the general rule: that which is made for receiving anything is susceptible to impurity, but that which only offers protection against perspiration is pure.   
  The dung bag of a bull, its muzzle, the bottom board of a beehive, and a fan are pure. The cover of a small box is susceptible to impurity; the cover of a clothes chest is pure. The cover of a box, the cover of a basket, a carpenter's vice, a cushion under a box  or its arched cover, a reading-desk for a book, a bolt-socket, a lock-socket, a mezuzah case, a lyre case, a violin case, the block of the turban-makers, a wooden musical toy horse, the clappers of a wailing woman, a poor man's parasol,  bed posts, a tefillin mold, and the mold of string makers — all these are pure.  This is the general rule, Rabbi Yose said: all objects that serve as a protection to objects that a person uses, both when they  are being used and when they are not being used, are susceptible to impurity; but those that [serve them as a  protection] only when they are in use are pure. 
  The sheath of a sword, a knife or a dagger, the case for scissors, or shears or a razor, the case for make-up and the make-up box, the stylus case, the compass case, the tablet case, the case for a board, a quiver and a javelin case — all these are susceptible to impurity. The case for a double flute is susceptible to impurity if the instrument is put in from above, but if it is put in from the side it is pure. A case for flutes—Rabbi Yehudah declares it is pure because he puts it in from the side. The covering of a club, a bow or a spear are all pure. This is the general rule: that which serves as a case is susceptible to impurity, but that which is a covering is pure.  
  
  
  
  All vessels [of wood, leather or bone] that belong to householders [become pure if they become pierced with holes] the size of pomegranates. Rabbi Eliezer says: [the size of the required hole depends] on what it is used for. Gardeners’ vegetable baskets [become pure if the holes in them are] the size of bundles of vegetables. Baskets of householders [become clean if the holes in them are] the size of [bundles] of straws. Those of bath-keepers, if bundles of chaff [will drop through]. Rabbi Yehoshua says: in all these the size is that of pomegranates.  
  A skin bottle [becomes clean if the holes in it are of] a size through which warp-stoppers [can fall out].  If a warp-stopper cannot be held in, but it can still hold a woof-stopper, it remains impure. A dish holder that cannot hold dishes but can still hold trays remains impure. A chamber-pot that cannot hold liquids but can still hold excrement remains impure. Rabban Gamliel declares it pure since people do not usually keep one that is in such a condition.   
  Bread-baskets [become pure if] the size [of their hole is such] that loaves of bread [would fall through]. Papyrus frames into which he inserted reeds from the bottom upwards to strengthen them, are pure.  If he made walls for them, they are susceptible to impurity.  Rabbi Shimon says: if it cannot be lifted up by these walls it is pure.  
  The pomegranates of which they have spoken--three attached to one another. Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: in a sifter or a sieve [the size of the hole must be such that a pomegranate will drop out] when one picks it up and walks about with it. In a basket it must be such [as would allow a pomegranate] to fall through while he hangs it behind him. And all other vessels which  cannot hold pomegranates as, for instance, the quarter <em>kav</em> measure and the half quarter <em>kav</em> measure, and small baskets, the size [of their holes must be] such as would extend over the greater part of  them, the words of Rabbi Meir.  Rabbi Shimon says: [the size of their hole must be such that] olives [could fall through]. If their sides were broken [the size of their hole must be] such as olives would drop through. If they are worn away the size must be such as would allow the objects which are usually kept in them [to drop through]. 
  The pomegranate that is spoken of is neither small nor big, but medium-sized. Why is a Badan pomegranate mentioned? Because they consecrate [i.e., if they are <em>orlah</em> they forbid a mixture to which they are added] even with the smallest amount, these are the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says, to measure the utensils with them. Rabbi Akiva says, they were mentioned for both reasons, to measure the utensils with them and because they consecrate even with the smallest amount. Rabbi Yose said, Badan pomegranates and Geba leeks were only mentioned because they need to be tithed with certainty in every case [e.g., when bought from <em>amei ha'aretz</em>].  
  [The measurement of] the egg that was mentioned is neither large nor small, but medium-sized. Rabbi Yehudah says, Bring the biggest of the big and the smallest of the small, put them in water, and divide the water [that is displaced]. Rabbi Yose said, Who will tell me which is big and which is small? Rather, it is according to the understanding of the observer. 
  [The measurement of] the dried fig that was mentioned is neither large nor small, but medium-sized. Rabbi Yehudah says, The biggest in the land of Israel is the medium-sized of other lands.
  [The measurement of] the olive that was mentioned is neither large and not small, but medium-sized; this is the <em>egori</em> [olive].  The barley-grain that was mentioned is not large and not small, but medium-sized; this is <em>midbarit</em> [barley]. The lentil that was mentioned is neither large nor small, but medium-sized; this is the Egyptian [lentil]. All movable goods impart impurity [by forming a "tent" over a dead body and other items] if they are the thickness of a shepherd's staff - neither large nor small, but average. What is average? Any which has a circumference of a <em>tefach</em>. 
  The <em>amah</em> [cubit] that was mentioned is an average <em>amah</em>, and two <em>amah</em> measures were at the <em>Shushan Habirah</em> [area of the Temple], one in the northeastern corner and one in the southeastern corner. The one which was in the northeastern corner was greater than that of Moses by half a fingerbreadth. The one that was in the southeastern corner was greater than it by half a fingerbreadth; therefore, it is greater than that of Moses by a fingerbreadth. And why did they say [there must be] one large and one small? So that the workmen could take according to the small and return according to the large, so that they would not misappropriate consecrated goods. 
  Rabbi Meir says: all <em>amot</em> were of the medium length  except for that of the golden altar, [and] the horns, the surround  and the  base [of the copper altar]. Rabbi Yehudah says: the cubit used for building was one of six <em>tefachim</em> and that for the vessels was of five <em>tefachim</em>.   
  And sometimes they stated a smaller measure: Liquid and dry measures  were measured with the Italian standard which was the one that was used in the wilderness. Sometimes they stated [a measure]  according to the individual concerned: One who takes the handful of a grain offering; one who takes both hands full of incense; one who  drinks a cheekful on Yom Kippur; and the two meals for an eruv: food for the weekday and not Shabbat, the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehudah says: for Shabbat but not for the weekday. And both intended to give the more lenient ruling. Rabbi Shimon says: two thirds of a loaf, when three [loaves] are made of a <em>kav</em> [of flour]. Rabbi Yochanan ben Beroka says: a loaf that is purchased for a <em>pundion</em> [when the price of wheat] is four <em>se'ah</em> for a <em>sela</em>. 
  And sometimes  they stated a large measure:  A ladleful of corpse mold refers to the big ladle of doctors; the split bean in the case of skin disease refers to the Cilician kind; one who eats on Yom Kippur a quantity of the bulk of a large date, refers to the size of the date and its pit; in the case of skins of wine and oil [the holes] must be as big as their large stopper; in the case of a hole for light that was not made by human hands, the minimum size of it is that of a large fist, referring to the fist of Ben Batiah. Rabbi Yose said: And it is as big as a large human head.  And in the case of one made by human hands, the prescribed size is that of the large drill in the Temple chamber, which is the size of the Italian <em>pundion</em>, or the Neronian <em>sela</em>, or like the hole in a yoke.   
  Anything that lives in the sea is pure, except the sea-dog, because it seeks refuge on dry land: the words of Rabbi Akiva. If one made vessels from what grows in the sea and joined to them anything that grows on land, even if only a thread or a cord, if it is susceptible to impurity, they are impure. 
  There are things that were created on the first day that are susceptible to impurity. On the second day, nothing created is susceptible to impurity. On the third day, there are things susceptible to impurity. On the fourth day and on the fifth day, nothing created is susceptible to impurity except for the wing of the vulture or an ostrich-egg that is plated. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri said: Why should the wing of a vulture be different from all other wings? Anything created on the sixth day is susceptible to impurity. 
  If one makes a receptacle, whatever its size it is susceptible to impurity.  If one makes a couch or a bed, whatever its purpose it is susceptible to impurity. If one makes a wallet from untanned hide or from papyrus, it is susceptible to impurity. A pomegranate, an acorn or a nut which children hollowed out to measure dust, or fixed into a pair of scales, are susceptible to impurity, since the children did the act without intention [to fix the scales to the ground]. 
  An arm of a scale or the leveling-rod that has a compartment in it for metal, and the yoke that has a compartment in it for money, and a poor person's cane that has a compartment in it for water, and a walking stick that has a compartment in it for a mezuzah or pearls - these are susceptible to impurity. And about all of these Rabbi Yochanan ben Zakkai said, "Woe is me if I speak! Woe is me if I do not speak!"
  The base of the goldsmiths’ anvil is susceptible to impurity, but that of the blacksmiths is pure. A sharpening-board which has a receptacle for oil is susceptible to impurity, but one that has none is pure. A writing-tablet that has a receptacle for wax is susceptible to impurity, but one that has none is pure. A straw  mat or a tube of straw: Rabbi Akiva declares it is susceptible to impurity, but Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri declares it pure. Rabbi Shimon says: the hollow stalk of colocynth is subject to the same law. A mat of reeds or rushes is pure. A reed-tube that he cut for receiving anything remains pure until he removes all the pith.  
  
  
  
  A wooden chest:   Beit Shammai says: it is measured on the inside;   and Beit Hillel says: it is measured on the outside. Both agree that the thickness of the legs and the thickness of the rim are not measured.  Rabbi Yose says: both agree that the thickness of the legs and the thickness of the rim are measured but the space between them is not measured. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: if the legs are one handbreadth high the space between them is not measured, and if not, [the space is] measured.  
  Its carriage: if it can be slipped off, it is not regarded as connected, nor is it included in its measurement, nor does it afford protection together with it in the tent of a corpse, nor may it be dragged on Shabbat when there is money in it. If it cannot be slipped off, it is regarded as connected, it is included in its measurement, it affords protection together with it in the tent of a corpse, and it may be dragged on Shabbat even if it contains money. Its arched top, if it is fixed [to the box], is considered connected and is measured with it, but if it is not fixed it is not connected and is not measured with it. How is it measured? By triangulating with a string. Rabbi Yehudah says: if it cannot stand by itself it is pure. 
  A chest, a box or a cupboard from which one of the legs was removed, even though it is still capable of holding [things], it is pure, as it cannot hold [things] in the usual manner. Rabbi Yose says: it is susceptible to impurity. The poles of a bed, its base, and [its] covering are pure. Only the bed itself and its frame are susceptible to impurity.  The bed frames of the Levites are pure. 
  A bed frame that is put on props: Rabbi Meir and Rabbi Yehudah say it is susceptible to impurity, but Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon say that it is pure. Rabbi Yose said: Why is this different from the bed frames of the Levites, which are pure? 
  A bed that had contracted <em>midras</em> impurity [transmitted by sitting]: If a short side was removed and its two legs it is impure. But if a long side and two legs were removed it becomes pure. Rabbi Nehemiah says: it is impure. If he chopped off two props at opposite corners, or if he chopped off two legs at opposite corners, or if he reduced the bed to less than a <em>tefach</em> [handbreadth] high, it becomes pure.  
  A bed that had contracted <em>midras</em> impurity: If the long side of it was broken and then he repaired it, it still retains its <em>midras</em> impurity. If the second side was also broken and then he repaired it, it becomes purified from <em>midras</em> impurity, but is impure due to contact with [an object impure through] <em>midras</em>. If he did not have a chance to repair the first side before the second side broke, the bed becomes pure.   
  If a [bed] leg that had contracted <em>midras</em> impurity is attached to a bed, all the bed contracts <em>midras</em> impurity. If he removed [the leg], it retains its <em>midras</em> impurity, while the bed is [impure due to] contact with [an object impure through] <em>midras</em>. If a bed leg that was subject to a seven-day impurity [through exposure to a corpse] was joined to a bed, all the bed contracts seven-day impurity. If he removed it, it retains its seven-day impurity, while the bed is only subject to evening impurity. If a leg that was subject to evening impurity was joined to a bed, all the bed contracts evening impurity. If he subsequently removed it, it is still subject to evening impurity, and the bed becomes pure. The same law applies also to the prong of a mattock. 
  A tefillin box [worn on the head] consisting of four compartments: if he removed the first compartment, and then he affixed [another], it retains its corpse impurity, and so too with the second and the third [compartments]. If he removed the fourth [compartment], it becomes purified from corpse impurity, but it remains impure from contact with [an object impure through] corpse impurity. If he went back to the first compartment and removed it and affixed [another], it remains impure from contact [with an object impure through corpse impurity]. So too with the second [compartment]. If he then removed the third compartment and affixed [another], it becomes pure, since the fourth was impure from contact, and what is impure from contact cannot convey impurity by contact. 
  A bed, half of which was stolen or lost, or one which brothers or joint owners divided, becomes pure. If it is restored [to its former state], it is susceptible to impurity from that point onward. A bed may contract impurity when all its parts are bound together and be purified [through immersion in a mikveh in that state], the words of Rabbi Eliezer. But the sages say: it contracts impurity in its individual parts, and must be purified [by immersing] its individual parts. 
  
  
  
  One who takes apart a bed in order to immerse it and [while doing so] touches the ropes remains pure.  The rope: when does it begin to be considered connected with the bed?  Once he knots three rows of meshes. And [if another rope was tied to this one] and a person touches it: If from the knot inwards, he becomes impure, but if from the knot outwards, he remains pure. As to the loose ends of the knot, one who touches that part which is needed for [the knot] becomes impure. And how much is needed for it? Rabbi Yehudah says: three fingerbreadths.  
  A rope that hangs out from a bed: If it is shorter than five <em>tefachim</em> [handbreadths], it is pure; if it is from five to ten <em>tefachim</em> long, it is impure. From ten <em>tefachim</em> and longer, it is pure, for it is with [this rope]  that they tie paschal lambs [to the bed, to control them until Pesah], and lower down beds. 
  A mattress strap that hangs over the bed [is impure] whatever its length; the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: up to ten <em>tefachim</em>. The remnant of a mattress strap remains unclean if the length is at least seven <em>tefachim</em>, enough to make a donkey's saddle girth. 
  If he carried a <em>zav</em> [a male with an abnormal genital discharge] on a bed [with] its mattress strap, [the latter] causes impurity [onward] to the second degree and unfitness [onward] to the first degree; the words of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yose says: if he carried a <em>zav</em> on a bed with its mattress strap, [if its length is up to] ten <em>tefachim</em> it causes impurity to the second degree and unfitness to the first degree, but if it is over ten <em>tefachim</em>, it causes only impurity to the first degree and unfitness to the first degree. If he carried [a <em>zav</em>] on the mattress strap [but the <em>zav</em> did not touch the actual bed], [if the strap is] shorter than ten <em>tefachim</em>, it becomes impure, but if it was longer than ten <em>tefachim</em>, it remains pure. 
  If a bed had <em>midras</em> impurity and one wrapped a mattress strap around it, the whole becomes impure through <em>midras</em> impurity. If he removed it, the bed remains impure through <em>midras</em> impurity, but the mattress strap is impure only from contact with <em>midras</em> impurity. If it had seven-day impurity [from exposure to a corpse] and one wrapped a mattress strap around it, the whole becomes impure from seven-day impurity.  If he removed it, the bed remains impure through seven-day impurity, but the mattress strap is impure [only] until the evening. If the bed was impure until evening, and he wrapped a mattress strap around it, the whole becomes impure until evening. If he removed it, the bed remains impure until evening, but the mattress strap becomes pure. 
  If he wrapped a mattress strap around a bed, and a corpse touched them, they become impure from seven-day impurity. If they are taken apart, they are still impure from seven-day impurity. If  a <em>sheretz</em> [one of a number of creeping creatures mentioned in the Torah as causing impurity] touched them, they are impure until evening. If they are taken apart, they are still impure until evening. If a bed [which is impure] has its two longer sides removed, and two new ones made for it, but its original sockets were not changed - if the new sides become broken, the bed remains impure, but if the old ones were broken, it becomes pure, since everything depends on the old ones. 
  A box whose opening is at the top is susceptible to corpse impurity. If it was damaged above, it is still susceptible to corpse impurity. If it was damaged below, it becomes pure. The compartments within it remain impure, and are not regarded as connected to it. 
  A shepherd's bag whose pocket was damaged, [the pocket] within it retains its impurity and [the set of pouches within] is not regarded as connected to it. If a skin vessel has scrotal sacs that serve also as receptacles and they were damaged, they become pure, since they will no longer serve their original purpose.
  A box whose opening is at its side is susceptible to both <em>midras</em> impurity and corpse impurity. Rabbi Yose said: When does this apply? When it is less than ten <em>tefachim</em> in height or when it does not have a rim one <em>tefach</em> deep. If it was damaged above, it is still susceptible to corpse impurity. If it was damaged below: Rabbi Meir declares it susceptible to impurity. But the Sages declare it pure, because if its primary function is annulled, the secondary one is also annulled. 
  A dung-basket that was damaged so that it will not hold pomegranates:  Rabbi Meir declares it susceptible to impurity, but the Sages say that it is pure, because if its primary function is annulled, the secondary one is also annulled. 
  
  
  
  Pillows, bed coverings, sacks and packing cases that were damaged are still susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity [transmitted by sitting or lying]. A fodder-bag that can hold four <em>kav</em>, a shepherd's bag that can hold five <em>kav</em>, a  traveling bag that can hold a <em>se'ah</em>, a skin that can hold seven <em>kav</em>, Rabbi Yehudah adds: also a spice-bag, and a food wallet that can hold the smallest quantity are susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity. If any of them was damaged it becomes pure, since if the primary function is annulled, the secondary function is  also annulled.   
  A bagpipe is not susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity. A trough for mixing mortar: Beit Shammai says: it is susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity, and Beit Hillel says it is susceptible to corpse impurity [only]. A trough that can hold two <em>log</em> to nine <em>kav</em> which becomes split, becomes susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity. If he left it out in the rain and it became damaged, it is susceptible to corpse impurity [only]. [If he left it out] during the east wind and it split, it is susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity. This is a stringency in the case of remnants of wooden vessels [that is more severe] than [that of such vessels] in their original condition. There is also a stringency in regard to the remnants of wicker vessels [that is more severe] than [to such vessels] in their original condition, for when they are in their original condition they are not susceptible to impurity until their rim is finished, but after their rim has been finished, even though their edges fell away leaving only the smallest amount, they are susceptible to impurity. 
  A stick which was made into a handle for a hatchet is regarded as connected for [purposes of susceptibility to] impurity at the time of use. A yarn winder is regarded as connected for [purposes of susceptibility to] impurity at the time of its use. If he fixed it to a pole, it is susceptible to impurity, but it is not considered connected to [the pole]. If he made the pole itself into a yarn winder, only that part which is needed for use is susceptible to impurity. A seat that he fixed to a pole is susceptible to impurity, but it is not regarded as connected to [the pole]. If he made the pole itself  into a seat, only the place of the seat is susceptible to impurity. [If he fixed a seat] to the beam of an olive-press, it is susceptible to impurity, but it is not regarded as connected to [the beam]. If he made the end of a beam into a seat it remains pure, because people would say to him, "Get up and let us do our work." 
  A large trough, which was so damaged that it could no longer hold pomegranates, and which he repaired it to be used as a seat: Rabbi Akiva declares it susceptible to impurity, but the Sages declare it pure until he trims it. If he made it into a feeding bowl for cattle, even if he fixed it to a wall, it is susceptible to impurity. 
  A wood block that he fixed to a row on a wall, whether he fixed it and did not built upon it, or built upon it but did not fix it, is susceptible to impurity. If he fixed it and also built upon it, it is pure. Matting that he spread over roof-beams, whether he fixed it but did not put on the plasterwork, or whether he put on the plasterwork but did not fix it, is susceptible to impurity. If he fixed it and he laid plasterwork over it, it is pure. A dish that he fixed to a chest, box or cupboard: If [he did so] so that it holds [its contents] in the usual way, it is susceptible to impurity, but if it cannot hold [its contents] in the usual way, it is pure. 
  A sheet that is susceptible to impurity by <em>midras</em> and is used as a curtain is not susceptible to <em>midras</em> impurity, but it is susceptible to corpse impurity. When is it not susceptible to [<em>midras</em> impurity]? Beit Shammai says, when it is torn. Beit Hillel says, when it is tied. Rabbi Akiva says, when it is hung.
  A mat in which reeds are run lengthwise is not susceptible to impurity. The Sages say, only if they are in the form of [the Greek letter] chi. If they were run through its width and there were not four <em>tefachim</em> [handbreadths] between each reed, it is not susceptible to impurity. If it were divided along its width, Rabbi Yehuda [says] it is not susceptible to impurity. So, too, if the end knots [of reed matting] are untied, it is not susceptible to impurity. If it were divided along its length, and three knots of six <em>tefachim</em> were left on it, it is susceptible to impurity. A mat - when does it become susceptible to impurity? When it is trimmed, as this completes its production.
  
  
  
  One who touches the upper beam [of a loom], the lower beam, the heddles, the warp fringe, the thread that they draw over the purple material, or thread on the shuttle which will not be woven in, remains pure. [If he touches] the woof, the standing warp, the double thread that is drawn over purple material or thread on the shuttle that will be woven in, he becomes impure. One who touches the wool that is on the distaff, or on the spool, he remains pure. If he touches the spindle's coil: Before it was uncovered  he is impure; after it was uncovered he remains pure.  
  One who touches the yoke, the crossbar, the collar-piece, or the thick ropes, even when they are being used, he remains pure. If he touched the handle, knee beam or cross-piece, he becomes impure. [If he touched] the metal rings, the guides, or the mouldboards, he becomes unclean.  Rabbi Yehudah says that he remains clean if he touched the guides since they are only made to pierce the soil. 
  One who touches the handle of a saw at this end or that end becomes impure; [If he touched] its string, cord, cross-piece or side-pieces, a carpenter's vise, or the bow-handle of a bow-drill, he remains pure. Rabbi Yehudah says: also one who touches the frame of a large saw remains pure. One who touches the bow-string or the bow, even though it was stretched, he remains pure. A mole-trap is pure. Rabbi Yehudah says: as long as it is stretched, the separate parts are [regarded as] connected.   
  
  
  
  If a table or a side-board was damaged, or he covered them with marble but room was left for cups to be set, it is susceptible to impurity.  Rabbi Yehudah ruled: [if he left] room enough for pieces of food.
  A table one of whose legs was removed is not susceptible to impurity. If a second leg was removed it is still pure. But if a third was removed it becomes susceptible to impurity when the owner has the intention of using it. Rabbi Yose says: no intention is necessary. The same applies also to the side-board.
  A bench, one of whose legs was removed, is not susceptible to impurity.  If its second leg also was removed it is still pure. If it was one <em>tefach</em> [handbreadth] high, it is impure. A footstool, one of whose legs was removed, is impure. The same applies to the chair in front of a cathedra. 
  A bridal chair whose seat has been removed: Beit Shammai rules that it still susceptible to impurity, and Bet Hillel rules that it is not susceptible. Shammai rules: even the frame of the chair is susceptible to impurity. A stool which was fixed to a kneading-trough - Beit Shammai rules that it susceptible to impurity, and Beit Hillel rules that it is pure. Shammai rules: even one made [in this way originally] is susceptible to impurity.
  A chair whose seat boards did not project, and then were removed, is still susceptible to impurity, for it is usual to turn it on its side and to sit on it.
  A chair whose middle seat board was removed, but the outer ones  remained, is still susceptible to impurity. If the outer ones were removed and the middle seat board remained, it is also susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Shimon says: only if it was a <em>tefach</em> wide.
  A chair from which two adjoining seat boards were removed - Rabbi Akiva says: it is susceptible to impurity; and the Sages say that it is pure. Rabbi Yehudah said: so too the seat boards of a bride's chair which were removed and a receptacle remained - it is clean, because when the primary function is annulled, the secondary one is also annulled.  
  A chest whose top part was removed is still susceptible to impurity on account of its bottom; if its bottom was removed, it is still susceptible to impurity on account of its top part. If both the top part and the bottom part were removed: Rabbi Yehudah says that it is susceptible to impurity on account of its sides; but the Sages rule that it is pure. A stonecutter's seat is subject to <em>midras</em> impurity [transmitted by sitting or lying]. 
  A [wooden] block which was painted red or saffron, or was polished:  Rabbi Akiva says that it is susceptible to impurity, but the Sages say that it remains pure until he carves out [a seat]. A small basket or a large one that was filled with straw or other soft material, [even] if he set it up to be a seat, remains pure. But if he plaited it over with reed-grass or with a cord, it becomes susceptible to impurity. 
  A toilet is subject to both <em>midras</em> and corpse impurity. If it was taken apart, the leather is subject to <em>midras</em> impurity, but the iron is subject [only] to corpse impurity. A folding stool whose seat covering is of leather is subject to both <em>midras</em> and corpse impurity. If it was taken apart, the leather is subject to <em>midras</em> impurity, while the stool is altogether pure. Benches in the bathhouse that have two wooden legs are susceptible to impurity. If one leg was of wood and the other of stone, it is pure.  Boards in a bath-house which he joined together: Rabbi Akiva says that they are susceptible to [midras] impurity; but the Sages say that they are pure, since they are made only for the water to flow under them. A fumigation-cage that contains a receptacle for garments is susceptible to impurity, but one that is made like a bee-hive is pure. 
  
  
  
  A ball, a mold, an amulet or tefillin which were torn [after becoming impure]: one that touches them becomes impure, but one that touches what is inside them remains pure. A saddle which was torn: one that touches its contents becomes impure, because the stitching joins them. 
  The following are susceptible to impurity as objects that are fit for riding upon: an Ashkelonian saddle, a Medean saddle, a camel's cushion, and a horse-cloth. Rabbi Yose says: a horse-cloth is susceptible to impurity as a seat, since people stand on it  in the arena. But a saddle of a camel is susceptible to [sitting] impurity. 
  What is the practical difference between [the uncleanness of an object used for] riding upon and [one used for] sitting upon?  [An object] ridden upon has a distinction between contact with it and carrying it, but in the case of [an object that is] sat upon, there is no difference between contact with it and carrying it. The pack-frame of a donkey on which he sat is pure, but if he changed the size of the spaces or if they have been broken one into another, it is susceptible to impurity. 
  The bier, the mattress and the pillow of a corpse are susceptible to <em>midras</em> uncleanness [transmitted by sitting or lying]. A bridal chair, a birthing stool, and a launderer's stool on which he piles the clothes: Rabbi Yose says: they are not regarded as a seat. 
  A fishing net is susceptible to uncleanness on account of its bag. Nets, snares, bird-traps, slings and fishermen's skeins are susceptible to impurity. A fish-trap, a bird-basket and a bird-cage are not susceptible to impurity.  
  
  
  
  There are three types of shields [with regard to purity status]: a rounded shield is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity [a type of impurity due to being sat on by certain types of impure individuals, rendering something an Origin of impurity]; and one that is sported with in the arena is susceptible to corpse impurity; and the Arabian toy shield is pure from all [types of impurities].  
  There are three types of wagons: one fashioned like a cathedra [i.e. shorter, and with walls on its sides] is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; [one fashioned] like a bed [i.e. longer] is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one for [transporting] stones is pure from all [types of impurities]. 
  There are three types of troughs: a trough [which can hold] between two <i>log</i> [a specific unit of volume] to nine <i>kav</i> [a larger unit of volume, four times the size of a <i>log</i>] which is cracked is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; [a trough that size which is] whole is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one that holds a [sufficiently great] measure is pure from all [types of impurities]. 
  There are three types of chests: a chest which has its opening is on its side is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; [one which has its opening] on its top it is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one that holds a [sufficiently great] measure is pure from all [types of impurities]. 
  There are three types of leather covers: one used by barbers [for their customers to sit upon] is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; one which people eat upon is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one which is for [spreading out] olives is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of bases [i.e. small tables]: that which is [used as a footrest] before a bed or before scholars is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; that which is of a serving table [i.e. nested below it, for bringing out foods] is susceptible to corpse impurity; and that which is [used as the base] of a tower [i.e. a tall cabinet resembling a tower] is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of notebooks: an <i>afiforin</i> [a large writing tablet which can be folded and used as a chair] is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; and one that has a hollowed space to hold wax [which can then be carved into] is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one which is flat [and written upon with ink or charcoal, not wax] is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of beds: one made for lying upon is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; one used by glass makers is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one used by weavers is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of baskets: one which is for fertilizer is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; one which is for straw is susceptible to corpse impurity; and a camel's rope bag is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of mats: one made for sitting upon is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity;  one belonging to dyers is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one used in wine-presses is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of water skins and three types of pouches: those which can hold the prescribed measure are susceptible to <i>midras</i> uncleanness; those which cannot hold the prescribed measure are susceptible to corpse impurity; and that which is made of fish hide is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of hides: one made to be a rug is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; [one made] to be a wrapping for vessels is susceptible to corpse impurity; and that which is to be [cut into strips and] used for straps or for sandals is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of sheets: one made for lying upon is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; [one made] to be a curtain is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one with designs is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of kerchiefs: one used for [wiping] hands is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; one used for [wrapping] <i>sefarim</i> [books of the Tanach written in holiness, on parchment, and used for personal or public study, or for reading aloud in public. Sometimes the intent is specifically Torah scrolls]is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one used as a shroud or for [wrapping] the harps of the Levites is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of mitts: one used by hunters of [wild] animals and fowl is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity; one used by [hunters of] locusts is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one used by fig-driers is pure from all [types of impurities].
  There are three types of hairnets: one belonging to a girl is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity;  one belonging to an old woman's is susceptible to corpse impurity; and one of a woman who goes out is pure from all [types of impurities].    
  There are three different types of containers: a worn-out basket which one patched onto a sound one  follows after [the purity status of] the sound one; a small one [patched] onto a large follows after [the purity status] the large one; those [baskets, patched onto each another] which are equal [in size] follow after the inner one. Rabbi Shimon says: Regarding an [impure] cup of a scale which one patched onto the bottom of a boiler, if [it was patched] from the inside, it [i.e. even the boiler] is impure; if from the outside, it is pure; if one patched it from the side, whether on the inside or on the outside, it is pure.  
  
  
  
  All vessels have [a distinction, with regard to purity status, between their] outsides and insides, for instance: cushions, and blankets, and sacks, and packing-bags, according to Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: anything which has loops [through which to thread a drawstring] has [such a distinction, with regard to purity status, between its] outsides and insides; but any which does not have loops, does not have [such a distinction between its] outsides and insides. A table and a serving table have [such a distinction between their] outsides and insides, according to Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: they do not have outsides [i.e. they have no such distinction]. And similarly regarding a board that has no rim.
  An cattle-prod has [a distinction, with regard to purity status, between its] outsides and insides: the seven [handbreadths] from the spade [attached to the back end of the prod, are considered to be the outside], and the four [handbreadths] from [the pointed end of] the prod [are considered to be the inside], according to Rabbi Yehuda. Rabbi Meir says: they do not have [such a distinction]; the four and the seven were only mentioned for the purposes of remnants [i.e. if it breaks, these are measures of how much must remain in order for it to still be considered an implement, for purity purposes]. 
  Measuring cups for wine or oil, and a fork-ladle, and a mustard-strainer, and a wine-filter all have [a distinction, with regard to purity status, between their] insides and outsides, according to Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yehuda says: they do not have [such a distinction]. Rabbi Shimon says: they do have [such a distinction], for if they are rendered impure from their outsides, that which is inside them is pure; and one is required to immerse [the vessel in its entirety, in order to purity it]. 
  Regarding a [vessel which has two sections in which can be measured a] <i>rova</i> [a specific measure of volume, a quarter of a <i>log</i>] and a half <i>rova</i>, if the <i>rova</i> [section] was rendered impure, the half <i>rova</i> [section] is not rendered impure; if the half <i>rova</i> was rendered impure, the <i>rova</i> is not rendered impure. They [i.e. the students] said before Rabbi Akiva, "Since the half <i>rova</i> is the outside of the <i>rova</i>, should not the outside of a vessel whose inside was rendered impure [thereby also] be rendered impure?" He said to them, "Is it surely of the former category? Or perhaps the <i>rova</i> is the outside of the half <i>rova</i>, and regarding a vessel the outsides of which were rendered impure, its insides are not rendered impure!"
  If the [inside of the] <i>rova</i> [measure] was rendered impure, the <i>rova</i> and its outsides are impure, [and] the half <i>rova</i> and its outsides are pure. If the [inside of the] half <i>rova</i> was rendered impure, the half <i>rova</i> and its outsides are impure, [and] the <i>rova</i> and its outsides are pure. If the outsides of the <i>rova</i> were rendered impure, the outsides of the half <i>rova</i> are pure, according to Rabbi Meir. And the Sages say: the outer sides cannot be divided [in purity status].  And when one immerses it [for purification], he must immerse it in its entirety. 
  Regarding the bases of vessels, and their rims, and their hangers, and the handles of vessels that can contain [thnig], if [impure] liquids fell onto them, one may dry them and they are pure. And regarding all remaining vessels, which cannot [even] hold pomegranates, which do not have [a distinction between their] insides and outsides, if [impure] liquids fell on a part of it, it is rendered impure in its entirety. If the outsides of a vessel were rendered impure by liquids, its outsides are impure; its insides, its rim, its hanger, and its handle are pure. If its inside was rendered impure, it is impure in its entirety.
  All vessels have [a distinction, with regard to purity status, between their] outsides and insides and a [similar distinction for their] holding-place. Rabbi Tarfon says: [this is the case] regarding a trough. Rabbi Akiva says: regarding cups. Rabbi Meir says: [the distinction of a holding-place was only said] regarding impure and pure hands. Rabbi Yose says: they said this only regarding pure hands.
  How so? If one's hands were pure, and the outsides of a cup were impure, one who grasps it  by its holding-place need not be concerned that his hands may have been rendered impure by the outsides of the cup. If one was drinking from a cup whose outsides were impure, he need not be concerned that the liquids in his mouth may have been rendered impure by the outsides of the cup, and then gone on to render [the inside of] the cup impure. Regarding a boiling kettle [whose outsides are impure], one need not be concerned that liquids may have emerged from it and touched its outsides and then returned to its inside [and rendered it impure].
  Sacred vessels do not have [a distinction, with regard to purity status, between their] outsides and insides, nor do they have a [similar distinction for their] holding-place. And one may not immerse vessels within vessels [such that they can be used] for [handling] sacred things [i.e. rather each vessel must be immersed independently in order to achieve the required level of purity]. All vessels may descend to impurity [status] through intentional thought, but they may only rise out of their impurity through a change-effecting action; for an action may annul [the effects of] an action or an intentional thought, but an intentional thought cannot annul [the effects of] either an action nor an intentional thought.
  
  
  
  Regarding an Imki sandal [a sandal from the Imki valley, consisting of a piece of leather with attached straps], and a draw-string pouch, Rabbi Yehudah says: also an Egyptian basket, Rabbi Shimon ben Gamaliel says: also a Ladiki sandal [from Ludkia], anything similar to them can thereby be made [susceptible or insusceptible to being rendered] impure or pure without [the aid of] a craftsman. Rabbi Yose said: but are not all vessels able to be rendered [susceptible or insusceptible to being rendered] impure or pure and without a craftsman? Rather, these, even when they are unlaced are [susceptible to being rendered] impure, since a layperson can restore them. They said this [that unlacing something can make it insusceptible to impurity] only regarding an Egyptian basket which even a craftsman cannot [easily] restore. 
  A draw-string pouch whose laces were removed is still [susceptible to being rendered] impure; if it flattened out, it is pure [insusceptible to impurity]. If one hung a flap on it from below [such that it can still hold something, even when flattened out], it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. Regarding a pouch within a pouch, if one of them was rendered impure by a liquid, the other is not rendered impure. A [leather] bundle for a gem is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. Regarding a bundle for money, Rabbi Eliezer considers it [susceptible to being rendered] impure; and the Sages consider it pure [insusceptible to impurity].
  A glove of thorn-pickers is pure [i.e. insusceptible to impurity]. A [leather] belt or knee-guard is [susceptible to being rendered] impure.  And [leather] sleeves are [susceptible to being rendered] impure. And hand-coverings are pure [i.e. insusceptible to impurity]. And all finger-coverings are pure, except one of thorn-pickers [alternatively: pickers of Summer fruit], since it can [be used as vessels to] hold the sumac berry. If it was torn, if it cannot hold the majority of a sumac berry, it is pure [i.e. insusceptible to impurity].  
  Regarding a sandal with a hole [for a strap] that was broken, if one fixed it, it [retains prior impurities and thus] is impure with <i>midras</i> impurity [a type of impurity due to being sat on by certain types of impure individuals, rendering something an Origin of impurity]. If the second hole was broken and one fixed it, it is pure from [and can no longer retain] <i>midras</i> impurity, but is [still susceptible to be being rendered] impure from contact with <i>midras</i> impurity. If one was unable to fix the first [hole] before the second was broken, it is pure. If its heel broke off, or if its toe-piece was removed, or if it was split in two, it is pure. A heel-less slipper that was torn anywhere is pure. A shoe that was diminished [by damage], if it cannot hold the majority of the foot, it is pure. Regarding a shoe [still] on the last, Rabbi Eliezer considers it pure [i.e. insusceptible to impurity], and the Sages consider it impure. All [punctured] water skins which are tied up in a bundle are pure [insusceptible to impurity, due to being punctured], except for Arabian ones [since their ties are stronger]. Rabbi Meir says: if [they are tied in] a temporary bundle, they are pure; if [in] a permanent bundle, they are impure. Rabbi Yose says: all water skins tied up in bundles are pure.  
  The following hides are susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity: a hide which one intended to use as a rug, a hide used as an apron, a hide used as a bed-covering, a hide used by a donkey-driver, a hide used by a flax-worker, a hide used by a porter [who carries burdens on his shoulders], a hide used by a physician, a hide used for a cradle, a hide [used as a bib] for a child's chest, a hide for a cushion, a hide for a blanket; [all these are susceptible to] <i>midras</i> impurity. Regarding a hide used for [wrapping] combed wool, and a hide used by a wool-comber [to place upon his knees], Rabbi Eliezer says: [it is susceptible to] <i>midras</i> impurity; and the Sages say: [it is susceptible only to] corpse impurity. 
  A cover or wrapper for garments is susceptible to <i>midras</i> impurity. Regarding a bag or wrapper for purple [garments], Beit Shammai say: [it is susceptible to] <i>midras</i> impurity; and Beit Hillel say: [it is susceptible only to] corpse impurity. A hide which one made to be a covering for a vessel is pure; [if one made it to be a covering] for weights, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure.  Rabbi Yose considers it pure, in the name of his father.
  Whenever no act is lacking [in order to make vessels fit for use], intentional thought [to use them as they are] renders them [susceptible to becoming] impure. But whenever an act is lacking [in order to make vessels fit for use], intentional thought does not render them impure, except with regard to a [leather] seat-covering [for a wagon or a saddle, which is sometimes used as such even before being fully trimmed or finished].
  The hides of a householder are rendered [susceptible to becoming] impure by intentional thought, but those of a tanner are not rendered [susceptible to becoming] impure by intentional thought. Those of a thief are rendered impure by intentional thought; but those of a robber are not rendered impure by intentional thought. Rabbi Shimon says: the matter should be reversed: those of a robber are rendered impure by intentional thought; but those of a thief are not rendered impure by intentional thought, since [in the latter case] the owners have not abandoned hope [for recovery]. 
  Regarding a hide that has contracted <i>midras</i> impurity, if one then thought to use it for straps or sandals, as soon as he put the knife to it, it is pure, according to Rabbi Yehuda. And the Sages say: [it is not pure] until he has reduced it to less than five handbreadths. Rabbi Elazar bar Tzadok says: even if one made a napkin from a hide it is [still susceptible to being rendered] impure; if [one made one] from a blanket, it is pure [and insusceptible to impurity]. 
  
  
  
  Clothing may be rendered impure due to five different reasons; sack-cloth [may be rentered impure] due to four; leather due to three; wood due to two; and an earthenware vessel due to one. An earthenware vessel may be rendered impure [only] due to [being] a receptacle. Regarding earthenware vessels, any that has no inside, has no outside [which can be rendered impure]. Wood, in addition to this, can also be rendered impure due to [being] a seat. Similarly, regarding a tablet which has no rim, if it is a wooden vessel it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure; and if it is an earthenware vessel it is pure.  Leather, in addition to this, may be rendered impure due to tents [if it forms an enclosure over certain impure things]. Sack-cloth, in addition to this, may be rendered impure due to [being] a woven work. Clothing, in addition to this, may be rendered impure due to [being] a three by three [fingerbreadths piece of fabric].
  Clothing may be rendered impure as a [piece which is] three by three [handbreadths] with <i>midras</i> impurity [a type of impurity due to being sat on by certain impure individuals, rendering something an Origin of impurity], and at three by three [fingerbreadths] with corpse impurity. Sack-cloth [may be rendered impure] at four by four  [handbreadths]; Leather, five by five; matting, six by six; these are all equally [susceptible to being rendered impure] with <i>midras</i> and corpse impurity.  Rabbi Meir says: regarding sack-cloth, its scraps [may be rendered impure] at four [by four handbreadths], but initially [it can be rendered impure only] once it is  completed.  
  One who makes a piece of material from two [handbreadths] of cloth and one [handbreadth] of sack-cloth, or three of sack-cloth and one of leather, or four of leather and one of matting, it is pure [insusceptible to impurity]. If [one made something] of five [handbreadths] of matting and one of leather, or four of leather and one of sack-cloth, or three of sack-cloth and one of cloth, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. This is the general rule: anything to which one attached something of a higher level of stringency is [susceptible to being remdered] impure; [anything to which one attached something] of a lesser level of stringency is pure. 
  If one cuts off [a piece of] one square handbreadth from each of these [materials, and then fashions them into a single piece], it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. If [one cuts off a piece which is] one square handbreadth from the bottom of a basket, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. If from the sides of a basket,  Rabbi Shimon considers it pure, and the Sages say: if one cuts off a square handbreadth from anywhere, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure.  
  Regarding worn-out pieces of a sifter or a sieve that one adapted for use as a seat,  Rabbi Akiva consideres them [susceptible to being rendered] impure, and the Sages consider them pure until one trims them [for use as a seat]. A child's chair which has legs, even if it is less than a handbreadth high, is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. Regarding a child's robe, Rabbi Eliezer says: [it is susceptible to impurity] at any size; and the Sages say: only once it is of the prescribed measure; and it is measured doubled [i.e. folded] over [such that it must actually be twice the required measure].
  The following are measured when doubled over: cloth slippers, and knee-breeches, and pants, and a hat, and a hollow [in a belt which functions as a] pouch. Regarding a piece of fabric which one sewed onto the hem [of the collar of a garment], if it is [sewn on] unfolded it is measured unfolded; and if doubled over it is measured doubled over.       
  Regarding a piece of cloth which one wove to be three by three [handbreadths] which was rendered impure with <i>midras</i> impurity, and one then completed the whole garment upon it, if afterwards one then removed a thread from its initial portion, it is pure from <i>midras</i> impurity, but it is impure from contact with <i>midras</i> impurity. If one removed a thread from  its initial portion and then afterwards completed the whole garment upon it, it is [still] impure from contact with <i>midras</i> impurity. 
  And likewise regarding a piece of cloth which one wove to be three by three [fingerbreadths] which contracted corpse impurity, and one then completed the whole garment upon it, and then afterwards removed a thread from its initial portion, it is pure of corpse impurity, but is still impure from contact with corpse impurity. If one removed a thread from its initial portion and then afterwards completed the whole garment upon it, it is pure; for They said: a [piece of cloth of] three by three [fingerbreadths] which was diminished is pure. But one of three by three [handbreadths] which was diminished, even though it is pure of <i>midras</i> impurity, is [susceptible to being] impure from all the [other] impurities.
  Regarding a sheet which contracted <i>midras</i> impurity, which one then fashioned into a curtain, it is pure from <i>midras</i> impurity, but is impure from contact with <i>midras</i> impurity.  Rabbi Yose said, "And yet which <i>midras</i> impurity has touched it?! [Rather] only if a <i>zav</i> [a male with a genital discharge that renders him an Origin of impurity] touched it is it [rendered] impure from contact with a <i>zav</i>."
  A [piece of cloth] three by three [handbreadths] which was divided, is pure from <i>midras</i> impurity, but is impure from contact with <i>midras</i> impurity.  Rabbi Yose said, "And yet which <i>midras</i> impurity has touched it?! [Rather] only if a <i>zav</i> touched it is it [rendered] impure from contact with a <i>zav</i>."
  Regarding a [piece of cloth] three by three [handbreadths], if [it was found] in the trash heaps, [it is susceptible to retaining impurity only] if it is sound and capable of  storing salt;      if [it was found] in the house, [it is susceptible to impurity] if it is either sound or capable of storing salt.  How much salt must it be capable of storing? A <i> rova</i> [a specific unit of volume, a quarter of a <i>kav</i>]. Rabbi Yehudah says: this is with regard to fine salt. And the Sages say: it is with regard to coarse salt.  Both of their intentions were to rule leniently.      Rabbi Shimon says: [pieces which are] three by three [handbreadths, which were found] in a trash heap, are [legally] equivalent to [pieces which are] three by three [fingerbreadths, which were found] in a house.
  Regarding a [piece of cloth of] three by three [handbreadths] which was torn, if one places it on a chair and [when he sits down upon it] his skin touches the chair, it is pure; and if not, it is impure [i.e. it can retain impurity]. Regarding a [piece of cloth of] three by three [fingerbreadths], if one of its threads was worn away, or if a knot was found in it, or if two of its threads ran alongside each other [i.e. as an imperfection in its weave], it is pure. A [piece of cloth of] three by three [fingerbreadths] which was cast to the trash heap is pure. If one brought it back [from the trash], it is [once more susceptible to being rendered] impure. Its having been thrown away always renders it pure, and its being brought back renders it [susceptible to becoming] impure, except when it is of purple or fine crimson [which can still be rendered impure even after being cast into the trash].      Rabbi Eliezer says: the same applies also to a piece of new cloth. Rabbi Shimon says: all of these are pure; they were mentioned [as exceptions] only with regard to the returning of lost property.
  
  
  
  A [piece of cloth] three by three [fingerbreadths] which was stuffed into a ball, or was itself made into a ball, is pure. But a [piece of cloth] three by three [handbreadths] which was stuffed into a ball is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. If it was itself made it into a ball, it is pure, because the sewing diminishes it.  
  Regarding a [piece of cloth] less than three by three [handbreadths] which one adapted for plugging bathhouse with it, for emptying a cooking-pot with it [by using it on a handle to protect from the heat], or for wiping the mill stones with it, whether or not it is [set aside and] ready for such use, is [susceptible to being rendered] impure, according to Rabbi Eliezer. Rabbi Yehoshua says: whether or not it is ready for such use, it is pure. Rabbi Akiva says: if it is ready, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure; and if it is not ready, it is pure.   
  If one makes a bandage, whether of cloth or of leather, it is pure. Rabbi Yose says, regarding leather, that it is pure. Regarding a poultice, with cloth it is pure, and with leather it is [susceptible to becoming] impure. Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel says: even with cloth it is [susceptible to becoming] impure because it can be shaken off [once it dries, and then appropriated for other uses]. 
  Covers of ,<i>sefarim</i> [books of the Tanach written in holiness, on parchment, and used for personal or public study, or for reading aloud in public. Sometimes the intent is specifically Torah scrolls] whether or not [the covers] are embroidered, are [susceptible to being rendered] impure, in accordance with Beit Shammai. Beit Hillel say: those which are embroidered pure, and those which are not embroidered are [susceptible to being rendered] impure. Rabban Gamaliel says: these and those are pure.   
  Regarding a head-covering which was rendered impure with <i>midras</i> impurity [a type of impurity due to being sat on by certain types of impure individuals, rendering something an Origin of impurity], if one placed it [as a covering] on a book, it is pure from <i>midras</i> impurity, but it is [susceptible to being  rendered] impure from corpse impurity. A skin which one fashioned into a rug, or a rug which one fashioned into a skin, is pure. A skin which one fashioned into a satchel, or a satchel which one fashioned into a skin, a cushion which one fashioned into a sheet, or a sheet which one fashioned into a cushion, a blanket which one fashioned into a kerchief, or a kerchief which one fashioned into a blanket, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. This is the general rule: any object which one changed into one with the same name [the same general use] is impure; if [one changed it into something] of another name, it is pure.
  A piece of cloth which one patched onto a basket renders one item impure [with a second degree level of impurity, upon coming into contact with it], and invalidates one [for <i>terumah</i>, the priestly tithe; i.e. if the second item comes into contact with a third item, it renders it impure with a third degree level of impurity, which invalidates it with regard to <i>terumah</i>]. If one separated it from the basket, the basket renders one item impure [with a second degree level of impurity], and renders one invalid [with regard to <i>terumah</i>], and the piece of cloth is pure. If one patched it onto a garment, it renders two items impure [i.e. it renders one impure upon contact, with a first degree impurity, and that item, in turn, renders a second item impure with a second degree level of impurity], and renders one invalid [i.e. the second item then renders a third item invalid for the purposes of <i>terumah</i>]. If one separated it from the garment, it renders one impure [upon contact, with a second degree of impurity], and [that one, in turn] invalidates one [for the purposes of <i>terumah</i>], and the piece of cloth renders two items impure [i.e. it renders one impure with a first degree impurity, and that item renders a second item impure with a second degree impurity], and renders one invalid [i.e. the second item then renders a third item invalid for the purposes of <i>terumah</i>]. And such is the case regarding one who attaches [a piece of fabric as a patch] onto sack-cloth or leather, according to Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Shimon considers it pure. Rabbi Yose says, with regard to leather, that it is pure, and with regard to sack-cloth that is it impure because it is a woven material. 
  The [piece of fabric of] three by three [fingerbreadths] of which They spoke does not include the hem, according to Rabbi Shimon. And the Sages say: it is precisely three by three [including the hem]. If one patched it onto a garment on one side [only], it is not considered a connection [for the purposes of impurity]; if on two sides, one opposite the other, it is considered to be a connection. If one fashioned it like a gamma [in an L-shape], Rabbi Akiva considers it impure, and the Sages consider it pure. Rabbi Yehudah said, "With regard to what do these things apply? To a cloak. But regarding a robe, if [it was patched on] from above [the tear], it is considered a connection; and if from below [the tear], it is not considered a connection."      
  Poor people's garments, even if they contain less than three by three [fingerbreadths], can thereby be rendered impure with <i>midras</i> impurity. Regarding a cloak which one began to tear, once the majority of it is torn, it [i.e. its two halves] is not considered a connection. Those [materials] which are coarse or fine are not subject to [the minimum measure of] three by three [fingerbreadths; they are instead subject to the larger minimum of three by three handbreadths]. 
  A porter's blanket [used as shoulder padding] is [susceptible to being rendered] impure with <i>midras</i> impurity. A [cloth] wine strainer is not susceptible to [contracting the impurity of] a seat.      An old woman's hair-net is [susceptible to being rendered] impure as a seat. The robe of a prostitute [literally: she who goes out] which is woven like a net is pure [i.e. insusceptible to being rendered impure]. If one makes a garment out of a fishing net, it is pure; if [one makes it] out of its bottom part [which is more tightly woven] it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. Rabbi Eliezer ben Yaakov says: even one who makes a garment out of a fishing net and doubles it over, it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. 
  A hair-net which one began [to knit] from its opening is pure [and insusceptible to impurity] until he complete its base section. If one began from its base section, it is pure until he completes its opening.  Its headband is [susceptible to being rendered] impure on its own [even if separated from the hair-net]. Its ribbons are [susceptible to being rendered] impure by way of connection. A hair-net which was torn, if it cannot hold the majority of the hair, it is pure. 
  
  
  
  Regarding the fringes of a sheet, or of a scarf, or of a cap, or of a head-scarf, if they are six fingerbreadths [long, or shorter, they are considered connected to the garment, for the purposes of impurity]; and regarding those of undergarments, [their measure for being considered connected is up to] ten [fingerbreadths]. The fringes of a thick wool cloak, or of a veil, or of a robe, or of a cloak are [considered connected if they are up to a length of] three fingerbreadths. Regarding the fringes of an old woman's cap, of Arabian face scarves, or of a goat-hair garment, or of a hollow [in a belt which functions as a] pouch, or of a turban, or of a dividing-curtain, their fringes [are considered connected] at any length.
  Three woolen covers [stitched together, i.e. in order to keep track of them], six of linen, three sheets, twelve handkerchiefs, two pant-sleeves, one robe, one cloak, or one thick wool garment, are considered connected with regard to impurity and with regard to sprinkling [the waters of the red heifer, as part of the purification ritual]. If more than these [are sewn together], they are considered connected with regard to impurity, but they are not considered connected with regard to sprinkling. Rabbi Yose says: not even with regard to impurity. 
  The string of a plumb-line [is considered connected up to a length of] twelve [handbreadths]. That of the carpenters’ [plumb-line is considered connected up to a length of up to] eighteen [handbreadths]. That of the builders’ [is considered connected up to a length of] fifty cubits. Exceeding that, if one wanted to retain it [at that length], it is pure [i.e. the excess string beyond that measure is insusceptible to being rendered impure]. Those of plasterers or of [wall] illustrators [are considered connected] at any length.
  The cord of the scales of gold weighers or of those who weigh fine purple fabric is [considered connected to the scale, with regard to impurity, up to a length of] three fingerbreadths. The shaft of an axe, behind the grip, is [considered connected up to a length of] three fingerbreadths. Rabbi Yose says: if [its length is] one handbreadth [past the grip], it is pure [and is not considered connected as a handle to the axe].
  The cord of the scales of shopkeepers or of householders is [considered connected up to a length of] one handbreadth. The shaft of an axe, in front of the grip, is [considered connected up to the length of] one handbreadth. The remnants of a compass are [considered connected to the compass at a length of up to] one handbreadth. The handle of a stone-mason's chisel is [considered connected to the chisel at a length of] one handbreadth.  
  The cord of the scales of wool dealers or of glass-weighers is [considered connected up to a length of] two handbreadths. The shaft of a millstone chisel is [considered connected up to] two handbreadths. The shaft of the battle-axe of [military] legions is [considered connected up to] two handbreadths. The shaft of the goldsmiths’ hammer is [considered connected up to] two handbreadths. And that of blacksmiths, [up to] three handbreadths.   
  The remnant of the shaft of an ox-goad at its upper end is [considered connected up to a length of] four [handbreadths]. The shaft of a spade is [considered connected up to] four [handbreadths]. The shaft of a weeding-spade is [considered connected up to] five [handbreadths]. The shaft of a small hammer is [considered connected up to] five [handbreadths], and that of a [regular] hammer, six [handbreadths]. The shaft of a hatchet used for splitting [wood] or of one used for hoeing is [considered connected up to] six [handbreadths]. The shaft of a stonemasons' sledgehammer is [considered connected up to] six [handbreadths].  
  The remnant of the shaft of an ox-goad at its lower end is considered connected [to that end up to a length of] seven [handbreadths]. Regarding the shaft of a householders' [oven] rake, Beit Shammai say: [it is considered connected up to] seven [handbreadths]; and Beit Hillel say: eight. Regarding that [i.e. the shaft of a rake] of plasterers, Beit Shammai say: nine; Beit Hillel say: ten. Exceeding that, if one wants to retain [it at its length], it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure. The shafts of fire tools [are susceptible to being rendered impure] at any length.
  
  
  
  Regarding glass vessels, those that are flat are pure [i.e. insusceptible to being rendered impure], and those that have receptacles are [susceptible to being rendered] impure. If they are broken, they become pure; if one then went back and fashioned them into vessels, they are able to retain impurity from then and onward. A tray or a flat dish made of glass are pure [i.e. insusceptible to impurity]; if they have a rim, they are [susceptible to being rendered] impure. The [concave] bottoms of a glass plate or a flat dish which one adapted for use [as receptacles] are pure. If one polished them or sanded them with a file, they are [susceptible to being rendered] impure. 
  A mirror is pure. A cauldron which one fashioned into a mirror is [susceptible to being rendered] impure but if from the outset it was made to serve as a mirror, it is pure. Regarding a large [glass] spoon which one places on a table, if it can hold any amount [when it stands on its own], it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure; but if not, Rabbi Akiva considers it [susceptible to being rendered] impure, and Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri considers it pure [i.e. insusceptible]. 
  Regarding a cup, if the majority of it [i.e. of its circumference] has been damaged, it is pure. If it is damaged in three places extending over the majority of it, it is pure. Rabbi Shimon says: if it disperses the majority of the water [put into it], it is pure. If it was punctured and one fixed it, whether with tin or pitch, it is pure. Rabbi Yose says: if with tin it is [susceptible to being rendered] impure; and if with pitch, it is pure.   
  A small [glass] flask, the neck of which was removed, is [susceptible to being rendered] impure; and a large one, the neck of which was removed, is pure [i.e. insusceptible]. One of spikenard oil, the neck of which was removed, is pure, because it injures the hand. Large [glass] flagons whose necks have been removed are [susceptible to being rendered] impure, because one adapts them for holding pickled foods. A glass funnel is pure. Rabbi Yose said, "Joyous are you, Kelim, for you entered in impurity, and you departed in purity!"