meta: {"file": "/data/tomer/Sefaria-Export/txt_done/Modern Works/English Explanation of Mishnah/Seder Tahorot/English Explanation of Mishnah Oktzin/English/Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp.txt"}
text: English Explanation of Mishnah Oktzin
  ביאור אנגלי על משנה עוקצים
  Mishnah Yomit by Dr. Joshua Kulp
  
  
  English Explanation of Mishnah Oktzin
  
  Introduction
  
  The final tractate of Seder Toharot and indeed of the entire mishnah deals with things that are "stems" to food. The question is when is something considered to be attached to food such that if one part becomes impure the whole is impure and when are they independent?
  This tractate does not really contain a lot of new information. Rather, most of it has been taught elsewhere. At times these mishnayot add information to the earlier ones and at times they are only repetitive. I think the best reason why these halakhot are found in two places is that the Mishnah's editors thought that these halakhot could belong in two places.
  There is some evidence that already in Talmudic times Tractate Oktzim wasn't all that well learned. For instance there is a story in the Bavli (Horayot 13b) that some students wanted to belittle Rabban Shimon ben Gamaliel so they asked him to teach Oktzim, which he didn't know. So consider yourselves lucky to be learning this Tractate—you can learn material that even the greatest of rabbis didn't get to learn all that well.
  Good luck in learning the tractate. It's our last one, so I hope you treasure it. 
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  That which serves as a handle but does not protect, both contracts uncleanness and conveys uncleanness; but it is not included.  If the stem of a piece of produce serves as a handle by which to hold the produce, but it doesn't protect the produce from spoiling, then it is considered part of the produce for issues of impurity. If the stem is defiled so is the produce and vice versa, if the produce is defiled so is the stem. However, when determining the size of the piece of produce, this stem doesn't count. So if the produce is less than the size of an egg, it cannot be defiled (see Toharot 2:1).
  If it protects but is not a handle, it contracts and conveys uncleanness and is included.  If it protects the produce even if it doesn't serve as a stem, then it counts as part of it for all matters, even to be including in reckoning its size.
  If it neither protects nor serves as a handle, it neither contracts nor conveys uncleanness.  If it neither serves as a handle nor protects the produce, then it is not part of it for any issue of impurity.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Roots of garlic, onions or leeks that are still moist, or their top-parts, whether they are moist or dry, also the central stalk that is within the edible part, the roots of lettuce, the radish and the turnip, the words of Rabbi Meir.Rabbi Judah says: only the large roots of the radish are included, but its fibrous roots are not included.The roots of the mint, rue, wild herbs and garden herbs that have been uprooted in order to be planted elsewhere, and the spine of an ear of grain, and its husk.Rabbi Elazar says: also the earth covering of roots;All these things contract and convey impurity and are included.Today's mishnah discusses what parts of certain types of produce are considered to be part of the plant.Sections one through four: In these four sections, various tannaim determine what parts of certain types of produce, specifically the roots and the spines/stalks of root vegetables, count as being part of the produce.  In general roots are part of the plant if they will either be eaten or if they will be used for replanting. Inedible roots are not part of the produce. So too other parts of the produce, and even the dirt accompanying the produce according to Rabbi Elazar, count with the produce if they are necessary to it. I think that most of these are fairly clear from the translation, so I won't explain each one on its own.Section five: All of the parts of produce that are listed above do three things: they contract impurity if the rest of the piece of produce was defiled. If they are defiled they convey their impurity to the other part. Finally, they are reckoned with the remainder of the produce to constitute the requisite amount to become impure.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  Introduction
  Today's mishnah lists part of produce that are considered part of the produce for matters of defiling and being defiled. If they are defiled, the rest is defiled and vice versa. But they do not join together to make up the requisite minimum because they are not food.
  The following are both defiled and defile, but do not join together [together with the rest]: Roots of garlic, onions or leeks when they are dry, the stalk that is not within the edible part, the twig of a vine a handbreadth long on either side, the stem of the cluster whatsoever be its length, the tail of the cluster bereft of grapes, the stem of the ‘broom’ of the palm-tree to a length of four handbreadths, the stalk of the ear [of grain] to a length of three handbreadths, and the stalk of all things that are cut, to the length of three handbreadths.  Most of the items listed here can be used to hold the produce but are not edible. Thus they are considered "handles" to food but are not "food". They are defiled and defile but since they are not "food" they are not reckoned to reach the requisite minimum needed to be susceptible to impurity. I will explain just a few of these things that are unclear: The "broom of the palm-tree" is the part of the tree that has the dates on its end. It is a "handle" for the dates. Stalks are not eaten but are used to handle grains. It's only necessary to have about three handbreadths so only three handbreadths counts as a handle. Beyond that, the stalk is impervious to impurity and doesn't convey impurity.
  In the case of those things not usually cut, their stalks and roots of any size whatsoever.  If produce is generally not "cut," meaning it is not harvested with something like a scythe, then any sized stalk or root could be used as a handle. Since these parts will not usually be attached, if he leaves them attached then he must have intended them to be used as a handle.
  As for the outer husks of grains, they defile and are defiled, but do not join together.  The outer husks of grains are not edible but they are "handles."
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  The following neither defile nor can they be defiled and they do not join together:The roots of cabbage-stalks,Young shoots of beet growing out of the root, and [similar] such turnip-heads,[And produce whose roots] that are ordinarily cut off but in this case were pulled up [with their roots].Rabbi Yose declares them all susceptible to contract uncleanness, but he declares insusceptible cabbage-stalks and turnip-heads.Today's mishnah lists parts of produce that are neither edible nor used as a handle. Therefore, they are not susceptible to impurity nor do they count as part of the volume. Most of the mishnah should be self-explanatory, so I have only explained some sections.Section two: Cabbages are held by the cabbage itself. The roots are neither eaten nor used to hold the cabbage.Section three: These parts too are not eaten nor used as handles.Section four: If it is typical to cut off the vegetable and leave the roots in the ground, but for some reason in this case, he uprooted the roots with the vegetable, the roots are not part of the vegetable.Section five: Rabbi Yose says that all of the above are indeed handles to the vegetable, the only exceptions being the roots cabbage-stalks and turnip heads.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  Stalks of all foods that have been threshed on the threshing-floor are clean. Rabbi Yose declares them unclean.  Once produce has been threshed, the edible part has been detached from the stalk. Therefore the stalks no longer serve as handles and they are clean meaning they are not susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Yose disagrees and says that they are still susceptible.
  A sprig of a vine when stripped of its grapes is clean, but if one grape alone is left on it, it is unclean. A twig of a date-tree stripped of its dates is clean, but if one date remains on it, it is unclean. Similarly, with beans, if the pods were stripped from the stem it is clean, but if even one pod alone remains, it is unclean. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah declares [the stalk] of the broad bean clean, but declares unclean the stalk of other beans, since it is of use when [the pulse] is handled.  There are three sections here that all basically teach the same thing. Once a grape, date or bean has been removed from that which was holding it, the handle is no longer a handle and it is pure. Rabbi Elazar ben Azariah agrees with most of these scenarios but disagrees with regard to the stalk of most types of pulse since these are used when the pulse is picked up.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Introduction
  Today's mishnah is that which gives our tractate its name it deals with stems (oktzim).
  Stems of figs and dried figs, kelusim, and carobs are both defiled and defile, and they join together. Rabbi Yose says: also the stalks of the gourd.  The stems of these fruits can be eaten. Therefore they are fully considered part of the fruit. Rabbi Yose says that the stem of the gourd is edible, but the other sages hold that while it is a handle, it is not edible.
  The stems of pears and krutumelin pears, quinces, and crab-apples, the stalks of the gourd and the artichoke [to the length of] one handbreadth. Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: two handbreadths; [All] these are defiled and defile; but do not join together.  These stems are used as handles but they are not edible. Therefore, they defile and can be defiled but since they are not food they don't add to the requisite amount.
  As for other stems, they are neither defiled nor do they defile.  The stems of other types of produce are not used as handles nor are they eaten. Therefore, they are not susceptible to impurity.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Leaves of olives pickled together with the olives remain clean, for their pickling was only for the sake of appearances.  Leaves of olives are not edible. Even if one pickled them with olives, he did so only for appearance sake. Therefore, they are not susceptible to impurity.
  The fibrous substance on a zucchini and the flower-like substance on it are clean. Rabbi Judah says: that as long as it is still before the merchant, it is unclean.  These substances that are on a zucchini are neither edible nor are they handles. Therefore, they are not susceptible to impurity. Rabbi Judah holds that since a merchant wants to sell the zucchini (these are not necessarily identical to modern varieties) in as great of a volume as possible, as long as these are with the merchant, these parts are susceptible to impurity. However, once they are sold they are useless so they are no longer susceptible.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  All kinds of pits can be defiled and defile but do not join together.  Pits are part of the fruit in which they are found and therefore they defile and can be defiled. But since they fall out and are not really attached to the fruit, they do not join together to make the requisite amount.
  The pits of fresh dates, even when detached [from the edible part], do join together; but those of dried dates do not join together.  People suck on the pits of fresh dates. Therefore, they count fully as part of the date. But dried dates are like other pits, they are not counted with the date.
  Accordingly, the stems of dried dates do join together, but that of fresh dates do not join together.  The stem of a dried date is considered to be something that protects the pit from falling out. Therefore, it is fully considered part of the date. But a person doesn't care if the pit of a fresh date falls out, because it's part of the date. Therefore, the stem does not "guard" the fruit and the stem doesn't count.
  If only part of a pit is detached, then only that part near the edible portion joins together.  If part of a fresh date pit has become detached, only the part next to the date still counts. I really can't imagine how one could actually determine how big the date is, but theoretically it makes sense.
  [Similarly] with a bone on which there is flesh, only that part that is close to the edible part joins together.  The same thing is true when determining the volume of meat. The bone is part of the meat, but only the part of the bone on which there is still some flesh.
  [If a bone] has flesh only upon one of its sides: Rabbi Ishmael says: we take it as though [the flesh] encompasses it like a ring; But the sages say: [only] that part close to the edible part is included [as is the case] for example with savory, hyssop and thyme.  The sages debate a case in which there is meat on only one side of the bone. Rabbi Ishmael says that we look at the flesh as if it was a string and if there is enough to go around the bone, it joins together. This would mean even the part of the bone that is not under the flesh would join together. The sages disagree and say that only the part of the bone that has flesh on it joins with the flesh. The other part does not. This is like these three spices that have thin stalks and the spices are on only one side. Whatever has spices on it joins together and whatever does not have spices on it, does not count.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  If a pomegranate or melon has rotted in part, [what is rotten] does not join together.  The rotted part of the fruit does not join together to equal the requisite amount.
  And if [the fruit] is sound at either end but has rotted in the middle, [what is rotten] does not join together.  Even if both ends are okay and only the middle part is rotten, it still is not counted as part of the fruit.
  The stem of a pomegranate does join together, but the fibrous substance in it does not join together. Rabbi Elazar says: also the comb is not susceptible to uncleanness.  The stem of the pomegranate is treated like other stems and it joins together with the fruit. But the little hairs inside the stem do not. Albeck describes the "comb" as being a sort of "cup" around the fibrous substance whose edge looks like a comb. This part is clean meaning it doesn't join together and according to the Tosefta it is not even considered part of the fruit such that it could be defiled.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  All kinds of peels defile and are defiled, and join together.  Peels generally protect the fruit that's what they're there for. So they count as part of the fruit, they defile and can be defiled and they join together to add up to the minimal amount.
  Rabbi Judah says: an onion has three skins: the innermost one whether it is in its entire state or whether it be pierced with holes joins together; the middle one when it is in a whole state joins together, but when it is pierced with holes does not join together; the outermost skin is in either case insusceptible to uncleanness.  Rabbi Judah distinguishes between the different layers of an onion. The inner part is always considered part of the onion. It's probably edible so why shouldn't it be. The middle part is part of the onion when it is whole. But if it has holes, meaning it's not complete, it is not part of the onion. [This is probably the part I always try to keep because I don't like to waste, but sometimes I can't peel the outer part without taking this off as well]. The outer peel is not part of the onion because the onion is protected even without it.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  If one chops up [fruit] for cooking, even if [the chopping had] not been completely finished, it is not regarded as connected.  Once one begins to chop up produce in order to cook it, the pieces are no longer considered connected to one another.
  If his intention had been to pickle or to boil it, or to set it on the table, then it is regarded as connected.  However, if he intends to either pickle, boil or set aside the pieces, then they are considered connected to one another. If one is defiled, then they are all defiled. It is a bit difficult to understand why or how section two differs from section one. According to Albeck, section two presents cases in which he wants the pieces to stay together until he does something else with them, such as pickle them, put them in a pot or put them in front of those eating.  Therefore, they are considered connected. However, in section one he doesn't care if they stay connected, perhaps because he will cook them separately.
  If he began to take [the pieces] apart, [only] that part of the food which he began to take apart is not considered connected.  This refers to section two. Once he begins to take the pieces of the fruit apart from the pile that they were in, the stuff he has taken apart is no longer considered connected. But the parts he has not yet taken apart remain connected.
  Nuts that had been strung together, or onions that had been piled together, count as connected. If he began to take the nuts apart, or to strip the onions, they are not connected.  Nuts or onions strung together, perhaps to bring them to market, count as connected. But once he begins to take them apart, they are not connected.
  [Shells of] nuts and almonds are considered connected [with the edible part] until they are crushed.  Shells of nuts are connected until they are smashed to get the nuts out. Once they are smashed, they are not considered connected even if he has not yet removed the shells. This is because they no longer protect the nut.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  [The shell of] a roasted egg [is considered connected] until it is cracked. That of a hard-boiled egg [is considered connected] until it is entirely broken up.  The shell of a roasted, soft-boiled egg is considered connected to the egg until the egg is cracked so that someone could scoop out or suck out the egg itself. If the egg was hard-boiled, then the shell is connected until it's all broken up. At this point it no longer guards the eggs. But it is already not considered connected even though it hasn't been removed.
  A marrow-bone serves as connected until it is wholly crushed.  Until he crushes the bone to get out the marrow, the whole bone is considered connected.
  A pomegranate that has been divided into sections is connected until it has been knocked with a stick.  It seems that they would remove the seeds of the pomegranate by hitting it with a stick. This is a trick that I would like to learn. In any case, until he knocks on the pomegranate to separate the seeds, it is considered connected.
  Similarly, loose stitches of laundrymen or a garment that had been stitched together with threads of kilayim, are connected until one begins to loosen them.  If a laundrymen or clothier sold strung garments together with string that are "kilayim" with each other meaning the garment is wool and the string is linen or vice versa then they are connected and therefore forbidden from use until he begins to loosen them.
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  The [outer] leaves of vegetables: if they are green they join together, but if they have whitened they not join together.  If the outer leaves are green, they are still edible and therefore they are included as part of the vegetable. Once they have whitened, they are no longer part and are not included.
  Rabbi Elazar bar Zadok says: the white leaves of cabbage join together because they are edible.  White outer leaves of cabbage are still edible so they join together.
  So also those of lettuces, because they preserve the edible part.  While the outer leaves of lettuce may not be eaten, they join together because they protect the inner part.
  
  Mishnah 8
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah deals with foods that have an empty space in them, or that might have an empty space. Does the empty space count as part of the volume of the food?
  Onion leaves or the offshoots of onions, if there is moisture in them they are to be measured as they are; if there is empty space within them, it must be squeezed tightly together.  "Onion leaves" probably refers to leaks. "Offshoots of onions" are small onions that sprout from larger onions. In either case, if they are still moist, then they are measured for matters of impurity as they currently are. However, if they have dried out and the inner part is not full of moisture, then we squeeze the air out of them before measuring them.
  Spongy bread is measured as it is, but if there is empty space within it, it must be pressed firmly.  The same is true for spongy bread. If it is moist, it is measured as it is, but if there is an empty space in it, the empty space is squeezed before it is measured.
  The flesh of a calf which had swollen, or the flesh of an old [beast] that has shrunken in size, are measured in the condition they are in.  The swelling or shrinking of this meat is after cooking. The mishnah basically teaches that if meat either expands or shrinks when cooked, its volume is measured as it is, and not as it was.
  
  Mishnah 9
  
  A cucumber planted in a pot which grew until it was out of the pot is pure.  The mishnah refers to a plant growing in a non-perforated pot. Such a plant is treated as if it is no longer attached to the ground and it is susceptible to impurity. According to the first opinion in the mishnah, if the plant grows out of the pot is now considered to be attached to the ground below it. Plants that grow from the ground are not susceptible to impurity and therefore this plant is now pure. Note that the whole plant is pure, not just the parts growing out of the plant.
  Rabbi Shimon said: what is its nature to make it clean? Rather, that which has already become unclean remains unclean, and only that which is pure can be eaten.  Rabbi Shimon questions how something that was impure can all of a sudden become pure. He rejects the tanna kamma and holds that once something is unclean it remains unclean. The part of the plant that remains in the pot is impure; only the part of the plant that grows out of the pot is pure.
  
  Mishnah 10
  
  Vessels made of cattle dung or of earth through which the roots can penetrate, do not render the seeds susceptible.  If a pot is made of cattle dung or earth and the pot has been perforated so that roots can penetrate to the ground do not allow the seeds inside to become susceptible to impurity. This means that if rain water falls into this pot, the seeds are not susceptible to impurity.
  A perforated plant-pot does not render seeds susceptible; but if it has no hole, the seeds do become susceptible. What should be the hole's dimension? Such that a small root can push its way through.  Produce growing in perforated pots is considered to be attached to the ground. Therefore, anything in it is not susceptible to impurity. But pots without holes are treated as if they are not "ground" and produce growing in there is susceptible. To be considered "perforated" the hole must be at least wide enough for a small root to push through.
  If it was filled with earth to its brim, it is deemed as a frame without an edge.  If the pot was completely filled up, all the way to the brim, then it is treated like a "frame without an edge" (see Kelim 2:3). This means that there is no "inside" to the frame or in this case the pot. So anything that grows in such a pot is not susceptible to impurity.
  
  
  
  
  
  Mishnah 1
  
  Some things need to be rendered susceptible [to uncleanness] but they do not need intention,[Other things need] intention and to be rendered susceptible.[Other things] need intention, but do not need to be rendered susceptible,[And other things] need neither to be rendered susceptible nor intention.Any food that is meant for people need to be rendered susceptible, but does not need intention.The first four sections of this mishnah divide foods into four categories depending on two factors. First of all, whether they need to have been in contact with water in order to be susceptible to impurity (the topic of Makhshirin). Second, whether a person needs to be think about using them for human food in order for them to be susceptible. Our mishnah introduces these issues and then subsequent mishnayot explain and illustrate them. Sections 1-4 are the introduction, section five is explained below.Section five: This illustrates the rule in section one. Foods that are clearly intended for human use, let's say expensive fruits, need to have been in contact with water to be susceptible. But since they are clearly meant for human consumption, they do not need intention. One doesn't need to actively decide that the food will be used by a human for it to be susceptible.
  
  Mishnah 2
  
  Introduction
  This mishnah lists things that are not human food and therefore are not susceptible to impurity unless someone decides that they are going to eat them (some of these are a bit gross, so beware). They also require contact with water to become susceptible.
  That which has been severed from a human, beast, wild animal, bird, or from the carrion of an unclean bird, and the fat in villages.  Pieces of flesh cut off of a living human, beast, wild animal or bird are not impure. If one decides to eat them (this is not allowed, but someone might do it) and they come into contact with water, they become susceptible to impurity. The carrion of an unclean bird is not impure (see Toharot 1:3). Therefore, a piece of flesh cut off from it has the same status as the other meat.
  And all kinds of wild vegetables, except for truffles and mushrooms; Rabbi Judah says, except for field-leeks, purslane and ornithagolum. And Rabbi Shimon says: except for cynara sycaria. Rabbi Yose says: except for muscari comusum.  Wild vegetables generally are not eaten. There are however some exceptions. The first opinion and various other rabbis cite some exceptions. I don't know what some of these are and the translations are mostly from Albeck. Suffice it to say that these are wild grown vegetables that seem to have been eaten.
  Behold all these need both intention and to be rendered susceptible [to uncleanness].  This is the summary of category two from yesterday's mishnah. In order to be susceptible to impurity these things need to come into contact with liquids and one needs to actively decide that they are going to be eaten.
  
  Mishnah 3
  
  The carrion of an unclean beast at all places, and of a clean bird in villages, need intention but do not need to be rendered susceptible.  The foods listed in this section are not generally eaten, at least according the first opinion. Therefore, to defile one would need to think about them as food. However, since they are already impure they don't need to be rendered susceptible to impurity. Carrion of an unclean beast, for instance horse carrion, defiles. This mishnah really didn't need to teach this, because it is stated clearly in the Torah. In order to find an innovation in the mishnah the talmud notes that generally less than an olive's worth does not defile because it is too small of an amount. The mishnah is understood as innovating that if 1/2 of an olive's worth of carrion from an unclean beast joins together with a 1/2 of an olive's worth of other unclean food, the two halves join together to defile in the same was as would impure food. If one doesn't think about eating this carrion, it's not considered food because most people don't consider unclean beasts to be food. The carrion of a clean bird is forbidden to eat but it doesn't defile except when in the gullet (see Toharot 1:1). In the villages where there aren't a lot of people evidently most people wouldn't bother eating bird carrion. Therefore, one would specifically have to think about eating it for it to defile.
  The carrion of a clean beast in all places, and that of a clean bird and also fat in the market places, require neither intention nor to be rendered susceptible.  Carrion of a clean beast is forbidden but since most people do eat such animals, it causes food impurity even if one doesn't specifically think about using it for food. It also doesn't need to be made susceptible because carrion is already impure. In market places people will be found to buy carrion of clean birds and forbidden fat. Therefore, they don't need to be thought of as food to defile. And since they are already impure, they don't need contact with liquid to become susceptible.
  Rabbi Shimon says: also [the carrion of] the camel, rabbit, hare or pig.  Rabbi Shiomon says that people eat camel, hare, rabbit and pig. Therefore, the same rules that apply to carrion of clean meat (cow, sheep, goats) apply to them.
  
  Mishnah 4
  
  Introduction
  Today's mishnah discusses what constitutes food such that if it was originally terumah it is still considered terumah and it would still be subject to the laws of food impurity.
  We should note that the identity of some of these spices is speculative. Nevertheless, the principles are clear.
  The aneth stalk after having given its taste to a dish is no longer subject to the laws of terumah, and also no longer imparts food uncleanness.  Once a stalk of aneth has given away its taste into a dish, it is no longer considered to be food. It's just a stalk. Therefore, if it was terumah, the stalk can now be eaten by a non-priest. And it is no longer subject to the laws of food impurity.
  The young sprouts of hawthorn, of lapidum, or leaves of the wild arum, do not impart food uncleanness until they are sweetened.  These sprouts or other agricultural products are not considered human food in their raw form. They are "food" only once they've been "sweetened" by soaking them in wine, vinegar or salt water, sort of pickling them. There are many foods we eat today that would probably have the same rule for instance raw coffee or chocolate. These are inedible in their raw form and wouldn't be considered food until they've been processed.
  Rabbi Shimon says: also [the leaves of] the colocynth are like them.  Some say that the vegetable referred to here is a type of wild vine while some say it is a wild melon. In any case, the leaves are not edible until sweetened.
  
  Mishnah 5
  
  Costus, amomum, principal spices, [roots of] crowfoot, asafoetida, pepper and lozenges made of saffron may be bought with tithe money, but they do not convey food uncleanness, the words of Rabbi Akiva.  According to Rabbi Akiva these spices and other plant derivatives (some of them are also mentioned in Tevul Yom 1:5) are considered food in that one can use second tithe money to purchase them. As a reminder, second tithe money is supposed to be brought to Jerusalem and used to buy food there (see Deuteronomy 14:26). However, they do not convey food uncleanness, so in this aspect they are considered food. Evidently the reasoning is that these foods aren't foods but they do improve the taste of other foods. Since they improve taste, one can use second tithe money to buy them. But since they are not eaten on their own, they cannot convey food impurity.
  Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri to him: if they may be bought with [second] tithe money, then why should they not impart food uncleanness? And if they do not impart food uncleanness, then they should also not be bought with [second] tithe money?  Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri doesn't like this inconsistency. In his opinion, a plant is either considered a food, in which case it can be bought with second tithe money and it would convey food uncleanness. Or it is not a food in which case it can't be bought with second tithe money and it doesn't convey uncleanness.
  
  Mishnah 6
  
  Unripe figs or grapes: Rabbi Akiva says: they convey food uncleanness; Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: [this is only] when they have reached the season when they are liable to tithes.  According to Rabbi Akiva, although they are not yet ready to eat, unripe grapes and figs are already considered food and therefore they convey food uncleanness. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says that this is so only when they become liable to tithes. Their liability to tithes is discussed in Sheviit 4:7-8.
  Olives and grapes that have hardened: Bet Shammai says: they are susceptible to uncleanness, Bet Hillel says: they are insusceptible.  The mishnah now moves to the opposite scenario olives and grapes that have hardened. Bet Shammai says that they are nevertheless still considered food. Bet Hillel says that since they are generally no longer eaten, they are no longer considered food.
  Black cumin: Bet Shammai says: is not susceptible, Bet Hillel says: it is susceptible.  Bet Shammai says that black cumin which is not eaten but just put on the top of bread is not considered food and therefore is not susceptible to impurity. Bet Hillel says that since it is eaten, it is considered food.
  Similarly [they dispute with regard to their liability to] tithes.  The same dispute occurs with regard to tithing black cumin. Bet Shammai says it is not food and therefore need not be tithed. Bet Hillel says it is liable for tithes because it is food.
  
  Mishnah 7
  
  The heart of a palm is like wood in every respect, except that it may be bought for [second] tithe money.  Heart of palm is not generally considered food and therefore it is not susceptible to food impurity. This is probably because often it wouldn't be eaten, since the palm grew before the heart could be harvested. However, since it is edible when the palm is still young, one can use second tithe money to buy it.
  Unripened dates are considered food, but are exempt from tithes.  Unripened dates are almost an opposite case. Whereas the heart of palm begins as food but then becomes inedible, unripened dates are currently inedible but will become edible later. They are considered food as far as impurity goes, but if one eats them before they are ripe, he need not tithe them.
  
  Mishnah 8
  
  When do fish become susceptible to uncleanness? Bet Shammai say: after they have been caught. Bet Hillel say: only after they are dead. Rabbi Akiva says: if they can still live.  Fish can be eaten without first being slaughtered. Indeed, theoretically one could catch a fish from the sea and immediately eat it even while it's still alive (there definitely are cultures that do this). Therefore, Bet Shammai says that fish are immediately susceptible to impurity, once they have been caught, for they are immediately considered food. Bet Hillel says they are not food until they are dead, because that's when they are generally eaten. Rabbi Akiva takes a position somewhere between the two houses. If the fish is still currently alive but will die even if it were thrown back into the water, then it is already considered food and is susceptible to impurity. But if the fish has been caught but could still be thrown back into the water and live, then it is not susceptible.
  If a branch of a fig tree was broken off, but it was still attached by its bark: Rabbi Judah says: [the fruit] is still not susceptible to uncleanness. But the sages say: [it all depends] whether they could still live.  A similar case is brought with regard to branches that have been cut off a tree but are still hanging by their bark. Fruit on a tree is not susceptible to impurity but once it has been cut off it is. Rabbi Judah says that as long as the fruit is hanging by its bark, meaning it is still attached, it is not susceptible. The other sages say that it all depends on whether the fruit is attached enough such that it could live. Like the fish, if the fruit could still live, it is not susceptible to impurity.
  Grain that had been uprooted, but is still attached to the soil even by the smallest of roots, is not susceptible to uncleanness.  Grain is not susceptible to impurity until it has completely been severed from the soil
  
  Mishnah 9
  
  Introduction
  Today's mishnah returns to the topic of whether a food needs to first be made susceptible to impurity or whether it needs "intention" in order to be considered food.
  The fat [of the carcass] of a clean beast is not regarded as unclean with carrion uncleanness; for this reason it must first be made susceptible.  "Helev," a certain type of fat, from a clean animal, cow, goat or sheep, that died without being properly slaughtered, is not impure. Only the "helev" of an unclean animal (camel, rabbit, pig, etc.) is impure (as is the whole animal, after it has died). So if one has "helev" from an clean animal it must first come into contact with water to be even susceptible to impurity. We should note that such fat is forbidden to eat, even if the animal was properly slaughtered.
  The fat of an unclean beast, however, is regarded as unclean with carrion uncleanness; for this reason it need not be made at first susceptible.  As stated above, "helev" from an unclean animal is already impure. Indeed, the entire animal is impure (see mishnah three). Therefore, even the helev need not come into contact with water for it to be impure.
  As for unclean fish and unclean locusts, intention is required in villages.  In the villages people don't seem to eat unclean fish and locusts. Therefore, in such places, for the fish or locust to be susceptible to food impurity the person must have the intention to eat it. In contrast, in larger marketplaces people will eat such food. If this food is sold there, it will not require intention for it to be susceptible to impurity. In all places, the fish and locusts are not susceptible to impurity until they have had contact with liquids.
  
  Mishnah 10
  
  Introduction
  Today's mishnah deals with the halakhic status of a bee-hive. Specifically, the sages debate whether it is considered to have the status of land because it is attached to the land.
  A bee-hive: Rabbi Eliezer says: it is treated as if it were land; and one can write a prozbul on it security, it is also not susceptible to uncleanness as long as it remains in its own place, and the one who scrapes honey from it on Shabbat is liable to a sin-offering.  According to Rabbi Eliezer, the beehive has the status of land. The mishnah lists three consequences to this determination. a) If the debtor owns a beehive, a prozbul may be written using just the beehive as security, even though he owns no actual land. This is a topic that we covered in yesterday’s mishnah. A prozbul was a document written by the creditor to avoid loan remission in the Sabbatical year (see chapter 10 of Tractate Sheviit). In order to write a prozbul one must own land (see Sheviit 10:6-7). b) Land and anything that is considered attached to it (such as plants or houses) is not susceptible to impurity. Thus, according to Rabbi Eliezer, the beehive cannot become impure. However, this is only true while it remains in its place. If the beehive was picked up and moved elsewhere, it can become susceptible to impurity. c) One who plucks something from the land is liable for having transgressed Shabbat. Hence, according to Rabbi Eliezer, one who removes honey from a beehive on Shabbat is liable.
  But the sages say: it is not to be treated as if it were land, and one many not write a prozbul on its security; it is susceptible even if it remains in its own place; and the one who scrapes honey from it on Shabbat is exempt [from a sin-offering].  The rabbis do not consider the beehive to be “land” and therefore, in all three of these halakhot, they rule opposite of Rabbi Eliezer.
  
  Mishnah 11
  
  Introduction
  Honey is one of the seven liquids that causes food to become susceptible to impurity (see Makhshirin 6:4). Today's mishnah discusses when honey from a honeycomb begins to count as honey.
  When do honeycombs become susceptible to uncleanness on account of their being regarded as liquids?  As long as the honey is still totally connected to the honeycombs it is still part of its source and liquids that are still part of their source do not cause susceptibility to impurity. Therefore the mishnah asks at what point the honey begins to be considered a "liquid" such that it would cause susceptibility.
  Bet Shammai says: from the moment he begins to smoke the bees out.  Bet Shammai says that as soon as someone begins to smoke the bees out of the honeycomb, the honey counts as liquid. Once the bees are gone, the honey can be eaten.
  But Bet Hillel says: once he breaks up the honeycomb.  Bet Hillel says he has to actually break up the honeycomb to get the honey out.
  
  Mishnah 12
  
  Introduction
  The last mishnah in the entire Mishnah is actually not originally a mishnah! It was a late addition to the Mishnah so that the book could end with a word of peace.
  Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: In the world to come the Holy One, Blessed be He, will make each righteous person inherit three hundred and ten worlds, for it is written: "That I may cause those that love me to inherit yesh (numerical value of 310); and that I may fill their treasuries" (Proverbs 8:2.  The first derashah is based on the word "yesh" which in Hebrew has the gematria (numerical) value of 310 (yod is 10, shin is 300). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi understands the word "yesh" to mean that tzadikim, the righteous, will inherit 310 worlds. I hope they're good ones!
  Rabbi Shimon ben Halafta said: the Holy One, Blessed be He, found no vessel that could contain blessing for Israel save that of peace, as it is written: "The Lord will give strength unto his people; the Lord will bless his people with peace."  Shalom, peace, wellbeing, or perhaps completeness, is the vehicle by which God brings berakhah into the world. It is the reason that the last berakhah of the Amidah is "peace" and it is the reason that the Mishnah, which has been one of the greatest berakhot the Jews have ever created or received, ends with the same word. Completeness is also an appropriate way of completing the Mishnah, which after more than 12 years, you and I have now done. Congratulations! We have completed Tractate Oktzim, Seder Toharot and the Entire Mishnah!! Usually I write, "It is a tradition at this point to thank God for helping us finish learning the tractate and to commit ourselves to going back and relearning it, so that we may not forget it and so that its lessons will stay with us for all of our lives." But today, I think I might need to write a bit more. For the past 12 years I have been writing my commentary on the Mishnah and you have been reading and studying it. And now, we've actually reached that moment. We've finished learning the whole Mishnah. So grab yourself a beer, a glass of wine, a shot of whiskey, raise a l'haim, say a berakhah (shehakol over beer and whiskey, hagafen over wine) and drink up. It's been a true privilege to serve as your teacher and it's been an amazing opportunity for me as well. I should say that my feeling is one of utter humility. My commentary was based on the work of others, whose work was based on their predecessors, going all the way back to the Talmud. I hope I have brought to you just a small taste of the amazing rabbinic tradition. The Mishnah is, after all, one of the shortest of rabbinic works. There is much learning to be done, and shortly we will begin Daf Shevui. But for now, one moment of congratulations is in order. I will be reciting the Hebrew siyyum (words of completion) on Sunday at the Conservative Yeshiva. Hopefully, it will be on the internet so that you can see it as well. Congratulations on an amazing amount of learning. And finally thank you to all of the people who've made this possible. Thanks to all of you who have donated money to subsidize the project. Thanks to the many people at USCJ in New York, Dr. Morton Siegel and Rabbi Paul Drazen, and others over the years who've made sure the Mishnah was properly sent out. Thanks to the people at the Conservative Yeshiva, including Rabbi Gail Diamond, who took over the project in recent years. And "aharon aharon haviv" I want to extend my warmest gratitude to Rabbi Jerome Epstein who approached me about 12 years ago and asked whether I would be interested and willing to start this project. Without Rabbi Epstein's commitment Mishnah Yomit would never have begun and it would not have been completed. For twelve years he has been my most consistent learner, and without his careful eye, the text would have been full of even more typos than there probably are. I have benefited tremendously from his dedication and I hope it continues for many years.