💾 Archived View for scholasticdiversity.us.to › scriptures › jewish › t › Mishneh%20Torah%2C%20Vesse… captured on 2024-05-10 at 12:29:36. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
24 [1] These are the hides that can contract the impurity associated with the support of a *zav* (*midras*): a hide that one intended to use as a carpet, a hide placed on top of beds to sleep upon, a hide placed on a donkey under the burden it carries, a hide placed in a basinet under a baby, a hide used for a pillow, a hide used for a cushion, a hide placed beneath the table while eating so that crumbs will fall upon it; it is susceptible to impurity, because one leans his feet upon it, a hide worn by a potter, a hide worn by a flax-carder when he cards flax, a hide a porter places on his shoulders when he is carrying burdens, and a hide which a doctor places on his knees when he is puncturing boils. These hides are susceptible to impurity, because a person will sit upon them.
The hide placed over a child's heart upon which spittle descends so that his clothes will not be spoiled, a hide meant to place over a person's heart during the harvest, because of the heat, a hide wrapped around a garment, and a hide sewed into a chest in which clothes are placed are all susceptible to impurity. The rationale is that they are all turned upside down and used as supports. [2] All of the hides that are susceptible to *midras* impurity are not susceptible to that impurity unless they are of the minimum size: five handbreadths by five handbreadths.
The following hides are not susceptible to *midras* impurity: a hide a person who combs wool wears while combing, a hide wrapped around combed wool, a hide wrapped around fine purple cloth, and a carrying case for fine purple cloth sewn from leather. All of these hides are susceptible to other types of impurity. [3] When leather was made into a cover for a *k'li*, it is pure with regard to all types of impurity. If it was made as a cover for weights, it is susceptible to other types of impurity, because it was made to serve as a receptacle. It is not susceptible to *midras* impurity. [4] If a hide made to protect one's heel and the sole of one's foot, covers the greater portion of the foot, it is susceptible to impurity. If not, it is pure. [5] A shoe that is on the mold, even though it has not been worn by a person yet, is still susceptible to *midras* impurity, because the tasks associated with it have been completed. [6] All hides that are fit to become susceptible to *midras* impurity and are not lacking the performance of any tasks to make them functional become susceptible to impurity through thought alone, i.e., if one intended to use it as a mat for a table or the like, it becomes susceptible to *midras* impurity. If the performance of a task is necessary to make them functional, one's intent does not change their status until that task is completed. There is an exception: a hide used to cover a saddle to guard it against dust. In this instance, the person's intent has an effect even though the deed necessary to make it functional has not been completed.
With regard to what does the above apply? To hides owned by a private person. Hides owned by a leather maker, by contrast, can be assumed to be set aside for sale. Hence, one's intent does not have an effect on their status unless one performs a deed with them preparing them to serve as a support. [7] A person does not impart *midras* impurity to a surface on which one lies or sits unless it belongs to him, as indicated by Leviticus 15:5: "One who touches his couch...." If one obtained a surface on which one lies through robbery and used it as a support without touching it, it is pure. If the owner despaired of its recovery, it contracts impurity. If one stole a surface on which one lies and sat on it, it contracts impurity, for it can be presumed that the owner despaired of its recovery, because he does not know who stole it. If it is known that the owner has not despaired, the surface is pure. Therefore, if a thief stole a hide and intended to use it to lie on, his intent alone is sufficient to change its status and it can contract *midras* impurity from him. The intent of a robber, by contrast, does not change the status of an article unless the owner despairs of its return. [8] When a hide contracted *midras* impurity and the owner began tearing straps from it, it remains impure until its size was reduced to less than five handbreadths by five handbreadths. [9] The following rules apply to all leather *keilim* that had contracted *midras* impurity from a *zav* and, afterwards, were fashioned into another type of *k'li*. If a leather article was changed from one flat implement to another such implement, it remains impure. If it was changed from a simple implement to a receptacle or from a receptacle to a simple implement, it is pure. And with regard to articles from cloth, everything is impure.
What is implied? If one made a leather drinking pouch into a rug or a rug into a leather drinking pouch, it is pure. If, however, a leather drinking pouch was made into a satchel or a satchel into a drinking pouch, they are considered as impure due to *midras* as they were before. [10] When a cloth pillow that had contracted *midras* impurity was made into a cloak, a cloak was made into a pillow, a cushion or a garment was made into a cover, or a cover was made into a cushion, they remain impure due to *midras* as they were before. [11] The following laws apply to articles that are fundamentally made to function both as receptacles and surfaces on which one can sit or lie, for example, pillows, cushions, sacks, carrying bags. If they were damaged and unable to hold substances, even though they are pure with regard to susceptibility to the impurity associated with a human corpse and other impurities, because they are no longer fit to serve as receptacles, they are still susceptible to *midras* impurity, for they are still fit to serve as supports.
Different rules apply when, by contrast, *keilim* that are made primarily to serve as a receptacle, e.g., a drinking pouch or a satchel. If they are large enough that they are fit to sit upon, since they are sat upon due to their size, they are susceptible to *midras* impurity as long as they are intact. If they are damaged and unable to hold substances, even though it is still possible to sit upon them, they are not susceptible to *midras* impurity. The rationale is that they are made primarily to serve as receptacles. Since they become unfit to serve as receptacles, they became pure and are not susceptible to any type of impurity, neither *midras*, nor any other type.
What is the measure that makes these *keilim* subject to *midras* impurity? A drinking pouch, seven *kabbin*; a carrying case, five *kabbin*; a feeding bag in which barley is hung from the head of an animal, four; a leather sack with which water is poured, a *se'ah*. Anything less than these sizes is not fit to be used as a support and it is not common to be used for people to sit upon.
If they were damaged and one bound up the damaged portion, they are pure; it is as if the damaged portion was not tied closed. All of the drinking pouches that were damaged and bound closed are pure except those of Arabs, because it is always their practice to bind them closed. A bag pipe is not susceptible to *midras* impurity, because it is not common to use it as a support.
Version: Mishneh Torah, trans. by Eliyahu Touger. Jerusalem, Moznaim Pub. c1986-c2007
Source: https://www.nli.org.il/he/books/NNL_ALEPH001020101/NLI
License: CC-BY-NC