This Week's Article

Torn Patches

Keilim (27:10) | Yisrael Bankier | 11 hours ago

Recall that fabric that is three by three tephachim is susceptible to tumat midras. This means that if a zav or a zava sit on that begged it becomes an av ha'tumah -- a source of tumah. The Mishnah (27:10) discusses a case where that tameh midras fabric was torn in two pieces. Whilst each piece is no longer large enough to be susceptible to tumat midras, it is still large enough for other forms of tumah. Consequently, the Chachamim maintain that it is no longer tameh midras, but rather maga midras. In other words, the smaller pieces are considered like something that came into contact with a fabric that was tameh midras and is consequently a rishon le'tumah. R' Yossi however argues that while the pieces originated from something that was tameh midras, the smaller pieces were never in contact with something that was tameh midras. They are therefore tahor. We shall try to understand this debate.

The Gemara (Chulin 94b) explains that if the clothe was torn such that one of the pieces was still larger than three-by-three then even R' Yossi agrees with that the smaller piece is maga midras. That is because it would be very difficult to prevent the two pieces from touching as they separated. The debate is where the two final pieces are less than three-by-three. The debate is regarding tumat beit setarim. In other words, as the begged is being torn, do we view the yet to be torn part as a contact point between the two pieces such that tumah can transfer.

The Tosfot (94b s.v lo) however explains that another Mishnah (Keilim 29:8) appears to teach that once a tallit is mostly torn it becomes completely tahor. Similarly the Tosfot Yom Tov notes that the Bartenura explain in Zevachim (11:5) that a begged that is torn in two is completely tahor. The Tosfot Yom Tov cites the Tosfot who explains that there the begged was an existing kli -- a full garment. Tearing it two "breaks" it and making it completely tahor, as one would expect regarding any broken kli (except for klei cheres). In our Mishnah we are discussing a large piece of fabric that does share the same laws as keilim and tearing it therefore simply reduces its size.

Rashi (Chullin 123a) however provides a different explanation. He explains that in our Mishnah the begged became tameh in two ways. It was tameh midras and a zav also touched it. Tearing the begged was only able to remove one of the tumot -- tumat midras -- since it was no longer big enough for tumat midras. The case in Zevachim however is where there was only one form of tumah on the begged, for example a zav touched it. Tearing it therefore removed that tumah.

The Tosfot however find this answer very difficult. Why should tearing the begged only have the ability to remove one tumah? Furthermore, if the parts of the torn begged are larger than three-by-three fingers width, why should it be tahor.

The Kovetz Shiurim¹ explains that the debate between the Rashi and Tosfot touches on how they understand why breaking a kli makes it tahor. According to the Tosfot, they understand that when a kli is broken it loses its status as a kli and along with that, the susceptibility to tumah. Rashi however understands that the act of breaking a kli -- the process -- as a purifying act. This is learnt from the pasuk "oto tishboru" from which we learn that it is similar to immersion in a mikveh. The novelty that Rashi adds is that this process works for one tumah and not two.

Yisrael Bankier

¹ Cited in the Yalkut Biurim Zevachim 94b.

Download