Ask A Question about the Daf

Previous daf

Nidah 49

1. USING A "KLI" WITH A HOLE FOR NETILAS YADAYIM OPINIONS: The Gemara rules that a vessel with a hole which allows liquids to enter the vessel (Kones Mashkeh) is Pasul for Mei Chatas. The Gemara in Chulin 107a rules that a vessel with a hole which is Kones Mashkeh is invalid for Netilas Yadayim as well.

   Do these laws apply only to Klei Cheres (with which our Sugya is dealing) or to all Kelim?

   1. TOSFOS (DH Im) concludes that since the Gemara which discusses Netilas Yadayim did not single out any particular material, it is evident that all vessels become invalid for Netilas Yadayim if they have a hole which is Kones Mashkeh.

      The Derishah (Orach Chayim 159) explains that even though a different sized hole is necessary to make each material Tahor, nevertheless we require a "complete" Kli for Netilas Yadayim. Even a hole the size of Kones Mashkeh makes a Kli no longer complete.

   2. The RAMBAM (Hilchos Berachos 6:11) rules, "Any vessel which is broken in a way that it would *become Tahor*, is no longer valid for Netilas Yadayim." The Kesef Mishneh explains that the Rambam is ruling differently from Tosfos. According to the RAMBAM, the size of the hole which would invalidate a vessel for Netilas Yadayim varies depending on the material it is made from, just as each material needs a different sized hole to make it Tahor. Thus, a vessel which would become Tahor with a hole which is Kones Mashkeh would become invalid for Netilas Yadayim with such a hole, while a vessel which would become Tahor with a hole the size of a k'Zayis would only become invalid for Netilas Yadayim with such a hole, not with a smaller hole.

      HALACHAH: The TAZ (Orach Chayim 159:1) and BI'UR HALACHAH (ibid.) rule in accordance with TOSFOS that there is a uniform Shi'ur for the hole that invalidates a Kli for Netilas Yadayim. A hole the size of Kones Mashkeh renders all Kelim invalid for Netilas Yadayim.

49b

2. "KELIM" UNDER A "ZAV" WHICH ARE NOT SUITED FOR SITTING UPON
   • Question: The Mishnah rules that there are objects which become Tamei Mes but not Tamei Midras. The Gemara elaborates that this refers to a Se'ah and Tarkav, which acquire Tumas Mes but not Midras since they are not suited for sitting upon. (Of course, if the body of the Zav made physical contact with the Se'ah or Tarkav it becomes Tamei since it touched him. We are discussing a situation where something is separating the Zav from the Se'ah or Tarkav)

     RASHI (DH l'Asuye) explains that since a Se'ah or Tarkav are not suited for sitting upon, they do not become an "Av ha'Tum'ah." This implies that they are Tamei, but they are not Avos ha'Tum'ah. They are merely Rishon l'Tum'ah.

     The Mishnah (Zavim 5:2) states: Whatever a Zav is above is Tahor unless it is suited for sitting on. How, then, can Rashi write that a Se'ah or Tarkav becomes a Rishon l'Tumah?

   • Answer: TOSFOS (Eruvin 27 DH Kol) quotes the opinion of RABBEINU TAM, who explains that the Mishnah in Zavim does not literally mean that the objects beneath the Zav are fully Tahor. The Mishnah means that the objects are not Avos ha'Tumah but are considered Rishon l'Tumah. Rashi clearly agrees with RABBEINU TAM. (This is even more explicit in RASHI later in Nidah 54b DH Hi.)

     This also explains why Rashi tells us earlier on this page (DH l'Asuyei) that when a Zav sits on a Se'ah or Tarkav it becomes a Rishon, since he has touched it. The Zav sitting on the Se'ah or Tarkav is presumably wearing pants -- why should we automatically assume that if he sits on a Se'ah or Tarkav his skin has touched it?

     According to what we have said, though, Rashi simply means that a Se'ah or Tarkav under a Zav is *always* a Rishon, regardless of whether it touches his skin or not. (M. Kornfeld)

     (Permission is granted to print and redistribute this material as long as this header and the footer at the end of the mailing are included.)