Halacha
הלכה א
כֹּהֵן שֶׁטִּהֵר כֵּלָיו לְגַת זוֹ וְהִנִּיחָן לַגַּת הַבָּאָה הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בְּחֶזְקָתָן. שֶׁאֵין עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ נוֹגְעִין בְּכֵלִים שֶׁל כֹּהֵן זֶה שֶׁהֵן בְּתוֹךְ גִּתּוֹ מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהוּא אוֹכֵל טָהֳרוֹת. אֲבָל שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל טְמֵאוֹת עַד שֶׁיֹּאמַר בְּלִבִּי הָיָה לִשְׁמֹר עַם הָאָרֶץ שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס לַגַּת שֶׁלֹּא יִגַּע בְּכֵלִים:
כסף משנה
1.
When a priest purifies his keilim for the grape-pressing season and then sets them aside for the following grape-pressing season, it is assumed that their status remains unchanged, for unlearned people will not touch the keilim of a priest when they are in his winepress, because he partakes of pure food. If an Israelite puts away his keilim in a similar manner, by contrast, they are considered impure, unless he says: "Within my heart, there was a resolve to guard against an unlearned person entering the winepress and touching the keilim."הלכה ב
הָרוֹצֶה לַעֲשׂוֹת יֵינוֹ בְּטָהֳרָה בְּאֻמָּנִין עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ הֲרֵי זֶה מַטְבִּיל אֶת הַבּוֹצְרִים. וְכֵן אִם הָיָה עוֹשֶׂה שֶׁמֶן מַטְבִּיל אֶת הַבַּדָּדִין. וְצָרִיךְ לַעֲמֹד עַל הָאֻמָּנִים עַד שֶׁיִּטְבְּלוּ בְּפָנָיו שֶׁהֲרֵי אֵינָן יוֹדְעִים הִלְכוֹת טְבִילָה וַחֲצִיצָה. יָצְאוּ חוּץ לְפֶתַח בֵּית הַבַּד וְנִפְנוּ אֲחוֹרֵי הַגָּדֵר וְחָזְרוּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ בְּטָהֳרָתָן. עַד כַּמָּה יַרְחִיקוּ וְהֵם טְהוֹרִין עַד כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יִסָּתְרוּ מֵעֵינָיו. אֲבָל אִם נִסְתְּרוּ מֵעֵינָיו חָזְרוּ לְטֻמְאָתָם עַד שֶׁיַּטְבִּילֵם פַּעַם אַחֶרֶת וְיַעֲרִיב שִׁמְשָׁן:
כסף משנה
2.
When a person desires to make wine that is ritually pure while using workers who are unlearned, he must make sure that those who harvest the grapes immerse themselves in a mikveh. Similarly, if they were involved in producing oil, he should have those who work in the olive-press immerse themselves. He must stand over the workers and have them immerse themselves in his presence, for they are not familiar with the laws of immersion and intervening substances.If the workers left the entrance to the olive-press and went outside to defecate behind a fence and returned, they are still considered as ritually pure. How far may they go and still be considered as ritually pure? Until they are hidden from the chavair's sight. If, however, they go out of his sight, they return to a state of impurity until he has them immerse again and they wait until nightfall.
הלכה ג
הַבַּדָּדִין וְהַבּוֹצְרִים שֶׁנִּמְצֵאת טֻמְאָה לִפְנֵיהֶן נֶאֱמָנִין לוֹמַר לֹא נָגַעְנוּ. וְכֵן בְּתִינוֹקוֹת שֶׁלָּהֶם:
כסף משנה
3.
When a source of impurity was found in the presence of olive-press workers and grape harvesters, if they say, "We did not touch it," their word is accepted. This also applies if their children say: "We did not touch the wine or the oil."הלכה ד
הַמְטַהֵר אֶת הַבַּדָּדִין וְהִכְנִיסָן לְבֵית הַבַּד וְנָעַל עֲלֵיהֶן. אִם הָיוּ שָׁם כֵּלִים שֶׁנִּטְמְאוּ בְּמִדְרָס הֲרֵי בֵּית הַבַּד כֻּלּוֹ טָמֵא שֶׁמָּא נָגְעוּ בְּאוֹתָן הַכֵּלִים. וַאֲפִלּוּ רָאָה אוֹתָם מִקֹּדֶם נִזְהָרִין מֵאוֹתָם הַכֵּלִים מִפְּנֵי טֻמְאָתָן הֲרֵי בֵּית הַבַּד טָמֵא שֶׁמָּא הֵסִיטוּ וְהֵן מְדַמִּין שֶׁאֵין הַמֵּסִיט טָמֵא שֶׁאֵין עַמֵּי הָאָרֶץ בְּקִיאִין בְּטֻמְאַת הֶסֵּט:
כסף משנה
4.
The following laws apply when a person purifies olive-press workers, brings them into the vat, and locks it. If there were keilim there that had contracted midras impurity, the entire olive-press is impure, for perhaps they touched those keilim. Even if the chavair saw them previously showing care not to touch those keilim, the olive-press is impure, for perhaps they moved them and thus contracted impurity and they think that a person who moves keilim with midras impurity is not impure. For unlearned people are not familiar with the impurity contracted by moving keilim.הלכה ה
הָיוּ חַמָּרָיו וּפוֹעֲלָיו טוֹעֲנִין טָהֳרוֹת וְעוֹבְרִין לְפָנָיו אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִפְלִיגוּ יוֹתֵר מִמִּיל הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ טְהוֹרוֹת מִפְּנֵי שֶׁהֵן בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהוּא שׁוֹמְרָן וְהֵן מְפַחֲדִין לִגַּע וְאוֹמְרִים עַכְשָׁו יָבוֹא שֶׁהֲרֵי הוּא יָבוֹא אַחֲרֵינוּ. אֲבָל אִם אָמַר לָהֶם צְאוּ וַאֲנִי אָבוֹא אַחֲרֵיכֶם כֵּיוָן שֶׁנִּתְכַּסּוּ מֵעֵינָיו הֲרֵי הֵן טְמֵאוֹת:
כסף משנה
5.
When a chavair's donkey-drivers and porters were loaded with pure foods and they were proceeding in front of him, even if they were more than a mil ahead of him, they are pure. The rationale is that they assume that he is watching them. Hence, they are afraid to allow others to touch impurity, for they will say: "He will come now, for he is following after us." If, however, he tells them: "Go and I will follow you," as soon as they proceed beyond his sight, the foods are impure.הלכה ו
חָבֵר שֶׁהָיָה לָבוּשׁ בְּחָלוּק וְעָטוּף בְּטַלִּית וּמְהַלֵּךְ וְאָמַר בְּלִבִּי הָיָה לִשְׁמֹר אֶת הֶחָלוּק וְהָיִיתִי נִזְהָר בּוֹ וְהִסַּחְתִּי דַּעְתִּי מִן הַטַּלִּית. הֲרֵי הֶחָלוּק בְּטָהֳרָתוֹ וְהַטַּלִּית טְמֵאָה שֶׁמָּא נָגַע בָּהּ עַם הָאָרֶץ. הָיָה סַל עַל כְּתֵפוֹ וּמַגְרֵפָה בְּתוֹךְ הַסַּל וְאָמַר בְּלִבִּי הָיָה לִשְׁמֹר אֶת הַסַּל וְלִשְׁמֹר אֶת הַמַּגְרֵפָה מִדָּבָר הַמְטַמְּאָהּ אֲבָל לֹא מִדָּבָר הַפּוֹסְלָהּ הַסַּל טָהוֹר וְהַמַּגְרֵפָה טְמֵאָה. וְכָל תְּרוּמָה שֶׁבַּסַּל פְּסוּלָה מִפְּנֵי הַמַּגְרֵפָה טְמֵאָה שֶׁפּוֹסֶלֶת הָאֳכָלִין שֶׁבַּסַּל. הָיָה מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ מִן הֶחָבִית בְּטָהֳרָה בְּחֶזְקַת שֶׁהִיא חֻלִּין וְאַחַר כָּךְ נִמְצֵאת תְּרוּמָה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהִיא טְהוֹרָה הֲרֵי הִיא אֲסוּרָה בַּאֲכִילָה שֶׁמָּא נָגַע בָּהּ טְבוּל יוֹם שֶׁהוּא פּוֹסֵל בִּתְרוּמָה וְטָהוֹר בְּחֻלִּין כְּמוֹ שֶׁיִּתְבָּאֵר. וְאֵינוֹ דּוֹמֶה מְשַׁמֵּר תְּרוּמָה לִמְשַׁמֵּר חֻלִּין. וְאִם אָמַר בְּלִבִּי הָיָה לְשָׁמְרוֹ אֲפִלּוּ מִדָּבָר הַפּוֹסְלָהּ הֲרֵי זוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת בַּאֲכִילָה. נִתְחַלְּפוּ לוֹ כֵּלִים שֶׁל שַׁבָּת בְּכֵלִים שֶׁל חֹל וּלְבָשָׁן נִטְמְאוּ. שֶׁאֵינוֹ מְשַׁמֵּר כֵּלִים שֶׁל חֹל כְּכֵלִים שֶׁל שַׁבָּת. מַעֲשֶׂה בִּשְׁתֵּי נָשִׁים חֲבֵרוֹת שֶׁנִּתְחַלְּפוּ לָהֶן כְּלֵיהֶן בְּבֵית הַמֶּרְחָץ וּבָא מַעֲשֶׂה לִפְנֵי חֲכָמִים וְטִמְּאוּ הַכּל. אֲפִלּוּ נָפְלָה מַעֲפַרְתָּהּ מִמֶּנָּה וְאָמְרָה לְחָבֵר תְּנָה לִי וּנְתָנָהּ לָהּ נִטְמֵאת גְּזֵרָה שֶׁמָּא יִתְּנֶנָּה לָהּ עַם הָאָרֶץ אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יִהְיֶה הֶחָבֵר מְשַׁמְּרָהּ שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מְשַׁמֵּר כֵּלִים שֶׁאֵינָן שֶׁלּוֹ כְּכֵלָיו אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הוֹדִיעַ שֶׁסָּמַךְ עָלָיו:
כסף משנה
6.
The following laws apply when a chavair was wearing a tunic and wrapped in a cloak while proceeding on his way. If he said: "In my heart, I intended to guard the tunic from contracting impurity and I was careful about it, but I diverted my attention from the cloak," the tunic remains pure, while the cloak is considered impure, because it is possible that an unlearned person touched it.If there was a basket on his shoulder with a pitchfork in the basket and he said: "In my heart, I intended to guard the basket and to guard the pitchfork from something that would make it a source of impurity, but not from something which disqualifies it," the basket is pure, the pitchfork is impure, and all the terumah in the basket is impure. The rationale is that the impure pitchfork disqualifies the food in the basket.
If chavairim were using a barrel while in a state of purity under the assumption that its contents were ordinary food and it was discovered that they were terumah, even though it is pure, it is forbidden to be eaten, for perhaps it was touched by a person who had immersed in the mikveh that day. Such a person disqualifies terumah, even though ordinary food he touches is pure, as will be explained. Guarding terumah is not the same as guarding ordinary food. If, however, he states: "In my heart, I intended to guard it from even an entity that will disqualify it," it is permitted to be eaten.
If a person's Sabbath garments become exchanged with his weekday garments and he wore his Sabbath garments on an ordinary weekday, they become impure, for one does not guard his weekday garments to the same degree as he guards his Sabbath garments.
An incident occurred concerning the wives of two chavarim whose clothes became exchanged in the bathhouse. The matter was brought to the attention of the Sages and they ruled that the garments were impure. Even if one's scarf fell and he asked a chavair to give it to him and he gave it to him, it becomes impure. This is a decree, enacted lest an unlearned person give it to him or lest the chavair not guard it, for a person will not guard articles that do not belong to him like he guards his own articles unless the other person notifies him and relies on him.
הלכה ז
חָבֵר שֶׁמֵּת וְהִנִּיחַ טָהֳרוֹת הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ טְהוֹרוֹת. הִנִּיחַ כֵּלִים הֲרֵי הֵן טְמֵאִים שֶׁאֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁמָּא נִטְמְאוּ וְהִזָּה עֲלֵיהֶם בַּשְּׁלִישִׁי וְלֹא הִזָּה עֲלֵיהֶן בַּשְּׁבִיעִי. אוֹ שֶׁמָּא הִזָּה עֲלֵיהֶם בַּשְּׁבִיעִי וַעֲדַיִן לֹא הִטְבִּיל. אוֹ שֶׁמָּא לֹא הִזָּה עֲלֵיהֶן בַּשְּׁבִיעִי כָּל עִקָּר:
כסף משנה
7.
When a chavair dies and leaves pure foods, they are considered as pure. When he leaves keilim, they are impure. The rationale is that we suspect that perhaps they became impure and he had the ashes of the red heifer sprinkled on them on the third day of their impurity, and not on the seventh day. Or perhaps he had the ashes sprinkled on them on the seventh day, but did not immerse them. Or perhaps he did not have the ashes sprinkled on them on the seventh day at all.הלכה ח
מִי שֶׁאָמַר לוֹ עֵד אֶחָד נִטְמְאוּ טָהֳרוֹתֶיךָ וְהַלָּה שׁוֹתֵק הֲרֵי זֶה נֶאֱמָן וַהֲרֵי הֵן טְמֵאוֹת. וְאִם הִכְחִישׁוֹ וְאָמַר לֹא נִטְמְאוּ הֲרֵי הֵן בְּחֶזְקָתָן עַד שֶׁיָּעִידוּ שְׁנַיִם. הָיָה עוֹשֶׂה עִמּוֹ בְּטָהֳרוֹת אוֹ בִּזְבָחִים וּלְאַחַר זְמַן מְצָאוֹ וְאָמַר לוֹ בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁפָּגַע בּוֹ טָהֳרוֹת שֶׁעָשִׂיתִי עִמְּךָ נִטְמְאוּ וּזְבָחִים שֶׁעָשִׂיתִי עִמְּךָ נִתְפַּגְּלוּ הֲרֵי זֶה נֶאֱמָן. אֲבָל אִם פָּגַע בּוֹ וְלֹא אָמַר לוֹ כְּלוּם וְאַחַר כָּךְ פָּגַע בּוֹ פַּעַם שְׁנִיָּה וְאָמַר לוֹ אֵינוֹ נֶאֱמָן אֶלָּא הֲרֵי זְבָחָיו בְּחֶזְקַת כַּשְׁרוּת וְטָהֳרוֹתָיו בְּחֶזְקַת טָהֳרָה: בְּרִיךְ רַחֲמָנָא דְּסַיְּעָן
כסף משנה
8.
When one witness tells a person, "Your pure foods have contracted impurity," and the owner remains silent, his word is accepted and the foods are considered as impure. If he contradicts him and maintains that they did not contract impurity, it is assumed that their status has not changed unless two witnesses testify that they contracted impurity.If a person was working together with a colleague with pure foods or sacrificial offerings and after a while, the colleague found him and told him when he met him: "The pure foods with which I was working with you became impure or the sacrificial offerings that I was offering with you became piggul, his word is accepted. If, however, he met him and did not say anything and afterwards met him a second time and he told him the above, his word is not accepted. Instead, his sacrifices are assumed to be acceptable and his pure foods are assumed to be pure.