Shabbat No.4: This Leg Was Made for Walking

מַתְנִי׳ הַקִּיטֵּעַ יוֹצֵא בְּקַב שֶׁלּוֹ — דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וְרַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹסֵר. וְאִם יֵשׁ לוֹ בֵּית קִיבּוּל כְּתִיתִין — טָמֵא. סָמוֹכוֹת שֶׁלּוֹ טְמֵאִין מִדְרָס, וְיוֹצְאִין בָּהֶן בְּשַׁבָּת, וְנִכְנָסִין בָּהֶן בָּעֲזָרָה. כִּסֵּא וְסָמוֹכוֹת שֶׁלּוֹ טְמֵאִין מִדְרָס, וְאֵין יוֹצְאִין בָּהֶן בְּשַׁבָּת, וְאֵין נִכְנָסִין בָּהֶן בַּעֲזָרָה. לוּקַטְמִין טְהוֹרִין, וְאֵין יוֹצְאִין בָּהֶן.

MISHNA: One with an amputated leg may go out on Shabbat with his wooden leg, as it has the legal status of a shoe; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. And Rabbi Yosei prohibits going out into the public domain with the wooden leg, since he does not consider it to have the legal status of a shoe. And if the wooden leg has a receptacle for pads, a concave space at the top of the leg into which pads are placed to cushion the amputated leg, it assumes the status of a wooden vessel and can become ritually impure. And his supports, which are shoes that one who had both of his feet amputated places on his knees in order to walk on his knees, if a zav wears them, they are subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading. A zav is a primary source of ritual impurity. If he touches a vessel it assumes first-degree ritual impurity status. However, vessels on which he treads, sits, lies, or leans become primary sources of ritual impurity, provided they are designated for that purpose. These supports are vessels designated for treading. And one may go out with them into the public domain on Shabbat since they have the legal status of shoes. And one may enter the Temple courtyard with them. Although, generally, wearing shoes in the Temple courtyard is prohibited, in this regard, the supports do not have the legal status of shoes. However, if one who is crippled to the extent that he cannot walk at all sits on a chair that is attached to him, places supports on his hands, and propels himself along with his hands, his chair and supports are subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading. And one may not go out with them on Shabbat, and one may not enter the Temple courtyard with them. Loketamin, which will be explained in the Gemara, are ritually pure in the sense that they cannot become ritually impure because they are not vessels, and one may not go out with them on Shabbat.

https://adata.org/factsheet/ADANN-writing

Words are powerful.
The words you use and the way you portray individuals with disabilities matters. This factsheet provides guidelines for portraying individuals with disabilities in a respectful and balanced way by using language that is accurate, neutral and objective.

  1. Ask to find out if an individual is willing to disclose their disability. Do not assume that people with disabilities are willing to disclose their disability. While some people prefer to be public about their disability, such as including information about their disability in a media article, others choose to not be publically identified as a person with a disability.
  2. Emphasize abilities, not limitations. Choosing language that emphasizes what people can do instead of what they can’t do is empowering.
  3. In general, refer to the person first and the disability second. People with disabilities are, first and foremost, people. Labeling a person equates the person with a condition and can be disrespectful and dehumanizing. A person isn’t a disability, condition or diagnosis; a person has a disability, condition or diagnosis. This is called Person-First Language.
  4. However, always ask to find out an individual’s language preferences.
  5. People with disabilities have different preferences when referring to their disability. Some people see their disability as an essential part of who they are and prefer to be identified with their disability first – this is called Identity-First Language. Others prefer Person-First Language.
וְאָמְרִינַן: מַאן תַּנָּא? אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: רַבִּי מֵאִיר הִיא, דִּתְנַן: הַקִּיטֵּעַ יוֹצֵא בְּקַב שֶׁלּוֹ — דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי מֵאִיר, רַבִּי יוֹסֵי אוֹסֵר. וְאַף רַב הוּנָא הֲדַר בֵּיהּ, דְּתַנְיָא: סַנְדָּל שֶׁל סַיָּידִין טָמֵא מִדְרָס, וְאִשָּׁה חוֹלֶצֶת בּוֹ, וְיוֹצְאִין בּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת — דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא, וְלֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ. וְהָתַנְיָא ״הוֹדוּ לוֹ״! אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: מַאן ״הוֹדוּ לוֹ״ — רַבִּי מֵאִיר, וּמַאן ״לֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ״ — רַבִּי יוֹסֵי. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: מַאן ״לֹא הוֹדוּ לוֹ״ — רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי. דִּתְנַן: כַּוֶּרֶת שֶׁל קַשׁ וּשְׁפוֹפֶרֶת שֶׁל קָנִים — רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא מְטַמֵּא, וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בֶּן נוּרִי מְטַהֵר.
And we said: Who is the tanna who holds that a wooden sandal is considered a shoe for this purpose? Shmuel said: It is Rabbi Meir, as we learned in a mishna: An amputee may go out with his wooden leg, this is the statement of Rabbi Meir, and Rabbi Yosei prohibits doing so. Ultimately, Shmuel accepted Rav’s reading of the mishna. And Rav Huna also reversed his opinion, as it was taught in a baraita: With regard to a plasterers’ sandal worn by those who work with lime and would cover their leather shoes with a shoe woven from straw or reeds so that the leather shoes would not get ruined by the lime. If the plasterer is a zav and walks with his shoes covered, the shoe covering is subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading, as the legal status of that sandal is that of a shoe. A woman may perform ḥalitza with it, and one may go out with it on Shabbat; this is the statement of Rabbi Akiva. And the Rabbis did not agree with him. The Gemara asks: Wasn’t it taught in a baraita that they agreed with him? Rav Huna said in resolution of this apparent contradiction: Who is the Sage whose opinion is referred to in the phrase: They agreed with him? It is Rabbi Meir. And who is the Sage whose opinion is referred to in the phrase: They did not agree with him? It is Rabbi Yosei. Even Rav Huna accepted Rav’s reading of the mishna that Rabbi Yosei prohibits going out with a wooden leg. Rav Yosef said: Who is the Sage whose opinion is referred to in the phrase: They did not agree with Rabbi Akiva? It is Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri. As we learned in a mishna: A receptacle made of straw and a tube made of reeds, Rabbi Akiva deems these vessels capable of becoming ritually impure, and Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri deems them pure, i.e., incapable of becoming ritually impure because they are not vessels. According to Rabbi Yoḥanan ben Nuri, straw objects are not considered vessels fit for use.
וְאִם יֵשׁ לוֹ בֵּית קִיבּוּל כְּתִיתִין — טָמֵא. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: טָמֵא טוּמְאַת מֵת, וְאֵין טָמֵא מִדְרָס. רָבָא אָמַר: אַף טָמֵא מִדְרָס. אָמַר רָבָא: מְנָא אָמֵינָא לַהּ — דִּתְנַן: עֲגָלָה שֶׁל קָטָן — טְמֵאָה מִדְרָס. וְאַבָּיֵי אֲמַר: הָתָם סָמֵיךְ עִילָּוֵיהּ, הָכָא לָא סָמֵיךְ עִילָּוֵיהּ. אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: מְנָא אָמֵינָא לַהּ — דְּתַנְיָא: מַקֵּל שֶׁל זְקֵנִים טָהוֹר מִכְּלוּם! וְרָבָא: הָתָם לְתָרוֹצֵי סוּגְיָא עֲבִידָא, הָכָא — לִסְמוֹךְ עִילָּוֵיהּ הוּא דַּעֲבִידָא, וְסָמֵיךְ עֲלֵיהּ.
We learned in the mishna: And if the wooden leg has a receptacle for pads, it is capable of becoming ritually impure. Abaye said: It is subject to ritual impurity due to contact with ritual impurity imparted by a corpse, and it is not subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading. If a zav uses a wooden leg it merely assumes first-degree ritual impurity status, since he cannot lean all his weight on it. Rava said: The artificial foot is even subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading. Rava said: From where do I derive to say this halakha? As we learned in a mishna: The wagon of a small child utilized to teach him to walk (Tosafot) is subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading, since its purpose is to lean on it. And Abaye said: The two cases are not comparable. There, in the case of the wagon, he leans all his weight on it; here, in the case of the wooden leg, he does not lean all his weight on it. Abaye said: From where do I derive to say this halakha? As it was taught in a baraita: A walking stick, typically used by the elderly, is pure, i.e., incapable of becoming ritually impure from any form of ritual impurity. Apparently, an object upon which one does not lean all his weight is not subject to ritual impurity imparted by treading. And how does Rava respond to this proof? He says that there is a distinction between the cases: There, in the case of a walking stick used by the elderly, it is made merely to align his steps and straighten his posture. He does not completely lean all his weight on it. Here, in the case of a wooden leg, it is made to lean on, and in fact he leans all his weight on it.
וְאַחַ֣ר ע֭וֹרִֽי נִקְּפוּ־זֹ֑את וּ֝מִבְּשָׂרִ֗י אֶֽחֱזֶ֥ה אֱלֽוֹהַּ׃
This, after my skin will have been peeled off. But I would behold God while still in my flesh,