Chullin 107aחולין ק״ז א
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save 'Chullin 107a'
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
107aק״ז א

פקתא דערבות כגון אתון דלא שכיחי לכו מיא משו ידייכו מצפרא ואתנו עלייהו לכולא יומא איכא דאמרי בשעת הדחק אין שלא בשעת הדחק לא ופליגא דרב ואיכא דאמרי אפילו שלא בשעת הדחק נמי והיינו דרב

the valley of Aravot [pakta da’aravot], where there was a shortage of water: People such as you, for whom water is scarce, should wash your hands in the morning and stipulate with regard to them for the entire day. Some say that Rabbi Avina maintains that in exigent circumstances, yes, one should act in this manner, but when one is not in exigent circumstances, he should not do so. And according to this explanation, Rabbi Avina disagrees with the opinion of Rav, who permitted this practice to all. And some say that Rabbi Avina ruled that one may do so even when not in exigent circumstances, and Rabbi Avina’s opinion is identical to that of Rav.

אמר רב פפא האי אריתא דדלאי אין נוטלין ממנו לידים דלא אתו מכח גברא ואי מיקרב לגבי דולא דקאתו מכח גברא נוטלין ממנו לידים

Rav Pappa said: With regard to this irrigation channel [arita dedalla’ei], into which water is poured from a river using buckets, and which then transports the water to the fields, one may not wash his hands in it. The reason is that this water does not come from a person’s force, i.e., it is not poured on the hands by a direct act, as it moves by force of the current in the channel. But if one draws his hands near the bucket itself, in such a manner that the water poured on his hands comes from a person’s force before it begins to flow in the channel, then one may wash his hands with it.

ואי בזיע דולא בכונס משקה מילף ליופי ומטביל בה את הידים ואמר רבא כלי שניקב בכונס משקה אין נוטלין ממנו לידים

And if the bucket in which the water is drawn from the river is perforated with a hole large enough to enable liquid to enter the vessel when it is placed in the river, the presence of this hole connects the water in the channel to the water in the river, as they touch through that hole. And therefore, one may immerse his hands in that channel as he would in the river itself. Yet the perforated bucket is invalid for the washing of the hands by pouring, since it is no longer considered a vessel. As Rava says: With regard to a vessel that is perforated with a hole large enough to enable liquid to enter, one may not wash his hands with it.

ואמר רבא כלי שאין בו רביעית אין נוטלין ממנו לידים איני והאמר רבא כלי שאין מחזיק רביעית אין נוטלין ממנו לידים הא מחזיק אע"ג דלית ביה

And Rava says: With regard to a vessel that does not have a quarter-log of water in it, one may not wash his hands with it. The Gemara asks: Is that so? But doesn’t Rava say: With regard to a vessel that cannot contain a quarter-log of water, one may not wash his hands with it. It may be consequently inferred that as long as the vessel can contain a quarter-log, one may use it even if it does not currently have a quarter-log in it.

לא קשיא הא לחד הא לתרי דתניא מי רביעית נוטלין לידים לאחד ואפילו לשנים

The Gemara answers: This is not difficult; this former statement, requiring a quarter-log of actual water, is referring to washing for one person, whereas that latter statement, requiring only that the vessel have a capacity of a quarter-log, is referring to washing for two people. If a vessel originally contained a quarter-log of water, then even if less than that amount remains after one person has washed his hands, a second individual may use the remainder, which is considered fit based on the water’s original volume. As it is taught in a baraita: With a quarter-log of water, one may wash the hands of one individual, and even those of two.

אמר ליה רב ששת לאמימר קפדיתו אמנא א"ל אין אחזותא א"ל אין אשיעורא אמר ליה אין

Rav Sheshet said to Ameimar: Are you particular about the vessel used for washing hands, that it be wholly intact? Ameimar said to him: Yes. Rav Sheshet further inquired: Are you also particular about the appearance of the water, that it be normal? Ameimar again said to him: Yes. Rav Sheshet further asked: Are you particular about the measure of water, that it be no less than one quarter-log? Ameimar said to him: Yes.

איכא דאמרי הכי אמר ליה אמנא ואחזותא קפדינן אשיעורא לא קפדינן דתניא מי רביעית נוטלין לידים לאחד ואפי' לשנים

Some say that this is what Ameimar said to him: We are particular about the wholeness of the vessel and about the water’s appearance, but we are not particular about the water’s measure, as it is taught in a baraita: With a quarter-log of water one may wash the hands of one individual, and even those of two. The baraita indicates that there is no need for a quarter-log for each individual.

ולא היא שאני התם משום דקאתו משירי טהרה

The Gemara notes: And it is not so, i.e., one cannot derive from the baraita that the measure of water is immaterial. It is different there because there the water comes from the remainder of a measure initially sufficient for purity. If there was not initially a quarter-log, the water is unfit for even one person.

אתקין רב יעקב מנהר פקוד נטלא בת רביעתא אתקין רב אשי בהוצל כוזא בת רביעתא

The Gemara relates: Rav Ya’akov from Nehar Pekod prepared a glass vessel that could contain a quarter-log of water for washing his hands. Rav Ashi in Huzal likewise prepared an earthenware vessel that could contain a quarter-log.

ואמר רבא מגופת חבית שתקנה נוטלין ממנה לידים תניא נמי הכי מגופת חבית שתקנה נוטלין ממנה לידים חמת וכפישה שתקנן נוטלין מהם לידים שק וקופה אע"פ שמקבלים אין נוטלין מהם לידים

And Rava says: If one prepared the stopper of a barrel for use as a vessel by hollowing it out until it contained a quarter-log, one may wash his hands with it, even though it was not originally designated for this function. This ruling is also taught in a baraita: If one prepared the stopper of a barrel for this purpose, one may wash his hands with it. Likewise, with regard to a ḥemet and a kefisha, types of leather wineskins, that one prepared for this purpose, one may wash his hands with them, as they were initially designed to hold liquids. But with regard to a sack and a basket, even if they can contain water, one may not wash his hands with them, as no sack or basket is designed to hold water, and most cannot.

איבעיא להו מהו לאכול במפה מי חיישינן דלמא נגע או לא

A dilemma was raised before the Sages: What is the halakha with regard to eating with a cloth [mappa] on one’s hands, rather than washing them to purify them? Are we concerned that perhaps he will touch the food with his hands, or not?

ת"ש וכשנתנו לו לרבי צדוק אוכל פחות מכביצה נוטלו במפה ואוכלו חוץ לסוכה ואין מברך אחריו מאי לאו הא כביצה בעי נטילת ידים

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from a mishna (Sukka 26b): And when they gave Rabbi Tzadok on the festival of Sukkot less than an egg-bulk of food, he took the food in a cloth, and he ate it outside the sukka, as he held one is not obligated to eat food of this amount in a sukka. And he did not recite a blessing after eating it, since less than an egg-bulk does not satisfy the verse: “And you shall eat and be satisfied and bless the Lord your God” (Deuteronomy 8:10). What, is it not to be inferred that consequently, if one eats an egg-bulk, it requires washing of the hands, even if one uses a cloth?

דלמא הא כביצה בעי סוכה ובעי ברכה

The Gemara rejects this: Perhaps one can conclude from that mishna only that consequently, if one eats an egg-bulk he needs to do so in a sukka and needs to recite a blessing after eating; but he can still use a cloth instead of washing his hands.

תא שמע דשמואל אשכחיה לרב דקאכיל במפה אמר ליה

The Gemara suggests: Come and hear proof from an incident where Shmuel found Rav eating with a cloth rather than washing his hands, and Shmuel said to him: