Shabbat 15b — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

Rather, they came, [Yosi ben Yo'ezer and Yosi ben Yohanan], and

Yosei ben Yo'ezer and Yosei ben Yoḥanan—came and

decreed

impurity

upon a clod [a clod of earth]

of the land of the nations,

to burn

the teruma that touches it, because of the possibility of graves within it.

And although ordinarily teruma is not burned on account of rabbinic impurity, the earth of the land of the nations is different, for its impurity is because of the possibility of a grave within it. And the Sages gave it the status of a certain grave, whose impurity is by Torah law.

But as for the airspace

of the land of the nations, they did not decree

anything at all.

For if the teruma is found in the airspace of the land of the nations and does not touch its earth, it is pure. And although nothing separates between it and the ground, so that it forms an ohel over the land of the nations, they did not decree ohel impurity in the land of the nations.

And the Sages of the eighty-year period came and decreed upon the airspace

of the land of the nations, which imparts impurity even without contact with its clod, . But they did not decree complete impurity upon it, so as to burn teruma because of it , rather they decreed

to suspend

the teruma because of it alone, and to disqualify it from eating .

For since it is impure only rabbinically, while by Torah law it is pure, it is forbidden to burn it, because of the loss of teruma.

And again we raise an objection:

Does this mean that at first, a single

decree existed

concerning the clod of earth of the land of the nations,

to

require the teruma touching it

burning?

But it is impossible to say so.

For

Ilfa said:

The impurity of

hands—

at the beginning of their decree

was, to require the teruma touching them

to be burned!

And it follows that specifically the impurity of

hands is what

was

at the beginning of their decree for burning.

But anything else

upon which impurity was decreed by their words—

not

was it initially decreed that teruma be burned because of it, but only that it be suspended.

And we answer:

Rather, they came, [Yosi ben Yo'ezer and Yosi ben Yohanan,]

Yosei ben Yo'ezer and Yosei ben Yoḥanan—

and decreed

contact with

the clod, to suspend

the teruma because of it.

But the airspace

they did not decree

anything at all. And the Sages of the eighty-year period came and decreed upon the clod

of the land of the nations,

to burn

the teruma upon contact with it.

And

if

the

teruma entering the

airspace

of the land of the nations—they decreed

to suspend it.

And again we raise an objection:

But still,

it was not the Sages of the eighty-year period who decreed that teruma be burned upon contact with the clod, but

in Usha they decreed

so.

For we learned:

For six uncertainties

of impurity

they burn teruma.

A.

For the uncertainty

of impurity that exists

in a beit ha-peras.

For a field in which there is a grave, whose place was lost and it is not known where it is, is entirely impure because of uncertainty . And teruma that enters it is burned according to the law of impure teruma.

B.

And

so teruma is burned

for the uncertainty

of corpse impurity that they decreed upon

earth brought from the land of the nations.

C.

And for the uncertainty

of impurity that they decreed

upon the garments of an am ha-aretz.

For we are uncertain whether his wife sat upon them while she was a menstruant and rendered them impure with midras impurity. And as we learned: “The garments of an am ha-aretz are midras for perushim.”

D.

And for the uncertainty concerning found vessels,

when we do not know whether they are impure or pure.

E.

And for the uncertainty concerning found spittle

that is found. For we are uncertain; perhaps it is the spittle of a zav.

F.

And for the uncertainty concerning human urine.

And there are two grounds for leniency: perhaps it is animal urine. And if you should say that it is human, perhaps it is that of a pure person. Nevertheless, we are concerned with the double uncertainty: perhaps it is that of a human zav. And although

they

are found

opposite animal urine,

we do not suspend for leniency and say: just as these are animal urine, so too these are animal urine. Rather, they are impure, and teruma is burned upon contact with them .

And all of these,

for their certain contact [if the teruma certainly touched them],

if the teruma certainly touched them,

which is

contact with

possible

impurity, for the entire decree of

their impurity

is because of possible Torah impurity—

they burn teruma.

Rabbi Yosi says: even for the uncertainty of their contact

with teruma, if the uncertainty arose

in the private domain—

they burn

the teruma because of it. For uncertainty of impurity in the private domain is like certain impurity, even in a double uncertainty, as we derive from sota.

And although the impurity of all these is rabbinic, its law is like Torah impurity, for in the private domain its uncertainty is impure.

And the Sages say:

when the uncertainty arose

in the private domain—

they suspend

for the uncertainty of their contact. Because it is a double uncertainty: perhaps he did not touch; and if you should say that he touched, perhaps they are pure. And teruma is not burned for a double uncertainty of impurity in the private domain.

And in the public domain—

all pure things concerning which it is uncertain whether they touched these six things are

pure!

For every uncertainty of contact in the public domain has a pure status.

And we conclude our objection:

And Ulla said: these six uncertainties

taught in this Mishna—

in Usha they instituted

that teruma be burned because of them. And one of them is the earth of the land of the nations. And how did you say that the Sages of the eighty-year period decreed concerning it !?

And we answer:

Rather, they came, Yosi ben Yo'ezer and Yosi ben Yohanan, and

Yosei ben Yo'ezer and Yosei ben Yoḥanan,

decreed

contact with

the clod

of the land of the nations,

to suspend

the teruma because of it.

But the airspace

they did not decree

anything at all.

And the Sages of the eighty-year period came and decreed

upon

both and both [the clod and the airspace],

the clod of earth and the airspace,

to suspend.

And

the Sages

in Usha came and decreed upon the clod to burn

the teruma,

but the airspace remained as it stood!

For they left it as the Sages of the eighty-year period had decreed concerning it: to suspend teruma because of it.

We learned above: Yosi ben Yo'ezer and Yosi ben Yohanan decreed impurity, and so on, and concerning glass vessels.

And we ask concerning it:

Glass vessels,

which do not receive impurity by Torah law—

for what reason did the Sages decree impurity upon them?

Rabbi Yohanan said in the name of Reish Lakish: since the beginning of their creation is from sand,

and in this they resemble earthenware vessels—

the Sages made them like earthenware vessels.

And we raise an objection:

If so,

they should be entirely like earthenware vessels, and

they should have no purification in a ritual bath,

just as immersion is ineffective for earthenware vessels. For it is established: “Their breaking—that is their purification!” For they leave their impurity only when they break, as it is written: “And you shall break it.”

Why then,

and why do we not hold so?

For

we learned:

Any vessel requiring immersion, if something concerning which its owner is particular became attached to it, it interposes between the vessel and the waters of the ritual bath, and its immersion is not effective.

And these interpose with vessels

with regard to immersion—

tar and myrrh

interpose

with glass vessels.

For glass vessels are smooth, and everything that becomes attached to them falls off by itself. Therefore, the owner is not particular about it. And anything concerning which he is not particular does not interpose for immersion. But with regard to tar and myrrh, which are things that adhere well, he is particular about them. Therefore, they interpose.

You learn from this at any rate that immersion is effective for glass vessels, and their law is not like that of earthenware vessels. And this is difficult for Rabbi Yohanan and Reish Lakish, who compared them to earthenware vessels.

And we answer: actually, immersion is not effective for glass vessels, because they are like earthenware vessels . And that which it teaches immersion with glass vessels—

with what are we dealing here? For example, they became perforated

the glass vessels that had become impure, and the status of glass vessels was annulled from them, and their impurity departed. For it is established: “Their breaking is their purification.”

And

afterward

he dripped lead into them [lead],

and sealed the hole with it, and restored them to the status of a vessel. And since they again became a vessel, their old impurity returns to them, according to the law of metal vessels . For it is established concerning them: if they broke, they became pure from their impurity; if he again made vessels from them, they returned to their old impurity!

And

the fact that it considers them like metal vessels is because the Mishna is

Rabbi Meir’s.

For he says: “Everything follows the one that supports”

and since the lead supported them and restored them to the status of a vessel, their law is like that of metal vessels.

As it was taught: glass vessels

that are impure

that became perforated, and he dripped lead into them [lead]—

lead—

Rabbi Shimon ben Gamliel said: Rabbi Meir declares them impure,

because everything follows the one that supports. And since the lead is what supports the vessel, it is considered like a metal vessel, which returns to its old impurity.

And the Sages deem them pure,

because we do not follow the supporting component; rather, we follow the main substance of the vessel. Therefore, the law of glass vessels applies to them: if they broke and were repaired, they do not return to their former state of impurity.

And according to Rabbi Meir, we indeed find immersion in a glass vessel in such a case. Although immersion is generally ineffective for glass vessels, this case is different. Once holes were made in them, their impurity as glass vessels was nullified. Their only impurity is due to the lead that supports them. And this lead does not restore them to their former impurity as glass vessels; rather, it gives them the impurity of metal vessels. Therefore, immersion is effective for them as it is for metal vessels.