Mishnah Tevul Yom

1 If someone collected hallah portions with the intention of keeping them separate, but in the meantime they became stuck together: Bet Shammai say: they are connected in the case of a tevul yom. But Bet Hillel say: they are not connected. Pieces of dough of terumah that became stuck together, or loaves that became joined, or one who bakes a batter-cake on top of another batter-cake before it could form a crust in the oven, or the froth on the water that was bubbling, or the first scum that rises when boiling groats of beans, or the scum of new wine. Rabbi Judah says: also that of rice. Bet Shammai say: they are connected in the case of a tevul yom. But Bet Hillel say: they are not connected. They agree that they serve as connectives if they come into contact with other kinds of uncleanness, whether they are of minor or major grades.

2 If someone collected pieces of hallah without the intention of separating them afterward, a batter-cake that was baked on another after a crust formed in the oven, or froth had appeared in the water before its bubbling up, or the second scum that appeared in the boiling of groats of beans, or the scum of old wine, or that of oil of all kinds, or of lentils, Rabbi Judah says: also that of beans. All these are defiled when touched by a tevul yom. And there is no need to say, this is the case if touched by other sources of uncleanness.

3 The nail-shaped knob on the back of the loaf, or the small globule of salt, or the burnt crust less than a finger’s width: Rabbi Yose says: whatever is eaten with the loaf becomes unclean when touched by the tevul yom. And this is certainly so when touched by other unclean things.

4 A pebble in a loaf or a large globule of salt, or a lupine, or a burnt crust larger than a finger’s width. Rabbi Yose says: whatever is not eaten with the loaf remains clean even when touched by a father of impurity. It is certainly so when touched by a tevul yom.

5 Unshelled barley or spelt, root of crowfoot, asafoetida, silphium, and according to Rabbi Judah, even black beans, remain clean even when coming into contact with a “father of uncleanness,” and there is no need to say if touched by a tevul yom, the words of Rabbi Meir. But the sages say: they are clean if touched by a tevul yom, but unclean when touched by other sources of impurity. Shelled barley or spelt, or wheat whether shelled or unshelled, or black cumin, or sesame or pepper, and according to Rabbi Judah, also white beans, become unclean even when touched by a tevul yom, and there is no need to say when they have come into contact with other sources of impurity.

1 Liquids that come out of a tevul yom are like those he has touched: neither of them causes defilement. With regard to all others that are unclean, whether of minor or major degree, the liquids that come out of them are like those they touch. Both have first-degree impurity, except for liquid that is a “father of impurity.”

2 A pot full of liquid and a tevul yom touched it: If it is terumah, the liquid is disqualified, but the pot is clean. But if the liquid is nonsacred hullin then all remains clean. If his hands were defiled and he touched the liquids in the pot, all becomes unclean. This is a case where defiled hands are treated more stringently than a tevul yom. But a greater stringency is applied to a tevul yom than to defiled hands, since uncertainty about contact with a tevul yom disqualifies terumah, but uncertainty about contact with defiled hands leaves it clean.

3 If the porridge was of terumah and the garlic or oil it contained was of hullin, and a tevul yom touched part of them, he has disqualified the whole thing. But if the porridge was of hullin and the garlic or oil it contained was of terumah, and a tevul yom touched part of them, he disqualifies only the part he has touched. If the greater part was garlic the majority determines its status. Rabbi Judah said: When does this apply? When it formed one cohesive mass in the pot, but if it was finely ground in the mortar, then it is clean, since he wants it to remain scattered. Similarly with all other mashed foods that were mashed with liquids. But those that are usually mashed with liquids but were mashed without liquids, though they formed one cohesive mass in the pot, are regarded as a cake of preserved figs.

4 If the porridge and batter-cake were of hullin and oil of terumah was floating above them, and a tevul yom touched the oil, he disqualifies only the oil. If he stirred it all together, all the places where the oil goes are disqualified.

5 Sanctified meat over which the gravy formed a crust, and a tevul yom touched the crust, the slices of meat are permitted. But if he touched one of the slices, that slice and all the crust that comes up with it form a connective with the other. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: the two of them serve as connectives to each other. Similarly, with cooked beans that have formed a layer over pieces of bread. Beans or other foods cooked in a pot: when they are still separate, do not serve as connectives. But when they become a solid pulp, they do act as connectives. If they formed several solid masses, each mass is counted separately. If oil floats on wine and a tevul yom touched the oil, only the oil is disqualified. But Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: each serves as a connective with the other.

6 A jug that sank into a cistern containing wine, and a tevul yom touched it: If he touched it from the rim inward, it serves as a connective. If from the rim outward, it does not serve as a connective. Rabbi Yohanan ben Nuri says: even though the level of wine in the cistern is a person’s height above the sunken jar, and he touched the wine directly above the mouth of the jar, it serves as a connective.

7 If a jug had a hole at its neck, bottom, or sides, and a tevul yom touched it at the hole, it becomes unclean. Rabbi Judah says: if the hole is at its neck or bottom it becomes unclean. But if on its sides, on this side or on that, it remains clean. If someone poured liquid from one vessel into another, and a tevul yom touched the stream, and there was enough liquid within the vessel, then the liquid he touches is neutralized in a hundred and one.

8 A bubble on a jug which was pierced with holes on its inner side and on its outer side, whether above or below: If the holes are opposite one another, it becomes unclean if touched by a “father of uncleanness” and it becomes unclean if it is in a tent in which there is a corpse. If the inner hole is below and the outer above, it becomes unclean if touched by a “father of uncleanness,” and it becomes unclean in a tent in which there is a corpse. If the inner hole is above and the outer below, it remains clean if touched by a “father of uncleanness,” but it becomes unclean in a tent in which there is a corpse.

1 Handles to food, that count as connectives when touched by a “father of uncleanness,” also count as connectives when touched by a tevul yom. If a food was divided into two but a small part was still attached: Rabbi Meir says: if somesomeone takes hold of the larger part and the smaller part lifts with it, the two parts are treated as one. Rabbi Judah says: if one takes hold of the smaller part and the greater also lifts with it, the two parts are treated as one. Rabbi Nehemiah says: this refers to the case of the clean portion. But the sages say: it refers to the unclean portion. In the case of all other foods, those usually held by the leaf should be taken by the leaf, and those usually held by the stalk should be taken by the stalk.

2 If a beaten egg was on top of vegetables of terumah, and a tevul yom touches the egg, then he disqualifies only that stalk of the vegetables that is opposite the part of the egg he touched. Rabbi Yose says: the entire upper layer. But if it was arranged like a cap it does not serve as a connective.

3 The streak of an egg that had congealed on the side of a pan and a tevul yom touched it: If within the rim of the pan it serves as a connective. But if outside the rim, it does not serve as a connective. Rabbi Yose says that the streak and the part that can be peeled away with it serve as a connective. The same applies to beans that had congealed on the rim of the pot.

4 Dough that had been mixed with dough of terumah or that had been leavened with yeast of terumah, is not disqualified by a tevul yom. Rabbi Yose and Rabbi Shimon declare it unfit. Dough that had become susceptible to uncleanness by a liquid, and it was kneaded with fruit juice, and later touched by a tevul yom: Rabbi Elazar ben Judah of Bartota says in the name of Rabbi Joshua: he disqualifies all of it. Rabbi Akiva says in his name: he disqualifies only the part that he touched.

5 Vegetables of hullin were cooked with oil of terumah and a tevul yom touched it: Rabbi Elazar ben Judah of Bartota says in the name of Rabbi Joshua: he has disqualified the whole thing. Rabbi Akiva says in his name: he disqualifies only the part that he touched.

6 A clean person who chewed food and the food fell on his clothes and on a loaf of terumah, the loaf is not susceptible to uncleanness. If he ate crushed olives or moist dates, or if his intention was to suck out the pit, and it fell on his clothes and on a loaf of terumah, it is susceptible to uncleanness. If he ate dried olives, or dried dates or it was not his intention to suck out the pit, and they fell on his garments and on a loaf of terumah, it is not susceptible to uncleanness. This applies whether it was a clean person or a tevul yom who was eating. Rabbi Meir says: in either case it becomes susceptible to uncleanness in the case of a tevul yom, since liquids issuing from unclean persons render anything susceptible whether he wanted them or not. But the sages say: a tevul yom is not regarded as an unclean person.

1 If food that was tithe had been rendered susceptible to impurity by a liquid, and a tevul yom or one with unwashed hands touched it, terumah of tithe may still be removed from it in purity, since it only has third-degree uncleanness, and third-degree uncleanness counts as clean in hullin.

2 A woman who is a tevulat yom may knead dough, cut off the hallah, and set it apart, and she should arrange it on an Egyptian basket, or on a tray, and then bring it near and call it by its name. For it the dough has third-degree uncleanness and third-degree uncleanness is clean in hullin.

3 A trough that has tevul yom status may be used to knead dough and cut off the portion for hallah and bring it near and call it by name as hallah. For it the dough has third-degree uncleanness and third-degree uncleanness is clean in hullin.

4 A flagon had tevul yom status and they filled it from a cask containing tithes from which terumah had not yet been taken: If someone said, “Let this be terumah of tithe after nightfall,” it becomes terumah of tithe. But if he said, “Let this be the food for the eruv,” he has said nothing. If the cask was broken, the contents of the flagon still remain tithe from which terumah had not yet been taken. If the flagon was broken, then what is in the cask still remains tithe from which terumah had not yet been taken.

5 Originally they said: one may redeem second tithe for the produce of an ʿam haʾaretz. Later they reconsidered and said: also for money of his. Originally they said that if a man was being led out to execution and said, “Write a bill of divorce for my wife,” they may write a get and give it to her. Later they reconsidered and said, even if he were leaving on a sea voyage or on a caravan journey. Rabbi Shimon Shezuri says: even if he were dangerously ill.

6 If Ashkelon grappling-irons were broken but their hooks remained, they remain susceptible to impurity. If a pitchfork, winnowing fan, or rake, and the same applies to a hair-comb, lost one of its teeth and it was replaced by one of metal, it is susceptible to impurity. And concerning all these Rabbi Joshua said: the scribes have introduced a new legal principle here, and I have no explanation to offer.

7 If someone was taking terumah from a cistern and said: “Let this be terumah provided it comes up safely,” it is implied that he meant safely from being broken or spilled, but not from becoming impure. But Rabbi Shimon says: also from impurity. If it were broken, it does not render the contents of the cistern subject to the restrictions of terumah. How far away can it be broken and still not make the contents of the cistern subject to terumah restrictions? Only far enough that if it rolls back, it can reach the cistern. Rabbi Yose says: even if one had the intention of making such a stipulation, but did not do so, and it broke, it does not make the contents of the cistern subject to terumah restrictions, for this is a stipulation laid down by the court.