Mishnah Kelim 2:5-6

Sugya Map

The current sugya focuses on the tum’ah (ritual impurity) of earthenware (kli cheres). Unlike metal or wood, kli cheres is uniquely governed by the principle of tocho (its interior capacity).

• Core Issue: What defines a "vessel" for the purpose of susceptibility? Is it utility, capacity, or form?
• Primary Sources: Mishnah Kelim 2:5-6; Torat Kohanim (Sifra), Shemini 8:12; Tosefta Kelim Bava Metzia 2:1-2.
• Nafka Mina:
  • Functionalism: Does an object’s use (e.g., as a lid) override its structural capacity to hold?
  • Morphology: Does a "rim" or "projection" create a toch (interior) where none existed previously?
  • Brokenness: At what point does a "broken" vessel cease to be a vessel, and at what point does it transition back into a state of susceptibility?

Text Snapshot

• Mishnah Kelim 2:5: "כסוי כדי יין ושמן וכסוי ניירות טהורין, ואם התקינן להיות משמשין בית קיבול – טמאין."
  • Leshon Nuance: The term hitkinan (to adapt/designate) signifies a shift from tashmish (ancillary use) to tichlul (receptacle status).
• Mishnah Kelim 2:6: "כל שהכלי חרס שאין לו תוך אינו מקבל טומאה מגביו."
  • Dikduk: The Mishna uses the absolute ein lo toch (it has no interior) to establish the exclusionary rule for the gav (exterior). The gav is only susceptible if the toch is first susceptible.

Readings

1. Rash MiShantz: The Derivation of Exemption

Rash MiShantz (ad loc.) anchors the exemption of lids in the textual constraints of the Torah. He references Sifra, Shemini: "Can I include covers of vessels? The verse says 'in them'—excluding covers of vessels." Rash’s chiddush is that kli cheres is inherently defined by its toch. A lid, by definition, is meant to cover, not to contain. Therefore, it lacks the legal "interior" required by the Torah’s description of kli cheres. Even if it has a physical depression, its purpose as a cover renders it an av (a secondary object) rather than a kli.

2. Rambam: The Functional Transition

Rambam (Hilchot Kelim 18:5) emphasizes the hitkinan aspect. He argues that when the Mishna discusses the lid of a lafas (pot) that is not perforated, it becomes impure because the woman uses it to drain vegetables (ronki). Rambam’s chiddush is that tum’ah here is not merely about physical shape, but about the act of usage. If a lid is pressed into service as a vessel for straining, it has functionally acquired a toch. The transformation from "cover" to "vessel" is a move from passive architectural element to active tool, thus triggering the susceptibility inherent in kli cheres.

Friction

The Kushya: The Paradox of the "Rim"

The Mishna (2:6) discusses a tray made of multiple dishes. If they share a rim, they become a single unit. The kushya is: How can a mere decorative or structural rim retroactively alter the status of individual vessels? If they are distinct, why does the shared rim create a kibbur (collective unit)?

The Terutz:

The terutz lies in the definition of toch. The sages (Tosafot Yom Tov) argue that the "rim" acts as a boundary-extender. When the rim projects above the level of the individual compartments, it creates a "new" collective interior. Thus, the tum’ah is not transmitted "between" the vessels, but the entire structure is redefined as a single, large, multi-compartment vessel. As soon as the rim unites the geometry, the "air-space" (avir) is no longer confined to the individual dish but is shared by the whole, making the unit a singular kli.

Intertext

• Parallel 1: Bava Kamma 49b discusses the "covering of a flask." The Gemara there distinguishes between a cover used for protection versus one used for measurement/utility. This mirrors the Mishna’s logic: susceptibility follows function.
• Parallel 2: Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chayim 302:5 (regarding hotza'ah). The principles of kli definition in Kelim are frequently cross-referenced to determine if an object is a kli such that one might be liable for carrying it on Shabbat. The status of a "broken" vessel is a critical pivot point in both tractates.

Psak/Practice

The meta-psak heuristic here is "Designation dictates status." In contemporary kashrut and taharat hamishpacha contexts, this informs how we view "multi-use" items. If a lid is designed with a rim that serves as a bowl, it is legally a bowl, regardless of its original label. For those interested in Kelim, the takeaway is that kli cheres does not care about the manufacturer's intent as much as it cares about the user's reality. If you use a broken shard to hold a liquid, you have effectively "remade" the vessel, and chazal will treat it as such.

Takeaway

Tum’ah in kli cheres is the shadow of the vessel's utility; if you give an object a "space" to hold, you have given it a "space" to contract impurity. The rim is the boundary of the soul of the vessel.