Shabbat

R. Ashi said: After all, it is similar to earthen utensils, and as for your difficulty, 'let them not become unclean through their [flat or convex] backs', [the reply] is because its inside is as visible as its outside. 'Simeon b. Shetah instituted a woman's marriage settlement and imposed uncleanness upon metal utensils.' But [the uncleanness of] metal utensils is Biblical, for it is written, howbeit the gold, and the silver [… etc.]? — This [the Rabbinical law] was necessary only in respect of former uncleanness.  For Rab Judah said in Rab's name: It once happened that Queen Shalzion  made a banquet for her son and all her utensils were defiled. Thereupon she broke them and gave them to the goldsmith, who melted them down and manufactured new utensils of them. But the Sages declared, They revert to their previous uncleanness. What is the reason? — They were concerned there to provide  a fence against the water of separation. Now, that is well on the view that they [the Sages] did not rule thus in respect of all forms of defilement but only in respect of the defilement of the dead:  then it is correct. But on the view that they ruled thus for all forms of uncleanness, what can be said? — Abaye answered: As a preventive measure lest he might not perforate it to the standard of purification.  Raba said: As a preventive measure lest it be said that tebillah  of that very day is effective for it.  Wherein do they differ? — They differ where a smith refashioned it. And what is another?  For we learnt: If one places vessels under a spout to catch rain water therein, whether they are large vessels or small, or even vessels [made] of stone, earth  or dung, they render the mikweh unfit. It is all one whether he places or forgets them [there]: that is Beth Shammai's view; but Beth Hillel declare it clean  if he forgets them.  Said R. Meir: They took a count, and Beth Shammai outnumbered Beth Hillel. Yet Beth Shammai admit it that if he forgets [the utensils] in a courtyard,  it is clean.  R. Jose said: The controversy still stands in its place. R. Mesharsheya said: The scholars of Rab  said: All agree that, if he places them [under the spout] when clouds are massing, they  are unclean;  [if he places them there] when the clouds are dispersed, all agree that they are clean.  They differ only if he places them there when the clouds were massing, but they then dispersed, and subsequently massed together again:  one Master [Beth Hillel] holds that his intention was nullified,  while the other Master holds that his intention was not nullified. Now, according to R. Jose, who maintained, The controversy still stands in its place, they are less [than eighteen]? — Said R. Nahman b. Isaac: On that same day they also enacted that the daughters of Cutheans  are niddoth  from their cradles. And what is another? For we learnt: All movable objects induce uncleanness by the thickness of an ox-goad.  Said R. Tarfon,