7. If pieces of dough [that were Heave-offering] were stuck together or if loaves were stuck together, and one of them was rendered unclean by a [dead] creeping thing,1 they all count as suffering first-grade uncleanness; if they were separated each counts as suffering first-grade uncleanness. It one of them was rendered unclean by a liquid^ they all count as suffering second-grade uncleanness; if they were separated each counts as suffering second-grade uncleanness. If [one of them was rendered unclean] by hands, i all count as suffering third-grade uncleanness; if they were separated, each counts as suffering third-grade uncleanness.
8. If to a piece of dough already suffering first-grade uncleanness others were made to stick, all count as suffering first-grade uncleanness; if they were separated, the first still suffers first-grade uncleanness but the others only second-grade uncleanness. If to a piece suffering second-grade un¬ cleanness others were made to stick, all count as suffering second-grade uncleanness; if they were separated, the first still suffers second-grade uncleanness, but the others only third-grade uncleanness. If to a piece suffering third-grade uncleanness others were made to stick, it suffers third-grade uncleanness, but the others remain clean/ w'hether they were separated or whether they were not separated.
9. If in the hollows of loaves that were Hallowed Things5 was water that was holy, and one of them was rendered unclean by a creeping thing, they all become unclean.6 If the loaves were Heave-offering, [the creeping thing] renders the first and the second unclean and the third invalid.7 But 1 App. IV. 8 b. 2 Unclean liquids themselves suffer only first-grade uncleanness; they are not fathers of uncleanness (cf. App. IV. 8 b).
J Which, unless intentionally cleaned for the purpose of touohing food, always count as suffering second-grade uncleanness.
♦ Since third-grade conveys fourth-grade uncleanness, to which not even Heave-offering is susceptible. 5 And that touched each other.
* The firat loaf suffers first-grade uncleanness, the one that touches this suffers secondgrade, and so up to the fourth. But (see below, a*; cf. Par. 8’) the liquid on being rendered unclean by third-grade uncleanness suffers first-grade uncleanness, thereby hiving the power to convey second-grade uncleanness to that loaf; and so the process can continue without end. 7 i.e. the first suffers first-grade uncleanness, the one that touches this suffers second-grade, and the next third grade; but Heave-offering is not susceptible to lighter grades of uncleanness. But if liquid was present this contracts first-grade unclean- ncss even from the loaves suffering the lighter grade of uncleanness, so conveying the uncleanness indefinitely.
if there was dripping liquid between them, even among Heave-offering all become unclean.
2. 1. If a woman was preparing preserved vegetables [of Heave-offering] in a pot, and she touched a leaf [that projected] outside the pot at a place that was dry, although there was an egg’s bulk1 [in the leaf] the leaf alone becomes unclean but the rest [that is in the pot] remains clean;2 but if she touched it at a wet spot3 and there was an egg’s bulk [in the whole leaf] all [that is in the pot] becomes unclean; if there was not an egg’s bulk it becomes unclean but the rest remains clean. If [the part of the leaf that was wet] returned into the pot the whole is unclean. If she had had contact with one that suffered corpse uncleanness,4 and she touched the leaf either at a dry spot or a wet spot, and there w-as an egg’s bulk [in the leaf,] all [in the pot] becomes unclean; but if there was not an egg’s bulk, the leaf itself becomes unclean but the rest remains clean. If a woman that had immersed herself the selfsame day5 [because of uncleanness] emptied out the pot while her hands were unwashed, and she saw liquid on her hands, and it is in doubt whether it was splashed from the pot or whether a stalk of the vegetables had touched her hands, the vegetables become invalid, but the pot remains clean.
2. R. Eliezer says: He that eats food of first-grade uncleanness suffers first-grade uncleanness; if it was food of second-grade uncleanness, he suffers second-grade uncleanness; if it was food of third-grade uncleanness, he suffers third-grade uncleanness. R. Joshua says: He that eats food of first-grade uncleanness or food of second-grade uncleanness suffers second- grade uncleanness; if [it was food of] third-grade uncleanness he suffers second-grade uncleanness in what concerns Hallowed Things,6 but not second-grade uncleanness in what concerns Heave-offering. [This applies only] to common food that is kept in the cleanness proper to Heave¬ offering.7 3. First-grade uncleanness in common food is unclean and renders [Heave-offering] unclean; second-grade uncleanness renders [Heave¬ offering] invalid, but not unclean; while [common food suffering] third- grade uncleanness may be consumed in pottage containing Heave-offering.
4. First-grade uncleanness and second-grade uncleanness in Heave¬ offering are unclean and render [Hallowed Things] unclean; third-grade uncleanness renders [Hallowed Things] invalid but not unclean; while [Heave-offering suffering] fourth-grade uncleanness may be consumed in pottage containing Hallowed Things.
5. The first, second and third grades of uncleanness in Hallowed Things are unclean and render [Hallowed Things] unclean; the fourth grade of un¬ cleanness is invalid and does not render [Hallowed Things] unclean; while [Hallowed Things suffering] fifth-grade uncleanness may be consumed in pottage containing Hallowed Things.
Which suffices to convey uncleanness.
- Her hands are deemed to suffer second grade, and what she touches contracts only third- grade uncleanness which (in Heave-offering) cannot convey further uncleanness.
1 The liquid (see below, 2*) contracts first-grade uncleanness, sufficing to give the leaf second-grade uncleanness, which conveys to the rest of the contents third-grade uncleanness.
* And she was therefore suffering first-grade uncleanness.
5 Such a one is deemed to suffer second-grade uncleanness until sunset.
'* And so capable of rendering them unclean at a first and also at a second remove.
7 Since common food can contract uncleanness only from what suffers first-grade un- cieanness.
SIXTH DIVISION: TOHOROTH 6. Second-grade uncleanness in common food renders unclean liquid1 that is common food, and renders invalid foods that are Heave-offering. Third-grade uncleanness in Heave-offering renders unclean liquid per¬ taining to Hallowed Things, and renders invalid food pertaining to Hal¬ lowed Things if it was kept in the cleanness proper to Hallowed Things; but if it was esteemed according to the clean conditions proper to Heave¬ offering, it conveys uncleanness at the first and second removes, and renders Hallowed Things invalid at the third remove.
7. R. Eliezer says: The three of them are equal:2 Hallowed Things, Heave-offering and common food that suffer first-grade uncleanness convey uncleanness to Hallowed Things at a first and a second remove, and render them invalid at a third remove; and they convey uncleanness at a first remove to Heave-offering and render it invalid at a second remove; while they do but render common food invalid. The three of them, when they suffer second-grade uncleanness, convey uncleanness at a first remove to Hallowed Things and render them invalid at a second remove; they convey uncleanness to liquid that is common food and render invalid food that is Heave-offering. The three of them, when they suffer third-grade unclean¬ ness, convey uncleanness to a liquid pertaining to Hallowed Things, and render invalid food pertaining to Hallowed Things.
8. He that eats food suffering second-grade uncleanness may not labour in an olive press.3 Common food kept in the cleanness proper to Hallowed Things counts still as common food. R. Eliezer b. Zadok says: It counts as Heave-offering, in that it conveys uncleanness at a first and a second remove and renders [Hallowed Things] invalid at the third remove.
3. 1. If grease, bean-mash or milk are in the form of running liquid, they suffer4 * first-grade uncleanness;s if then they turn solid they suffer second- grade uncleanness.6 If they again become liquid and are [no more than] an egg’s bulk exactly, they are clean;7 but if they are more than an egg’s bulk they remain unclean, for then so soon as the first drop has come forth they are unclean if they are as much as an egg’s bulk.
2. R. Meir says: [Unclean] oil always suffers first-grade [uncleanness]. The Sages say: Honey also. R. Simeon of Shezur says: Wine also. If a mass of [unclean] olives fell into an oven and were burnt,8 and they were [no more than] an egg’s bulk exactly, they are clean; but if they were more than an egg’s bulk they remain unclean, for then so soon as the first drop has come forth they are unclean if they are as much as an egg’s bulk. But if they were separate olives they are clean, even though there was a seah of them.
3. If one that suffered corpse uncleanness pressed out the juice of olives or grapes that were [no more than] an egg’s bulk exactly, they remain clean, provided that he does not touch the place where is the liquid; if they were more than an egg’s bulk they become unclean, for then so soon as the first 1 With first grade uncleanness. See Par. 8?. Cf. above, t*.
* i.e. they can be compared after the manner that follows.
3 In pressing out the oil. He would convey third-grade uncleanness and so render invalid the portion destined to be Heave-offering.
* If they touch what is unclean. s As is the rule with liquids.
6 As having touched first-grade uncleanness.
7 Since at the moment the first drop of liquid is fashioned, there is not left an egg's bulk still solid, which alone suffices to convey the uncleanness to the drop of liquid.
* So that some liquid flowed out.
drop has come forth they become unclean, if they are as much as an egg’s bulk. If it was a man or woman that had a flux, and but a single berry [was squeezed out], it becomes unclean, for then so soon as the first drop has come forth it becomes unclean by carrying.1 If one that had a flux milked a goat, the milk becomes unclean, for then so soon as the first drop has come forth, it becomes unclean by carrying.
4. If an egg’s bulk of food was left in the sun and shrank (so, too, if it was2 an olive’s bulk of corpse or an olive’s bulk of carrion, or a lentil’s bulk of a creeping thing, an olive’s bulk of Refuse,3 an olive’s bulk of Rem¬ nant,4 or an olive’s bulk of fat), they become clean, and none thereby becomes liable through [transgression of the laws of] Refuse, Remnant and uncleanness.5 If they were left in the rain and swelled, they become unclean, and one may become liable thereby through [transgression of the laws of] Refuse, Remnant, and uncleanness.
5. Conditions of uncleanness are so accounted of as they appear at the time when they are found:6 if they were [found] unclean they are [assumed to have been already] unclean [if one had touched them before]; if they were [found] clean they are [assumed to have been] clean [before]; if they were [found] covered they are [assumed to have been] covered [before]; if they were [found] uncovered they are [assumed to have been] uncovered [before]; if a needle was found full of rust or broken,7 it is [assumed to have been] clean [if one had touched it before], since conditions of uncleanness are so accounted of as they appear at the time when they are found.
6. If a deaf-mute, an imbecile or a minor was found in an alley-way8 wherein was uncleanness, he can be assumed to be clean, but one of sound senses must be assumed to be unclean.9 If any one lacks understanding to be inquired of, a condition of doubt affecting him must be deemed clean.
7. If a child was found beside a cemetery with lilies in his hand, and the lilies grew only in a place of uncleanness, he is deemed to be clean, since I might suppose that another gathered them and gave them to him. So, too, if an ass was found among the tombs, its harness is deemed to be clean.10 * 8. If a child [that was unclean] was found beside unbaked bread with a piece of dough in his hand, R. Meir declares the unbaked bread clean, but the Sages declare it unclean, since it is the way of a child to slap [dough]. If dough had on it the marks of a hen’s beak, and there was unclean liquid in the house, and the distance between the liquid and the loaves was enough for the hens to dry their mouths on the ground, the loaves are deemed to be clean; or, in the case of a cow or a dog, if the distance was enough for it to lick its tongue; or, in the case of other beasts, if the distance was enough for their tongue to dry. R. Eliezer b. Jacob declares the dough 2 The quantities here cited are the minimum in each case that conveys uncleanness.
7 In which condition, as the useless remains of a utensil, it can no longer contract or convey uncleanness.
8 The side street, leading from the public street to a series of courtyards and houses.
It counts as the private domain of the neighbouring occupants, who include it in their shittuf (see App. I. 39).
9 The principle here introduced is that where a condition of doubt arises in a question of uncleanness in a private domain it must be deemed unclean; and if in the public domain, it may be deemed clean.
10 If its trappings were not found at the time overshadowing a grave (App. IV. 4, 6) it need not be assumed that they had earlier overshadowed a grave.
720 SIXTH DIVISION: TOHOROTH clean in the case of a dog, since it is cunning and will not leave food and go after water.
4. i. If a man threw aught unclean from one place to another,1 or [if he threw] a [clean] loaf between [unclean] keys, or an [unclean] key between [clean] loaves, [what was clean] is still accounted clean. R. Judah says: [If he threw] a [clean] loaf between [unclean] keys it becomes unclean; and if an [unclean] key between [clean] loaves, they are still accounted clean.
2. If a weasel2 had a [dead] creeping thing in its mouth and passed over loaves of Heave-offering, and it is in doubt whether [the creeping thing] touched them or whether it did not touch them, their condition of doubt is deemed clean.
3. If a weasel had a creeping thing in its mouth, or if a dog had carrion in its mouth, and they passed between things that were clean, or if they that were clean passed between them, their condition of doubt is deemed clean, since the uncleanness had no abiding place. If they3 picked at them [while these lay] on the ground, and a man said, ‘I went to that place but I do not know' whether I touched it or whether I did not touch it’, his condition of doubt is deemed unclean, since the uncleanness had an abiding place.
4. If a raven had an olive’s bulk of corpse in its beak, and it is in doubt whether it overshadowed a man or vessels, and it was in a private domain, the man’s condition of doubt is deemed unclean, but the vessels’ condition of doubt is deemed clean.4 If a man drew water into ten buckets and a creeping thing was found in one of them, this is deemed unclean but the rest clean. If a man poured out from one vessel into another and a creeping thing was found in the lower vessel, the upper one is deemed clean.
5. Because of six uncleannesses whereof there is doubt. Heave-offering must be burnt: because of what was perhaps a Grave-area, or because of what was perhaps earth from the land of gentiles, or because of the garments of an Am-haaretz that were perhaps unclean, or because of vessels found by chance that were perhaps unclean, or because of spittle en¬ countered by chance that was perhaps unclean, or because of urine of a man that was near by the urine of a beast; if these have of a certainty touched [the Heave-offering] and so conveyed an uncleanness which is in doubt, the Heave-offering must be burnt. R. Jose says: [The same applies] in a private domain even when the contact itself was in doubt. But the Sages say: In a private domain it5 is left in suspense; and in the public domain the condition of doubt is deemed clean.
6. If there were two drops of spittle, the one unclean and the other clean, [and a man touched one of them and it is not known which,] the matter is left in suspense if, being in a private domain, he touched, carried or shifted [one of them], or, being in the public domain, he touched one of them that was moist, or carried one of them, whether it was wet or dry. If there was but one drop of spittle and he touched, carried or shifted it in the public domain. Heave-offering must be burnt by reason of it; still more so if it was in a private domain.
7. These conditions of doubt6 the Sages have declared clean: if there is 1 And it is in doubt whether it touched anything clean on its way.
J The weasel or dog; it is assumed that it was in a private domain. Cf. above, p. 719, n. 9.
4 Applying the principle of 3*; the man has ‘understanding to be inquired of’, the vessel* have not. 5 A case where there is the double doubt.
6 Whether they befell in the public or a private domain.
doubt about drawn water that falls into an Immersion-pool,1 or doubt about aught unclean that floats on the water;2 if it is in doubt whether a liquid has contracted uncleanness, it is deemed unclean, but if whether it has conveyed uncleanness, it is deemed clean;3 if there is doubt about the hands, whether they have contracted uncleanness or have conveyed uncleanness or have become clean, they are deemed clean.4 [Moreover they have declared clean] a condition of doubt that arises in the public domain,5 or about what is enjoined by the Scribes,6 or about common food,7 or about creeping things,8 or about leprosy-signs,9 or about the Nazirite- vow,10 or about Firstlings" or about offerings.12 8. ‘If there is doubt...about aught unclean that floats on the water’ — [it is deemed clean] whether [the water was] in vessels or upon the ground. R. Simeon says: If in vessels [and it is in doubt whether a man touched it or not] he is deemed unclean; but if upon the ground, he is deemed clean. R. Judah says: If it is in doubt [whether he touched it] when he went down into the water, he is deemed unclean; but if when he came up, he is deemed clean.13 R. Jose says: Even if there was there [in the water] only space enough for the man and the uncleanness, he is still deemed clean.
9. ‘If it is in doubt whether a liquid has contracted uncleanness, it is deemed unclean’ — thus if one that was unclean stretched his foot between clean liquids and it is in doubt whether he touched them or not, the con¬ dition of doubt is deemed unclean. If he had an unclean loaf in his hand and he threw it14 between clean liquids, and it is in doubt whether he touched them or not, the condition of doubt is deemed unclean. [‘If it is in doubt] whether it conveyed uncleanness it is deemed clean’ — thus if a man had a stick in his hand and there was unclean liquid on the end of it and he threw it between clean loaves and it is in doubt whether it touched them or not, the condition of doubt is deemed clean.
10. R. Jose says: Where a condition of doubt arises about the cleanness of liquids, it is deemed unclean in what concerns foodstuffs and clean in what concerns vessels. Thus if there were two jars [of water], the one unclean and the other clean, and a man kneaded dough [with water] from one of them, but it is in doubt whether he kneaded it [with water] from the unclean jar or from the clean jar, such is a case where a condition of doubt about liquids is deemed unclean in what concerns foodstuffs and clean in what concerns vessels.15 11. ‘If there is doubt about the hands, whether they have contracted uncleanness or have conveyed uncleanness or have become clean’, the condition of doubt is deemed clean. A condition of doubt that arises in the public domain is deemed clean. A condition of doubt that arises about aught enjoined by the Scribes — [namely, if it is in doubt] whether a man ate unclean food or drank unclean liquid, or whether he immersed his head and the greater part of his body in drawn water,16 or whether there fell on • See Mikw. 2'. - See the following paragraph. 1 See below. 45', 4 Yad. 24. Even if it was an uncleanness explicitly declared unclean tn the 3 See below, 41*. * See below, 411. >0 Cf. Naz. 3’.
11 See below, 41*. 11 See below, 4”.
13 Since it is tbs nature of floating matter to be drawn to him when he goes into the water and to be propelled away from him when he rises out of the water.
’* There is a variant: ‘stretched it out’, the preferable reading. Cf. above. 4' 13 The dough is deemed unclean whereas the vessels containing it are deemed clean.
722 SIXTH DIVISION: TOHOROTH his head and the greater part of his body three logs of drawn water, such a condition of doubt is deemed clean; but if it was a doubt about ‘a father of uncleanness’, even one that is enjoined by the Scribes,1 such a condition of doubt is deemed unclean.
12. ‘A condition of doubt about common food’ — this concerns the cleanness practised by the Pharisees.2 ‘A condition of doubt about creeping things’ — this is determined according to their condition at the time when they are found.3 ‘A condition of doubt about leprosy-signs’ — in the be¬ ginning it is deemed clean if it had not yet come within the bonds of un¬ cleanness, but after it has come within the bonds of uncleanness the condition of doubt is deemed unclean.4 If there is a doubt about the Nazirite-vow5 the vow is not binding. If there is doubt about a Firstling — it is all one whether it is the firstborn of man or beast, or whether it is a thing unclean or clean: [the priest can claim nothing], for on him that would exact aught from his fellow lies the burden of proof.6 13. ‘A condition of doubt about offerings’; thus,7 if a woman suffered five miscarriages that were in doubt or five issues that were in doubt, she need bring but one offering, and she may then eat of the animal-offerings; and she is not bound to bring the other offerings.
5. 1. If there was a creeping thing8 and a frog9 in the public domain (so, too, if there was an olive’s bulk of corpse10 and an olive’s bulk of carrion,11 ora bone of a corpse12 and a bone of carrion,13 or a clod of clean earth and a clod from a Grave-area,14 or a clod of clean earth and a clod from the land of gentiles,14 or if there were two paths, the one unclean15 and the other clean), and a man walked by one of them but it is not known which, or overshadowed one of them16 and it is not known which, or shifted one of them and it is not known which, R. Akiba declares him unclean, but the Sages declare him clean.
2. If a man said, ‘I touched this17 and I know not whether it is unclean or clean’, or ‘I touched one but I know not which of the two I touched’, R. Akiba declares him unclean, but the Sages declare him clean. R. Jose declares him unclean in every case18 excepting the case of the path, since men usually go their way and do not usually touch.
3. If there were two paths, the one unclean and the other clean,19 and a man walked by one of them and afterward prepared foodstuffs in condi¬ tions of cleanness and they were consumed, and he then sprinkled himself a first and a second time and immersed himself and became clean;20 if he 1 See above, 4’.
2 For whom the clothes of an Am-haaretz were deemed to suffer rmdrar-uncleanness (cf. Hag. 2?); and if it is in doubt whether the Pharisee touched the clothes of an Am-haaretz, the condition of doubt is deemed clean and the Pharisee may eat of common food.
3 Cf. above, 3*. If such was thrown among clean foodstuffs but was not found touching them, it need not be assumed that it had touched them and that they are unclean.
4 See Neg. 5*1. 5 Whether a man did or did not vow to become a Nazirite.
8 Any one of the eight specified in Lev. 11”. It is a father of uncleanness and conveys uncleanness by contact. » Which does not convey uncleanness at all.
10 Which conveys uncleanness by contact, carrying, and overshadowing.
11 Conveys uncleanness by contact and carrying.
11 Conveys uncleanness by contact and carrying.
,J Which does not convey uncleanness at all. 14 Conveys uncleanness by contact and carrying. ' s Passing over a grave.
16 The olive’s bulk of corpse or of carrion. it The creeping thing or the frog.
'* Of those cited in these two paragraphs. '» But it was unknown which was which.
20 Fulfilling the injunctions of Num. 19”, for becoming clean from corpse-uncleanness.
then walked by the other path and prepared foodstuffs in conditions of cleanness, these are clean; but if the first foodstuffs still remained, both alike are left in suspense. If he had not become clean in the meantime, the first foodstuffs are left in suspense, but the second must be burnt.
4. If there was a creeping thing and a frog in the public domain,1 and a man touched one of them and then prepared foodstuffs in conditions of cleanness and they were consumed; and he immersed himself and then touched the other and afterward prepared foodstuffs in conditions of clean¬ ness, these are clean. If the first still remained, both alike are left in suspense; if he did not immerse himself in the meantime, the first are left in suspense, but the second must be burnt.
5. If there were two paths, the one unclean and the other clean, and a man walked by one of them and afterward prepared foodstuffs in condi¬ tions of cleanness, and his fellow came and walked by the second path, and prepared foodstuffs in conditions of cleanness, R. Judah says: If each inquired2 by himself, each is declared clean; but if they inquired together, they are both declared unclean. R. Jose says: In either case they are both declared unclean.
6. If there were two loaves, the one unclean and the other clean, and a man ate one of them and afterward prepared foodstuffs in conditions of cleanness, and his fellow came and ate the other loaf and afterward pre¬ pared foodstuffs in conditions of cleanness, R. Judah says: If each inquired by himself, each is declared clean; but if they inquired together, both are declared unclean. R. Jose says: In either case both are declared unclean.
7. If one man sat in the public domain and another came and pressed against his clothes, or if he spat and the other touched his spittle, because of the spittle the Heave-offering3 must be burnt, and as for his garments, they decide4 according to [whether] the greater number [of the people of the place suffered from flux].5 If a man slept in the public domain, when he is risen his garments are deemed unclean from tntdras-uncleanness. So R. Meir. But the Sages declare them clean. If he touched some one in the night and it is not known whether it was one that was alive or dead, and in the morning he arose and found him dead, R. Meir declares him clean, but the Sages declare him unclean, for conditions of uncleanness are so accounted of as they appear at the time when they are found.6 8. If there was in the town a woman that was an imbecile7 or a woman that was a gentile or a Samaritan,8 all spittle found in the town is unclean. If a woman pressed against a man’s garments or sat with him in a boat,9 if she perceived that he was one that ate Heave-offering10 his garments remain clean; if not, he must inquire of her.
9. If a witness said, ‘Thou hast become unclean’, but he said, ‘I have not become unclean’, he is accounted clean. If two said, ‘Thou hast become unclean’, but he said, ‘I have not become unclean’, R. Meir declares him unclean, but the Sages say: He may be believed concerning himself. If one witness said, ‘He has become unclean’, but two witnesses said, ‘He has * And they cannot be distinguished one from the other.
* Asked the Sages for a ruling about their cleanness.
s Which the first man touches. See above, 4*.
* As to whether the first man is to be accounted unclean from mfdr oj-uncleanness.
5 See App. IV. 10. 6 See above, 3*.
7 And careless of her conduct and of the onset of her periods.
H See App. IV. 10, 20. 7 See Zab. 3*.
io A priest; she would therefore not press against his garments or sit with him in a boat.
724 SIXTH DIVISION: TOHOROTH not become unclean’, whether it was in the public domain or in a private domain, he is accounted clean. If two witnesses said, ‘He has become un¬ clean’, but one said, ‘He has not become unclean’, whether it was in the public domain or in a private domain he is accounted unclean. If one witness said, ‘He has become unclean’, and another witness said, ‘He has not become unclean’, or if one woman said, ‘He has become unclean’, and another woman said, ‘He has not become unclean’, and it was in a private domain, he is accounted unclean; but if it was in the public domain he is accounted clean.
6. i. If a place was a private domain and was made a public domain and then became again a private domain,1 such time as it was a private domain any condition of doubt concerning it is deemed unclean, but such time as it was a public domain any condition of doubt concerning it is deemed clean. If a man at the point of death was in a private domain, and they took him out into the public domain and then brought him again into a private domain [and he was found to be dead], such time as he was in a private domain his condition of doubt2 is deemed unclean, but such time as he was in the public domain his condition of doubt is deemed clean. R. Simeon says: The public domain intervenes.3