Study Shabbat folio 59A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
It is considered a vessel since a bell without a clapper is suited to strike on earthenware and produce a sound of similar quality to that produced by a clapper. If so, even when the clapper is removed, the bell may still be used for its original purpose.
It was also stated that R' Yosei, son of R' Ḥanina, said: It is considered a vessel, since a bell without a clapper is suited to strike on earthenware. R' Yoḥanan said: It is considered a vessel, since it is suited for use to give water to a child to drink.
And with regard to the essence of R' Yoḥanan’s statement, the Talmud asks: And does R' Yoḥanan not require that the vessel’s new usage must be of the same type as the original labor in order for it to retain its ritual impurity after it has undergone change? Wasn’t it taught in a baraita: “Every bed
There is a dispute between the amora’im on this matter: R' Elazar says: With regard to ritual impurity imparted by treading [midras], i.e., the halakhot pertaining to a zav or to a menstruating woman who sits or lies down on an object, one states the principle: Stand and we will perform our labor t
The Talmud answers: Reverse the opinions in the first dispute: It was not R' Yoḥanan who gave that reason; it was R' Yosei, son of R' Ḥanina. The Talmud asks: And what did you see that led you to reverse the first? Reverse the opinions of R' Yoḥanan and R' Elazar in the latter dispute, and avoid a c