Netillat Yadayim - Washing Hands Before Eating Bread

 

Translated and adapted by Rav Eliezer Kwass

          In this article, Rav Krumbein deals with several approaches to the reason underlying the law of washing hands before eating bread.  In order to resolve a group of conceptual difficulties that arise in the sources, he offers an innovative understanding of the function and purpose of this law.

Hebrew terms used frequently in this article:

NETILLAT YADAYIM: washing hands (in this case before eating bread);

TUM'A: impurity that prevents one from eating certain foods, e.g., sacrifices or teruma (see below) or entering certain holy places, among them, the Temple in Jerusalem (TUM'AT YADAYIM applies only to hands);

TERUMA: a tithe of produce grown in Eretz Yisrael given to kohanim;

CHULLIN: a term generally referring to food without any special holiness.  Here, non-teruma;

KOHEN: a priest descended from Moses' brother Aharon, who must eat his teruma while pure.

 

The Talmud (Chullin 106a) states:

"The [reason for the] rabbinic decree of washing hands before eating bread, is to form a habit for ('serakh') [those who eat] teruma."

Rashi (s.v. Netillat  Yadayim) explains:

"Hands are considered a second-level impurity ('sheniot le-tum'a') which renders teruma unfit for use [through contact] but does not affect regular food ('chullin').  Because of 'serakh teruma,' to accustom those who eat teruma to wash their hands before eating, they [the Sages] decreed that hands should also be washed before eating chullin."

          The obligation of netillat  yadayim stems from hands being deemed a second-level impurity which causes the invalidation of teruma. 

          Why are hands considered impure?  The gemara (Shabbat 14a) counts tum'at yadayim among the "eighteen rabbinic decrees," explaining that contact with hands renders teruma unfit to be eaten because "hands are very active (askaniot)."  Rishonim argue about how to interpret this expression.  Rashi in his commentary on Shabbat (14a) writes:

"'Are active': and touch his flesh and soiled places.  This is a disgrace for teruma and food becomes ruined when touched with dirty hands.  However, my teachers explained that we are worried that his hands will come in contact with impurity and the teruma will become impure ..."

[See Rashi's questions on his teachers' approach.]

          According to Rashi, the Sages decreed that hands should be washed before eating teruma so that one should eat with clean hands, whereas according to his teachers, the Sages feared that a person's hands had come in contact with impurity.  The Ramban (in his glosses to the first shoresh of Rambam's Sefer Ha-mitzvot) and the Rambam himself (at the end of his commentary to Mishna Zavim) agree with Rashi's teachers.  The Pri Megadim, in the introduction to his commentary on the Shulchan Arukh, points out a practical difference between the two opinions.  One who touches dirt is, according to Rashi, obligated to wash his hands, whereas according to the Rambam he would not.  Only the possibility of ritual impurity requires washing, according to the Rambam.

This issue presents a number of difficulties:

1.       The creation of a type of impurity that does not apply to the whole body, only to hands, is strange and puzzling.  The whole spectrum of impurities, ranging from contact with a dead body to impure bodily conditions, relates to the PERSON, and hence affects the entire body uniformly.  Purification, too, relates to the person as a whole.  A classic example is the need to immerse all of one's body - to the last hair - in the mikva.  Netillat  yadayim stands out as the one exception to this rule.  The difficulty becomes more pronounced in light of a talmudic passage that views this decree as one exhibiting King Solomon's unique wisdom:

"Said Shmuel: When Solomon instituted eruvin and netillat  yadayim, a heavenly voice said, 'Son, if your heart is wise, My heart will also rejoice.'  'My son is wise and My heart rejoices, and I will reply to those that mock Me.'"

          Rashi's approach presents less of a difficulty than the others.  Since netillat  yadayim was decreed to make certain that people keep their hands clean before eating, it follows that it should focus only on hands.  An IMPURITY relating only to hands was created by rabbinic authority to ensure that people would wash - for CLEANLINESS - before eating.

          The Rambam and the Ramban's approach leaves us puzzled.  Why would the Sages create a unique impurity only affecting one part of the body?  Once such an impurity exists, the decree that hands should be purified before eating lest they became impure makes sense.  But why institute tum'at yadayim in the first place?

2.       Netillat  yadayim applies not only to pure teruma and chullin, but also to chullin which is impure. (This is why nowadays we continue to wash before eating despite the fact that all bread today is impure.)  This carries with it a serious difficulty.  If, as the Rambam holds, the main reason for netillat  yadayim is fear of hands having come into contact with impurity, such a precaution is self-defeating if the food is itself impure.  Why ensure that hands be pure to eat impure food?  Even if there is such a requirement, the hands themselves become impure again the moment they come into contact with the food!?

          Rashi's approach cannot avoid this problem either.  Though, according to Rashi, the motivation for the Sages requiring netillat  yadayim is the preservation teruma's physical cleanliness, their method for ensuring that everyone eats with clean hands is to declare an impurity applying to the hands.  Everyone must remove this impurity before eating through netillat  yadayim.  Since the Sages have chosen to use the category of impurity to achieve the goal of cleanliness, this decree must also abide by the standard rules of impurity, and Rashi's approach becomes affected by the same endless loop as the Rambam's.  If the bread is impure, the purified hands become instantly impure again and demand constant re-washing.

3.       We quoted the Pri Megadim above who inferred that, according to the Rambam, touching (pure) dirt does not mandate washing one's hands.  In the Ramban's (Nachmanides') works, however, there are contradictory passages concerning this issue.  Though he explicitly agrees with the Rambam that the reason behind the decree of netillat  yadayim is fear of impurity, in a responsum ascribed to him (Teshuvot Ha-meyuchasot La-Ramban, #195) he explicitly writes that one who touched an unclean part of his body must re-wash his hands.  Though one could resolve the difficulty within the Ramban's approach by doubting his authorship of this particular responsum, a similar contradiction exists within Rabbeinu Chananel's writings.  In Shabbat (14a) he offers the Rambam's reason for the decree, but in his commentary to Pesachim (115) he writes that one who came in contact with dirt must wash his hands again.  [The Bi'ur Halakha (OC 165) points out this inconsistency.]

4.       The Maharshal (Yam Shel Shelomo, Chullin 8:41) quotes the aforementioned responsum of the Ramban (that one who came into contact with dirt must re-wash his hands) and differs with him.  Washing, he agrees, prevents health problems ("sakana") and eating with dirty hands is disgusting (and therefore prohibited based on "bal teshakatzu").  However,

"I see no need to make a blessing before re-washing.  We do not find that one has any obligation to wash in the middle of a meal, unless he got up and went for a long walk.  He [the Ramban] has exaggerated." 

In other words, washing for cleanliness is not part of the mitzva of netillat  yadayim.

          It seems obvious to the Maharshal that once the meal has begun there is no need to wash again unless one interrupted the meal.  Whether the reason behind netillat  yadayim is cleanliness (Rashi) or purity (Rambam and others), it seems sensible that any contact with dirt or impurity should obligate washing, even within a meal.  Why should such contact be ignored just because one washed before the meal?

 

          These difficulties can be resolved by re-examining the gemara's comment (Shabbat 14a) explaining why contact with unwashed hands renders teruma unfit: "Hands are active" ("Yadayim askaniot hen").

          The unique characteristic of netillat  yadayim lies, as we have said, in viewing the hands as a distinct entity independent from the rest of the body.  This is rooted in a unique characteristic that sets hands apart from the rest of the body: "hands are active."  This means, first and foremost, that they are very likely to come into contact with either dirt or impurity.  This statement has an additional meaning, though: They are liable to come in contact with all sorts of things because they are "active," operating as if on their own, unfettered by the restraints of the mind's conscious supervision.  The hands' tendency for free movement gives them an independent status that other limbs of the body do not have.  This distinction allowed the Sages to declare that the hands become impure independently of the rest of the body.

          Based on this, we must explore the nature of the act of washing that purifies the hands.  At first glance, washing one's hands parallels immersing one's body in a mikva.  Both remove a previous impurity, but there are some very obvious differences: netillat  yadayim uses water already disconnected from the ground, involves pouring from a vessel, and insists upon human force to pour the water, whereas all of those would render immersion ineffectual.

          Many Acharonim see kohanim's washing their hands and feet from the laver in the Temple ("kiddush yadayim ve-raglayim" - sanctification of hands and feet) as the precedent for netillat  yadayim.  Some have even drawn halakhic conclusions from this analogy (see Knesset Ha-rishonim on Zevachim chapter 2, 156-165).  The conceptual implication of such a connection is to view netillat  yadayim, not as a process that removes impurity, but as an act which sanctifies the hands and prepares them for the upcoming activity.  Kohanim had to sanctify their hands and feet by washing before serving in the Temple; we have to sanctify our hands, in order to prevent their becoming impure, before we eat bread.

          The reason why hands were singled out for impurity independent of the rest of the body is their mindless activity, their state of being "askaniot."  When a kohen sets out to begin his service in the Temple, he washes his hands - sanctifies them - and focuses their activity.  His hands are now dedicated to the Temple service.  Likewise, when one is ready to eat, netillat  yadayim focuses his hands' activity on eating, and directs a person to guard them from dirt and impurity.  In other words, his hands are no longer defined as "askaniot."  They are pure because they no longer have the possibility of becoming impure.  The only source for their impurity was their "activity," and that no longer exists because their use has been focused.  [Though one can fulfill the requirement of netillat  yadayim through immersing one's hands in a mikva, it seems that this need not be viewed as an immersion that removes impurity, but rather as one that initiates a new state, similar to the immersion of a convert or the high priest on Yom Kippur.]

          Based on this, the need for netillat  yadayim before eating impure non-teruma (question #2) is no longer difficult to understand.  Since the function of washing is not removing any impurity but defining the hands as "not-active," they cannot, by definition, become impure.  Even contact with impure bread does not affect them.

          [One might raise the following objection: If we follow this explanation to its logical conclusion, one who washes his hands then eats impure non-teruma could now touch teruma without rendering it impure.  No source suggests such a radical possibility.  The reason why this would not be true is based on the Rambam's opinion in his commentary on Zavim.  Netillat  yadayim for non-teruma is not valid for teruma.  His hands would be considered pure only for non-teruma food, but would be considered unwashed as far as teruma is concerned.]

          We can now also understand why even those Rishonim (Rabbeinu Chananel and the Ramban) who relate netillat  yadayim exclusively to impurity still require washing after hands come into contact with dirt (question #3).  The only reason the hands are pure is because they are not defined as "active."  If, however, the hands prove their "activity" by touching something dirty, they are no longer pure.  Hands that come into contact with dirt are not focused on eating, and need to be re-focused by washing them again. 

          The Maharshal's opposing approach, that contact with dirt during the meal does not mandate another washing again, can be explained along similar lines.  Even hands that touch dirt or impurity during the meal will not become impure; washing one's hands  directs them towards eating and they are defined as "not-active."  The only way to break that focus is to interrupt the meal.  Once hands are not expressly devoted towards eating the person drops his guard on his hands' activity and they become impure.  The hands of one who touches dirt or impurity during the meal but has not decided to interrupt the meal are still, in principle, focused on the meal.  This particular person has just accidentally slipped.

          "Tum'at yadayim" - impurity of the hands - regarding the laws of teruma has its counterpart in spiritual experience.  Impurity attaches itself to the fringes of existence that are cut off from the unifying forces of life.  Outside of the "annoying" supervision of the central organs, the alert intellect and the feeling heart, there is a tendency for "hands" - aspects of our lives near our spiritual edges - to become "active," to do things without any connection to the higher ideals which should be the focus of our lives.  The way to counteract this "tum'at yadayim" is not necessarily by directly forcing purification through dipping them in a mikva.  The way to deal with this type of impurity is by strengthening the connections and opening up lines of communication between the particular aspects of our lives and our unifying center, by focusing our "hands" on directed activity.  We pray that God purify our hearts to receive His teachings.

 

(Adapted from Daf Kesher #136, Sivan 5748, vol. 2, pp. 68-70.)