We continue with chapter 3 of Maseches Eduyos, mishnah 4, which carries on with the disputes between Rabbi Dosa ben Harkinas and the Sages, with Rabbi Dosa holding the lenient position in all of them. The first part of the mishnah deals with contracting tumah, and specifically with midras tumah.
Introduction: two types of contracting tumah:
Tumas meis - the general, familiar transmission of tumah.
Midras tumah - a tumah unique to objects meant to bear a person's weight. When a zav, a zavah or a niddah stands, sits or lies on them, even without direct contact, the object becomes tamei and becomes an av hatumah.
The rule is that anything that can contract midras tumah can also contract tumas meis, but not everything that contracts tumas meis contracts midras tumah. To contract midras tumah, the object must be designated to bear a person's weight.
The case before us is a woven article that a person would not normally lie or sit upon, but under pressing circumstances, when there is nowhere else, he might well use it for that purpose.
The dispute between Rabbi Dosa and the Sages:
Rabbi Dosa: The article does not contract midras tumah, since people do not normally sit on it.
The Sages: Since a person does sometimes sit on it, or would sit on it if he needed to, it contracts midras tumah on account of those exceptional situations.
The Gemara's distinction in Maseches Sukkah:
If it is comfortable to lie on - all agree that it contracts midras tumah.
If it is hard and uncomfortable to lie on, to the point that one would rather sleep on the floor - all agree that it does not contract midras tumah.
The dispute concerns the middle case: it is not really comfortable, but it will do when there is nothing else.
Why the article does contract tumas meis:
Since even Rabbi Dosa agrees that the object contracts tumas meis, we are not dealing with a simple reed mat. For a utensil to contract tumah it must be made of one of the seven materials, one of which is wood - and reeds, which come from plant growth, count as that same plant material. However, a wooden utensil contracts tumah only if it has a receptacle. Therefore, according to the Bartenura, we should picture a utensil resembling a tray made of woven material: since it has a rim around it and can hold things, it is a wooden receptacle and contracts tumas meis. Were it without that rim, it would be considered a flat wooden utensil and would not contract tumah at all.
It is worth noting that the Gemara in Maseches Sukkah, daf 20, presents another approach to understanding what this object is: it is not a mat shaped like a tray, but a woven pouch that a shepherd carries with him. According to this explanation, the use under discussion is not as a mattress but as a pillow - when there is nothing else to place under one's head, it is better than nothing and better than a stone. According to this picture, the Sages say that since a person sometimes rests his head on it, it bears a person's weight and contracts midras tumah; and Rabbi Dosa says that it is not normally used for that purpose, and therefore it contracts only tumas meis.
The Mishnah reads as follows: "Kol hachutzalos tamei meis, divrei Rabbi Dosa, vachachamim omrim midras" - the chutzalos are those woven mats. According to Rabbi Dosa they are susceptible only to tumah of a corpse, while according to the Sages they are susceptible to midras tumah as well.
The second part of the Mishnah - weaving by hand:
Here a new point arises. Everyone agrees that materials woven on a loom, and even by hand in the manner of weaving or knitting, are called a garment and are susceptible to tumah. The question concerns material made by hand in a loose fashion, merely twined or braided: is it too susceptible to tumah?
The Mishnah says: "Kol hachalayos tehoros chutz mishel galgalon, divrei Rabbi Dosa" - according to Rabbi Dosa, something made by hand that is merely braided is not considered woven, and therefore it is not considered a garment and is not susceptible to tumah.
The exception is the galgalon, a type of belt woven by hand. The reason for this distinction is subject to differing views: some explain that it is considered an ornament rather than an article of clothing, and therefore its law is different. Either way, it is a unique case.
"Vachachamim omrim kulan temeios" - according to the Sages, even something made by hand and twined together is susceptible to tumah. The twining under discussion here is not a loose braid that comes apart, but rather the technique known as a cobra weave, familiar from paracord bracelets and from the friendship bracelets that children make: there is a central cord, and the two remaining cords pass around it over and under, right and left, whether or not they are knotted. The key point is the motion of right over left and left over right, which closely resembles weaving, unlike an ordinary braid such as a challah braid. For this reason the Sages hold that this method of production is considered weaving, similar to the over-and-under motion of the loom, and such material is susceptible to tumah.
"Chutz mishel tzamaram" - the exception is those cords that wool merchants use. These are made very loosely and are designed to be adjustable, and because of that looseness they are not considered proper weaving, and therefore they are not susceptible to tumah.
In summary: in this Mishnah Rabbi Dosa and the Sages disagree about two matters. In the first part - regarding chutzalos, which are not normally lain upon except in pressing circumstances: according to Rabbi Dosa they are susceptible only to tumah of a corpse, while according to the Sages they are susceptible to midras tumah as well, and in any case their susceptibility to tumah of a corpse stems from their being wooden vessels with a receptacle. In the second part - regarding materials made by hand: according to Rabbi Dosa braiding is not considered weaving and they are tahor, except for the galgalon, while according to the Sages this method of twining is like weaving and they are all susceptible to tumah, except for the loose cords of the wool merchants.