אין נוטלים לידים אלא בכלי וכל הכלים כשרי' ואפילו כלי גללים [פירוש כלים עשוים מרפת בקר ועפר] וכלי אבנים וכלי אדמה וצריך שיהא מחזיק רביעית ואם ניקב בכונס משקה דהיינו שאם ישימו אותו על משקים יכנסו בתוכו דרך הנקב והוא גדול מנקב שהמשקים שבתוך הכלי יוצאים בו אז בטל מתורת כלי ואין נוטלים ממנו לידים ואפילו אם הוא מחזיק רביעית מן הנקב ולמטה:

Only wash your hands with a vessel. All vessels are kosher for this, even galalim vessels [vessels made from cow feces and dust ], stone vessels, and earthenware vessels. The vessel must be able to hold a reviis of liquid. If there is a hole/crack in the vessel [that is, if you put the vessel in liquid, the liquid will enter it through the crack and that crack is bigger than a crack that lets water out], then the vessel is no longer considered a vessel and you shouldn't use it to wash your hands. This is so even if the vessel could hold a reviis of liquid below the crack.

The above applies when you pour from the mouth of the vessel above the hole/crack, because water above the crack is not considered to be in a vessel, so the water isn't pouring onto your hands from a vessel. However, if you pour from the crack, it is permitted since the vessel can hold a reviis under the crack.

A vessel that holds a reviis when it is propped up (by something else) and if it is not propped up will pour out the water so that not even a reviis of water remains in it is not a vessel. Therefore, the body of a (rounded) single piece barrel that doesn't hold a reviis when it is not supported should not be used to wash with. If it is wide enough on the bottom that it does hold a reviis while unsupported, you can wash with it.

Chemet and Kfisa, which are types of water skins that have a base, may be used for washing. But sacks and baskets that have been arranged to sit on without being supported and have been coated with tar until they are water-resistant may not be used to wash with, because they are not made to receive water. The same applies to the hats of the levedim (meaning a type of hard material). Even when they are so hard that they can hold water and do not leak, they are still not made to receive water. However, in a case of necessity, they can be used, because passers-by on regular roads commonly drink from them

A utensil that was initially repaired in such a way that it cannot stand without support, and is only used with support, is considered a valid utensil. Therefore, a utensil that has a hole in its base and a narrow opening at the top, such that water does not come out when one places a finger on it, but flows out when the finger is removed, is permissible to use. Even if it does not hold anything, it is considered a utensil since it is fit for use in this regard. The essential use of a utensil is what determines its status. Rema: This applies even to a utensil with a spout at its base, since it was initially made to be used in this way [Tur and Beit Yosef].

One should not pour water for his fellow using his cupped hands, because one may only wash from a vessel. And the same law applies if one washed one hand from a vessel and then poured from that hand onto the other hand — it is ineffective. However, Rabbeinu Tam permits in such a case, since the initial washing of the first hand was from a vessel, and that is provided the first hand was pure, such as when a quarter-log (רביעית) was poured on it at once. Rema: And the custom is to be lenient like Rabbeinu Tam, but the first opinion is the main one; therefore, one should be stringent initially (le-khatchila).

Water must come from the force of the one pouring it. Therefore, a pipe, that he draws water from a river and pours it into the pipe so that the water flows from it to water the fields, one cannot put his hands into the water to be used for washing them because the water does not come from human force. *** If he places his hands near the place of pouring, even if he does not place them directly under the pouring, it is considered as if he washed his hands because the force of the pouring still affects them as long as they are close to the place of pouring. ***Re’ma - One should not wash his hands from those stones that are fixed to the wall (i.e. a cavity in the wall) but should make for them a receiving vessel and faucet. However, if there were utensils first and he attached them to the wall, one may take water from them.

If one inserted his hands into a vessel of water and agitated them within it: if the vessel is attached to the ground, the washing is not valid. And if it is not attached to the ground, some say the washing is valid, and some say it is not. In a pressing situation, one may rely on the opinion that permits. And if afterward he has the opportunity to wash in the proper manner, he should wash again without a blessing.

A barrel containing water — if one places it on his knees and draws water from it to wash his hands, it is valid. But if it is lying on the ground and water flows from it, or if it is standing and water comes out through a hole in it and one places his hands there, the washing is not valid. However, if there is a stopper (meaning something that blocks the hole — “spina” in the vernacular) in the hole, and he removes it and receives the water on his hands, it is considered as koach gavra (human force), and he must replace and remove it again for each and every pouring.

If one tilted a barrel full of water and then went and sat down, and the barrel continues pouring water all day due to his tilting it, and he washed his hands from it — the washing is valid.

Anyone is fit to pour water for handwashing — even a deaf-mute, an imbecile, a minor, a non-Jew, and a woman in a state of niddah. [And there is an opinion that a minor under the age of six is like a monkey and is not valid] (Hagahot Ashri, Chapter 2 of Berakhot)

If a monkey (i.e., a species of animal — “simia” in the vernacular) pours water for handwashing, there are those who invalidate it and those who validate it, and the words of those who validate seem correct. (Nevertheless, one should be stringent).

Ideally (לכתחלה), the one washing should have intent for a washing that renders him fit to eat. (And the intent of the one pouring also suffices — even ideally — even if the one washing had no intent at all) (Rashba, Siman 510).

If one immersed his hands in spring water, even if it does not contain forty se'ah, the immersion is valid as long as his hands can be covered by the water all at once. And if he immersed them in mikveh water, some say it has the same status as a spring, and some say it requires forty se'ah — and the ruling follows the lenient opinion. (But one should be stringent לכתחלה.)

Rainwater that is flowing (i.e., running and not gathered) and contains forty se'ah — there is uncertainty whether one may immerse his hands in it.

Forty se'ah of drawn water that are in the ground — according to the Rambam, one may not immerse hands in them, but according to the Raavad, one may. However, drawn water that has all been caused to flow (i.e., poured or directed to flow) — even according to the Rambam, one may immerse hands in it.

One should not take water from the river in one hand and pour it onto the other hand, because here there is neither washing nor immersion.

If one hand is being washed (נטילה) and the other hand is being immersed (טבילה), both hands are considered pure.

One who immerses his hands does not need to do it twice, nor to dry them, nor to raise his hands afterward.

One who immerses his hands does not recite a blessing on the immersion itself but rather on the washing of the hands. (Some say that one does bless on the immersion (על טבילת), and this is the main opinion.) (Tur and Mordechai, chapter "Eilu Devarim," and Semag and Agur).