אין האשה עולה מטומאתה ברחיצה במרחץ ואפילו עלו עליה כל מימות שבעולם עדיין היא בטומאתה וחייבים עליה כרת עד שתטבול כל גופה בבת אחת במי מקוה או מעיין שיש בהם מ' סאה ושיעורה אמה על אמה על רום שלש אמות במרובע באמה בת ששה טפחי' וחצי אצבע ואם הוא רחב יותר ואינו גבוה כל כך כשר אם יכולה להתכסות כל גופה בהן בבת אחת וצריך שיעלה בתשבורת מ"ד אלף וקי"ח אצבעות בגודל ועוד חצי אצבע (ד"ע בב"ה) וצריך שיהיה החריץ שבו המים גדול יותר משיעור זה כדי שכשתכנס הטובלת ויתפחו המים ישארו שם מ' סאה (תוס' פ' ערבי פסחים):

Laws of Mikveh and its water. Containing 75 sections: The woman does not rise up from her impure status through washing in a bathhouse, and even if all the waters in the world passed over her, she is still in her impurity, and those (who have sex with her) are deserving of spiritual excision, until she immerses her whole body at once in the waters of a mikveh or spring which has the volume of 40 se'ah, with a size of one amah by one amah and a height of three amot square, where an amah equals six tefachim and half an etzbah. And if it is wider but not as tall, that is valid, as long as she is able to get her whole body covered by them (the water) at once. And the geometric values must add up to 44,118 and a half etzba'ot in size. And the container where the water is located must be larger than this size, so that the immersee can enter and and when the water is displaced, 40 se'ah will still remain.

Spring water purifies even when it is flowing. Rain water only purifies when in a still body, but when it is flowing, it is Biblically invalid, if it is detached from a spring. If the flowing water from a spring mixed with downflow which derives from rain, then the whole mixture has the status of the spring for all purposes. But if the downflow is greater than the spring flow, or similarly if rain water makes up the majority of the water in a river, they do not purify while flowing but only while still. Therefore one must set up a barrier or something like it in the mixed river, until the water gathers together and one can immerse in it. [Comment of Rema: And thus it is correct to teach and to be stringent. But some permit immersion in rivers all year round, even during rain and snowmelt season, when the downflow is greater than the spring flow, because the essence of the river's size is from its source location. This is the practice in most places where there is no mikveh, and we should not reprimand those who have the custom to be lenient, because they have authorities to rely on. However, one must be careful not to immerse in a river that appears entirely through rain, and when there is no rain it stops completely. Even if other rivers pour into it during the rainy season and it appears through them, in any case, since it stops entirely during the season when there is no rain, it is forbidden to immerse in it while it is flowing, until the waters are gathered together. But a river that does not stop, even even if during the rain it swells and and expands over its banks, it is permissible to immerse in it in any case, according to the lenient opinions and the common practice.]

The forty se'ah that is prescribed must not be drawn water, for if they are drawn, they are invalid. [Comment of Rema: And if the whole mikveh was drawn water, it is Biblically invalid, and when in doubt we must be stringent. But if the majority of the mikveh is valid and a minority is drawn, this (disqualification) is only Rabbinic and when in doubt we must be lenient.]

A mikveh that belongs to idolaters and they get fees from it- we should not trust the idolaters about it unless there is a fixed volume of (at least) 21 se'ah. [Comment of Rema: Since the majority of it is valid, the doubt must be resolved leniently. If we observed a partly empty mikveh, and then came and found it full, and we do not know who filled it- if it was already mostly valid, meaning that 21 se'in were present (of the necessary 40) we proceed leniently. And if the majority was not valid, then now we have a Biblical-level doubt: whether we should suspect that the idolater filled it up for bathing, and it is invalid, or whether rather an Israelite filled it up for immersion in it, and it is valid. Since most of the people who are around a mivkeh and work to make it valid are experts, certainly they have filled it properly. And even more so, if the Israelite is before us and says that they filled it properly, they are trustworthy, given that they have the ability to fix it. Similarly, one witness can be relied upon to determine forbidden status of objects, as above in Section 127 and below at the end of this section regarding rules for doubt about drawn water.]

All seas are considered springs, in that they purify even while flowing. Therefore, if a wave separates from the sea and has a volume of 40 se'ah and falls on a human or onto objects, the immersion counts for them. But if one immersed in a wave while it was in the air before it fell to the ground, even if it has a volume of 40 se'ah, or if one threw objects into the middle of the wave when it is shaped like a dome, the immersion has not counted for them.

The mikveh's 40 se'ah must not be in a container, as we do not immerse inside containers.

If one takes a large container like a big barrel or big tub and punctures it with a puncture that would render it insusceptible to impurity, (and some say the opening must be as large as the tube of a waterskin, and there is reason to be stringent) and installs it in the ground, and turns it into a mikveh, this is valid. And similarly if the plaster or building has cracks, this does not invalidate it, and the water that is collected inside is a valid mikveh. If one sealed it with plaster or gypsum, it still invalidates the mikveh until it is installed in the ground, or built-in. And if he dragged it across the ground or across plaster and the mud smooths (itself onto the container) from the outside, this is valid. [Comment of Rema: It is permissible to make it on a roof, as long as it is not inside a container or one stone that was first carved out and then installed. But a collection of many stones is not considered a container.]

A spring that pours into a container- immersion is invalid in it, whether in the water inside the container or after it has exited the container. And if the container pours onto the edge of a container, and from there to the inside of the container- inside the container one may not immerse, but outside of it one may, even if the majority of the water is inside.

An impure container which one placed other containers into and then immersed- the immersion counted for all of them, even if the container has a very narrow mouth such that the water enters through it. And since immersion counts for the large container, it counts for the containers inside it. But if one tipped it onto its side and immersed it, the immersion only counts for them if the mouth is as wide as the tube of a waterskin. Similarly, if the container was pure, and one put impure containers inside it and immersed them, the immersion only counts for them if the mouth is as wide as the tube of a waterskin. [Comment of Rema: And it is permissible to immerse vessels in a basket or bag, because they do not hold water which is superior to an opening as wide as the tube of a waterskin.]

A spring that one extended into a pool of waters which are gathered and standing- it has the status of a spring. And if the intake of the outflow stops, it goes back to having the status of a mikveh. And if one went back and extended the spring's outflow into it, it goes back to the status of a spring.

A mikveh of drawn water into which one extended the waters from a spring- even if the waters from the spring are the minority, the minority of spring waters purify the majority of drawn waters, whether the spring waters preceded the drawn or the drawn preceded the spring. [Comment of Rema: As will be explained below. But in any case, one should not immerse in it, but rather in an area of still water, as this should not be more favorably regarded than rivers where there is more outflow (from rain) than flowing water (from springs).

A spring that was passed over the backs of containers and drawn to another location returns to the status of a mikveh, as long as one does not immerse on the actual backs of the containers.

A spring that descends from a mountain drop by drop discontinuously has the status of a mikveh unless it descends as a flow and not discontinuously.

Drips that became flowing water, for example, if one placed an earthenware slab close to the place that is dripping, and the waters flow and drop on it, they are valid. But any item that can become impure, even on a Rabbinic level, we may not use to create a flow. And flowing waters that pours through nut leaves are valid.

A mikveh that (already) contains 40 se'ah or a spring of any size- one may draw as much as desired to be added inside it, and they will be valid, even if they are greater than the waters that were inside at first. (And there is no distinction between whether the spring preceded the drawn water or not, as was explained.) But any time that the mikveh does not (yet) contain 40 se'ah, even if it is only missing a small amount, if 3 lugin of drawn water fall inside, they have invalidated it, and it makes no difference if they were drawn in a container or squeezed from one's garment and held up so the water in it would fall from many locations. Likewise if one pours from the jug and drips from many locations into it, or if one threw them with the palms, and even if they fell in from two or three containers, a bit from one and a bit from the other, they combine (to comprise a volume of 3 lugin). In which circumstances is this stated? When (water) begins from the second container before the first container has stopped. But if the first one stopped before the second one started, they do not combine. And if the second start before the first stopped, specifically up to three vessels, but they do not combine from four. In which circumstances is it stated that (water) from four cannot combine? When one's original intention was not to add all three lugin. But if originally one intended to add all three lugin, even if they only added it little by little from several containers that add up to 3 lugin, it is invalid. [Comment of Rema: But if one manually passed 3 lugin over the ground, or if they splashed from an animal's feet, this is valid. And some say that an animal's feet are like a human's feet, and that neither one is valid except when passing (water) over the ground, which is like drawing it, but not when splashing, see below in this chapter in Section 39.]

A sponge that has absorbed within it 3 lugin, and when it fell into the mikveh the absorbed waters mixed with the mikveh's waters, or likewise a bucket whose mouth is narrow which contains 3 lugin of drawn water and it fell into the mikveh and not all the water inside it came out, but rather it mixed with the mikveh's water- they have not invalidated it, because they (the Sages) only discussed 3 lugin that fell and entirely mixed with the mivkeh's waters.

Drawn waters which were at the side of the mikveh, even though the waters touch the mikveh's waters, they have not invalidated it.

Two pools, one above the other, with a wall in between them, where one is full of valid waters and its companion is full of drawn waters, and there is an opening between them- if there are three lugin of drawn water opposite the opening, it has become invalid. How large will the opening be to have 3 lugin in it? One part out of 320 of the (size of the) pool.

Two mikvaot, of which neither contains 40 se'ah, where one and a half lugin fell into one and one and a half lugin fell into the other, and the two mikvaot were mixed- they are valid, because neither one attained a status of invalidation. But a mikveh that did not contain 40 se'ah into which 3 lugin of drawn water fell, and which was afterwards split into two and had valid water added in, these are invalid.

A cistern full of drawn water, which the aqueduct enters and exits- it remains perpetually invalid until it can be calculated that less than three lugin remain of the drawn waters that had been in the cistern.

A mikveh into which drawn waters fell, invalidating it, and then later one added valid water until there were 40 se'ah- it remains invalid until all the water in it leaves and the drawn water is lessened below 3 lugin. Likewise, if one made a mikveh containing 40 se'ah of valid waters and mixed it with this invalid mikveh, these have purified those. (The same rule applies to a spring of any size, which one drew to the drawn water- they have been purified as was detailed above.)

If the mikveh was missing 3 lugin, and 3 lugin of drawn waters fell into it, it remains perpetually invalid until rain waters overwhelm it or until valid waters pour into it to the point that it can be assessed that the original full volume has fallen in and more, because the incoming waters push out the waters that are inside, and remove them. If the mikveh was less, even a kortov, and less than 3 lugin of drawn waters fell into it and completed it, they have not invalidated or validated it. How is this? It remains invalid until rain falls into it or until (waters of) about the volume of water that it is missing pours in. If the right volume of rain water falls in, it is valid. If it was missing even a kortov and 3 lugin of waters fell in, they have invalidated it, and it remains invalid until its full volume and more leaves. [Comment of Rema: We specifically validate 3 lugin of drawn waters in this fashion, but if the whole thing was drawn, even if one added to it until the full volume and more leaves, it does not work, but rather we calculate the water that is leaving based on the value of both the valid and invalid waters.]

3 lugin only invalidate (the mikveh) when they are made of water and look like water. Therefore, 3 lugin of water into which wine fell, which look like wine, which fell into a mikveh have not invalidated it. Likewise, 3 lugin minus a little bit into which some milk fell, completing the volume, which fell into an incomplete mikveh have not invalidated it.

Water from pickling, vegetable broths, and not-yet-fermented grape pomace and, similarly, dyed waters invalidate the mikveh when at (a volume of) 3 lugin. But any other liquids, fruit juices, fish pickling liquid, and fermented grape pomace do not invalidate the mikveh which is missing 3 lugin, and they also do not complete it to make it valid. So if it had 39 se'in and one se'ah of these (liquids) fell in, they do not complete it. But if it had 40 se'ah and one se'ah of these (liquids) fell in, and one took out one other se'ah, this is valid even if one did this 19 times. But with drawn waters, if one se'ah fell into 40 se'ah of valid waters, and one took out one other se'ah, and one se'ah of valid water fell in, even if one did this forever, it would be valid.

Dyed waters have the status of waters for invalidation of the mikveh which is missing 3 lugin, even if their appearance is unusual compared to the appearance of water. But a complete mikveh- even if dyed waters fell in and changed its appearance, is not invalidated. Likewise, if one washed dishes in it and its appearance changed, or steeped herbs or foods in it and its appearance changed, it is not invalidated. But if wine or olive juice fell in and changed its appearance from what it had been, it is invalidated. What should one do? If it is missing volume, one should wait until rains fall and fill it and its appearance goes back to the appearance of wate. And if it contains 40 se'ah, which means it cannot be invalidated by drawing water in, one should fill it up manually and add to it until its appearance returns to the appearance of water.

If it contained 40 se'ah and wine fell in and changed the appearance of half of it (the mikveh), if it does not have 40 se'ah that have the appearance of water, then one should not immerse in it.

A mikveh in which the waters have changed appearance due to their own reasons and nothing has fallen in- this is valid.

A changed appearance only invalidates rain waters that have formed a mikveh, but a spring cannot be invalidated by a change of appearance. Not only this, but even if the mikveh has (already) been invalidated, if one drew waters from a spring towards it, the spring purifies it, even if they (the waters) have not returned to their appearance.

If three lugin of wine fell in, it is as if they did not fall in (and permissible to immerse) whether in the area of the wine or the area of the water. If it contains drawn water and one connected it (to a mikveh), if it connects at the area of the wine, neither one is purified. If it connects at the area of the water, the area of water is purified, the area of wine is not purified. [Comment of Rema: An incomplete mikveh into which wine fell, changing its appearance, and then 3 lugin of drawn water fall in, they do not invalidate it, and when one returns and completes the mikveh with valid waters, and it returns to the appearance of water, it is valid.]

The action of drawing only invalidates water. But snow, hail, ice, salt, somewhat thick mud, even if it is soft enough to pour from one container to another- drawing does not invalidate them, so that if one drew these into an incomplete mikveh, they have not invalidated it. Not only this, but even if one made the entire mikveh from snow or ice or hail which was brought in a container, and made a mikveh out of it, this is valid. [Comment of Rema: And when one assesses the volume of the mikveh using snow, they must first condense its hollow spaces, and then it is permissible to immerse in it as-is. And some are stricter, immersing in all of these only after they have melted and turned to water, and ideally it is good to be strict.]

A drawn mikveh that has frozen is pure from concern of drawn water. If it melts, it is valid for immersion.

A mikveh that contains 40 se'ah of water and soft mud that a cow might bend and drink from, if the water floats on top of the mud, we may immerse even in the mud. If the water does not float on top of the mud, we may not immerse in the area of mud, but we may immerse in the water, even if it only contains 40 se'ah when the mud is included.

Anything originating within the water, like red gnats- we may immerse in it. And we may immerse in the eye of a large fish where the fat of the eye has melted inside the socket.

A container is only considered to invalidate the water in it by reason of "drawing" if it was suitable as a container before it was installed, and it was deliberately filled. Then it invalidates (the water), whether it is a large container that holds 40 se'ah liquid measure, which would be 2 kurim in dry measure, or whether it is an extremely small container. And even if it is a container made from dung, a stone container or an earthen container.

One places a board under the pipe near the mikveh so that the waters will fall from it to the mikveh. If it has four rimmed edges so it suitable to contain the waters, it invalidates (the mikveh), but if not, it does not invalidate. One stands (the board) up on its side to rinse it, even if it has rimmed edges, it does not invalidate, since it is not positioned in a way that is suitable for containing. This is in a situation where the waters are eligible to enter the mikveh without it (the board). But if the waters were not eligible to enter the mikveh without it, even if it was stood up on its side or flipped onto its mouth, it invalidates (the mikveh).

A pipe that does not have four rimmed edges is not considered a container, and it is suitable for bringing water through it to the mikveh. And if one carved out a hollow, even a small one, inside (the pipe) before installing it, if it is wooden, then even if the hollow only holds a tiny amount, the whole thing becomes a container because of it, and all the waters that pass through it are considered drawn. But if it was made of pottery, the hollow only invalidates it if it holds a revi'it. And if clumps of mud or dirt fell in the hollow, it cannot be considered sealed off enough to nullify the (pipe's) container status unless they adhere inside it. A spout that narrows on both ends and is wide in the middle is not considered "containing" enough to invalidate the mikveh. [Comment of Rema: And therefore it is permitted to make mikvaot by means of wooden pipes and spouts that bring the water from a river or some other spring to the mikveh, or pipes from the roofs. And we do not need to worry that perhaps the force of the moisture has made hollows in them and they are containing, because even if there is a hollow in them, it is not considered a container, since it was not made intentionally by anyone. And if the waters come into the pipe by way of containers that are fixed on a wheel, which are punctured in a way that makes them not considered containers, it is permissible to immerse in them if the mikveh contains 40 se'ah. But if it does not contain 40 se'ah, one must not immerse there, since it is not considered connected to the river by this. See OC159.]

Tiles that we cover roofs with- even though they have hollows and carved portions, they do not invalidate the mikveh, because they were not made to contain (anything) in them.

One places fabric or wicker under the pipe- the waters that are drawn down them do not invalidate the mikveh.

The rule they stated - Anything that is not made for containing water does not invalidate the mikveh - they only said about the case where they (the waters) fell of their own accord into the mikveh, on their own. But if a human put them into the mikveh, then this invalidates it, as any thing a human does manually, even splashing with their hands and feet, and even passing through waters which flow on their own down their legs into the mikveh, invalidates it. In which cases is this said? When they flow down their legs. But if one was riding on the back of an animal and the waters flowed down the animal's legs, they have not invalidated it, even though they flowed from the animal that one is riding on, this is not considered the same as flowing down one's own legs. (It has been explained already that some disagree with this, see above Section 15.)

A container that has a puncture in its base, even a very small one, is not considered a container enough to invalidate the mikveh. But in any case, one should not be lenient and in an ideal case make the mikveh with water brought in punctured containers like this. And if the puncture is on the sides, it does not nullify the status of a container until the puncture has a width of the tube of a waterskin, which is approximately the width of the first two fingers from the parallel portion of the hand, folded over, within the opening of the puncture, whether it is square or round. And it must be close to its base so that it cannot hold any water from there downward, but if it can hold any water below it, its status as a container has not been nullified. And if one mixed plaster with clumps of mud and sealed the puncture with them, it is not considered sealed enough to return it to the status of a container. Or if one set it on the ground or even on plaster or gypsum, it is not considered sealed. However, if one mixed plaster and gypsum and sealed it, it is considered sealed. Therefore, if one wants to draw water from the mikveh to clean it, but fears dripping 3 lugin back from the container used to remove the water into the mikveh after less than 40 se'ah remain and invalidating it, one should puncture the utensil in its base a little bit, so then the waters within it will not be considered drawn. But if the waters are flowing, there is no need for this, as a spring is not invalidated by drawing. [Comment of Rema: But in any case, they have customarily been strict even about a spring, because some disagree even about a spring and say that drawing does invalidate it, and therefore, ideally, we should be stringent and puncture the container that we are drawing water with, even in a spring. And if they did not do this and drew the water with a complete container, and 3 lugin of drawn waters fell in and the mikveh was invalidated and they now want to clean it and make it valid, if the dripping punctures can be easily stopped up, it is best to be stringent and to do so, but if this is a very difficult task or after the fact if they did not do it, we should rely on the lenient opinions, who think that drawing water does not invalidate a spring, because this is the basic rule. And even in a mikveh that does not have a spring, if the container is not so large that it will certainly drip 3 lugin of drawn waters, but we might suspect that the drips are sequential etc., we follow the lenient opinion because a doubt about the 3 lugin of drawn water is a doubt about a Rabbinic-level rule, and we do not need to be suspicious after the fact.]

One places containers under the pipe to catch the waters that will fall from them into the mikveh- if one placed them when clouds were gathering and it rained before the clouds dispersed, and they fill up, they are considered intentional and become "drawn." But if the clouds were not gathering at the time that one placed them (the containers) and they (the clouds) then gathered and filled them, or even if one placed them while clouds were gathering but they scattered, and they (the containers) remained there until they (the clouds) gathered again, and filled them, this is not considered intentional, and they are not invalid. This is only when one breaks the containers or flips them without raising them off the ground, because if one raises them from the ground with the water, they are considered "drawn" and invalidate the mikveh.

One places jugs on top of the roof to dry them, and rains fall on them and fill them- even if it was the rainy season, one may break the jugs or flip them and the water that had been in the jugs is valid for immersion, even if all the water had been in the containers, because one has not filled them manually. But if one lifted the jugs and poured them out, then all the waters in them become "drawn."

The plasterer who forgot a pot in the mikveh, and it filled with water- even if only a little remains in the mikveh and the pot has the majority of the mikveh's volume, one may break the pot in its place and the whole mikveh will be valid. Likewise, one who placed jugs in the mikveh to strengthen them and they filled with water, even if the mikveh has absorbed its waters and there is no water remaining except the water that is inside the jugs, one may break the jugs and the collected water in them is a valid mikveh.

Drawn waters of 3 lugin do not invalidate the mikveh until they fall into the mikveh from a container. But if the drawn waters were dragged outside the mikveh and flowed so they fell into the mikveh, they do not invalidate the mikveh until they constitute a half-and-half fraction, but if the majority is the valid portion then the mikveh is valid. How (does this work)? A mikveh contains 20 se'ah plus a small amount of valid waters, and one fills and draws (water) up outside the mikveh, and the waters flow and fall into the mikveh. Whether they flow over the earth, or inside a pipe etc. made of things that do not invalidate the mikveh, it is valid, even if in total they comprise a thousand se'in. Because drawn water that has been made to flow is valid if most of 40 se'ah of valid (water) was already present. Similarly, if a roof had 20 se'ah plus a small amount of rain waters, and one filled it manually and added less than the 20 that were present - the whole thing is invalid - and then opened the pipe and the waters all flowed to one place, this is a valid mikveh. Because drawn water that has been made to flow is entirely valid, therefore a majority of the water present is valid. [Comment of Rema: But if one first made the invalid waters flow, and then after brought to them the majority of valid water, this was not effective.]

The length of this flowing portion must be no less than three hand-widths.

Causing the flow does not work unless it is over the earth or a pipe that does not have a separate container. But if one made it flow over containers, even containers made of dung etc. this does not constitute flowing. [Comment of Rema: And some say that making it flow only works specifically on the earth, which is able to absorb it, but if one made if flow over stone flooring which is not absorbent, and even more so over a board or container, even one that does not invalidate a mikveh, this does not work. And ideally it is good to be stringent.]

A mikveh that flows that dried out in the summer, and the cistern was somewhat far from it, and one filled it (the cistern) with drawn water and the mikveh filled up from under the ground with those same drawn waters, the mikveh is just as valid as if it was flowing.

One trying to cause waters to flow to the mikveh must not use an item that can contract impurity. So for example, if one wants to make rain waters flow to another place to make a mikveh, they must not grab a board by hand and pass them over it. Instead, they should place the board on the earth and take their hand off of it before the waters pass over it. And similarly, it is forbidden to cause the waters to flow through a metal pipe into the mikveh, because it can contract impurity. This is when the waters fall directly from the item that can contract impurity into the mikveh. But if they fall on its (the mikveh's) edge, outside, and flow into it, or if one connects a small tube of wood or pottery to the lead pipe, through which the water cascades into the mikveh, this is valid. And if the metal pipe is connected to the earth, even if it cascades directly into the mikveh, it is valid, because it cannot contract impurity, because it is rendered insignificant by the earth. [And it does not make a difference whether it is buried under the ground or not.]

In what cases was this said? When one causes regular rain water to flow. But if one is causing it to flow from a spring or a mikveh, even using something that can contract impurity, it is valid. Because we consider this mikveh that is receiving the flow as if it were connected to that spring or to that mikveh that is originating the flow of waters. And some do not differentiate between these.

A rain water mikveh that had one of its walls break, and the waters are exiting through the crack- if 40 se'ah are left after the portion next to the crack exit, it is valid, but if not, it is invalid. Because it has become flowing, and a mikveh does not purify while flowing. [Comment of Rema: And some are stringent, even if 40 se'ah will remain until the crack is reached, and ideally one should be sensitive to their concerns, and seal the cracks. And all this is specifically in a mikveh that does not come from a spring, but if it comes from a spring, one does not need to worry about its flow. And waters' exit is not considered 'flowing' unless they do not return to the mikveh. But if they go out a little and come back there, it is not considered flowing.] And if one tries to seal the crack so that 40 se'ah will remain, they must not seal it manually, or with anything that can contract impurity. And some permit sealing with any item that can contract impurity.

If the mikveh is punctured and its waters drip little by little, or are absorbed into the earth little by little, it is valid, because their flow is not identifiable.

One trying to mix an invalid or too-small mikveh with a valid mikveh to make it valid, or when both are too small and one is trying to mix them to make them valid- the opening between them must be as wide as the tube of a waterskin (and the stream of water must be as wide as the opening) and after the invalid has been mixed with the valid, even for a moment, it remains valid forever, even if the puncture is later sealed up. Anything located near the waterskin-tube-width can reduce its size, even materials originating from the water. If it is doubtful whether the opening is as wide as the tube of a waterskin or not, it is invalid. If it has many small punctures, they combine to add up to the width of a waterskin tube, if the one mikveh is complete and the second is too small. [Comment of Rema: And it is permissible to dig a mikveh next to a river and to immerse in it, even if there are not 40 se'ah, since the soil is continuously percolating, and since it is close to the river and we can observe the percolation between them, in which the waters come from the river by way of percolation, meaning, through tiny openings in the earth, this is considered a connection.] But if both are too small, the small punctures do not add up to the width of a waterskin tube. (And the rule is the same if a part of the mikveh is in a basket or bag, if neither side has enough volume, it is invalid.)

One trying to validate a mikveh of drawn water with a full, non-drawn mikveh- even if one only connects them by a hair's breadth, it is valid. And even if the waters at that connection do not contact the surface. [Comment of Rema: This is specifically relating to the invalidation of drawing water, which is Rabbinic-level. But a Biblical-level invalidation requires the width of the tube of a waterskin, as was explained. Even the invalidation of drawn water is disputed, and it is proper to teach it this way.]

A wall between two mikvaot that has cracked from one side to the other, even a very small amount, if it is in "warp thread" direction, they combine to mix the two mikvaot and make them valid. But if it is in the "weft thread" direction, they do not combine until one area has the diameter of the tube of a waterskin. And if the wall was split at the top between one and the other, with a height of a garlic peel and width of the tube of a waterskin, it is valid. [Comment of Rema: And it would be the same rule if there was a pile of dirt between the two mikvaot- if one removed a little from the height of the pile until they flow into each other with a width of the tube of a waterskin and the height of a garlic peel, this is enough, since we only require the full diameter of the tube of a wineskin for a puncture.]

Three mikvaot, where two of them have twenty se'ah each of valid waters and one has twenty se'ah of drawn waters, and they are standing side by side, and three people descend and immerse in them, and through this, they fill up and overflow and mix together- all three of them become valid, since at one point 40 se'ah of valid water were connected together, and those people who immersed in them are purified. But if the drawn water was in the middle, so the two valid ones could only mix through it, they have not become valid, but rather remain as they were originally, and those people who immersed in them have not been purified.

Two mikvaot, of 20 se'ah each, where one is drawn and one is valid- if two people descended in and connected them and immersed in them, even if they (the waters) started off red and became white (through mixing), or started off white and became red, the mikvaot are just as they were before, and the immersees are just as they were before.

Everything that is mixed with the mikveh has the status of a mikveh, and one may immerse in pits close to the mikveh's mouth, and in places where animal hooves have stepped, if the water in them is mixed with the mikveh's water by the width of the tube of a waterskin, they may immerse in them. [Comment of Rema: And therefore, for a utensil placed on the edge of the mikveh, one may splash their hand in the mikveh to make a wave in the water, which will pass over the utensil, and the immersion has counted for it. However, one must not disconnect the wave from its place, and it must rather be attached to the mikveh.]

Niches in caves, and crevices in caves- one may immerse in them even if the water in them is only mixed with the mikveh's water by a very small amount.

A lower chamber (meaning, an excavated area) within the mikveh- if the earth that separates between the lower chamber and the mikveh is sturdy and can support itself, one may not immerse in the waters in the lower chamber until they mix with the mikveh's waters by the width of the tube of a waterskin. But if it cannot support itself, even if they are only mixed a tiny amount, one may immerse in them.

Three pits along a riverbed, where the bottom and top are of 20 se'ah, and the middle is of 40, and a flood of rainwater passes through the riverbed- even though it enters and exits them, this is not considered mixing, and one may only immerse in the middle one, as flowing waters do not mix unless they stand still.

One gathers their arms and legs, and positions themselves at the water spout- if water covers all of them, they are pure.

A mikveh that contains 40 se'ah exactly- a person who immerses in it must not jump in, so as not to reduce the water by their jumping in, and must not immerse twice in a row. If two people immersed one after the other, even if the feet of the first are still touching the water, the second remains in their impurity, as the water has been reduced from 40 se'ah.

If one immerses a thick fabric that absorbs water- the whole time that the fabric is touching the mikveh, it is valid, even if three lugin have flowed back into the mikveh. If one removes it (the wet fabric) from it (the mikveh), it is invalid, as it has been made "drawn" by the waters that flow from the fabric into it. And if one immerses a kettle or other utensils, they should lower it into it by the mouth, so that the waters will not splash when they enter it, making it (the mikveh's volume) reduced, and they should raise it out by the sides, so that the water will not stay in it and be missing from the mikveh. [Comment of Rema: All the water that is in the utensil. Also the water in the utensil becomes drawn, and if it falls after this into the mikveh, it can invalidate it, since there is no longer the necessary volume for a mikveh.]

One immersing a pillow or cushion in the mikveh that has exactly 40 se'ah, as soon as its lip is lifted out of the water, the waters inside it become "drawn." How should one proceed? Immerse them, and raise them by their edges. But a basket or a fabric bag- one can immerse them and lift them in their normal way without concern.

A mikveh where it is known that its water volume grows smaller and ultimately will have less than 40 se'ah- (and one has already immersed in it) they must return and immerse, any time that we do not know for sure that at the time of their immersion there was 40 se'ah. But if it is not known that the water volume grows smaller to that degree that it will ultimately have less than 40 se'ah, even if its waters sometimes rise and sometimes fall, they do not need to return and immerse. But in any case, the proper thing is to check before immersion if there are 40 se'ah in it. ...

A mikveh where the waters are shallow and one cannot cover themselves in it- one may place on one edge stones or bundles of wood so that its waters are gathered to one place, and they will rise up to a level where one can cover themselves in it, as long as it does not totally divide the mikveh. But if one did this with utensils, it is invalid. [Comment of Rema: And even if one could cover themselves with water- if the water is not one fingerspan higher than the immersee's navel, ideally one should not immerse in it, in case they do not immerse nicely. However, if there is no other mikveh, and it is not possible to fix it, even if one needs to lie down flat on their face because the waters are not deep enough- if they can cover their whole body in this way at once, they may immerse there.]

Water that is doubtfully drawn is pure. What does this mean? A mikveh where doubts arise about whether drawn waters fell in or did not fall in, or even if it is definitely known that they fell in, there is doubt about whether they consisted of 3 lugin or not, or even if it definitely known that they consisted of 3 lugin, there is doubt if the mikveh they fell into had 40 se'ah already or not- this is valid.

Two mikvaot, where one has 40 se'ah and one does not, and 3 lugin of drawn water has fallen into one of them, but it is not known into which one they fell- its doubt renders it pure, because there is "something to hang it on." If both were smaller than 40 se'ah, and it fell into one of them but it is not known into which, then each of them is invalid, because there is "nothing to hang it on."

A mikveh that was empty when one left it, but one has arrived and found it full- this is valid, because this case is doubtfully drawn water in a mikveh. (And see above, at the beginning of this section what I wrote about this.)

A pipe that spills into the mikveh and has a hollow in its side, so that doubt arises about whether (the water comes) from the pipe to the mikveh or from the hollow to the mikveh - this is invalid, because the invalidation is obvious. But if the mikveh already contains a majority of valid waters, this is valid, because this case is doubtfully drawn water, since there is already a valid mikveh established there.

One who is impure who descends to immerse, and doubt arises about whether they immersed or did not immerse, and even if they immersed, there is doubt about whether there were 40 se'ah or not, or (if there were) two mikvaot, where one has 40 se'ah and one does not, and one has already immersed in one of them and it is not known in which one- they are impure, because the impure one remains in their established status until it is known that they have immersed appropriately. And similarly, a mikveh that was measured and found to be too small, whether that mikveh is in the public domain or the private domain, all the purifications that were done through it are retroactively impure, until the last known time that it was measured and found to be complete. (And see above 65)

Two mikvaot, which do not contain 40 se'ah, had three lugin (of drawn waters) fall into one of them, and we know which one they fell in, and then a second volume fell in, and we do not know which they fell into- I can "hang it" and say that the location where the first (waters) fell, the second also fell. But if it is not know which one the first fell into, but it is know where the second fell, one cannot "hang it" and say that the place where the second fell, the first also fell. If one mikveh contained 40 se'ah and one did not, I can say that they fell into the one that did contain 40. If one was drawn and one was not drawn, I can say that it fell into the drawn one.

Two mikvaot which do not contain 40 seah, and three lugin (of drawn waters) have fallen into one of them, and it is not known into which one they fell and then afterwards rain came and they were filled, one must not ideally immerse in any of them.

All mikvaot that are found are invalid, as their assumed status is that of "drawn."

Some prohibit pouring a kettle of hot water into the mikveh to heat it, and likewise, to fill the mikveh with hot water and to connect it to a river by a waterskin's width. [Comment of Rema: But some are lenient, and permit pouring hot water into the mikveh in order to heat it. But in any case, on should be stringent unless one is is in a community that customarily is lenient, in which case one should not discourage them. But in hot springs, like those of Tiberias, it is permissible according to all opinions. And after the immersing in valid waters, one may enter the bathhouse in order to warm themselves, but some prohibit returning to wash afterwards, and this is how the custom is practiced.]