This week’s learning is sponsored by Carolyn Hochstadter, Adam Dicker and family to commemorate the first yahrzeit of Judith Hochstadter, Gittel bat Kreindel v’Binyamin Benzion, which will take place this Thursday, 27 Av. “Ma was a holocaust survivor who came to Canada, met Dad in Montreal, and built a family and business together, as well as generously supported their community and Medinat Yisrael. We all think of you and we miss you. As all the kids complete their Aliyah אי”ה this summer, we will all continue to be guided by your wise and humorous counsel.”
Avodah Zarah 60
August 17, 2025 | כ״ג באב תשפ״ה
Share this shiur:
Masechet Avodah Zarah
Masechet Avodah Zarah is sponsored by the Talmud class of Congregation Beth Jacob in Redwood City, CA, in honor of the Hadran staff who make learning possible.
This month’s learning is sponsored by Jonathan Loring in honor of his wife, Leah Ackner and their children Zev and Meira. “From the first day I met my wife in Hebrew class at JTS to watching her show kindness when we volunteered together to help those in need and even when I had to wait 9 years for a first date, my wife has always been an inspiration to me and everyone she meets. Thank you for these 20 years and B’Ezrat Hashem to many more! I love you wifesy.”
This month’s learning is dedicated for a refuah shleima for Pesha Etel bat Sarah
This week’s learning is sponsored by Robert and Paula Cohen in loving memory of Chaim Avraham HaKohen ben Alter Gershon HaKohen.
Want to dedicate learning? Get started here:
0:00
0:00
Today’s daily daf tools:
Masechet Avodah Zarah
Masechet Avodah Zarah is sponsored by the Talmud class of Congregation Beth Jacob in Redwood City, CA, in honor of the Hadran staff who make learning possible.
This month’s learning is sponsored by Jonathan Loring in honor of his wife, Leah Ackner and their children Zev and Meira. “From the first day I met my wife in Hebrew class at JTS to watching her show kindness when we volunteered together to help those in need and even when I had to wait 9 years for a first date, my wife has always been an inspiration to me and everyone she meets. Thank you for these 20 years and B’Ezrat Hashem to many more! I love you wifesy.”
This month’s learning is dedicated for a refuah shleima for Pesha Etel bat Sarah
This week’s learning is sponsored by Robert and Paula Cohen in loving memory of Chaim Avraham HaKohen ben Alter Gershon HaKohen.
Avodah Zarah 60
וְאִידָּךְ שְׁרֵי, וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: עַד (הברזא) [בַּרְזָא] — חַמְרָא אֲסִיר, וְאִידָּךְ שְׁרֵי.
but the other wine in the barrel is permitted. There are those who say that Rav Pappa said: The wine until the stopper, i.e., in the upper portion of the barrel, is prohibited, but the other wine in the barrel, below the stopper, is permitted.
אָמַר רַב יֵימַר, כְּתַנָּאֵי: חָבִית שֶׁנִּקְּבָה, בֵּין מִפִּיהָ, בֵּין מִשּׁוּלֶיהָ, וּבֵין מִצִּידֶּיהָ, וְנָגַע בּוֹ טְבוּל יוֹם — טְמֵאָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: מִפִּיהָ וּמִשּׁוּלֶיהָ — טְמֵאָה, מִצִּידֶּיהָ — טְהוֹרָה מִכָּאן וּמִכָּאן.
Rav Yeimar says: Rav Pappa’s ruling is subject to a dispute between tanna’im, as the mishna teaches (Tevul Yom 2:7): In the case of a barrel that was pierced, whether on its top, on its bottom, or on one of its sides, if one who immersed that day touched it, it is ritually impure. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it was pierced on its top or on its bottom, it is impure. If it was pierced on one of its sides, the wine is pure, whether it was touched from here or from there, i.e., on either side. Only the wine that he touched is rendered impure. According to the first version of Rav Pappa’s statement he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.
אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: גּוֹי אַדַּנָּא וְיִשְׂרָאֵל אַכּוּבָּא — חַמְרָא אֲסִיר, מַאי טַעְמָא? כִּי קָאָתֵי — מִכֹּחַ גּוֹי קָאָתֵי. יִשְׂרָאֵל אַדַּנָּא וְגוֹי אַכּוּבָּא — חַמְרָא שְׁרֵי, וְאִי מְצַדֵּד צַדּוֹדֵי — אֲסִיר.
§ Rav Pappa says: In a case where a gentile is pouring the wine from the barrel and a Jew is holding the beaker [kuva] into which it is poured, the wine is prohibited. What is the reason? When the wine comes out of the barrel, it comes out by force of the gentile’s action. In a case where a Jew is pouring the wine from the barrel and a gentile is holding the beaker into which it is poured, the wine is permitted. But if the gentile tilts the beaker to the side, the wine is prohibited.
אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: הַאי גּוֹי דְּדָרֵי זִיקָּא וְקָאָזֵיל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲחוֹרֵיהּ, מַלְיָא — שְׁרֵי, דְּלָא מְקַרְקֵשׁ. חַסִּירָא — אֲסִיר, דִּלְמָא מְקַרְקֵשׁ. כּוּבָּא: מַלְיָא — אֲסִיר, דִּלְמָא נָגַע. חַסִּירָא — שְׁרֵי, דְּלָא נָגַע.
Rav Pappa says: In the case of this gentile who carries a sealed wineskin and a Jew is walking behind him and ensuring that the gentile does not touch the wine itself, the halakha depends on the circumstances. If the wineskin is full, the wine is permitted, as the wine in the wineskin is not shaken. If the wineskin is incompletely filled, the wine is prohibited, as perhaps the wine in the wineskin might have been shaken by the gentile, which would have the same halakha as wine poured as a libation. In the case of a beaker, which is open on top, if it is full the wine is prohibited, as perhaps the gentile might have touched the wine. If the beaker is incompletely filled, the wine is permitted, as the gentile did not touch the wine.
רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: זִיקָא, בֵּין מַלְיָא וּבֵין חַסִּירָא — שְׁרֵי, מַאי טַעְמָא? אֵין דֶּרֶךְ נִיסּוּךְ בְּכָךְ.
Rav Ashi says: In the case of a wineskin, whether it is full or incompletely filled it is permitted. What is the reason that the wine is permitted even if it is shaken within the wineskin? It is because this is not the typical manner of offering a libation.
מַעְצְרָא זָיְירָא — רַב פַּפִּי שָׁרֵי, רַב אָשֵׁי, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַב שִׁימִי בַּר אָשֵׁי, אָסַר.
§ With regard to a winepress where the grapes are pressed with beams, rather than trod by foot, Rav Pappi deemed permitted wine that is produced by a gentile, as the gentile does not touch the wine. Rav Ashi, and some say it was Rav Shimi bar Ashi, deemed the wine prohibited.
בְּכֹחוֹ, כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דַּאֲסִיר. כִּי פְּלִיגִי — בְּכֹחַ כֹּחוֹ. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: בְּכֹחַ כֹּחוֹ, כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דִּשְׁרֵי. כִּי פְּלִיגִי — בְּכֹחוֹ. הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא בְּכֹחַ כֹּחוֹ, וְאָסַר רַב יַעֲקֹב מִנְּהַר פְּקוֹד.
The Gemara comments: In a case where the wine is pressed by means of the gentile’s direct force everyone agrees that the wine is prohibited. They disagree when the wine is pressed by means of a force generated by his force. Conversely, there are those who say that in a case where the wine is pressed by means of a force generated by the gentile’s force everyone agrees that the wine is permitted. They disagree when the wine is pressed by means of the gentile’s direct force. The Gemara relates: There was an incident in which wine was pressed by means of a force generated by the gentile’s force, and Rav Yaakov from Nehar Pekod deemed the wine prohibited.
הָהִיא חָבִיתָא
§ The Gemara relates: There was a certain barrel
דְּאִיפְּקַעָה לְאוּרְכַּהּ, אִידְּרִי הָהוּא גּוֹי חַבְּקַהּ, שַׁרְיַיהּ רַפְרָם בַּר פָּפָּא, וְאִי תֵּימָא רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, לְזַבּוֹנֵי לְגוֹיִם. וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דִּפְקַעָה לְאוּרְכַּהּ, אֲבָל לְפוּתְיַיהּ — אֲפִילּוּ בִּשְׁתִיָּה שְׁרֵי. מַאי טַעְמָא? מַעֲשֵׂה לְבֵינָה קָעָבֵיד.
that split lengthwise from top to bottom, and a certain gentile jumped up and encircled it with his arms in order to prevent the wine from spilling. Rafram bar Pappa, and some say it was Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, deemed it permitted to sell the wine to gentiles, as the wine was rendered prohibited only for drinking but not with regard to deriving benefit. The Gemara notes: This statement applies only in a case where it split lengthwise. But where the barrel split widthwise and the gentile held the top and bottom halves together, it is permitted even for drinking. What is the reason that the wine is permitted? The gentile is merely performing the action of a brick by weighing the barrel down, and he is not doing anything to the wine.
הָהוּא גּוֹי דְּאִשְׁתְּכַח דַּהֲוָה קָאֵי בְּמַעְצַרְתָּא, אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: אִי אִיכָּא טוֹפֵחַ לְהַטְפִּיחַ — בָּעֵי הַדָּחָה וּבָעֵי נִיגּוּב, וְאִי לָא — בְּהַדָּחָה בְּעָלְמָא סַגִּי לֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain gentile who was found standing in a winepress. Rav Ashi said: If there is enough wine in the winepress that it is moist enough to moisten other items, the winepress requires rinsing and requires a more thorough cleansing, as the Gemara will explain (74b). But if there is not enough wine to moisten other items, merely rinsing is sufficient for it.
מַתְנִי׳ נׇכְרִי שֶׁנִּמְצָא עוֹמֵד בְּצַד הַבּוֹר שֶׁל יַיִן, אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ מִלְוָה עָלָיו — אָסוּר, אֵין לוֹ מִלְוָה עָלָיו — מוּתָּר.
MISHNA: In the case of a gentile who was found standing next to the wine collection vat, if there is a loan owed by the owner of the wine vat to the gentile, the wine is prohibited. Since the gentile maintains that he has a right to the owner’s property he has no compunctions about touching the wine. But if there is no loan owed by the owner of the wine vat to the gentile, the wine is permitted, as it is assumed that the gentile did not touch the wine that was not his.
נָפַל לַבּוֹר וְעָלָה, מְדָדוֹ בְּקָנֶה, הִתִּיז אֶת הַצִּרְעָה בְּקָנֶה, אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מְטַפֵּיחַ עַל פִּי חָבִית מְרוּתַּחַת — בְּכׇל אֵלּוּ הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְאָמְרוּ: יִמָּכֵר, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. נָטַל אֶת הֶחָבִית וּזְרָקָהּ בַּחֲמָתוֹ לַבּוֹר, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְהִכְשִׁירוּ.
If a gentile fell into the wine collection vat and emerged from it, or if he measured the wine in the winepress with a pole without touching it with his hands, or if he cast a hornet out of the wine by means of a pole and the pole touched the wine, or where the gentile was removing the foam that was on the top of a fermenting barrel of wine; with regard to all these cases there was such an incident. And the Sages said that the wine may be sold to gentiles, as it is permitted to derive benefit from the wine, but not to drink it. And Rabbi Shimon deems the wine permitted even for drinking. In a case where a gentile took the barrel of wine and threw it, in his anger, into the wine collection vat, this was an incident that occurred and the Sages deemed the wine fit for drinking.
גְּמָ׳ אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: וְהוּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִלְוָה עַל אוֹתוֹ יַיִן.
GEMARA: The mishna teaches that in the case of a gentile who was found standing next to a wine collection vat, if the owner of the vat owes money to the gentile the wine is prohibited. Shmuel says: And this halakha applies only when the loan includes the qualification that the gentile has a lien on that wine, as only then does the gentile feel that he is entitled to touch the wine.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: מַתְנִיתִין נָמֵי דַּיְקָא, דִּתְנַן: הַמְטַהֵר יֵינוֹ שֶׁל נׇכְרִי וְנוֹתְנוֹ בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ, וְהַלָּה כּוֹתֵב לוֹ: ״הִתְקַבַּלְתִּי מִמְּךָ מָעוֹת״ — מוּתָּר, אֲבָל אִם יִרְצֶה יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהוֹצִיאוֹ וְאֵין מַנִּיחוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן לוֹ מְעוֹתָיו, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה בְּבֵית שְׁאָן וְאָסְרוּ.
Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise according to Shmuel’s interpretation, as we learned in the following mishna (61a): In the case of a Jew who renders the wine of a gentile permitted by treading the gentile’s grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, and he then places the wine in the gentile’s domain until he sells it, the halakha depends on the circumstances. If that one, the gentile, writes for the Jew: I received money from you in payment for the wine, even though he did not yet receive the actual payment, the wine is permitted. This is because the wine is considered the Jew’s property and there is no reason to suppose that the gentile might touch it. But in a case where the Jew desires to remove the wine and the gentile does not allow him to do so until the Jew gives him the money due to him, this was an incident that occurred in Beit She’an and the Sages deemed the wine prohibited.
טַעְמָא דְּאֵין מַנִּיחוֹ, הָא מַנִּיחוֹ שְׁרֵי, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: מִלְוָה עַל אוֹתוֹ יַיִן בָּעֵינַן. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.
Rav Ashi explains: The reason that the wine is prohibited is that the gentile does not allow the Jew to remove the wine, and therefore the gentile is considered to have some degree of ownership of the wine. Therefore, one can infer that if the gentile allows him to remove the wine, the wine is permitted, even though the Jew still owes him money. One may conclude from the mishna that in order for the wine to be prohibited we require the loan to include the qualification that the gentile has a lien on that wine. The Gemara affirms: One may conclude Shmuel’s principle from the mishna.
נָפַל לַבּוֹר וְעָלָה. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁעָלָה מֵת, אֲבָל עָלָה חַי — אָסוּר. מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: דְּדָמֵי עֲלֵיהּ כְּיוֹם אֵידָם.
§ The mishna teaches that if a gentile fell into the wine collection vat and emerged, it is not prohibited to derive benefit from the wine. Rav Pappa says: The Sages taught this halakha only in a case where the gentile emerged from the vat dead. But if he emerged alive, the wine is prohibited. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the wine is prohibited? Rav Pappa said: Since the gentile was rescued from death, he considers that day like their festival day, and he offers the wine as an idolatrous libation in thanksgiving.
מְדָדוֹ בְּקָנֶה וְכוּ׳. כׇּל אֵלּוּ הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְאָמְרוּ: יִמָּכֵר, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: יָנוּחוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרָכוֹת עַל רֹאשׁוֹ, כְּשֶׁהוּא מַתִּיר — מַתִּיר אֲפִילּוּ בִּשְׁתִיָּה, וּכְשֶׁהוּא אוֹסֵר — אוֹסֵר אֲפִילּוּ בַּהֲנָאָה.
§ The mishna teaches that if a gentile measured the wine in the winepress with a pole, or if he cast a hornet out of the wine by means of a pole, or if he removed the foam on top of a fermenting barrel of wine, with regard to all these cases there was such an incident, and the Sages said that the wine may be sold to gentiles but one may not drink it. And Rabbi Shimon deems the wine permitted even for drinking. Rav Adda bar Ahava says: May blessings rest upon Rabbi Shimon’s head, as his reasoning is clear. When he deems the wine permitted, he deems it permitted even with regard to drinking, and when he deems the wine prohibited, he deems it prohibited even with regard to deriving benefit from it.
אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בְּרֵיהּ דְּאַבָּא בַּר נַחְמָנִי, אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר רַב, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר זְעֵירִי: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אֲמַר לִי אַבָּא בַּר חָנָן, הָכִי אָמַר זְעֵירִי: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וְאֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.
Rav Ḥiyya, son of Abba bar Naḥmani, says that Rav Ḥisda says that Rav says, and some say that Rav Ḥisda says that Ze’eiri says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. There are those who say that Rav Ḥisda says: Abba bar Ḥanan said to me: This is what Ze’eiri says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. Despite this, the Gemara concludes: But the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.
נָטַל חָבִית וּזְרָקָהּ [בַּחֲמָתוֹ] לַבּוֹר, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה [וְהִכְשִׁירוּ]. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כׇּל שֶׁבַּזָּב טָמֵא בְּגוֹי עוֹשֶׂה יֵין נֶסֶךְ, כָּל שֶׁבַּזָּב טָהוֹר בְּגוֹי אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה יֵין נֶסֶךְ.
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to the case where a gentile took a barrel of wine and threw it, in his anger, into the wine collection vat, this was an incident that occurred and the Sages deemed the wine fit for drinking. Rav Ashi says: With regard to any form of contact through which a zav renders an object ritually impure, in a case where a gentile has that same type of contact with wine, he renders it wine used for a libation. In the case of any form of contact through which a zav does not transmit ritual impurity, leaving an object ritually pure, a gentile does not render the wine with which he has contact wine used for a libation.
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב הוּנָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: נָטַל אֶת הֶחָבִית וּזְרָקָהּ בַּחֲמָתוֹ לַבּוֹר, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה בְּבֵית שְׁאָן וְהִכְשִׁירוּ. בַּחֲמָתוֹ — אִין, שֶׁלֹּא בַּחֲמָתוֹ — לָא!
Rav Huna raised an objection to Rav Ashi from the mishna: With regard to the case where a gentile took the barrel of wine and threw it, in his anger, into the wine collection vat, this was an incident that occurred in Beit She’an and the Sages deemed the wine fit for drinking. One may infer that if the gentile threw the wine in his anger, yes, it is permitted. But if it was not in his anger the wine is not permitted, even though in the case of a zav, if he threw an object at a vessel, it does not render the vessel impure.
Follow 
Today’s daily daf tools:
Delve Deeper
Broaden your understanding of the topics on this daf with classes and podcasts from top women Talmud scholars.
New to Talmud?
Check out our resources designed to help you navigate a page of Talmud – and study at the pace, level and style that fits you.
The Hadran Women’s Tapestry
Meet the diverse women learning Gemara at Hadran and hear their stories.
I started my Daf Yomi journey at the beginning of the COVID19 pandemic.
Karena Perry
Los Angeles, United States
I had never heard of Daf Yomi and after reading the book, The Weight of Ink, I explored more about it. I discovered that it was only 6 months before a whole new cycle started and I was determined to give it a try. I tried to get a friend to join me on the journey but after the first few weeks they all dropped it. I haven’t missed a day of reading and of listening to the podcast.
Anne Rubin
Elkins Park, United States
A few years back, after reading Ilana Kurshan’s book, “If All The Seas Were Ink,” I began pondering the crazy, outlandish idea of beginning the Daf Yomi cycle. Beginning in December, 2019, a month before the previous cycle ended, I “auditioned” 30 different podcasts in 30 days, and ultimately chose to take the plunge with Hadran and Rabbanit Michelle. Such joy!
Cindy Dolgin
HUNTINGTON, United States
Jill Shames
Jerusalem, Israel
In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.
Lisa Berkelhammer
San Francisco, CA , United States
In early 2020, I began the process of a stem cell transplant. The required extreme isolation forced me to leave work and normal life but gave me time to delve into Jewish text study. I did not feel isolated. I began Daf Yomi at the start of this cycle, with family members joining me online from my hospital room. I’ve used my newly granted time to to engage, grow and connect through this learning.
Reena Slovin
Worcester, United States
I attended the Siyum so that I could tell my granddaughter that I had been there. Then I decided to listen on Spotify and after the siyum of Brachot, Covid and zoom began. It gave structure to my day. I learn with people from all over the world who are now my friends – yet most of us have never met. I can’t imagine life without it. Thank you Rabbanit Michelle.
Emma Rinberg
Raanana, Israel
In January 2020, my chevruta suggested that we “up our game. Let’s do Daf Yomi” – and she sent me the Hadran link. I lost my job (and went freelance), there was a pandemic, and I am still opening the podcast with my breakfast coffee, or after Shabbat with popcorn. My Aramaic is improving. I will need a new bookcase, though.
Rhondda May
Atlanta, Georgia, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Patti Evans
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
I started learning Jan 2020 when I heard the new cycle was starting. I had tried during the last cycle and didn’t make it past a few weeks. Learning online from old men didn’t speak to my soul and I knew Talmud had to be a soul journey for me. Enter Hadran! Talmud from Rabbanit Michelle Farber from a woman’s perspective, a mother’s perspective and a modern perspective. Motivated to continue!
Keren Carter
Brentwood, California, United States
I started learning daf in January, 2020, being inspired by watching the Siyyum Hashas in Binyanei Haumah. I wasn’t sure I would be able to keep up with the task. When I went to school, Gemara was not an option. Fast forward to March, 2022, and each day starts with the daf. The challenge is now learning the intricacies of delving into the actual learning. Hadran community, thank you!
Rochel Cheifetz
Riverdale, NY, United States
I had tried to start after being inspired by the hadran siyum, but did not manage to stick to it. However, just before masechet taanit, our rav wrote a message to the shul WhatsApp encouraging people to start with masechet taanit, so I did! And this time, I’m hooked! I listen to the shiur every day , and am also trying to improve my skills.
Laura Major
Yad Binyamin, Israel
I began my journey two years ago at the beginning of this cycle of the daf yomi. It has been an incredible, challenging experience and has given me a new perspective of Torah Sh’baal Peh and the role it plays in our lives
linda kalish-marcus
Efrat, Israel
In early January of 2020, I learned about Siyyum HaShas and Daf Yomi via Tablet Magazine’s brief daily podcast about the Daf. I found it compelling and fascinating. Soon I discovered Hadran; since then I have learned the Daf daily with Rabbanit Michelle Cohen Farber. The Daf has permeated my every hour, and has transformed and magnified my place within the Jewish Universe.
Lisa Berkelhammer
San Francisco, CA , United States
I started last year after completing the Pesach Sugiyot class. Masechet Yoma might seem like a difficult set of topics, but for me made Yom Kippur and the Beit HaMikdash come alive. Liturgy I’d always had trouble connecting with took on new meaning as I gained a sense of real people moving through specific spaces in particular ways. It was the perfect introduction; I am so grateful for Hadran!
Debbie Engelen-Eigles
Minnesota, United States
I started learning at the beginning of this cycle more than 2 years ago, and I have not missed a day or a daf. It’s been challenging and enlightening and even mind-numbing at times, but the learning and the shared experience have all been worth it. If you are open to it, there’s no telling what might come into your life.
Patti Evans
Phoenix, Arizona, United States
When the new cycle began, I thought, If not now, when? I’d just turned 72. I feel like a tourist on a tour bus passing astonishing scenery each day. Rabbanit Michelle is my beloved tour guide. When the cycle ends, I’ll be 80. I pray that I’ll have strength and mind to continue the journey to glimpse a little more. My grandchildren think having a daf-learning savta is cool!
Wendy Dickstein
Jerusalem, Israel
Geri Goldstein got me started learning daf yomi when I was in Israel 2 years ago. It’s been a challenge and I’ve learned a lot though I’m sure I miss a lot. I quilt as I listen and I want to share what I’ve been working on.
Rebecca Stulberg
Ottawa, Canada
When I started studying Hebrew at Brown University’s Hillel, I had no idea that almost 38 years later, I’m doing Daf Yomi. My Shabbat haburah is led by Rabbanit Leah Sarna. The women are a hoot. I’m tracking the completion of each tractate by reading Ilana Kurshan’s memoir, If All the Seas Were Ink.
Hannah Lee
Pennsylvania, United States
I am a Reform rabbi and took Talmud courses in rabbinical school, but I knew there was so much more to learn. It felt inauthentic to serve as a rabbi without having read the entire Talmud, so when the opportunity arose to start Daf Yomi in 2020, I dove in! Thanks to Hadran, Daf Yomi has enriched my understanding of rabbinic Judaism and deepened my love of Jewish text & tradition. Todah rabbah!
Rabbi Nicki Greninger
California, United States
Avodah Zarah 60
וְאִידָּךְ שְׁרֵי, וְאִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: עַד (הברזא) [בַּרְזָא] — חַמְרָא אֲסִיר, וְאִידָּךְ שְׁרֵי.
but the other wine in the barrel is permitted. There are those who say that Rav Pappa said: The wine until the stopper, i.e., in the upper portion of the barrel, is prohibited, but the other wine in the barrel, below the stopper, is permitted.
אָמַר רַב יֵימַר, כְּתַנָּאֵי: חָבִית שֶׁנִּקְּבָה, בֵּין מִפִּיהָ, בֵּין מִשּׁוּלֶיהָ, וּבֵין מִצִּידֶּיהָ, וְנָגַע בּוֹ טְבוּל יוֹם — טְמֵאָה. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: מִפִּיהָ וּמִשּׁוּלֶיהָ — טְמֵאָה, מִצִּידֶּיהָ — טְהוֹרָה מִכָּאן וּמִכָּאן.
Rav Yeimar says: Rav Pappa’s ruling is subject to a dispute between tanna’im, as the mishna teaches (Tevul Yom 2:7): In the case of a barrel that was pierced, whether on its top, on its bottom, or on one of its sides, if one who immersed that day touched it, it is ritually impure. Rabbi Yehuda says: If it was pierced on its top or on its bottom, it is impure. If it was pierced on one of its sides, the wine is pure, whether it was touched from here or from there, i.e., on either side. Only the wine that he touched is rendered impure. According to the first version of Rav Pappa’s statement he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.
אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: גּוֹי אַדַּנָּא וְיִשְׂרָאֵל אַכּוּבָּא — חַמְרָא אֲסִיר, מַאי טַעְמָא? כִּי קָאָתֵי — מִכֹּחַ גּוֹי קָאָתֵי. יִשְׂרָאֵל אַדַּנָּא וְגוֹי אַכּוּבָּא — חַמְרָא שְׁרֵי, וְאִי מְצַדֵּד צַדּוֹדֵי — אֲסִיר.
§ Rav Pappa says: In a case where a gentile is pouring the wine from the barrel and a Jew is holding the beaker [kuva] into which it is poured, the wine is prohibited. What is the reason? When the wine comes out of the barrel, it comes out by force of the gentile’s action. In a case where a Jew is pouring the wine from the barrel and a gentile is holding the beaker into which it is poured, the wine is permitted. But if the gentile tilts the beaker to the side, the wine is prohibited.
אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: הַאי גּוֹי דְּדָרֵי זִיקָּא וְקָאָזֵיל יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲחוֹרֵיהּ, מַלְיָא — שְׁרֵי, דְּלָא מְקַרְקֵשׁ. חַסִּירָא — אֲסִיר, דִּלְמָא מְקַרְקֵשׁ. כּוּבָּא: מַלְיָא — אֲסִיר, דִּלְמָא נָגַע. חַסִּירָא — שְׁרֵי, דְּלָא נָגַע.
Rav Pappa says: In the case of this gentile who carries a sealed wineskin and a Jew is walking behind him and ensuring that the gentile does not touch the wine itself, the halakha depends on the circumstances. If the wineskin is full, the wine is permitted, as the wine in the wineskin is not shaken. If the wineskin is incompletely filled, the wine is prohibited, as perhaps the wine in the wineskin might have been shaken by the gentile, which would have the same halakha as wine poured as a libation. In the case of a beaker, which is open on top, if it is full the wine is prohibited, as perhaps the gentile might have touched the wine. If the beaker is incompletely filled, the wine is permitted, as the gentile did not touch the wine.
רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר: זִיקָא, בֵּין מַלְיָא וּבֵין חַסִּירָא — שְׁרֵי, מַאי טַעְמָא? אֵין דֶּרֶךְ נִיסּוּךְ בְּכָךְ.
Rav Ashi says: In the case of a wineskin, whether it is full or incompletely filled it is permitted. What is the reason that the wine is permitted even if it is shaken within the wineskin? It is because this is not the typical manner of offering a libation.
מַעְצְרָא זָיְירָא — רַב פַּפִּי שָׁרֵי, רַב אָשֵׁי, וְאִיתֵּימָא רַב שִׁימִי בַּר אָשֵׁי, אָסַר.
§ With regard to a winepress where the grapes are pressed with beams, rather than trod by foot, Rav Pappi deemed permitted wine that is produced by a gentile, as the gentile does not touch the wine. Rav Ashi, and some say it was Rav Shimi bar Ashi, deemed the wine prohibited.
בְּכֹחוֹ, כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דַּאֲסִיר. כִּי פְּלִיגִי — בְּכֹחַ כֹּחוֹ. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי: בְּכֹחַ כֹּחוֹ, כּוּלֵּי עָלְמָא לָא פְּלִיגִי דִּשְׁרֵי. כִּי פְּלִיגִי — בְּכֹחוֹ. הֲוָה עוֹבָדָא בְּכֹחַ כֹּחוֹ, וְאָסַר רַב יַעֲקֹב מִנְּהַר פְּקוֹד.
The Gemara comments: In a case where the wine is pressed by means of the gentile’s direct force everyone agrees that the wine is prohibited. They disagree when the wine is pressed by means of a force generated by his force. Conversely, there are those who say that in a case where the wine is pressed by means of a force generated by the gentile’s force everyone agrees that the wine is permitted. They disagree when the wine is pressed by means of the gentile’s direct force. The Gemara relates: There was an incident in which wine was pressed by means of a force generated by the gentile’s force, and Rav Yaakov from Nehar Pekod deemed the wine prohibited.
הָהִיא חָבִיתָא
§ The Gemara relates: There was a certain barrel
דְּאִיפְּקַעָה לְאוּרְכַּהּ, אִידְּרִי הָהוּא גּוֹי חַבְּקַהּ, שַׁרְיַיהּ רַפְרָם בַּר פָּפָּא, וְאִי תֵּימָא רַב הוּנָא בְּרֵיהּ דְּרַב יְהוֹשֻׁעַ, לְזַבּוֹנֵי לְגוֹיִם. וְהָנֵי מִילֵּי דִּפְקַעָה לְאוּרְכַּהּ, אֲבָל לְפוּתְיַיהּ — אֲפִילּוּ בִּשְׁתִיָּה שְׁרֵי. מַאי טַעְמָא? מַעֲשֵׂה לְבֵינָה קָעָבֵיד.
that split lengthwise from top to bottom, and a certain gentile jumped up and encircled it with his arms in order to prevent the wine from spilling. Rafram bar Pappa, and some say it was Rav Huna, son of Rav Yehoshua, deemed it permitted to sell the wine to gentiles, as the wine was rendered prohibited only for drinking but not with regard to deriving benefit. The Gemara notes: This statement applies only in a case where it split lengthwise. But where the barrel split widthwise and the gentile held the top and bottom halves together, it is permitted even for drinking. What is the reason that the wine is permitted? The gentile is merely performing the action of a brick by weighing the barrel down, and he is not doing anything to the wine.
הָהוּא גּוֹי דְּאִשְׁתְּכַח דַּהֲוָה קָאֵי בְּמַעְצַרְתָּא, אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: אִי אִיכָּא טוֹפֵחַ לְהַטְפִּיחַ — בָּעֵי הַדָּחָה וּבָעֵי נִיגּוּב, וְאִי לָא — בְּהַדָּחָה בְּעָלְמָא סַגִּי לֵיהּ.
The Gemara relates: There was a certain gentile who was found standing in a winepress. Rav Ashi said: If there is enough wine in the winepress that it is moist enough to moisten other items, the winepress requires rinsing and requires a more thorough cleansing, as the Gemara will explain (74b). But if there is not enough wine to moisten other items, merely rinsing is sufficient for it.
מַתְנִי׳ נׇכְרִי שֶׁנִּמְצָא עוֹמֵד בְּצַד הַבּוֹר שֶׁל יַיִן, אִם יֵשׁ לוֹ מִלְוָה עָלָיו — אָסוּר, אֵין לוֹ מִלְוָה עָלָיו — מוּתָּר.
MISHNA: In the case of a gentile who was found standing next to the wine collection vat, if there is a loan owed by the owner of the wine vat to the gentile, the wine is prohibited. Since the gentile maintains that he has a right to the owner’s property he has no compunctions about touching the wine. But if there is no loan owed by the owner of the wine vat to the gentile, the wine is permitted, as it is assumed that the gentile did not touch the wine that was not his.
נָפַל לַבּוֹר וְעָלָה, מְדָדוֹ בְּקָנֶה, הִתִּיז אֶת הַצִּרְעָה בְּקָנֶה, אוֹ שֶׁהָיָה מְטַפֵּיחַ עַל פִּי חָבִית מְרוּתַּחַת — בְּכׇל אֵלּוּ הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְאָמְרוּ: יִמָּכֵר, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. נָטַל אֶת הֶחָבִית וּזְרָקָהּ בַּחֲמָתוֹ לַבּוֹר, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְהִכְשִׁירוּ.
If a gentile fell into the wine collection vat and emerged from it, or if he measured the wine in the winepress with a pole without touching it with his hands, or if he cast a hornet out of the wine by means of a pole and the pole touched the wine, or where the gentile was removing the foam that was on the top of a fermenting barrel of wine; with regard to all these cases there was such an incident. And the Sages said that the wine may be sold to gentiles, as it is permitted to derive benefit from the wine, but not to drink it. And Rabbi Shimon deems the wine permitted even for drinking. In a case where a gentile took the barrel of wine and threw it, in his anger, into the wine collection vat, this was an incident that occurred and the Sages deemed the wine fit for drinking.
גְּמָ׳ אָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל: וְהוּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִלְוָה עַל אוֹתוֹ יַיִן.
GEMARA: The mishna teaches that in the case of a gentile who was found standing next to a wine collection vat, if the owner of the vat owes money to the gentile the wine is prohibited. Shmuel says: And this halakha applies only when the loan includes the qualification that the gentile has a lien on that wine, as only then does the gentile feel that he is entitled to touch the wine.
אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: מַתְנִיתִין נָמֵי דַּיְקָא, דִּתְנַן: הַמְטַהֵר יֵינוֹ שֶׁל נׇכְרִי וְנוֹתְנוֹ בִּרְשׁוּתוֹ, וְהַלָּה כּוֹתֵב לוֹ: ״הִתְקַבַּלְתִּי מִמְּךָ מָעוֹת״ — מוּתָּר, אֲבָל אִם יִרְצֶה יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהוֹצִיאוֹ וְאֵין מַנִּיחוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּתֵּן לוֹ מְעוֹתָיו, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה בְּבֵית שְׁאָן וְאָסְרוּ.
Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise according to Shmuel’s interpretation, as we learned in the following mishna (61a): In the case of a Jew who renders the wine of a gentile permitted by treading the gentile’s grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, and he then places the wine in the gentile’s domain until he sells it, the halakha depends on the circumstances. If that one, the gentile, writes for the Jew: I received money from you in payment for the wine, even though he did not yet receive the actual payment, the wine is permitted. This is because the wine is considered the Jew’s property and there is no reason to suppose that the gentile might touch it. But in a case where the Jew desires to remove the wine and the gentile does not allow him to do so until the Jew gives him the money due to him, this was an incident that occurred in Beit She’an and the Sages deemed the wine prohibited.
טַעְמָא דְּאֵין מַנִּיחוֹ, הָא מַנִּיחוֹ שְׁרֵי, שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ: מִלְוָה עַל אוֹתוֹ יַיִן בָּעֵינַן. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ.
Rav Ashi explains: The reason that the wine is prohibited is that the gentile does not allow the Jew to remove the wine, and therefore the gentile is considered to have some degree of ownership of the wine. Therefore, one can infer that if the gentile allows him to remove the wine, the wine is permitted, even though the Jew still owes him money. One may conclude from the mishna that in order for the wine to be prohibited we require the loan to include the qualification that the gentile has a lien on that wine. The Gemara affirms: One may conclude Shmuel’s principle from the mishna.
נָפַל לַבּוֹר וְעָלָה. אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: לֹא שָׁנוּ אֶלָּא שֶׁעָלָה מֵת, אֲבָל עָלָה חַי — אָסוּר. מַאי טַעְמָא? אָמַר רַב פָּפָּא: דְּדָמֵי עֲלֵיהּ כְּיוֹם אֵידָם.
§ The mishna teaches that if a gentile fell into the wine collection vat and emerged, it is not prohibited to derive benefit from the wine. Rav Pappa says: The Sages taught this halakha only in a case where the gentile emerged from the vat dead. But if he emerged alive, the wine is prohibited. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that the wine is prohibited? Rav Pappa said: Since the gentile was rescued from death, he considers that day like their festival day, and he offers the wine as an idolatrous libation in thanksgiving.
מְדָדוֹ בְּקָנֶה וְכוּ׳. כׇּל אֵלּוּ הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְאָמְרוּ: יִמָּכֵר, וְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן מַתִּיר. אָמַר רַב אַדָּא בַּר אַהֲבָה: יָנוּחוּ לוֹ לְרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן בְּרָכוֹת עַל רֹאשׁוֹ, כְּשֶׁהוּא מַתִּיר — מַתִּיר אֲפִילּוּ בִּשְׁתִיָּה, וּכְשֶׁהוּא אוֹסֵר — אוֹסֵר אֲפִילּוּ בַּהֲנָאָה.
§ The mishna teaches that if a gentile measured the wine in the winepress with a pole, or if he cast a hornet out of the wine by means of a pole, or if he removed the foam on top of a fermenting barrel of wine, with regard to all these cases there was such an incident, and the Sages said that the wine may be sold to gentiles but one may not drink it. And Rabbi Shimon deems the wine permitted even for drinking. Rav Adda bar Ahava says: May blessings rest upon Rabbi Shimon’s head, as his reasoning is clear. When he deems the wine permitted, he deems it permitted even with regard to drinking, and when he deems the wine prohibited, he deems it prohibited even with regard to deriving benefit from it.
אָמַר רַב חִיָּיא בְּרֵיהּ דְּאַבָּא בַּר נַחְמָנִי, אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר רַב, וְאָמְרִי לַהּ אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא אָמַר זְעֵירִי: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. אִיכָּא דְּאָמְרִי, אָמַר רַב חִסְדָּא: אֲמַר לִי אַבָּא בַּר חָנָן, הָכִי אָמַר זְעֵירִי: הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. וְאֵין הֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.
Rav Ḥiyya, son of Abba bar Naḥmani, says that Rav Ḥisda says that Rav says, and some say that Rav Ḥisda says that Ze’eiri says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. There are those who say that Rav Ḥisda says: Abba bar Ḥanan said to me: This is what Ze’eiri says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. Despite this, the Gemara concludes: But the halakha is not in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon.
נָטַל חָבִית וּזְרָקָהּ [בַּחֲמָתוֹ] לַבּוֹר, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה [וְהִכְשִׁירוּ]. אָמַר רַב אָשֵׁי: כׇּל שֶׁבַּזָּב טָמֵא בְּגוֹי עוֹשֶׂה יֵין נֶסֶךְ, כָּל שֶׁבַּזָּב טָהוֹר בְּגוֹי אֵינוֹ עוֹשֶׂה יֵין נֶסֶךְ.
§ The mishna teaches: With regard to the case where a gentile took a barrel of wine and threw it, in his anger, into the wine collection vat, this was an incident that occurred and the Sages deemed the wine fit for drinking. Rav Ashi says: With regard to any form of contact through which a zav renders an object ritually impure, in a case where a gentile has that same type of contact with wine, he renders it wine used for a libation. In the case of any form of contact through which a zav does not transmit ritual impurity, leaving an object ritually pure, a gentile does not render the wine with which he has contact wine used for a libation.
אֵיתִיבֵיהּ רַב הוּנָא לְרַב אָשֵׁי: נָטַל אֶת הֶחָבִית וּזְרָקָהּ בַּחֲמָתוֹ לַבּוֹר, זֶה הָיָה מַעֲשֶׂה בְּבֵית שְׁאָן וְהִכְשִׁירוּ. בַּחֲמָתוֹ — אִין, שֶׁלֹּא בַּחֲמָתוֹ — לָא!
Rav Huna raised an objection to Rav Ashi from the mishna: With regard to the case where a gentile took the barrel of wine and threw it, in his anger, into the wine collection vat, this was an incident that occurred in Beit She’an and the Sages deemed the wine fit for drinking. One may infer that if the gentile threw the wine in his anger, yes, it is permitted. But if it was not in his anger the wine is not permitted, even though in the case of a zav, if he threw an object at a vessel, it does not render the vessel impure.
Follow
