Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

March 16, 2018 | 讻状讟 讘讗讚专 转砖注状讞

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Avodah Zarah 60

Many different cases are brought regarding different less direct contacts the non-Jew has with the wine and whether or not it is forbidden? Also in cases where a non_Jew is in the proximity of wine unwatched – in what cases can we assume that the non-Jew will not come in contact with the wine and therefore permit it and in which cases is there room for concern?


If the lesson doesn't play, click "Download"

讜讗讬讚讱 砖专讬 讜讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 注讚 讛讘专讝讗 讞诪专讗 讗住讬专 讜讗讬讚讱 砖专讬

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.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讬诪专 讻转谞讗讬 讞讘讬转 砖谞拽讘讛 讘讬谉 诪驻讬讛 讘讬谉 诪砖讜诇讬讛 讜讘讬谉 诪爪讬讚讬讛 讜谞讙注 讘讜 讟讘讜诇 讬讜诐 讟诪讗讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪驻讬讛 讜诪砖讜诇讬讛 讟诪讗讛 诪爪讬讚讬讛 讟讛讜专讛 诪讻讗谉 讜诪讻讗谉

Rav Yeimar says: Rav Pappa鈥檚 ruling is subject to a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, 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鈥檚 statement he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讙讜讬 讗讚谞讗 讜讬砖专讗诇 讗讻讜讘讗 讞诪专讗 讗住讬专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬 拽讗转讬 诪讻讞 讙讜讬 拽讗转讬 讬砖专讗诇 讗讚谞讗 讜讙讜讬 讗讻讜讘讗 讞诪专讗 砖专讬 讜讗讬 诪爪讚讚 爪讚讜讚讬 讗住讬专

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鈥檚 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.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讗讬 讙讜讬 讚讚专讬 讝讬拽讗 讜拽讗讝讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗讞讜专讬讛 诪诇讬讗 砖专讬 讚诇讗 诪拽专拽砖 讞住讬专讗 讗住讬专 讚诇诪讗 诪拽专拽砖 讻讜讘讗 诪诇讬讗 讗住讬专 讚诇诪讗 谞讙注 讞住讬专讗 砖专讬 讚诇讗 谞讙注

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.

专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讝讬拽讗 讘讬谉 诪诇讬讗 讜讘讬谉 讞住讬专讗 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬谉 讚专讱 谞讬住讜讱 讘讻讱

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.

诪注爪专讗 讝讬讬专讗 专讘 驻驻讬 砖专讬 专讘 讗砖讬 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 砖讬诪讬 讘专 讗砖讬 讗住专

搂 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.

讘讻讞讜 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讗住讬专 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讻讞 讻讞讜 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讘讻讞 讻讞讜 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚砖专讬 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讻讞讜 讛讜讛 注讜讘讚讗 讘讻讞 讻讞讜 讜讗住专 专讘 讬注拽讘 诪谞讛专 驻拽讜讚

The Gemara comments: In a case where the wine is pressed by means of the gentile鈥檚 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鈥檚 force everyone agrees that the wine is permitted. They disagree when the wine is pressed by means of the gentile鈥檚 direct force. The Gemara relates: There was an incident in which wine was pressed by means of a force generated by the gentile鈥檚 force, and Rav Yaakov from Nehar Pekod deemed the wine prohibited.

讛讛讜讗 讞讘讬转讗

搂 The Gemara relates: There was a certain barrel

讚讗讬驻拽注讛 诇讗讜专讻讛 讗讬讚专讬 讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讞讘拽讛 砖专讬讬讛 专驻专诐 讘专 驻驻讗 讜讗讬 转讬诪讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 诇讝讘讜谞讬 诇讙讜讬诐 讜讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讚驻拽注讛 诇讗讜专讻讛 讗讘诇 诇驻讜转讬讬讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖转讬讛 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪注砖讛 诇讘讬谞讛 拽注讘讬讚

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.

讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讚讗砖转讻讞 讚讛讜讛 拽讗讬 讘诪注爪专转讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讗讬 讗讬讻讗 讟讜驻讞 诇讛讟驻讬讞 讘注讬 讛讚讞讛 讜讘注讬 谞讬讙讜讘 讜讗讬 诇讗 讘讛讚讞讛 讘注诇诪讗 住讙讬 诇讬讛

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.

诪转谞讬壮 谞讻专讬 砖谞诪爪讗 注讜诪讚 讘爪讚 讛讘讜专 砖诇 讬讬谉 讗诐 讬砖 诇讜 诪诇讜讛 注诇讬讜 讗住讜专 讗讬谉 诇讜 诪诇讜讛 注诇讬讜 诪讜转专

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鈥檚 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.

谞驻诇 诇讘讜专 讜注诇讛 诪讚讚讜 讘拽谞讛 讛转讬讝 讗转 讛爪专注讛 讘拽谞讛 讗讜 砖讛讬讛 诪讟驻讬讞 注诇 驻讬 讞讘讬转 诪专讜转讞转 讘讻诇 讗诇讜 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讜讗诪专讜 讬诪讻专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专 谞讟诇 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 讜讝专拽讛 讘讞诪转讜 诇讘讜专 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讜讛讻砖讬专讜

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.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖讬砖 诇讜 诪诇讜讛 注诇 讗讜转讜 讬讬谉

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.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 谞诪讬 讚讬拽讗 讚转谞谉 讛诪讟讛专 讬讬谞讜 砖诇 谞讻专讬 讜谞讜转谞讜 讘专砖讜转讜 讜讛诇讛 讻讜转讘 诇讜 讛转拽讘诇转讬 诪诪讱 诪注讜转 诪讜转专 讗讘诇 讗诐 讬专爪讛 讬砖专讗诇 诇讛讜爪讬讗讜 讜讗讬谉 诪谞讬讞讜 注讚 砖讬转谉 诇讜 诪注讜转讬讜 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讘讘讬转 砖讗谉 讜讗住专讜

Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise according to Shmuel鈥檚 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鈥檚 grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, and he then places the wine in the gentile鈥檚 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鈥檚 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鈥檃n and the Sages deemed the wine prohibited.

讟注诪讗 讚讗讬谉 诪谞讬讞讜 讛讗 诪谞讬讞讜 砖专讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诪诇讜讛 注诇 讗讜转讜 讬讬谉 讘注讬谞谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

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鈥檚 principle from the mishna.

谞驻诇 诇讘讜专 讜注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖注诇讛 诪转 讗讘诇 注诇讛 讞讬 讗住讜专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讚讚诪讬 注诇讬讛 讻讬讜诐 讗讬讚诐

搂 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.

诪讚讚讜 讘拽谞讛 讜讻讜壮 讻诇 讗诇讜 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讜讗诪专讜 讬诪讻专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专 讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讬谞讜讞讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘专讻讜转 注诇 专讗砖讜 讻砖讛讜讗 诪转讬专 诪转讬专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖转讬讛 讜讻砖讛讜讗 讗讜住专 讗讜住专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讛谞讗讛

搂 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鈥檚 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.

讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讚讗讘讗 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 讝注讬专讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 诇讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讞谞谉 讛讻讬 讗诪专 讝注讬专讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讜讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉

Rav 岣yya, son of Abba bar Na岣ani, says that Rav 岣sda says that Rav says, and some say that Rav 岣sda says that Ze鈥檈iri says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. There are those who say that Rav 岣sda says: Abba bar 岣nan said to me: This is what Ze鈥檈iri 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.

谞讟诇 讞讘讬转 讜讝专拽讛 [讘讞诪转讜] 诇讘讜专 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 [讜讛讻砖讬专讜] 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻诇 砖讘讝讘 讟诪讗 讘讙讜讬 注讜砖讛 讬讬谉 谞住讱 讻诇 砖讘讝讘 讟讛讜专 讘讙讜讬 讗讬谞讜 注讜砖讛 讬讬谉 谞住讱

搂 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.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 谞讟诇 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 讜讝专拽讛 讘讞诪转讜 诇讘讜专 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讘讘讬转 砖讗谉 讜讛讻砖讬专讜 讘讞诪转讜 讗讬谉 砖诇讗 讘讞诪转讜 诇讗

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鈥檃n 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.

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Ron and Shira Krebs to commemorate the 73rd yahrzeit of Shira's grandfather (Yitzchak Leib Ben David Ber HaCohen v'Malka), the 1st yahrzeit of Shira's father (Gershon Pinya Ben Yitzchak Leib HaCohen v'Menucha Sara), and the bar mitzvah of their son Eytan who will be making a siyum on Mishna Shas this month.

  • This month's learning is sponsored for the refuah shleima of Naama bat Yael Esther.

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Avodah Zarah 60

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Avodah Zarah 60

讜讗讬讚讱 砖专讬 讜讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 注讚 讛讘专讝讗 讞诪专讗 讗住讬专 讜讗讬讚讱 砖专讬

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.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讬诪专 讻转谞讗讬 讞讘讬转 砖谞拽讘讛 讘讬谉 诪驻讬讛 讘讬谉 诪砖讜诇讬讛 讜讘讬谉 诪爪讬讚讬讛 讜谞讙注 讘讜 讟讘讜诇 讬讜诐 讟诪讗讛 专讘讬 讬讛讜讚讛 讗讜诪专 诪驻讬讛 讜诪砖讜诇讬讛 讟诪讗讛 诪爪讬讚讬讛 讟讛讜专讛 诪讻讗谉 讜诪讻讗谉

Rav Yeimar says: Rav Pappa鈥檚 ruling is subject to a dispute between tanna鈥檌m, 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鈥檚 statement he holds in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讙讜讬 讗讚谞讗 讜讬砖专讗诇 讗讻讜讘讗 讞诪专讗 讗住讬专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬 拽讗转讬 诪讻讞 讙讜讬 拽讗转讬 讬砖专讗诇 讗讚谞讗 讜讙讜讬 讗讻讜讘讗 讞诪专讗 砖专讬 讜讗讬 诪爪讚讚 爪讚讜讚讬 讗住讬专

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鈥檚 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.

讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讛讗讬 讙讜讬 讚讚专讬 讝讬拽讗 讜拽讗讝讬诇 讬砖专讗诇 讗讞讜专讬讛 诪诇讬讗 砖专讬 讚诇讗 诪拽专拽砖 讞住讬专讗 讗住讬专 讚诇诪讗 诪拽专拽砖 讻讜讘讗 诪诇讬讗 讗住讬专 讚诇诪讗 谞讙注 讞住讬专讗 砖专讬 讚诇讗 谞讙注

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.

专讘 讗砖讬 讗诪专 讝讬拽讗 讘讬谉 诪诇讬讗 讜讘讬谉 讞住讬专讗 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗讬谉 讚专讱 谞讬住讜讱 讘讻讱

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.

诪注爪专讗 讝讬讬专讗 专讘 驻驻讬 砖专讬 专讘 讗砖讬 讜讗讬转讬诪讗 专讘 砖讬诪讬 讘专 讗砖讬 讗住专

搂 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.

讘讻讞讜 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚讗住讬专 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讻讞 讻讞讜 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讘讻讞 讻讞讜 讻讜诇讬 注诇诪讗 诇讗 驻诇讬讙讬 讚砖专讬 讻讬 驻诇讬讙讬 讘讻讞讜 讛讜讛 注讜讘讚讗 讘讻讞 讻讞讜 讜讗住专 专讘 讬注拽讘 诪谞讛专 驻拽讜讚

The Gemara comments: In a case where the wine is pressed by means of the gentile鈥檚 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鈥檚 force everyone agrees that the wine is permitted. They disagree when the wine is pressed by means of the gentile鈥檚 direct force. The Gemara relates: There was an incident in which wine was pressed by means of a force generated by the gentile鈥檚 force, and Rav Yaakov from Nehar Pekod deemed the wine prohibited.

讛讛讜讗 讞讘讬转讗

搂 The Gemara relates: There was a certain barrel

讚讗讬驻拽注讛 诇讗讜专讻讛 讗讬讚专讬 讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讞讘拽讛 砖专讬讬讛 专驻专诐 讘专 驻驻讗 讜讗讬 转讬诪讗 专讘 讛讜谞讗 讘专讬讛 讚专讘 讬讛讜砖注 诇讝讘讜谞讬 诇讙讜讬诐 讜讛谞讬 诪讬诇讬 讚驻拽注讛 诇讗讜专讻讛 讗讘诇 诇驻讜转讬讬讛 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖转讬讛 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 诪注砖讛 诇讘讬谞讛 拽注讘讬讚

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.

讛讛讜讗 讙讜讬 讚讗砖转讻讞 讚讛讜讛 拽讗讬 讘诪注爪专转讗 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讗讬 讗讬讻讗 讟讜驻讞 诇讛讟驻讬讞 讘注讬 讛讚讞讛 讜讘注讬 谞讬讙讜讘 讜讗讬 诇讗 讘讛讚讞讛 讘注诇诪讗 住讙讬 诇讬讛

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.

诪转谞讬壮 谞讻专讬 砖谞诪爪讗 注讜诪讚 讘爪讚 讛讘讜专 砖诇 讬讬谉 讗诐 讬砖 诇讜 诪诇讜讛 注诇讬讜 讗住讜专 讗讬谉 诇讜 诪诇讜讛 注诇讬讜 诪讜转专

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鈥檚 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.

谞驻诇 诇讘讜专 讜注诇讛 诪讚讚讜 讘拽谞讛 讛转讬讝 讗转 讛爪专注讛 讘拽谞讛 讗讜 砖讛讬讛 诪讟驻讬讞 注诇 驻讬 讞讘讬转 诪专讜转讞转 讘讻诇 讗诇讜 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讜讗诪专讜 讬诪讻专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专 谞讟诇 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 讜讝专拽讛 讘讞诪转讜 诇讘讜专 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讜讛讻砖讬专讜

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.

讙诪壮 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讜讛讜讗 砖讬砖 诇讜 诪诇讜讛 注诇 讗讜转讜 讬讬谉

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.

讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 诪转谞讬转讬谉 谞诪讬 讚讬拽讗 讚转谞谉 讛诪讟讛专 讬讬谞讜 砖诇 谞讻专讬 讜谞讜转谞讜 讘专砖讜转讜 讜讛诇讛 讻讜转讘 诇讜 讛转拽讘诇转讬 诪诪讱 诪注讜转 诪讜转专 讗讘诇 讗诐 讬专爪讛 讬砖专讗诇 诇讛讜爪讬讗讜 讜讗讬谉 诪谞讬讞讜 注讚 砖讬转谉 诇讜 诪注讜转讬讜 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讘讘讬转 砖讗谉 讜讗住专讜

Rav Ashi said: The wording of the mishna is also precise according to Shmuel鈥檚 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鈥檚 grapes so that the wine can be sold to Jews, and he then places the wine in the gentile鈥檚 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鈥檚 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鈥檃n and the Sages deemed the wine prohibited.

讟注诪讗 讚讗讬谉 诪谞讬讞讜 讛讗 诪谞讬讞讜 砖专讬 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛 诪诇讜讛 注诇 讗讜转讜 讬讬谉 讘注讬谞谉 砖诪注 诪讬谞讛

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鈥檚 principle from the mishna.

谞驻诇 诇讘讜专 讜注诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 诇讗 砖谞讜 讗诇讗 砖注诇讛 诪转 讗讘诇 注诇讛 讞讬 讗住讜专 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗诪专 专讘 驻驻讗 讚讚诪讬 注诇讬讛 讻讬讜诐 讗讬讚诐

搂 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.

诪讚讚讜 讘拽谞讛 讜讻讜壮 讻诇 讗诇讜 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讜讗诪专讜 讬诪讻专 讜专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 诪转讬专 讗诪专 专讘 讗讚讗 讘专 讗讛讘讛 讬谞讜讞讜 诇讜 诇专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘专讻讜转 注诇 专讗砖讜 讻砖讛讜讗 诪转讬专 诪转讬专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘砖转讬讛 讜讻砖讛讜讗 讗讜住专 讗讜住专 讗驻讬诇讜 讘讛谞讗讛

搂 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鈥檚 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.

讗诪专 专讘 讞讬讬讗 讘专讬讛 讚讗讘讗 讘专 谞讞诪谞讬 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 专讘 讜讗诪专讬 诇讛 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 讝注讬专讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讗讬讻讗 讚讗诪专讬 讗诪专 专讘 讞住讚讗 讗诪专 诇讬 讗讘讗 讘专 讞谞谉 讛讻讬 讗诪专 讝注讬专讬 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讜讗讬谉 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉

Rav 岣yya, son of Abba bar Na岣ani, says that Rav 岣sda says that Rav says, and some say that Rav 岣sda says that Ze鈥檈iri says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Shimon. There are those who say that Rav 岣sda says: Abba bar 岣nan said to me: This is what Ze鈥檈iri 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.

谞讟诇 讞讘讬转 讜讝专拽讛 [讘讞诪转讜] 诇讘讜专 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 [讜讛讻砖讬专讜] 讗诪专 专讘 讗砖讬 讻诇 砖讘讝讘 讟诪讗 讘讙讜讬 注讜砖讛 讬讬谉 谞住讱 讻诇 砖讘讝讘 讟讛讜专 讘讙讜讬 讗讬谞讜 注讜砖讛 讬讬谉 谞住讱

搂 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.

讗讬转讬讘讬讛 专讘 讛讜谞讗 诇专讘 讗砖讬 谞讟诇 讗转 讛讞讘讬转 讜讝专拽讛 讘讞诪转讜 诇讘讜专 讝讛 讛讬讛 诪注砖讛 讘讘讬转 砖讗谉 讜讛讻砖讬专讜 讘讞诪转讜 讗讬谉 砖诇讗 讘讞诪转讜 诇讗

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鈥檃n 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.

Scroll To Top